ricevs,
Be sure to tell us how your mod to the Mivera sounds different than the stock Mivera. If you say "better" please describe objectively in what ways. Same for Legacy. My Rouge Studio N-10DM has 135 hours on it, and it is still quite variable from one day to the next. I plan to follow the advice of Francesco from Rouge and listen at 400 hours before judging it. Is there any change from your mods after break in? How much break in is needed to judge your mods? |
ricevs,,
Thanks. I bought the Rouge on your recommendation. Have you actually found your modded Rouge to have even greater improvements than your modded Mivera? How is the stock Rouge inferior to the Mivera even though the Mivera uses the stereo 1200 AS2?
|
yyzsantabarbara,
I suggest you put in 400 hours of amp time before sending it to Ric. I am doing this with my Rouge Audio Studio N-10DM, a dual mono IceEdge 1200 AS1. Francesco of Rouge advised 400 hours. At this moment, I have 157 hours on it. I let it play with my typical music, Mozart violin concertos with small orchestra. Loudest sections are about 75 dB, although transients are higher, but probably under 85 dB for milliseconds. I live in an apartment building and let it play for 16 waking hours a day, so I don't disturb neighbors by keeping the volumes modest. Ideal break in procedures are speculative. I wonder what the relevance of harsh break in at 90-100 dB would be. Perhaps the most relevant procedure would be to use your typical music at the playback levels you would listen to.
The sound is quite variable at this point. It has little to do with whether the amp is warm or cold. My power quality is very variable, which I found with other amps. At this point, I don't know whether my variability is due to the power quality or the break in of the Rouge amp. At 400 hours, I will do the final assessment, go back to my reference amps after they are briefly re-broken in after 1 month of no use. Then I will do Ric's mods.
Years ago, I almost bought the Benchmark AHB2. It had excellent clarity and neutrality, although after break in it was very slightly warmer than my Bryston 2.5B SST2. So I want to hear how your AHB2 compares to the new amp. |
yyz,
When I tried the single stereo Benchmark AHB2 with my LOW impedance of parallel electrostatics and Enigmacoustics stat tweeters, it shut down at even moderate power. Using mono AHB2's gives more power into 8 ohms, but not 2 ohms. I know it is early, but later please report on the relative tonality (clarity, neutrality) of the AHB2 and Voyager at sensible SPL's. The Voyager has greater power, but quality is what counts. |
ricevs,
Thanks. Now my 170 hours have been probably using 0.1 to only rarely 10 watts. I can try playing more dynamic orchestral music using up to maybe 500 watt peaks for short periods of time. Would that provide a better break in? For weight lifting, it is better to do short, intense workouts with heavy weight than long workouts with baby weights, a waste of time. Is the same thing true with amp break in? |
yyz,
Like you, I go for quality over quantity. 95% of my favorite music is small scale, so quality wins out. Even for large dynamic music like symphonies, much of the time things are quiet and low level detail is most important. If the detail is submerged, I am not interested in banging dynamics. It’s like if a mumbling, foolish person yells at you, you shut him out. But perhaps his foolish thoughts make some sense if he speaks clearly in a low voice. An amp with grunt is often accompanied by loss of clarity for subtle sounds. So far, it appears that the AHB2 is still king. There is no rush--give the Voyager much more time to see if things change. Once you do Ric’s mods, there are no returns. This doesn’t matter because spending under $4K is worthwhile if the sound is great. I have almost zero tolerance for expensive anything. Further, you couldn't PAY me $100K to be forced to live with the $100K amp if I am ho-hum about the sound. I pay reasonable sums to obtain enjoyment. |
yyz,
As ricevs suggested, I'll chime in with a wonderful CD I just acquired, and have been using on repeat for my last 187 hours of break in listening. It is a 2015 recording on a budget label, Naxos, of Mozart Violin Concertos 3,4,5 with soloist Henning Kraggerud and the Norwegian Chamber Orchestra. It is a very clear recording which is upfront but also spacious. What is especially interesting is that there is a YT video of the same performers in the same hall. You can see the position of the musicians on stage in the YT video and compare to the CD on your audio system. The violin soloist has exceptional precision of bow technique, and the small orchestra is very sensitive and also brilliant. For proper audio reproduction of this music and recording, CLARITY is a must, and the most important criterion to use. On a musical level, Mozart is the most difficult composer to play, not because it is so complex, but because supreme elegance and attention to detail are required. The slightest flaw in technique is exposed, but this performance is close to 100% flawless. It is also improvisatory, and I am surprised that I am still enjoying it as a fresh experience after all these 187 hours of repeats, lol. |
yyz,
Glad you like the Mozart CD I recommended. It is great that you enjoy it even if classical music is not your first love. Great performances can enable you to enjoy the music as you gain familiarity. Musically, it is the best version of these pieces I have heard. I have played and performed them as a solo violinist, and the soloist on this CD is a magical wizard. There is a YT video of him coaching a talented 16 year old girl violinist. She plays "correctly" but he has great imagination and artistry and offers inspiration to her.
Take this music in small doses. Each movement (section) is only about 7 min. From an audio point of view, early in the first track of Concerto 3, see if you can hear in the right channel several times when the soloist SNIFFS to give a cue to the orchestra. This is different from hearing the breath of a wind player from the mouth. The AHB2 is the amp most likely to best reveal the subtleties of the sniff. HF detail is needed to appreciate this.
I like the 40 lb dumbbells on the right side in one of your system pictures. Stay in great shape! |
yyz,
Your observations about the truthfulness of the Benchmark AHB2 are absolutely correct. I know the AHB2 sound, and of course I know the sound of classical music close up from the stage, 1st row and further back in the audience. This Mozart recording uses a very small chamber orchestra which has much less heft than other recordings of the same music which use a larger orchestra about 2x the size. If you heard this performance from the 1st row, the SPL would rarely be even 85 dB, and full orchestral sections would be about 75 dB average. The solo violin with very soft orchestral accompaniment would be 40-60 dB. The sniffs are about 20-25 dB. Even if the live sound is sharp, there is NO fatigue. Fatigue actually arises from playing a dull audio system too loud, in an effort to reveal detail. With an accurate, revealing system, satisfying detail is appreciated at much lower SPL's.
There are big romantic pieces like Brahms and Mahler symphonies which use very large orchestras of 100 players. Mahler's Symphony no. 8 is called "Symphony of a Thousand" because there are 1000 performers--a huge 150 member orchestra plus many different choral groups of adults and children. Whew--if you want heft, that's the piece for you, but Mahler symphonies are 80 min long. But this Mozart recording we like has little heft, and the performance and recording emphasize lightness, elegance and sharp quick instrumental attacks. So the AHB2 is the truth teller. BTW, what differences in tonality do you find between the AHB2 in stereo vs two monos?
I won't torture you to try to find the 2 or 3 moments of sniff on track 1. Tomorrow, I'll find the timings in the track so you can listen for them. I know the pieces backwards and forwards, but if you don't know them, it is harder to find the sniffs. |
ricevs,
When I trialed the Benchmark AHB2 for 1 month, it was quite close to my reference Bryston 2.5B SST2. At the end of the month break in, the AHB2 was slightly warmer than the Bryston. Only a guess--the AHB2 was on par with my current Mytek Brooklyn Amp (original version). My initial reaction to the Rouge was that it was rolled off in HF and fuller in overall sound than the Mytek. The Rouge still has some variation with the hour of the day, and I think it is evolving for the better. At 400 hours, I will reconnect my Mytek, re-break it in for a day, and then A/B the Rouge and Mytek. My Bryston is still king for crispness, although for larger scale music, I need more power, so I am hopeful about your modded Rouge. I will complete the 400 hours in about 2 weeks, so will contact you soon after that. |
yyz,
On the Mozart recording, track 1, Concerto 3, at 0:08 there is a very soft slow sniff or possibly a mouth breath in. At 1:12 there is a louder but still soft sharper sniff. It is sharper and quicker, whereas at 0:08 it is even softer but more prolonged. The 1:12 sniff is repeated with the same musical passage at 4:35. All these sniffs are done after the orchestra stops, and then the sniff is done about 1/2 second before they start again, as a cue. It is only possible to hear these extremely soft sounds when the orchestra is completely silent. We cannot hear these subtle sounds of 20 dB if there is background playing at 40 dB or so. This reminds me of when I hear my car turn signals only when there is little road noise or I turn off the radio.
Let me know if you can hear these sniffs on your main Thiel speakers and RAAL headphones with the different amps. Don't cheat by playing things too loudly at 90 dB when the full orchestra portions should be about 75 dB. Headphones can seem only moderately loud at 100 dB whereas room speakers will sound very loud at 100 dB. |
Good. Try the other sniffs at 1:12 and 4:35, see how slightly different they are, and with various amps. It is good that you tried the less revealing components first. If you try the most revealing first, then you know what to look for so the less revealing components can be imagined to reveal the detail which would have been hidden if you tried them first.
Were these tests on the Thiel speakers or RAAL headphones? I still am not certain whether these soft sounds are sniffs through the nose or inhaled from the mouth. Probably the nose, because musicians like to use the HF sniff to draw attention. Instruments with more HF content cut through the mass of sound and stand out better with greater clarity. The nose is smaller diameter than the mouth, so the nose creates more HF than the mouth. My guess is that the AHB2 sounds more like the nose because of its brighter tonal balance toward HF, and the other extreme of the Coda is more like the mouth. |
I bet the RAAL headphones are GREAT. They remind me of my AKG K1000 planar magnetic phones which I bought new for $1000 many years ago, and still have. They are like suspended speakers at a 1-2" distance from your ears. A unique feature of my AKG 1000 is that the ear speakers could be rotated to reduce bass. I have always hated most headphones for their overblown bass which diminishes midrange/HF clarity. I actually enjoy my Beyerdynamic DT880 phones better, a more conventional closed back phone. The 880 has a tasteful HF boost which enhances clarity. But the bass is too overblown, which I ameliorate by putting 1.5" measuring cups between my outer ear cartilage/head and the surrounding phone pads. Wearing this funny setup, I look like a woman wearing her helmet at the beauty parlor, lol. The cups fall off, so I just hold the phones about the same distance from my ears. I go for the most airy free air type sound which is with the greater distance and reduced bass. Of course, not too far away, which yields little bass.
My electrostatic Audiostatic 240 + Enigmacoustics Sopranino tweeter still kills any headphone or room speaker for exciting clarity at the price of reduced bass. |
The sniffs are very, very low in level, so near the threshold of perception, if the volumes are not matched, on one amp at lower overall volume, the sniffs could disappear. Even on the most resolving AHB2, if it is lower in volume, this could happen. The best you can do is to listen on the RAAL at the same comfortable level, which will be within 1 dB. If the house is not absolutely quiet, since the RAAL is totally open to the environment, the sniffs could be lost, even if the overall music is not.
Despite all the problems of this demanding test, you got the relative volumes of the 3 sniffs correct, a tribute to your good ears on this unfamiliar music. I read some reviews of the RAAL. They are a true reference. Thanks for exposing me to the RAAL. One review said the HEDDphone was possibly superior in micro detail and was brighter in HF. The AHB2 will be shown in careful tests to be the most revealing on the RAAL, for esoteric sniff tests and for music, as you know.
|
From what I read about the Convolution filter on the RAAL, it softened the sound to that reviewer's liking. Too bad you find the AHB2 fatiguing without the Convo filter, but the AHB2 is more revealing and truthful without it. The trick to enjoy the most detail with no fatigue is to keep the SPL modest. You would have a different perspective if I visited and played my violin on these brilliant Mozart concertos at close range. The under-my-ear sound of myself and fellow musicians a few feet away is my reference, and not too far off what close mikes capture on good recordings such as this. Trying to get an audio system to approach this close reference, I have no tolerance for anything like the Convo filter that softens the sound. From what you have, I think your RAAL with AHB2 and without the Convo filter can best approach my reference. Great headphones like the RAAL give a very close, intimate sound similar to my close experiences, and make almost all speakers sound hopelessly dull and boring. |
Forget the money--these are all decent amps for sensible money. Decide what kind of sound you want. I await tweak1's evaluation of the Voyager vs his EVS1200. My Rouge IceEdge 1200 AS1 amp at 260 hours is neutral, which is similar to the EVS1200 without the mods. I'll find out soon when I do the mods. The Voyager GaN is more tubelike, according to the people here. My experience with the Merrill Element 114 GaN is that it was tubelike. |
Silicone/silicon, tomato/potato, LOL.
Perhaps the ceiling/roof weighs more and is harder than before, which might tighten up the sound. Soft wood walls make the sound warmer and looser. |
Jaymark and yyz both imply that the Voyager has tighter but less quantity of bass than Pass and Krell. This observation is consistent with the Voyager's accuracy. Euphonic classic tube amps are notorious for big but loose bass. This also applies to SS amps like Pass and some Krells that try to please tube lovers. Score victory for Voyager for bass quality. |
tweak1,
Although your Voyager is young, how does it compare to your EVS1200 so far? My stock Rouge IceEdge 1200 AS1 now has 360 hours on it, and it isn't much different than initially when I got it with factory burn in of 8 hours. The hour-to-hour variations in the Rouge are more correlated with my power quality. |
yyz,
Your overall findings are that the AHB2 is the most accurate of all the amps. That includes the tightest bass, which will also be the least quantity of bass. Larger quantity of bass is always associated with lower quality and accuracy, as shown by the Krell. |
George,
Your good technical comments are not matched by any listening observations. I don't know how much musical training or experience you have, regarding live unamplified music. |
Interesting Darko review of the Peachtree GaN 400, finding it SLIGHTLY superior in HF detail to the Mytek Brooklyn Amp original version, which I find excellent. The Mytek is quite neutral from my 2 year experience with it. Darko's comments are consistent with the glowing reports from posters here on the Peachtree. The Peachtree is probably very close to the Voyager.
|
Ricevs,
Thanks for your analysis of just the AC mod, which in your words, changes the stock V to be "not as warm but much clearer and faster and real sounding." Apparently you found the stock V "very warm." From reading my posts, you know that I believe that less electronic warmth is associated with being clearer and faster, so you have confirmed my experience on this matter.
This is a great opportunity for you to write down your findings with each mod you do. You have never done this, but previously you have done all the mods and reported the final results. By changing a single variable at a time, this gives you a better understanding of everything you do, and reporting what you learn is valuable for everybody.
Thanks. |
Ricevs,
My Rouge is pretty substantial. 23 lbs, decent casework. Francesco wrote me and asked whether I wanted white or blue LED on lights, details about engraving of the round dial on the front. He treated me as if I were ordering an expensive D'ag amp. Rouge looks like a higher class company than the DIY'ers. They have many different products using Pascal, Hypex, Anaview modules as well as IceEdge. Thanks for recommending Rouge. |
Ricevs,
To quote you, "So, I did the AC mod (better wire, jack, less fusing, etc.)....now we are talking. It is not as warm but much clearer and faster and real sounding.....the micro harmonic info is not being covered by the excessive warmth. I am now more "moved" by the music."
This is an excellent summary of what I am saying and looking for. Even though you later qualified your statement to mean that the Voyager is "warmer than the winter" this original quote says it all. (Often in life, our first statement is how we really feel). Live, unamplified music has the micro harmonic info that makes us cry. All audio systems bury the micro info to some extent in the electronic warmth, which is nothing more than distortion from fuzz and mush. Notice how you say that after your AC mod, the sound "is not as warm but much clearer and faster and real sounding." YES! |
kuribo,
You are one of the few people on any Agon forum to agree with me that the ideal of high fidelity is best achieved with neutrality/transparency. The "straight wire with gain" is indeed what an amp is supposed to do. Good for you to imply boldly that coloration is just noise. |
cascadesphil,
In what sonic way is the EVS1200 better than the Mivera? My experience with Bryston is that only my 2.5B SST2 is outstandingly neutral/transparent. Earlier ST and SST 3B and 4B models are really mediocre. |
kuribo,
I don't mind someone saying something is "better," IF he describes what "better" means. For you and me, "better" means closer to neutrality with more clarity. For a tubaholic, "better" means warmer, sweeter, fuller, etc. I can read the comments of both types of listeners and learn something about the product being reviewed. To obtain maximum usefulness in reviews, "better" should be dropped, and more precise descriptors should be used. |
Atmasphere,
I have huge respect for your technical expertise, but sorry, if you are not a violinist or any other trained classical instrumentalist you may not realize that close exposure to real instruments teaches that these natural sounds are BRIGHT (in the good natural sense, not for example in the artificial types of distortion that is obvious if you tune the radio slightly off its freq and get the static which brightens the sound). The microphones in most recordings are close, roughly comparable to the 1st row of the hall, so when most people who sit much further away say that their 10th row sound is comparable to the recording played on their systems, they don't realize that this means their systems are rolled off in HF especially. These listeners would be astonished to go to the 1st row, or better yet, stand on the podium to hear what the conductor hears, which is the most detailed and balanced sound of anyone in the hall. This sound is bright and brilliant, not at all like the sound of most tube equipment. I have an open mind to discover some tube electronics that are brilliant and detailed. On Jay's thread, "My long list of amplifiers..." he plays his new tube mono amps the identity of which he hasn't disclosed yet. They sound brilliant and bright, and he says they are more detailed than many SS amps he has owned.
My 60 years of playing the violin, the latter 50 as an accomplished performer in solo concertos, chamber music, orchestra, and 50 years of being an audiophile and correlating audio system sound with live in all sorts of venues and environments, qualifies me to make the statements in the preceding paragraph. |
ricevs,
To convince skeptics that your mods increase the clarity and speed, for example, maybe you can explain in technical terms why they produce those sonic improvements. For example. on IceEdge amps like Legacy iv2 or Rouge, the input impedance is 38 Kohms or so. You increase it to 150 Kohms. To make an analogy with moving coil phono cartridge loading, I have always found that high loading of 47 Kohm yields more HF with clarity compared to loading in the 100's. Some have claimed that the 100's avoid the HF boost from loading at 47 Kohms. Personally, I don't care about whatever technical flaw of HF boost occurs--I like the increased openness and clarity at 47 K.
So why did the stock designers settle on 38K? Didn't they experiment with 150K? Maybe you will say that they didn't put in as much listening time as you did, and just decided that 38K measured well and they just settled there.
More generally, if Voyager did all these revisions, they did the listening. So why do you get better results after only a week of playing with it, compared to their 2 years of delays due to their tweaking? |
OK, you can talk about love and so on, but you also mentioned that your mods bring more clarity and speed. You talk about that also, which is fine. We don't know all the technical correlates of great sound, but a skillful designer knows what circuit designs bring about whatever type of sound he desires. You also must know a lot about this also, such as why 150 K sounds more open or whatever. It is more obvious why your direct connection to the internal wiring, bypassing the binding posts, yields more open sound. |
ricevs,
You said, "...the difference between bad sounding 38K resistors and great sounding 148K resistors (the brand of resistor and the impedance both give a sonic improvement....my source was 50 ohms high current capability....class A output discrete stage)."
Ah, the difference. What you found is the difference in the quality/brand of the resistors. What if you try the same high quality resistor for 38K and 148K? That would address George's point about whether the value of 38K, 148K makes the difference. I know you said you did this, that the value makes a difference, but it would be nice to evaluate technically with measurements also. Ideally, the better sound should correlate with better measurements. We need both the subjectivists and objectivists to have the best understanding of how we all can improve sound. The objectivists need to do more listening, and the subjectivists should try to do more measuring, although even the smartest objectivists don't have all the answers.
George,
I understand your point about how 38K is high enough, which is similar to the interface principle about having the input impedance of a power amp be over 10 times the output impedance of the preamp or other source. But maybe 100-1000 times is better than 10 times, as with my Denon 305 MC cartridge with its impedance of 40 ohms, having more HF extension and clarity going into a phono stage at 47K ohms rather than 400 ohms. Is my analogy correct? |
George,
No, what I heard from 47K loading of a few MC cartridges into a few phono stages was more extended HF, rather than reduced bass which thins the tonal balance but doesn't yield more HF.
|
With the 1K output impedance, 38K is a ratio of 38, and 100K is a ratio of 100, both way above 10, so I would expect the 38K and 100K to sound the same, as you found. However, public demonstrations in unfamiliar systems are not as revealing as making changes in your own familiar system. So ricevs' improvement in sound quality must be due mainly to the better quality resistor he is using in his mods compared to stock. Let ricevs say whether I am correct or not.
|
ricevs,
No, we actually agree mostly all the way. It is intuitively plain to me how resistors could have their own sound relating to their materials and design. Transistors are semi-conductors, and even the name "transistor" is similar to "resistor" he he. Vacuum tubes have been called natural amplification devices, and it is surprising that semi-conductors have the great specs that they do. So resistors are devices of their own. Someone must have come up with measurements that correlate with the superior sound of the resistors you like. So in what way was the 150K resistor better sounding than the 38K of the same brand? Did the 150K in that circuit have more HF extension than 38K, analogous to how the 47K ohm loading of the MC cartridge has more HF than at 100 ohm?
Your cartridge story is amusing. Cartridges are complex beings like speakers, and it is well known that speaker measurements don't correlate much with the character of sound emanating from those boxes. However, I can well imagine that the best sounding cartridge you heard had better specs than the others, but the routine simple amplitude/freq sweeps, static/dynamic compliance specs don't tell much, and are merely at the kindergarten level. |
ricevs,
My comments are intended as factual observations of my own, as well as comments on others' observations. It just so happens that they are based on LOVE for the truth, as best as I can determine it. I believe that people who are sincere and honest are also expressing true love. But mere declarations of love from people who are not honest are really sham. I'll take it as a compliment from you that you appreciate my honesty. |
ricevs,
Back to my question--what specific sonic improvements does 150K input impedance show compared to 38K, using the same resistor brand/materials? Just the facts, your observations, please. Thanks. |
atmasphere,
Thanks for your input on the impedance question. I use the Rane ME 60 equalizer as a small gain stage with EQ. This SS source has a low output impedance, I forgot, maybe 100 ohms. The ratio of input impedance to output impedance would be 380 for 38K input, or 1500 for 150K input. Both ratios are very high, way over the minimum 10, so I wonder whether there would be any audible or technical difference between 38K or 150K.
Off topic, I read some reviews and comments of your amps. Not being able to afford them, I won't get a chance to hear them, although the powerhouse MA-3 would be the ultimate, I would opine that your amps are the only tube amps without the typical warm, euphonic classic tube sound. Almost 40 years ago, I briefly owned the Futterman H3aa OTL amps, bought from Julius after waiting almost a year. They had a certain clarity, but I didn't like the typical tube fullness in the lower freq, so I soon switched to SS amps. |
yyzsantabarbara,
Thanks for your update. In order to determine the effect of Ric's mods, you'll have to use the Coda preamp, since you used the Coda with the stock Voyager. Still, now that you have the more transparent/neutral LA4 preamp again, it will be interesting to hear how the LA4 + AHB2 compares with LA4 + modded Voyager. |
ricevs,
You said, "HIgher impedance sounded better using a 50 ohm source with 10 ma of class A bias and two feet of hardwired at one end low capacitance cable."
Please, without wasting more time and space on love, etc., just say what you mean about "sounded better." Life is too short to waste time. Thanks. |
yyz,
Looking forward to your and your friend's impressions with the modded Voyager. Unfortunately, memory for details of sound is fleeting, so the ideal is to have stock and modded amps simultaneously for a quick A/B back and forth. I was lucky enough to do this with my Mytek Brooklyn original amp and its update, through the generosity of Michal, the owner. The differences were fairly small, and I found the original to have more clarity/snap in my system, which was the opposite of what Michal claimed. If the mods are dramatic, or even if the LA4 + modded V exceeds the clarity/detail of the LA4 + AHB2, whereby the modded V pushes ahead of the AHB2 in the horserace for clarity, that will make headlines.
Since ricevs is not forthcoming on exactly what he hears, user experience like yours will be most appreciated. |
atmasphere,
Thanks, confirming what I thought. I bought the Rane ME 60 when I walked into a pro audio store in 1995. My recordings of my orchestra on a small stage of a medical school hall were dead and dull. Neither the conductor nor I was happy. After using the Rane in the recording to boost HF and cut some bass, we were happy. I then inserted the Rane into my audio system for regular commercial recordings, using it flat as just a line stage. It demolished the Spectral DMC 10 gamma line stage for openness and clarity. Recently I bought a tweaked Rane with vibration damping by poster mrdecibel. It was even more open than my original Rane. He agreed with me that the Rane is more transparent than many audiophile line stages priced around $10K. Only his passive Luminous preamp beat the Rane for transparency.
Since my listening preference is very close as a violinist performer, I want to hear my recordings with that perspective. I use the Rane with HF boost above 8 kHz, which does a great job as a facsimile of reality. Believe me, it is most important to use judicious EQ by ear, which is a bigger factor than the relatively small differences in line stages. Many audiophiles have closed minds and mock pro audio equipment and concepts.
|
atmasphere,
Interesting about your use of the Rane mic input. You might have a different Rane product than my ME 60 which doesn't have any input marked mic. But some of these opamps are excellent, like the Jensen 990 (I think) used by John Hardy in his mic preamp. Back in 1995, I made several 1 min recordings of myself playing the first page of the solo Mendelssohn violin concerto, using various preamps, mikes. Even if my playing had slight variations, my violin tone still enabled me to hear the differences between mikes and their preamps. The John Hardy was the fastest and leanest, but it was a little unnatural, so I chose the Bryston preamp, the most transparent of the other common pro units.
Try the Rane ME 60 in your audio system (not the later ME 60S which is more colored), on eBay for $200 or less. RCA outputs have unity gain, XLR, 6 dB. The quarter inch diameter rotary volume control is crude, which you could upgrade. Still, as is, a great line stage. I hope you experiment with the enormous EQ capabilities--up to 12 dB boost or cut for 30 one third octave bands from 20-20kHz. There are lots of overlaps in these parametric curves. Boosting exclusively from 8 kHz on up still brings out the buzz on cello and string bass, and removes lots of midrange mud on other instruments. Have fun, and give me feedback. |
yyz,
The neutrality/transparency of things like Benchmark is appreciated mainly intellectually rather than viscerally. On classical music, transparency is required to fully appreciate the complexities. In my violinist training, one master teacher explained to me how mere minute, fine differences separate great players from average ones, so accuracy and transparency has been my lifelong quest. But rock thrives on visceral, gross excitement. This is why audiophiles who mainly listen to rock seek euphonic, ballsy electronics with colors. Benchmark is unsatisfactory for these rock listeners, because it doesn't give "oomph" and so on. Unfortunately, electronics that feature oomph are usually deficient in clarity. So you find that on Zeppelin, the LA4 gives electric detail and excitement, but the CODA 07x is duller. The colors of euphonic electronics are really shaved off transients making the sound duller, whereas the natural colors of live unamped instruments have the real detail with excitement.
You could save money by selling all the euphonic Coda, Krell stuff. Perhaps the LA4 + modded Voyager will give you enough of the warmth you want. We'll see if LA4 + AHB2 is still the ultimate for most naturally recorded music. |
yyz,
Sorry to hear about your experience with Fedex. I shipped my Rouge amp to Jay last Wed, and he got it Mon afternoon, no problem. NYC to Fort Lauderdale area by Fedex ground in only 5 calendar days, not bad. There's lots of buzz about the shootout he will do around tomorrow. Follow it, and give your impressions, which will be blinded to all except Jay. As with his legendary Rossini/MSB shootout, he will reveal the identities of each amp later, so perhaps heads will roll. |
yyz,
It seems that the modded Voyager still has rolled off HF compared to the AHB2, using the Coda 07X preamp. Can you compare the modded V + Benchmark LA 4 to the AHB2 + LA 4? The LA 4 is still the most revealing preamp.
Most relevant here, can you say how the modded V compares to the stock V? So far, it seems that the basic information retrieval gap remains between the AHB2 and V, modded or stock.
When you are ready, offer to send Jay your modded V. My stock Rouge is giving serious competition to Jay's undisclosed amp. My Rouge is more neutral, which some people don't like, but I predict that your V will give most people what they want with its slight warmth. This will show that some class D amps must be taken seriously and offer a practical and much cheaper alternative to big expensive amps for providing SOTA performance as well.
I don't believe that Jay's group will care much for AHB2 in either stereo or mono form. The AHB2 is not as dynamic as either my Rouge or your V. |
derek_hawaii,
No, I never had Harvey Rosenberg's amps, but only the last Futterman H3AA OTL monos. I started early with a Van Alstine modded Dyna Stereo 70. A Grant Lumley tube amp had much more definition. But I ditched tubes when I bought the Krell KSA 50 SS amp, which showed all these tube amps to be mushy and bloated. At the former Listening Room store in Scarsdale, NY, an ARC tube amp was also mushy and bloated compared to this Krell. I said goodbye to the tube world planet, and moved to the SS haven of Earth. Is there intelligent life in another galaxy? Maybe, and I wish I could afford to find out from auditioning powerful Atmasphere amps, probably the only intelligent form of tube life around. |
yyz,
You find the modded Voyager less grainy with more clarity than the stock V. Is the mod less warm/more neutral than stock? HF extension differences? Is the AHB2 still king of clarity and transparency, and maybe the gap has narrowed with the V mod? |
yyz,
Thanks. Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "grainy." The stock Voyager was warm compared to the AHB2. Since the modded V has more clarity than stock, is it also less warm than stock? When you have the time to A/B the modded V with the AHB2, see if you can note whether the warmth of the V is lessening, to approach the neutrality of the AHB2.
The modded V should be an interesting shootout with my Rouge. |
Thanks for your clarification. I do like your window analogy. I'll go further and ask how thick are the dirty films for the 3 best amps--AHB2, Coda #16, modded Voyager? 0-1 microns, 2-3, 5 respectively? More listening will tell. Is the Coda #16 warmer than AHB2?
I can see ricevs rolling his eyes and saying I am too analytical and I need to love more, LOL. |
