A few comments on some side topics percolating within this thread. One relating to opinion/taste in audio and the other to SOTA sound and does it need to cost a fortune.
I get we are in the era of forced equality of outcomes. My 8 year old twin boys played in a Y league hoops game today where they don't keep score....ever. But the reality in audio is no different than in life, there are things done better and there are individuals whose opinions on said better are earned and more valued and groups of said people could rather predictably form a general consensus on the basic qualities common to better gear. From that perch, personal preference for presentation and style has a safe home and it can flourish, hence many versions of best in class. As an example, we can all agree no one wants spurious noise in any reproduction. We are also all entitled to our opinion. Amps and transducers even many today of high caliber still often can struggle to get piano right. If someone prefers a crappy rendition of piano that is perfectly fine. That preference however changes nothing as it relates to performance.
From the sound of things, and I am new to Jay's crazy world (and have not read this thread except recent pages) , his opinion in '16 when he started would not have been particularly useful. But now it is quite valuable for a variety of reasons none less his refreshing candidness and vast experience with the esoteric. As he just acknowledged this is a task very high in error particularly when inexperienced. I'm guessing too there is a long list of gear he'd like another crack at as he's gained experience. Safe to assume as well that Jay is knowingly or unknowingly honing his personal preferences largely by accident as we all do "arriving" at some imperfect previously unknown version of it and then messing it up almost immediately.(Jay faster than most LOL) Plenty of ying and yang in this hobby, chase one thing and you are bound to lose another.
Which brings us to Jay's current set of preferences in a decent sized room. Of apparent high value is ultimate scale and maximum uncompressed dynamic capabilities with the last octave present with the ability to go into high SPL unwavering. Check. Those values elevate the cost / complexity equation significantly. Those values also by necessity invite easily predictable subtle limitations as well where smaller less complex systems gain a subtle edge that can stay in the realm of best in class overall. Interestingly, 70% of the music selections Jay gravitates too would perform better with the latter. Certainly this most recent duel.
20 years ago there was no digital source from 16/44K that by today's digital source standards would make the grade. Not one. In 1999 I had 4 of Jeff Kalt's Resolution Audio Quantum DAC's running in true differential mode with the best dac chip made at the time the UltraAnalog. Today that setup gets smoked by a $2k NOS DAC from China getting fed a low jitter signal juiced by a well executed FPGA.
Right now as I type I am listening through a $4k fully balanced AVC preamp from Great Britian that uses 4 Slagle autoformers and fet switches that it would not shock me if it illuminated more of the quality of Jays MSB stack than his Solution pre that is hitting the road.
My point is, back down Jay's current preferences at the extremes by 10%, pick a proper sized speaker for the room you are in, and the source and component quality that is available today and the sound you can achieve in systems in the $20-$30K range knocks on Jays door easily. I am not saying $20-30K is cheap for many, but its the cost of the Levinson reference 30 digital set from the early 90's that is a better coffee table base now.
This is my prediction for Jay. He will continue to hone his preferences, realize his most enjoyable listening rarely if ever sniffs the upper ranges of his systems dynamic capabilities. He'll dabble less in esoterica and realize many unsung geniuses of practical circuits and design all around the globe. He'll then get hooked on the unrivaled satisfaction of assembling systems that absolutely kill it for way less coin.
I get we are in the era of forced equality of outcomes. My 8 year old twin boys played in a Y league hoops game today where they don't keep score....ever. But the reality in audio is no different than in life, there are things done better and there are individuals whose opinions on said better are earned and more valued and groups of said people could rather predictably form a general consensus on the basic qualities common to better gear. From that perch, personal preference for presentation and style has a safe home and it can flourish, hence many versions of best in class. As an example, we can all agree no one wants spurious noise in any reproduction. We are also all entitled to our opinion. Amps and transducers even many today of high caliber still often can struggle to get piano right. If someone prefers a crappy rendition of piano that is perfectly fine. That preference however changes nothing as it relates to performance.
From the sound of things, and I am new to Jay's crazy world (and have not read this thread except recent pages) , his opinion in '16 when he started would not have been particularly useful. But now it is quite valuable for a variety of reasons none less his refreshing candidness and vast experience with the esoteric. As he just acknowledged this is a task very high in error particularly when inexperienced. I'm guessing too there is a long list of gear he'd like another crack at as he's gained experience. Safe to assume as well that Jay is knowingly or unknowingly honing his personal preferences largely by accident as we all do "arriving" at some imperfect previously unknown version of it and then messing it up almost immediately.(Jay faster than most LOL) Plenty of ying and yang in this hobby, chase one thing and you are bound to lose another.
Which brings us to Jay's current set of preferences in a decent sized room. Of apparent high value is ultimate scale and maximum uncompressed dynamic capabilities with the last octave present with the ability to go into high SPL unwavering. Check. Those values elevate the cost / complexity equation significantly. Those values also by necessity invite easily predictable subtle limitations as well where smaller less complex systems gain a subtle edge that can stay in the realm of best in class overall. Interestingly, 70% of the music selections Jay gravitates too would perform better with the latter. Certainly this most recent duel.
20 years ago there was no digital source from 16/44K that by today's digital source standards would make the grade. Not one. In 1999 I had 4 of Jeff Kalt's Resolution Audio Quantum DAC's running in true differential mode with the best dac chip made at the time the UltraAnalog. Today that setup gets smoked by a $2k NOS DAC from China getting fed a low jitter signal juiced by a well executed FPGA.
Right now as I type I am listening through a $4k fully balanced AVC preamp from Great Britian that uses 4 Slagle autoformers and fet switches that it would not shock me if it illuminated more of the quality of Jays MSB stack than his Solution pre that is hitting the road.
My point is, back down Jay's current preferences at the extremes by 10%, pick a proper sized speaker for the room you are in, and the source and component quality that is available today and the sound you can achieve in systems in the $20-$30K range knocks on Jays door easily. I am not saying $20-30K is cheap for many, but its the cost of the Levinson reference 30 digital set from the early 90's that is a better coffee table base now.
This is my prediction for Jay. He will continue to hone his preferences, realize his most enjoyable listening rarely if ever sniffs the upper ranges of his systems dynamic capabilities. He'll dabble less in esoterica and realize many unsung geniuses of practical circuits and design all around the globe. He'll then get hooked on the unrivaled satisfaction of assembling systems that absolutely kill it for way less coin.