kren0006,
WC has made preference statements in both camps of sound. Sometimes he likes neutrality/clarity, other times it is sweetness/musicality. I really didn't know what he meant when he said at first that the Esoteric blows away the Vivaldi. Now that he clarified that he meant the superiority refers to the Esoteric's sweetness/musicality, it is more informative of his findings.
|
Thanks, WC. I look forward to your Gryphon review, which will probably be without music so you can get credit on youtube. Then do the review of the Merrill, and maybe next week present the 3.7i playing music with both Gryphon and Merrill. That should be a sonic treat. You have already video'd the Wilson with Gryphon and a little with Merrill. Did you adjust the 3.7i toe-in from my suggestions?
|
kps25sc,
Certainly, I have not heard any open baffle (OB) dynamic speaker, but am relying on a trusted friend, tweak1, who has owned all types of OB speakers such as planar ribbon, electrostatic, and dynamic. He got me thinking that OB is a concept I had previously not considered, and therefore, OB dynamic speakers are things that may appeal to many people here. Also, another reader who owns the original MG III and is considering some dynamic OB designers, gave me the idea also.
You are right, just listen to the 20.7 vs ML 13A for now. I just had some brain storming before this exciting comparison is shown to us by WC.
|
minorl,
I see your points about ML vs Maggie. This is the 1st time WC has seriously worked with the Maggie, and I am just pointing out the superiority of the low mass transducer vs high mass. Of course, you never have the opportunity to hear the best examples of different speaker technology close in time, so memory is always a wild card. If someone prioritizes clarity over bass extension and loud SPL's, then low mass transducers are better, PROVIDED they are designed and implemented according to laws of physics. For HF, the narrow ribbon tweeter is superior to the large electrostatic panel, especially if curved, even though there is tighter/more accurate control of the diaphragm in the electrostatic vs the ribbon in the magnetic breeze. For midrange, the ribbon or planar magnetic driver flapping in the magnetic breeze is clearly inferior to the electrostatic. So I suspect that both you and I found the ML Monolith superior to a Maggie in the midrange.
Still, I think the 3.7i offers a superb combination of benefits for most listeners. In my case, my Audiostatic 240 single panel electrostatic 5" narrow by 48" tall diaphragm which is flat and not curved, precisely beamed to my ears, offers still greater clarity than any Maggie or ML, but I admit that I have made big compromises in bass extension and maximum undistorted SPL over the entire range. My Audiostatic comes with 2 panels, so if I use both panels I can get more bass and SPL output. But single panel is much better for clarity and focus. Most listeners would choose the 3.7i over my speakers.
|
kstaken,
Your ML CLX are about 10 dB more efficient than my Audiostatic 240's. I use only the single panel of the 240's to get the best clarity although the bass is sacrificed. In addition, I use the Enigmacoustics tweeter in parallel with the 240's. With its 8 kHz setting, the impedance of the combo is very low, and who knows what the parallel phase relationships are. So I think the Benchmark AHB2 works for you mainly because of the 10 dB higher efficiency and simpler setup. I did appreciate the purity of the AHB2 at modest volumes, as well as the purity of the CLX.
BTW, the strumming of the banjo and guitar often produce exciting HF transients where the speed of the Benchmark and CLX are an asset.
|
kstaken,
Thanks for both of your well-written posts, well said. In addition, I find that another problem with going for complementary sonic colorations is that although they may appear to match, they don't quite. For analogies, a pick-me-up from strong coffee won't cure a hangover from too much alcohol. If you want the road feel of a sports car, don't sit on plush pillows. When I tried the warm Classe D200, I couldn't get the snap of my Bryston 2.5B SST2 by fiddling with my EQ. This is why going for transparency actually makes things easier--you can concentrate on upgrades of sources, speakers, etc. I think WC's situation is that his particular music recordings are artificially processed and unpleasant to an extent, so he naturally seeks warmth for some of them. Listeners to more naturally recorded classical music and some jazz can feel more comfortable with transparency.
Incidentally, I almost bought the Benchmark AHB2 because it sounded extremely close to my Bryston. The Benchmark specs indicated that it should work to provide higher power and more current than my Bryston does, but in practice it shut down. I don't know why, and too bad. If you have speakers with high impedance, then bridged AHB2 gives high power and purity for only $6000 retail, although I couldn't test this on my very low impedance stats.
|
WC,
I recall that you liked the Merrill ANAP cables, but can't find the details. Did you try the ANAP power cord? It is interesting that Merrill is the only manufacturer who gives true specs on the power cables, like capacitance and inductance. Nordost does this on IC and speaker cables, but not power cables. Merrill says that the ideal is both capacitance and inductance as low as possible for speed and clarity. It would be nice if the other mfr's gave these specs for power cords, which are the most critical cable, so maybe we could predict the sonic qualities without having to buy/sell endlessly. For IC's, Merrill has lower capacitance but higher inductance than Nordost. How all these specs really relate to sound is anyone's guess. I realize that cost no object Nordost Odin has amazed you the most. A few people have been pleased with all the ANAP cables, and they are inexpensive. How do you rate the ANAP's in relation to the other cables you have used?
|
The sound is nice, but unfortunately I cannot tell you whether it is better than using your phone without the external mike. You should present an A/B using the 2 recording devices with their mikes. There are a few unknown variables. The recording media--phone vs ipad--could have different characteristics. And of course the external mike has different properties like voltage output than the phone internal mike. When I did my extensive mike tests, I made repeated recordings of my violin playing of a 1 minute passage, which were all fairly similar in characteristics. With different mikes, I adjusted the gain on my Bryston mike preamp. Then I tried different mike preamps and repeated all this. When I was all done, I had a recording of all mikes and different preamps with the gain adjusted to yield equal volumes in each recording. Then I could listen repeatedly to my recordings to make a decision as to which mike and mike preamp I wanted to buy. If you don't have the ability to do all these things with your 2 different recording setups, just use your preamp to adjust the volume so that the playback of each recording yields the same volume. Make a video with the 2 recordings in sequence, and then we could decide.
|
My objective perception that #1 is clearer than #2 agrees with those of kren, ron, grey9hound, rsf507, although grey prefers the fullness of #2. The guitar and voice are more immediate in #1. There is thinness compared to #2, but the overall sound is still full due to the DAW speaker and the Merrill amp (again I am revealing that the Merrill is a full, dynamic sounding amp from my experience with it). In my recordings, I used small diaphragm mikes from Shure, AKG, Schoeps, Neumann, B&K. These are all professional mikes, well respected and used widely. I found that Shure and B&K were rounded and smooth, with Shure being more veiled. AKG, Schoeps and Neumann were in the clarity/detail camp, with the Neumann the most detailed. All these mikes are the condenser (capacitor) type, analogous to an electrostatic speaker. Lower quality dynamic mikes produced obvious colorations compared to any of these condenser mikes, similar to dynamic speakers vs electrostatic/ribbon speakers.
This was a worthwhile experiment, so I think you can keep the Shure mike. Its purpose is to more accurately record what you want to present about your system, and thus to better reveal differences in components. If you want to have more fun and try the other brands of mikes I mentioned, that’s great. But if you don’t want to bother, the Shure is an excellent choice.
|
WC,
Yes, I am itching to relate my own experiences with the Merrill 114, which is very close to the 118, according to Merrill. I just hope you do the 118/Gryphon shootout as I described. We can all listen to it, your own assessment, and then I will chime in. That will be most meaningful. I also believe that you and I have different ratings of sweetness in general. I rate the Merrill 114 as moderately sweet, but you might rate it as neutral. And what I rate as neutral, you might rate as cold and sterile. Once we figure out the correlation of your ratings with mine, I can figure out how I might rate the Gryphon in my own mind after you rate it against Merrill. The small difference between the 114 and 118 might be like this--114 sweetness is 4, speed is 7. 118 sweetness is 3.8, speed is 7.2. That's all I'll say now. The ball is in your court.
Both the 20.7 and 3.7i have the same efficiency, according to Magnepan. So the 20.7 will also benefit from high power, probably requiring even more power to bring out its deeper bass. That's why the 10+ dB greater efficiency of the GTA is one way that will make that speaker more useful to you. But it is good that you are learning more about planars in your own way.
|
WC,
Thanks for your heartfelt appreciation of everyone who contributes to your thread. I appreciate you in the same way. In fact, I just decided to look for a used Nordost Valhalla 1 power cord rather than a new lower grade PC from another company. The Odin 1 is probably the best for me if a super price comes along. I like your strategy of buying used, especially for cables where break in is very important--this is more reliable than buying new.
Merry Christmas.
|
I tried the Shunyata Sigma HC power cord (the version just prior to the NR series) and wasn't impressed at all. Although it was SUPPOSED to be better than the introductory Venom HC because it had noise reduction and was 10x the price of the Venom, I found it laid back, not to my taste. I am happily using the Venom. I am now looking for the Valhalla 1 or Odin 1 power cords. Today, an AG offer for Odin (1 or 2?) for $2950 was snapped up within hours.
How do you tell if any Nordost is authentic? Certificates?
|
When a dealer or anyone says X beats Y, that is totally BS. What is meant by "beats"? More clarity, or sweetness? Although thieliste didn't A/B Ansuz and Nordost at the same time in the same system, his answer is the best we have, so far.
|
Techno just made excellent points. Also, music appreciation and the pursuit of high fidelity has nothing to do with powerful cars. For example, I heard a Bryston 3B SST in my system. It was powerful, but the midrange was dark and colored, and HF dull, compared to my reference Bryston 2.5B SST2 and Mytek Brooklyn amps.
|
|
WC,
Agree with most of your findings above. It is true that there are obvious differences between the 3.7i and 20.7. If you want more bass and less HF, then 20.7 is better. If you want more HF and can settle with 40 Hz bass, 3.7i is better. The HF ribbon doesn't bite--it is smooth and extended. Which one is better, depends on your tonal balance preference, since the drivers are much the same. To maximize the performance of both the 3.7i and 20.7, toe in properly.
Please do an A/B with Merrill 118 vs Gryphon using any preamp or DCS direct. Only a guess from your recent remarks--Gryphon is more revealing and less sweet than the Merrill. Let's see, to settle this question. It would be interesting, since the Merrill is a flagship GaN class D, and the Gryphon a flagship class A, AB. Can the Merrill unseat your Gryphon?
|
faxer,
I believe the GTA is more like a ribbon than planar magnetic. Ribbons are more efficient. It is remarkable how the relatively narrow GTA can get bass approaching 40 Hz. Much more room friendly than any Maggie. |
psnyder149,
Thanks for the Innuos interview. Do you have experience listening to their servers in widely different prices?
|
mayoradamwest,
Just some physics facts. SPL peaks in the 80's are satisfying in mid/HF where the ear is most sensitive. You can enjoy accurate bass at these levels, but it is more on a subtle perceptual, intellectual level. But bass is not perceived as loud unless it is 100+ SPL. Bass that you can feel could be much louder than that. One day I was riding in the subway. The overall sound wasn't loud, but I was surprised when my meter showed 100 dB, due to very low freq rumble vibrations.
|
Mayoradamwest,
We are both skilled musicians who know quite well the sound of a live double bass heard up close. Perhaps I didn't understand what you meant by "bass that you can feel." In the context of what most people here mean, that is loud gut punching bass which is well over 100 dB. But I appreciate the more subtle growl and buzz of the string bass and lower brass instruments which could be heard at 80 dB, although a lot of this are the mid/HF overtones where the human ear is more sensitive. That is a biophysical fact. I'm sure you know the Fletcher-Munson loudness curves. An apt analogy is when in the gym, I was 100 feet away from boxers in the ring. I appreciated the impact of fist upon chest, although obviously I didn't literally feel it.
|
WC,
Congrats on your new youtube venture. At a cheap price, let me restate my enthusiasm for the Mytek Brooklyn Amp. After listening to the excellent Merrill Veritas at home, I found the Mytek quite close to the sound character and quality of the Veritas. Both are neutral, smooth, detailed and non fatiguing. All this makes sense because the Mytek is a superb version of class D Pascal, and Veritas the same for class D Hypex NC1200. These class D modules are very near SOTA.
|
My small amps don't get very hot, so once they are broken in I listen as soon as they are turned on. There are no signficant changes after they are on for a few hours. I think few people keep power guzzlers on all the time, so for practical reasons they want the amp to sound good nearly right away. Let's hear how the Dag and Pass compare soon after turn on, and what sonic characteristics change when on several hours later.
|
Riaa,
You are an extraordinary detective to come to the conclusion that our political views are similar, since I don't think I have openly said anything. I'll just reveal that philosophically, I am a libertarian and Ayn Rand enthusiast. As with shilling, those who don't like me can just ignore me.
|
Greg, Thanks for your info on your GTA speaker. I like the division of the 6 foot planar panel into 3 sections. This is like my Audiostatic membrane which has buttons down its 48" shirt every 4 inches. Martin Logan used to have horizontal bars every 8 inches or so dividing their long panels. I believe this design feature tightens the membrane, reducing resonance and distortion as you indicate. |
WC, Certainly the DCS is a big can of good worms where it may be difficult to see which part is more responsible for its clarity vs the Esoteric. But it appears that the Boulder preamp may inject some warmth/veiling into the Esoteric, according to your sonic descriptions. You can do a simple bypass test like Kal did with the Benchmark LA4 preamp, to see if the Boulder colors the sound. You could also try the Esoteric with the Benchmark LA4.
Kstaken (I think it was he) confirmed that the whole Benchmark preamp + amp has a transparent quality, and eloquently described the disadvantages of the euphonic combo of Luxman preamp + M900u amp which he heard concurrently. |
mrdecibel,
Glad you are fine. I agree on all 6 points, with a minor modification to the last one. With mediocre sound systems, like youtube from the stock computer audio, and the car radio, I am listening to the music exclusively without analyzing the sound quality. When evaluating a new component in my audio system, I use good recordings of music I like, but I am concentrating on the sound quality, and occasionally I will hear a subtlety that I never heard before. If I keep the new component, then both the music and sound appreciation are enhanced. The danger is that by using reference recordings too often and repeatedly, you can get tired of the music.
|
Dasign and MrD,
Agreed that the goal is more musical enjoyment. "Involvement" really is about concentration to a certain extent. Any sensory experience can be appreciated on different levels. You can gulp down wine and enjoy it, but it is better to savor it slowly. You can be "involved" with the setting and music of a movie, but you'll get more out of the movie if you closely follow the dialogue and story. I am still discovering more greatness in music that I thought I knew well. With careful listening, I hear more of the complex harmonies, just like savoring the wine.
|
WC,
Guido told me he has all the electronics he wants, but now wants a good server. Your interest in the source with server and streaming service is most valuable and important.
|
Abedirov,
Mike Fremer in his CH Precision M1.1 (I think) review, said that its bias adjustment changes the sound from very cold to very warm. Most of his review relates to 1 particular setting only. In your terms, I would describe the Merrill 114 as polite. Polite=sweet.
WC,
These other Gryphons may be the way to go. But first, tell us and demonstrate the difference between the Colosseum and Merrill 118. Is the 118 polite compared to the Colosseum? I will elaborate after you tell all, promise.
|
WC,
I totally respect your interest in trying many things and the need to sell to finance the next purchase. I actually like the dignity of your voice on the video, which shows the seriousness of your quest. You're a great speaker (pun intended), lol.
BTW, what is the business model of having a youtube channel, and how does our subscribing help you?
|
kren,
Even though I think the GTA is the best planar speaker out there, I identify with WC's pursuit of the more familiar Maggies first, as a way to dip his toe into planar waters. Since his style is to own anything for only a short time, this is understandable. Maybe he wants to hear many other things before committing to GTA, since its resale value is unknown.
|
Very informative video 2. When you get a chance, it would be most interesting to do side by side A/B's of various components with a brief musical selection. Most videos just play something without comparison to anything else, so the mediocre sound doesn't tell you anything about the real sound in the room. But even with your compromised recording device, an A/B would be much more meaningful. Of course, keep your recording device on a stand about at ear level from your sweet spot reference listening position. When recording, the most critical component is the quality of the microphones. Top condenser mikes are about $1000/pair. My Neumann KM184 is ultra detailed, but the top Shure is cheaper and smoother yet still professional grade. You don't need to spend big bucks for mikes from Schoeps, B&K (now another name I forgot). With great mikes, you probably would be able to demonstrate differences in cables, amps, preamps, but with your present setup it may be possible to only show gross differences with speakers.
|
abedirov,
Thanks for correcting me on the CH Precision amp. Yes, Mike Fremer tried various negative feedback settings. The more negative feedback, the cooler was the tonal character. Frankly, I am an agnostic on the benefits of negative feedback. On the one hand, Merrill's 118/116/114 use no negative feedback, which he believes reduces speed. On the other hand, Soulution and Bruno Putzeys of Mola Mola believe that negative feedback greatly reduces distortion. If the circuitry is fast, then negative feedback has no disadvantage.
WC,
Someone, possibly on your thread, did an extensive listening comparison of the Merrill 118 with CH Precision, Dag, Soulution 501. He said Merrill was very close to the tonal character and detail of CH. Since Abedirov found the CH Precision more forgiving than his Gryphon Antileon, I might extrapolate and guess that the Merrill is more forgiving than his Gryphon. I found the Merrill 114 forgiving in my system, correlating with your statement that you can't get the Merrill 118 to ever sound bright, even with Nordost Odin cables I am guessing. As I recall, except for the special case of incompatibility of the Gryphon with Cardas speaker cable, you may have found the Gryphon a little bright with Odin. Am I on target with your findings on that?
|
I asked this before. How does a youtube channel owner like WC make money from it? Number of views? Number of subscribers? Both?
|
WC,
Almarg presents useful info. I can't remember any youtube video with great sound quality, so you could make a splash by presenting great sound quality. For me, your video quality is good enough, so I would spend most of the money on condenser mikes and a better recorder. I got lots of help from B&H like Almarg, but there may be a Sam Ash store near you which is also dedicated to pro audio and video.
|
chazzzy007,
Yes, the video quality is excellent on what you posted. But the mikes are probably in the back of the room. WC won't have show visitors, so he could place the mikes in the sweet listening spot, much closer, to obtain a more revealing sound so he could do more subtle A/B demonstrations. It is possible to beat the big boys.
|
Cheer up, WC. In 1995, I got into recording my small orchestra and ensembles of young pros I knew. I wanted to prove to myself that I could capture more immediate sound than the big record companies. I rented top microphones and microphone preamps over several weekends from Dream Hire in NYC. I made a demo tape of my own violin playing at home using all this equipment plus my DAT recorder. I listened to my tape to be sure that the Neumann KM184 and the Bryston mike preamp gave me the crispest sound I wanted. Most important, when I did the actual live recording of ensembles, I had a simple modified ORTF configuration for the mikes, which were very close to the musicians. No fancy mixing of many mikes or sound processing, except for my simple Rane EQ instead of the usual complex mixing board. I spent just a few thousand bucks on the critical stuff, and achieved my goal.
You have the opportunity to do the recording your own way, just as I did. The big boys went to audio engineering school which teaches standardized procedures but doesn't teach the kind of experimenting and tweaking that we do. My recordings are more exciting than commercial recordings of the same piece, which I demonstrated to a friend on his system.
|
Yyzsantabarbara,
In the old days, I read a book on stereo microphone techniques and learned some general principles. In the end, though, I needed to do my own experiments and listen to my recordings in order to get the sound I wanted. For example, the classic ORTF angle of 110 degrees didn't work for my trials on site as well as 90 degrees. Depending on the musician positions and the limitations of space that I had, I would be flexible in mike distance and angles. I came to prefer the directional soundstage precision of cardioid mikes versus the more popular spaced omnidirectional mikes. Today, I would never go blindly by what some DSP program says is the "right" setting. Nothing is set in stone. I do the EQ by ear whether recording or listening to any recording. We all know how blind "objective" specs don't really tell how a component sounds.
|
coot,
Welcome here. I am a classical violinist and have recommended classical pieces that I thought some people here would like. I agree that most classical music is more naturally recorded than pieces presented here. Many people have learned about classical music because of some well recorded demo pieces. First they appreciate the sound, and then develop a love for the music, slowly expanding their horizons.
|
WC and All,
My unique Bryston 2.5B SST2 and Mytek Brooklyn Amp are more focused, crisper, and cooler in tonality than the Merrill 114 I had at home. Other Brystons (I heard at home the 3B SST, 4B SST2) are dogs by comparison to my little Bryston and the medium power Mytek. The Merrill is more full and dynamic sounding, not because it has higher power capability, but because of its tonal balance, weighted towards bass. The Merrill has this character at all volume levels. Most people here would prefer the tonal balance of the Merrill to either of my amps. In your video, I slightly preferred the Merrill to the Dag. I agree with kren0006 that they are fairly close in sound character. To me, the Merrill 118 is more focused, tighter and less boomy than the Dag. But they are close enough so I say that the Merrill is another example of the sweet camp. My overall summation is that the Merrill has the sweet midrange of a great tube amp, with much more control and extension of bass and greater HF extension. For a tube lover, it gives the best of tubes and solid state. I agree with ricevs' point that the 114 and 118 are different, but my assessment of the 114 is consistent with many reviews of the 116 and 118. An interesting review of the 116 by Dr. Michael Bump, a professor and professional percussionist, who also owned the Merrill Veritas, said that the 116 was more full in the bass than the Veritas, so he didn't need his subwoofer with the 116, unlike when he needed it with the Veritas. I had the Veritas home, which Merrill knew I would like better than the 114, and I confirmed that. The Veritas had overall character similar to my Mytek.
I am looking forward to hearing the ARC Ref 6se with the Merrill. Even in the early days about 1982 when I heard the ARC SP6B preamp, I admired its midrange neutrality and overall control, not at all like a classic tube sound. Based on your descriptions, I would prefer the Ref 6 se to the Ref 10, due to the relatively greater focus and precision of the Ref 6 se.
Lastly, I congratulate you on the best sound I have heard from your Wilson, which I think is due to the better microphone you are now using. Please continue to use that mike in your recordings. Maybe I have opened a can of slithery worms for you to try more expensive and top shelf mikes, HAHA. I had a negative opinion on 2 Wilson models I heard years ago at a well known dealer. But your setup is far superior, so now I enjoy your sound. In acknowledgment of kren's belief that the clarity of your DAW is better than the 3.7i, I would say no, the 3.7i to me has better clarity because of its greater HF content and superior low mass driver technology vs the DAW. But I didn't like the tonal balance of the 20 compared to the 3 I heard 25 years ago. It is even possible that I would prefer the tonal balance of the DAW and its clarity compared to the 20.7, since the 20.7 might be too bass heavy for my tastes. I don't like huge bloated images, which detract from detail and clarity. Even Magnepan admits this weakness of Maggies--less focus. The right moderate size of any speaker is critical. The 3.7i and DAW are ideal size for your room, but in a huge room the 20.7 would be better and the 3.7i might seem like looking down at an insect from the 86th floor observation deck of the Empire State Building in NY.
|
Grey9hound,
I know you won't spend the money on any Merrill amp, but I will say their tonal quality is on the warm side, although probably not as much as your tube amp. You would find Merrill 114 I tried for several weeks to have plenty of "soul." As I said, tube lovers would say it has the "soul" of a tube amp, plus much more extended bass and HF with control. WC also said that the 118 has no brightness at all, which I also found with the 114. Maybe GaN is responsible for more warmth, but it is early days, and there are so many variables, as ricevs just said. |
Interesting personal account. As far as upgrading your recording equipment, you don't need fancy editing, etc. Just plan ahead and rehearse A/B matching of sound levels to allow for different gain of different amps. Don't go by specs because different tonal balances will affect subjective SPL. Do it by ear. Choose a brief 1 minute excerpt that illustrates your points. But the best external mics with placement in the sweet spot as you would listen is the most critical factor. Some people have good computer audio and would appreciate hearing for themselves the subtle differences you find. The sound still wouldn't be as good as sitting with you live in your room, but the opportunity to replay the A/B tests as often as you want would be invaluable. Even with friends doing live listening, there is a limit on how much patience friends have with each other, bending over to change connections repeatedly, etc. That's the value of high quality recordings. |
Fastfreight,
I have heard only the Mola Mola Kaluga amps at home on 2 occasions, both times well broken in. The MM Kaluga has excellent neutrality, whereas my Mytek Brooklyn Amp is slightly sweet/warm, but only by comparison. All other amps I have tried, with the exception of my Bryston 2.5B SST2 are warmer in tonality than the Mytek. The Kaluga has big bass which is full and tight. That full bass was a deal breaker for me, since my other amps are leaner, which suits the intimate chamber music I mainly listen to. |
Yes, amp stands and many other tweaks have profound effects on the sound, but they are unlikely to change the basic character of amps. Your preference for one amp over another is unlikely to change. As WC just implied, the thin power cord on the Pass didn't take away from its muscle character, the way he described in the video.
|
justmetoo,
It is likely you would like the Merrill GaN class D amps, which have the sweetness of Pass. I heard the cheapest of them, the 114, which Merrill and others I have met say is sweeter than the 116 or 118. So even if the expensive 118 is affordable to you, you actually would prefer the 114 for the sweetness you want, such as Pass or Mark Levinson you own. You can handle the 44 lb weight of the 114, and it runs only slightly warm. Minimal power consumption, since it is on all the time once plugged in.
|
ricevs,
What is junk about the hypex signal cable? What sound characteristics of your custom wire differ from the hypex? |
Professional mikes can record up to 140 dB. For critical listening, 85 dB or so is best, but this is about the speaker's design and the human ear where higher levels are uncomfortable for longer than short times and ultimately cause hearing damage. Horn speakers have low distortion up to about 120 dB.
|
So far, people here agree on the objective differences between the Dag and Pass, even if they have various preferences. If anyone is listening to youtube through their excellent system, it would be great to hear from you. Then if WC gets better microphones to reveal more differences, you will be able to hear subtle differences.
|
I didn't want to be biased by reading other people's impressions, so I listened first to the Dag/Pass A/B a few times on my lousy iMac computer with its stock speakers. Then I read gtaphile's observations, and I totally agree with him on the differences in sound. The Pass has a more spacious bloom, glow and rounded quality. The Dag has a more specific, clear, upfront presentation. I look forward to this comparison when you hook up the Nordost XLR. With the Nordost's general character of clarity, I expect the differences to be more apparent, but the overall character of each to remain the same, so if you prefer the Pass with the Cardas interconnect, you probably will not change your mind with the Nordost.
The sound quality has a nice stereo effect, but since I needed to listen several times to judge the differences, I would say at present the resolution of your setup is not sufficient to demonstrate more subtle A/B differences with cables, various digital filters, etc. For that, getting the best condenser mikes would be needed. The mikes are as critical as the speakers, because both are transducers. The sensitive mike diaphragm converts air vibrations (sound) into electrical current, and the speaker diaphragm converts electrical current into air vibrations.
I like what you are doing, so this is a great opportunity to archive important differences with a particular setup. You could sell your archives to dealers and their customers, to save many hours and trouble of doing A/B's. Then the dealer wouldn't be as pissed off if the customer wastes their time with A/B's and doesn't buy. If you get better mikes, this will have more value. Dealers could commission you to do excellent A/B demos of any combo of equipment they want. Even right now, your video is sufficient to demonstrate to a customer who values clarity first, that the Dag would be preferable.
I would also look for music that has more percussion and HF content. It is often easier to tell differences in clarity with this. |
Thanks to Guido and Grey9hound for revealing that their excellent systems can be used to get more revealing sound from youtube videos. As grey9hound says, we can start with good desktop speakers on your computer. Close behind would be if WC gets great mikes to record. Even if listening to youtube is still not as revealing as being with WC, the opportunity to listen repeatedly gives lots of benefits.
WC, I hope you can keep both the Dag and Pass as references for clarity and full sound, respectively. You can make a video with the new amp vs Dag, and new amp vs Pass. As you get more new amps, make the video A/B's, then you can sell off any amp to remain solvent. Remember the old days when you got Rowland or Luxman several times? Now you can do the whole quest more efficiently by making your own recordings. |
