Well, gentlemen, there you have it. Kinda nice, eh? |
Rcn, I understand all of your concerns. You are on a familiar glide path. Everyone likes detail at first, but later, there becomes a difference between natural detail and micro-nuance, its inta-relationship, actually, and surface accuracy to the exclusion of the former. My advice:
1. When a Supratek line stage comes on the market get it. $2200 used. It won't break. If you keep two years, you can still sell then for at least $1750, conservatively speaking. But you won't want to. Get $75 Discovery black PC cord used at the beginning + NOS tubes above @$200
2. Pass Aleph 3 solid state single ended amplifier, 30 watts but quite refined and powerful. Stay SS on amp for now; you will learn what you are hearing in be in better place to get amp later, and maybe you won't want to. Get the older compact unit shaped like a small square, not the direct mail unit that is a rectangle. Out of production, but will never break. $900-$1000 used and will never, ever go below $600.
3. Get some good, but not too expensive cryo-treated outlets. See threads here, particularly Albert Porter's comments, and others. $45/ ea. max.
4. Goertz speaker wire, copper. Flat, no hassles, can't rememeber model, ask around. @ $200-300 8ft pair.
5. BMI PC's. Ask around. CPCC good too for money, but too warm for you I would think initially. If you can scam a CPCC Top Gun PC for $275 get it for amp. Don't go nuts here. $150 ea. max.
6. Purist Collossus rev. B IC 1 meter RCA termination. $300 used.
7. Speakers, admittedly, very personal, but not Monitors...or Kliptch. Don't think of speakers in terms of "watts" as if that is better. If you want to look at specs look at sentitivity and efficiency. Frankly, I'd have to think about it more, but know, while I haven't heard any Tylers - they look to be a good value - I don't think its a good idea for someone where you are to go too undeground too fast. You might have trouble selling them later and that might deter you in other areas of the system. That doesn't mean Theil, mind you, maybe just not Lowther horns, et al. right out of the box. On Kliptch: I would venture that's a boyhood memory...a band of us weed-head guys had some in college too (hooked up, get this, guys, to the first Adcom amp, the GFA-1, a real raspy blow torch of pure attitude, when Adcom wasn't, er, Sonic Frontiers...Wonder that I still have any ears left! [no comments, please on that last opening!]). What type of music you listen to becomes important here also.
Some things to consider. Others comments invited. I know, audio missionary...
Cello: bery, bery nice, lots of listening to get there; big, rich powerful sound there. If I may make a suggestion...if you like the NBS spkr cable - who wouldn't?! - look at a Hydra conditioner sometime. Also, I won't say it will work everytime, but a Shun Mook puck in the right place is, surreally, well, surreal. Something at your level to experiment with here and there, not too much, but maybe just enough. On the Graham, I have one. Stay away from the older stuff; Graham's bias towards silver-sound too much in evidence on lower treble, and other things. Good dedicated phono IC important with Graham...about $350 for a Hovland, somthing to remember...Yes, set up easy on the Graham, but talk to other Teres owners here also, many knowledgeable guys here on that, ie besides advice, you might find someone else in your area willing to come over and help with set up. (Just to listen to the the Extremas would be worth it!).
Jim2: I've heard the Turks are developing a Mk XIX upgrade to the newly released Grange, all hush-hush and all, don't want to piss off "Mick" and all - you know those pesky Turks. Seems they are still smarting over the loss of those Jupiter intermediate rangers, and still looking for a toy to replace them with, and get their minds off of Cyprus, of course, and the German opposition party trying to stick an EC boot up their quasi-capitalist asses, and...what do you really think? Have you been there yet? I thought what you said was funny though :0) |
Oh God, I love it when I'm right. Its a $10K pre, or more, for @ $2K. As for Joule comparison, I wrote the Joule TAS review many moons ago and I've kept them both. Joule is slower, creamier upper mids - which I like. Syrah is "cleaner" but without any Nordost-like harmonic stripping (which some, eventually, call "lean" when describing Nordost). More people will like the Syrah. Dynamics are incredible and also on the phono, which, for the money, is the best hi-end value I've ever seen. Best dynamic/liquidity balance I've heard while maintaing harmonic presentation. For all of you who bitch about the bullshit of the hi-end mag/manuf/advertisment/reveiewer propaganda machine, this is the one you've been waiting for that restores your faith in (audio) mankind. I've permanently resigned from the hiend, but would like some of you guys to hear a gorgeous piece for a price that is more than fair.
The big mags will never review it - no "upside", if you know what I mean - so you'll have to take the jump yourself, or find one of these lucky ones who bought one to let you listen.
On tubes, I arrived at the KenRad black 6SN7's, which IMHO are mandatory - deep, layered, rich, homeric (I just, er, had to use that term once..). Tall Mullard GZ32 on rectifier. Good luck. Glad you ended up happy BWhite. |
Jewel, let me know how you like the Virtual PC on the Supra when you get it. Thanks. |
Hey, bwhite an the rest who have one how are they sounding over the longer haul?
Twl is right: if Mick doesn't build each one with his pathological need to give you the best he can create, then you won't get what we are talikng about. I know its frustrating though.
Still loving mine. Not a burp or hickup. Its a rock, a beautiful one. Hope you all think so to when you get yours.
mark |
bwhite, yes, sensitive to tubes. I get some noise from the Ken Rad black glass but it varies with the set (I have 4 pr). Still worth it though. I suspect that damping would help, but seems Ok on my RixRax stand, which is quite heavy. Maybe try Vibrapods on the PS; I've had good luck with them as a general rule on tube gear and they are cheap to try. The transformer towers are empty? Really? I never bothered to look and it doesn't seem Mick's style to put something on just for cosmetics. Seems heavy back there. What do you mean "used" to contain transformers? Shun Mook pucks also help in these limited circumstances where component is very good and you don't want to lose harmonic performance or introduce sterility to space with over-damping. Just wood pucks, but darn it, they do work. Here's a story on them: I'm reviewing them for some Indonesian magazine and am quite skeptical. I hear differences when placed on things but no big deal. Decided to leave them on TT plinth because worked well there, but again, lots of stuff works well in varying places and you just keep going til you find the combo. Had put them on top of my ESP Concert Grands - very heavy, vibrationally inert and well-made speakers - and was about to remove them to pack 'em up when noticed that I had put them upside down. Now, I know the "manual" said be sure to put the carving side up, but frankly, with the skepticism, maybe I didn't pay as much attention. So, since I was doing a review I turned them over, not expecting anything, and Whoooa!: liquidity increased, depth increased, transients became more integrated etc. Not subtle, really let the harmonics of the speakers shine.
So, hang in there; you'll find the combo. Of course, you made need deep therapy by then... |
Wsin: while we wait for the other guys to get their units, have your impressions remained consistent? Any changes? Any problems? |
Its not a revolution, just capitalism operating as it should. Other manufacturers hate a guy like Mick because he doesn't play the game of making everyone think that we should actually thank the manufacturers for the astronomical prices. They've got a closed system where the magazines incestuously support the manufacturers' agenda and vice versa from the manufacturers through sweetheart deals to the mags. I am not saying its a star chamber conspiracy, but there is a strong, determinant and tacit one occuring where the dynamics of the market are highly distorted. This occurs because the freedom of information is controlled by those entities and people most interested in distorting it for their own gains (Does any of this sound familiar? Enron, etc?). The mags will never cover a guy like Mick because he's not going to plunk down 20K for a six month black-and-white advert contract. This unbridled ideal of infinite self-interest distorts, for the consumer, the balance between democracy (freedom of information) and capitalism (freedom of self-interest). Like many sub-systems within the greater economy, the dynamics of our little microcosm are distorted where individuals at the top of the hierarchy have gained sufficient control over the means of information dissemination to redistribute value from the serfs to the nobility.
Hey, didn't we fight this already two hundred years ago? I take that back, it is (could be still) a revolution.
What is the nature of the Matrix? Control.
If you still can't hear this, then just buy the pre. |
Thanks, Patrick, just trying to stir the pot now and then, hoping someone is listening, or perhaps considers something different. I am not a writer for Playboy, which would be a great gig, but did do my graduate work on the evolution of nation-states. Since then, I've become interested in the evolution of consciousness in general - both human and not human - which doesn't have the biggest demographic in the world, if you know what I mean (even though its a subject that deals with the whole world, which is itself its own little paradox...).
We buy stereos to stop thinking after being in a world where we are required to think all day. Importantly, the type of thinking we are letting go of when we drift into the Music is a type that is good at accumulating objects (materialism), or in the most sociopathic instances, relegating people to objects. We want to rest our minds from its attachment to form and an environment where if don't adhere to an assumption of infinite greed you risk become the prey of the other. So we close our eyes (detaching the visual from the thinking mind that is disproportionately and evolutionarily dependant on this sense) and turn down the lights and put on the Music.
The Supratek helps you do this - letting go of thinking - while also being darn good at replicating the objective way that sound sounds. Its a break, like a wonderful sleep, from the imbalance between your waning freedom and others' attachment to control it (like an object...).
So guys, I know you don't want to hear my incesant ramblings-as-filler: What about those Pre's? Yea, nyet, ambivalent, hearing the Music? |
Just get the standard.....it is what it is, not a Levinson. That's the lesson. Bwhite, how is the phono going? Etthan's too? Haven't heard either of you say, so thought it might have been disappointing over long haul, although hope not. |
Outlier, shpouldn't be burn in or PC's on amps, etc. - that's too noticeable for that. Etthan contacted me and said he was having hum problems too, so you may want to talk with him about what he's doing. Its usually grounding issues or phono cord issues, ie not shielded enough. You may want to look into things there (good phono stages are invariably quite sensitive, some more than others).
Hum is a perennial hobgobblin in phono stages and every analog enthusiasist sighs relief when he/she doesn't have any - and sometimes you just don't know where its coming from! You just have to slog away, talk to other people like you're doing, and keep at it. However, if it is the phono stage itself then the manufacturer needs to address that. Finding another analog system to plug it in that is already stable is always a good idea, although not dispositive.
Keep us updated please. |
Happy, outlier, that hum solved. Its a real pain if not found and didn't want you to get deterred from analog. Hope you like it. Try listening to analog for about an hour then switching back to CD. Somehow, the mind gets it easier that way. |
Walter, you are dead on. The stock tubes are matched and balanced to each other very nice, but its hard to look back once you put some KenRad black 6SN7's in there. I've got 4 matched pairs, all primo NOS's in original boxes and they vary on noise. With that said, all spit in my face for the first 100 hrs and still can get cranky now and then. Basically the Supra is so discerning that you are hearing the tube's operation and with such high caliber stuff verything must be dead on. Its not that the pre is unstable, its just very very good and will tell you about a tube's given quality. Its a pain if you want to mucho magic, but as walter says, i think its worth it because once you get them right, they are stable. I've tried the Brimars (no noise, but too precise for me), Sylvania VT231 (alot like the black Kens, not as enveloping or expansive, but relatively quiet) and the ones I'm using now, Tungsol round plate black glass, which on this smaller system I prefer (sweeter, better micro-details on chestiness, guitar body, etc., not as expensive in depth field as Kens) and with very low noise.
I bought some tubes from a good dealer (Sylvania green letters) and they were so noisy I traded them back in for some RCA 12BH7 inputs on my amps. It was in the beginning and I thought, oh my God, I'll never get the noise down in this pre - but it wasn't the pre, it was the tubes.
You are getting a custom handmade $10-15K pre for $2500-5K and at that level things become exacting - its part of owning a Lamhorghini. Be patient, but know that it will never be a Spectral. Its not perfect, and should be kept standard, but if you get it right its very stable and will last you twenty years or more. |
ditto on twl on quiet vestigial enlivened silence vs. SS blackness or voidness. Listen to pre with music and the space will be what it supposed to be.
twl, I can't stand it anymore! You have a great system, really know your analog, and the Magus is a fine pre (I assume you've got it tweeked), BUT, YOU HAVE TO GET A SYRAH!! At your point of appreciation its simply a CRIME that you can't get into one. I don't care if you have to find pennies in behind the sofa cushions and starve, GET ONE as soon as you can!!
There, I feel better....
Bwhite, very happy for you. A guy with a great system told me a couple of months ago that his Aesthetix external PS, NOS tubed, two box IO w/ vol. pots direct into amps inched out the Syrah in a couple areas, and I believe him (perhaps in his system), but for the $ in one chassis, there is NOTHING that touches the Syrah. Everyone should tell the gurus to stuff it for their next purchase and get one (then do the same with a Teres TT, also a great value).
Incidentally, my Syrah didn't like the Bybee Sig conditioner I had around; likes to be plugged directly into the wall if you can believe that (!).
Would be interested to hear what PC's you guys have tried on it. Thanks in advance. |
twl, you have me drooling too!! Yea, the Berning is a keeper. A custom Supratek in front of it makes my knees go weak. Not much experience here with the 45 tube; so scarce and expensive try to keep myself from going places where my wallet might begin to scream these days. I'm with the WE300B and like it, but the choked amp, custom tweeked has me berry, berry envious!!
Thank you for sharing your enthusiasm. |
Ads, I'm a tube guy, but if you like the Spectral/Supratek combo, I'd be hard pressed to find an alternative; I think that you might miss that iron fist authority of the Spectral's and their vanishingly low "noise floor". On the other hand, if that was the case, then I'd expect that you would have hated the noise of analog too, so somewhat perplexed what to recommend. When bwhite was putting some gear together, I recommended the 100W LAMM 1.1 monos. They're hybrid tube input, SS out and everyone i know has loved them. bwhite hasn't said much about them to me, but you might ask him. Apart from that, you'd be into a ton-o-tubes and I don't think that's the right move for you right away.
What did you have in mind: stay with SS, $ to spend, etc.? |
Noble, on the volume knob being tight: mine too at first. I think its the change in humidity from AUST to here and the wood expanding. Its loosened up over time. I also treat the wood weekly with a quality furniture cream (not oil).
Noble, I also have a AirTight amp with Syrah, and the Syrah shows that the AirTight is not as complex in harmonics as it should be (and outfitted with NOS Mullards and WE300B's it should be very complex). This is a house sound I believe with AirTight and many other Japanese tube amp makers; the Jap tube market, drawn also to the dynamics of horns, IMHO tends also to give a little up in core harmonics to get that dynamic projection quality (AudioNote Kondo IC's/Spkr wire have same dynamic/harminic balance/signature).
Aside from changing amps, I have worked on the Syrah tube complement. I ended with Tungsol round plates for the 6SN7, but could easily live with the Black Kens. Also, the rectifier effects sound appreciably; I have an RCA-marked Coke bottle Mullard in there now and find it far superior to the 6 or so others I tried. The past Supratek distributor sent me this one, so if you want to know about it he's probably the best place to start (I'll send you his e-mail if you contact me). On isolation, bwhite I'm sure is correct, but I have mine on a Rix Rax stand I designed and it doesn't seem to matter after that. However, airborne-sourced tube microphonics have been significantly effected by tube dampers. I tried several and in all locations and the Shun Mook small valve resonators on the rectifier and on each 6SN7 did the trick for me, and especially versus others on the harmonic/naturalness issue. I just got a matched pair of Tungsol JAN 5881's and have been running them for about two weeks. My impression is very sweet, has led to slight melodic integration (better playing together, so to speak, again one of the AirTight's small weaknesses) between players, and even between hands on the piano, but dynamics compressed and voice has lost some presense, in sense that projection qualities of voice are diminished. Image size slao diminished, and too much. Hard call, but even with my marked toleration for lushness, I do not like compression. We'll see, but I think the image issue will break their back eventually.
I owned a CAT MkII for a year, so can't comment on the Ultra differences with Supra, but I always found the CAT resistant to changes/mods/rolling etc. That's good for most people, but I like to have some latitude to go farther. As I said, for many guys out there, and considering the phono that might get them into that, its a no-brainer, in that context. And thats what excited me.
Still would like to hear from you guys on PC's if you worked that at all.
Good luck. |
bwhite, what going on with your system!!? |
WOW, all the way to analog! Very excited for you, bwhite. Let us know how the Supra phono sounds in comparison, and then again when the Teres is introduced. BTW, that friend of yours who bought the CJ amps (and I think the Oracle later too) but wanted to jimmy the Syrah up with HT extras, how is his system going, if you know (sorry, I forgot his name. You get a guy to buy $10K of gear and then can't remember his name! whatta jerk I am, please apaologize for me...) |
TOK, you're right, juice makes all the difference with Digital. Its just tough to tell someone who wants a bit better CD player that he should also load mucho bucks into a power cord. I remember when I wrote this review in TAS on the ESP cord (ten years ago - damn it, I'm soooo old!!). Not much was out yet - the Positive Feedback crowd was just onto PC's - and people were still slinging arrows over IC's. I got a ton-o-grief off that piece from people who just didn't think wire was "technology" or was a "component" (which is what I said then), so I know its very tough to get people to go there, even now. Frankly, in the beginning it was tough to get me to go there! A year later, however, there I was with a PS Audio Lambda II transport, power filtering devices, dedicated lines, ground post, the Timber DAC getting all kinds of treatment, going through a year long digital cable shootout that nearly drove me crazy, and an audit and tactic digital "interface" stuck between the transport and DAC - four PC's in all just for the CD "player"!!
Like analog, digital takes work, even when convenience is one of your motives (its one of mine!)and I'm sure the Burmester is very fine (I haven't hear it, but I'd be taken by surprise if those factors above were ameliorated to a sufficient degree - but I'm always willing to see!), but for the bucks vs. performance vs. involvement, its hard to slight what we have in analog now.
And that's where the Syrah comes in: you get a verey, very good line stage but with a great phono stage for a pittance, and overall, a great product that many people would never touch because its not in the mags, and performance that they might have never touched if they had been forced to pony up big bucks for a mag-touted pre.
I'm sorry its taking so long to get units; its very frustrating. I warned Mick about this, but also respected his position that he wanted to make them himself at a pace that would ensure each one was what he expetcted it to be. I guess its the difference between manufacturer and craftsman, but I do understand the frustration... |
I heard the Syrah with the Berning on Acoustat 1+1 electrostats (Discovery sig wire I think, which could have been better...).
Both have similar characters: liquid but very clear and dynamic. Not overly-accurate type of clear, but naturally transparent. My feeling was that the combo would benefit from some NOS tubes (both were stock at the time) and better IC's that would inable translation of greater bloom and depth (not the Discovery's strong suit). Maybe an NBS or Purist between the two might be nice.
If you like the Merlins like Tubegroover, then you will like the Syrah very much. You can then balance the detail by the rolling of the 6SN7's in the pre: Brimars if you like more detail on transient; Ken Rad black glass for more lush presentation. The pre is very nuetral - like the Berning - in this regard, in the best sense of the word.
Tubegroover, quite inetrested in your opinion when you get the Supratek. Let us know please. |
BWhite is correct with many more advanced systems, especially ones that aim towards musicality, rather than just always going towards accuracy; namely, power conditioners become percieved as progressively sterile, in that the space is rendered more void-like, and harmonics loose that very-hard-fought-for last smidgen of harmonic depth (leading edge transients on breath inhale/exhale can loose "wetness" also, etc.). So, it gets tough. This is why you saw many guys going to Bybee's some years ago, and why some more are going towards Hydra's now; because their systems get along far enough and they still are following the "lower noise floor gives better sound" philosophy, but haven't realized yet that they can get by with "less" these days (see below)and these conditioners do the least harm in more advanced systems (I haven't heard the Stealth, but the systems I've seen like it do not lead me to a different conclusion).
The Supratek pre seems to act in this manner, in the sense that it likes good outlets (I have a...can't remember the name, the expensive ones that came out a few years back, mine has a "381" model number...I'm getting old), but doesn't seem to be cheered up by conditioners (it hated my Bybee Sig and that is one of the more palatable ones IMHO). I've never had a pre dislike the Electraglide Fat Boy, but the Syrah sure didn't like it. I ended up with the Discovery that I fished out of a box I hadn't looked into in ten years and it does no harm - which is a good thing. (Bwhite, I've got a Bybee PC laying around in the attic so I'll listen to it later on and let you all know what I think).
When you first start a system, and you get everything relatively balanced, power conditioners make a big difference. This is because, invariably, your system is digitally based, weighted towards accuracy (you can improve accuracy in a beginner to mid level system much more vis-a-vis harmonics, space, etc.). The digital gear likes to be filtered and the removal of artifacts and distortion in the space renders the source in greater relief, and whatever wrong the conditioner is committing on the musicality route is unpercieved because the system can't hear it yet, or its lack, so to speak. Then you follow the natural route and look into PC's, and, yes, they help. But, you start getting the creeping feeling (especially if you introduced tubes along the way) that "something" is being taken away. And, so, you get in this PC shopping/auditioning spree trying to find the balance - and sometimes you do, its just everytime you introduce a more musical component, the balance seems to go out of wack again, and always sourced in origin to the conditioner/PC system interaction. Finally, you end up removing the conditioner and concentrate on the cords and outlets, and the last five years of advancement in PC's makes this even more feasible (and, hence, why more people are beginning to see it). Conditioners came first many moons ago and were a good thing in the absense of better PC's outlets etc., but now this approach to system building is not as well entrenched. Yes, still keep the conditioner on the dig gear, and, yes, if you get a lot of crap into your lines from where you live you may need one, but just consider as your system advances that that conditioner that served you well in the mid-level of your system, may not be the same thing later on. Things change... |
Hey great, glad people aren't getting upset. I would feel the same if it was me, but, from a manufacturer's point of view - an expanding manufacturer - its important to keep in mind that there are all kinds of customers, and as volume increases, invariably, you encounter those who exepect ARC-type service.
Frankly, I think its the craftsman part of the equation that is the special part of this, and that is one of the things I respect Mick most for - as I do Jud Barber at Joule. Please understand that I did not mean to imply that less attention was the solution, or that a solution was even called for based upon the one comment above, only to remind that comunication on a product people are waiting months for from Australia with minimal US distributor support is important, and progressively so.
Tube and Dennis: I look forwards to your learned comments when yours come in. |
Hi Dennis, I think you know more technically than me, but I never liked transformers - even less than the so-called "purifiers" like the Bybee. Transformers came first - the big Tice's if you remember, commercially - and I always felt that there was some kind of ultra low level...discontinuity, is the only way I can put it (this in addition to the harmonic denuding, which happened because the pressurized "feel" of air, both within the sound projection ans around it, was reduced along with the mechanical artifacts of distortion). It was as if there was a gross distortion removed - the so-called grunge - but then also this subtle tension was introduced. It sounded like a super high frequency oscillation that could barely be heard, so you thought it could easily be ignored, but it couldn't. Hard to "see" if looking for it, but looking out of your peripheral perception, it was always there, and was quite un-natural. Was it the electro-magnetic fields feeding back into the IC's, or the nature of transformers in general, or were they just not good enough then, or...I don't know why technically, objectively, and there might be a good technical argument why transformers should sound better. But I've found that, like most ideas, even scientiific ones, they are good starting points - good pointers towards the truth, some better than others - but not determitive as far as experience. Although, again, I don't claim to be the expert on conditioners because I stopped listening then some time back, just my opinion.
Mprime, I heard the Supratek with an Aleph 3 amp - nice 'lil SS piece - in two systems, both sounded very nice, and particularly with the NBS Pro IC in between, which kept the Aleph from drifting into too much clearness (my experience with Aleph is that you want to accentuate - not tone, but bring out - its spatial qualities. With that approach, it usually maintains its detail/accuracy performance; but if you go for more detail on the IC/PC, you can sometimes end up with an amp that sounds like its not an SE SS Pass design, ie it sounds more "transistorized" so to speak). I had the Aleph/Supra in that later system for three months, but the NBS improved both systems in the same way. Actually, the Supra and Aleph sound quite alike, although the Supra is more liquid. Great dynamics, clarity, naturalness - just like you hear in the Pass stuff vis-a-vis other SS amps - but more liquidity and continuity in the Supra. If you like the Pass, you will like the Supratek. |
Six months is a long time IMHO. At some point, I would think that orders should be slowed, or buyers apprised, ahead of time, about length of wait. Basically, I'm glad people are getting a great product, that Mick is being rewarded for his work, but I know audiophiles are an antsy group when it comes to getting that next component. Would hate Mick's rep to suffer because he took on too much, no matter how well meaning...I've seen it happen before to some real nice guys...On the other hand, this is what happens when people BS'd over years find a great product, and, wonders of wonders, the new, small manufacturer doesn't let the small-fish-bowl notoriety go to his head and jack the prices up - which happens many many times. So, there's that too. Oh well, just have to wait I suppose. |
Great Jazzdude! Yes, I would say that the Supra's err just a smidgen towards "clearness" as opposed to sterilty; because they are not hyper-detailed, are liquid and not upfront I don't think they could be characterized as analytic in any way. I love my Joule, but its lushness is not what I recommend for everyone. Personally, I love wallowing in lush-ness, but I know most people do not, especially people coming from SS systems, or even tube pre/SS amp systems. In this sense, the Supra's are perfect for most people, and given the cost/performance ratio, a real no-brainer for 90% of even the hard core people out there. As I said, perhaps an Aesthetix IO with dual PS's or an AN M8 can take it out, but below ten grand (or more...), and with systems of 50K or less (or more in some instances...), its really a foregone decision. And that's why I've been pushing this piece so hard. Not in an absolute sense, but in an absolutely wonderful sense that more people can really make a BIG jump in their systems for a minimum of scratch, and let them start putting the money into other parts of the system where the Supra's now let them hear what some people have been saying and they just didn't/couldn't believe it. Its a shame that, usually, those super magical systems cost the price of a Mercedes, but with the Supra more people will be that much closer - and that's a great thing... Happy for you.
BTW, NOS tubes sputter a bit now and then. Doesn't mean they are going out, just the way they are sometimes. The right channel Tung round plate 6SN7 in mine was whining at a very low level last night and gone today. Did it two months ago also, so who knows, still sounds great. |
Bwhite, good comparison of the black Ken and black Tungsol. Yes the Ken has better weight on bottom which lends an expansiveness to the sound, and particularly, at least on my system, in the depth field on such things as large drums (listen to Gladiator on this for example). I do not find the Kens veiled, but if a system is a little dark, or tends to veer off that way a bit more than some, it can sound...um, distant in that darkness, if you don't like that sort of thing (I do, BTW). Also, while I don'y think either is a screamer up top, they sound both about the same to me in extension. Its just that with the Ken bigger on bottom, perhaps it is percieved as being a bit less extended on top, maybe. Add in the darkness aspect (I love gloomy Connemara days on the coast of Ireland...) and I think the mind would percieve it as rolled on top, maybe, who knows...
Anyway, I settled for the Tung too, but it was a close call; I know what Bwhite is saying. And, yes, it was the harmonic sweetness that won out (and something else, see below). If the system I have the Syrah in now was itself more full range, however, I wouldn't be surprised if I went back to the Kens. One thing though, even more than the sweet/weight trade-off: the Tungs lend more of a feeling that players are more integrated in their playing. For instance, listen to well recorded acoustic guitars. One drawback of the Tungs - and this may be an interaction with my particular system, like a system might veer towrds darkness more than another even though it starts off as no maore dark - is that the voice image is smaller with the Tungs. You get used to it, and its not un-realistic, but I do miss the large projection quality of the Kens...maybe I'll put them back in, just for a second this weekend, and...well, there you have it.
Bwhite, better watch NOS-ing that IO. You may need deep, deep therapy at some later time (24, right?)... |
I would like to know that too. Given the proportion of sales to the numkber of recent used ones for sale, like a spat, there seems to be something going on, maybe...
Are people getting the Supra and finding out its not for them? Let's hear the negative with the positive, if any. Fair is fair. |
You guys are, of course, right. For myself, I know what I hear in the Supratek, but thought there might be some issues with system capatibility with some others out there, or some reliability issues arising as time goes on, or something better they heard, beyond the issues of the economics of our time (can anyone hear that sucking sound?) or our audiophile brethren's admittedly/notoriously fickle nature. Blips on the screen should be inquired of, I think. In any event, as you all have noted, nice resale. |
Good. Very happy for you guys.
I went out on a limb and wrote a glowing review on the Supratek (never published by UA) a couple years back when there were only a few units in the country and have been very supportive in encouraging others to buy it, so, more than usual, I watch to see if people are hearing what I did and are happy. If not, then I want to hear that too.
Yes, its a no brainer...and, good point about the NOS tubes: without them I also hear it as subtlely, um, too clear, or, perhaps, a tendancy towards that with the wrong matched IC's, and particularly wrong IC's on all digital systems. Something to keep in mind if it sounds a bit "lean" in harmonics... |
As a general rule, I would stay away from IC's like Nordost. Or, put another way, cables that tend to reduce spatial qualities relative to the source, and particularly those that advance a detailed orientation to ones that are more balanced and holistically natural. System synergy is always a consideration, but I think these general rules would still apply to the Syrah. I use NBS Pro series I RCA IC between pre and AirTight amp and an Audionote Kondo Az series IC from CD to pre. This does not mean you should veer all the way towrds Cardas Cross, just that "accuracy school" IC's should be avoided. I don't have the experience with some of the newer IC's that many here do - Virtual Dynamics, Sakura OTA, etc. - but I would guess that a Purist Proteus Rev B might sound pretty nice too (caveat: some good ears here hyave said that the new lower priced Purists compete with the Proteus line quite well). So, maybe others could chime in (I'm also still waiting for that PC advice...) |
Like the wine variety, Sear-a (soft a, accent on Sear) |
Tubegroover: phoenetics were never my strong suit: actually, Sear-ah would be better, with something done to the "ah" when pronounced that I don't know how to denote; not nesessarily accented on "ah", but open mouthed...oh well.
Outlier, I does know what'cha mean...although at $220 I'd rather opt for a Bordeaux. But 99 scored, if you trust Parker on the Aussies, ain't bad at $220, although sounds a bit young right now...Slurp, slurp.
Yes, I know, just one more outlandish, decadent hobby... |
Thanks alot guys, you've just provided me with a few more venues to vent my Epicurean nueroses, which, of course, makes you both enablers!! :0)
I'm lost in the '00 Bordeauxs right now, like a needle skipping in a groove (Help!). The Gruaud Larose is very fine...
Oh BTW Outlier, at $159 I'm speed dialing Costco's at lunch...So, much for that new amp, wire.... |
If you run digital into SS direct - and like SS and digital - then you will like it better direct; more detail and you don't mind the ever more heightened incongruency between void space, even void-er, and detail (a bias towards hearing the detailed sound source over percieving the surrounding dimensional space and the two's relationship, i.e "transparent" as to sound projection, desiring it to be in greater relief from ever increasing void space, thereafter defined as a lower background "noise floor"). If you value dimensional spatial charactersistics, the aforementioned relationship to sound projection, etc., and usually, for the same reason are therefore into analog and NOS tubes, then you percieve the hardwired tube pre as the "fulcrum" of the system regarding the evolution of these traits and relationships in the future.
A little more complicated than what Jazzdude said, but same thing in more "objectified" subjective terms. |
Oh yea, guys above who know about the WE 350B, please educate me: tell me about the various vintages, any difference soundwise, costs justified between them or just crazy collectors for the older stuff, like with the 300B (although there it may be justified...). Thanks, Mark. |
I don't think its true balanced, meaning balanced from input to output within pre, but rather, just has balanced connectors to enable those with balanced systems to get a Supratek. To be honest, I think balanced was a bigger deal back when RCA dig cable connectors sounded like crap, or people needed anything just to help a Theta DAC out of its raspiness, or a SS Krell out of its, well, you know... With tubed systems, particularly hard-wired ones, RCA is perfectly fine. Of course, many have balanced CD hardware already when they arrive at a Supratek from SS/digital-based systems, so maybe, justifiably - economically justified - they need balanced pre inputs. But, on the whole, IMHO the whole balanced pre/amp thing may be past its prime...Not directed at you, audioobsessed, just throwing kindling on the fire. :0) |
Passion, passion, not a bad thing, if directed appropriately...
Even ignoring Mick's response, I don't think this is an example of the manipulative marketing stategy of the Sig model, or Master series, or Mk II, etc. that we are all on the gaurd for and which we, assumably, have assumed we had, in some small measure, escaped from when purchasing our original Syrah et al. Small manufacturers who are passionate - and, of course, this passion is where the original pre's derived - also tend to passionately introduce new models. Commonsense wise, Mick should have mentioned the upgrade path, but, as some have noted, I don't think that was what he was meaning to talk about in the first place.
If I had just purchased a Grange and saw this message, then my initial reaction might have been as some of the above. But, then again, I think I would have contected Mick directly on that matter, and I'm sure, given Mick's past performance, I would have been accommodated in the context of the retail price and potential upgrade, don't you think?
As for myself, I still own the Syrah - one of the early ones - and I know that its resale value, like all of our components, will eventually fall. In that context, a question: have we all become a wee bit spoiled that our pre's are holding their value so well?
Its the stereo game. Mick didn't invent it, and he's not, like most manufacturers, abusing it. Its a luxury, one that 99.9% of the planet's population can not even consider. Within that sub-culture, .1% you have found a product that comes along only .1% of the time. A new model for guys who can shell $7500 for a pre doesn't change that... |
Bwhite, get off the merry-go-round, fast, please, escape, ESCAPE!!!! :0) |
Tonneson...rigghhhhtttt.
Now, how about that Pass Aleph P thang just a sttin' there, justa dyin' for a shot across that dare bow! Oh well...all is happy in Whoville tonight. |
Khrys, I'll bite...
you jealous little baby.
how's that? |
Tom, I know you aren't going to make people "see" by listening to stereo, but its more than just airflow, isn't it? (although looking at "airflow" is a good too, or 52's, 600's, .314's, or, um, infinite fractal regressions beneath all those numbers, right?). On the other hand, I think a lot of people are here not simply for the gear (although, we should admit, it is always a remnant of consideration, as I look out at my black and gold and rosewood gleaming totem of "me"...).
It may sound contrite, but only because it remains so simple: people come here, you too, because you are in search of "beauty", in this case in sound transmuted into the "shape" of music in your mind. And, I would submit, that attraction is a symptom of a recoil from its opposite: not-beauty, or what is percieved as such. People come home from their capitalist-conformist lives, hardly what Locke had in mind, and sit down to go to a place, which is in their mind. No, stereo does not change ground orientation - how one is in the world when not listening to stereo - but it is a tonic from that world, is it not? Isn't that a gradiation you are willing to concede; have already conceded by still being here?
Eccl: love to hear you on NOS tubes! More of that! Please. Yes, the Mullard 12AU7's are a good point to make, I have several pairs for my amp and arrived at them the hard way, which I would further submit, is how I arrived there. Consider this: I have people contact me to ask about stuff - which is quite nice, if they are, and I know you help around too - but isn't it true that sometimes you can say to someone do-this-or-that, just a suggestion, and they head head-strong into what Tom Gillette says? Its conformism, attachment to the feeling of security, actually a secondary symptom of the fear of making a mistake (um, that others might see) that then, in fact, causes the mistake. And it takes a few knocks on the head to go out and get a tube-tester, doesn't it? So, is the path ever separate from the eventual knowledge gained? I used to be more impatient, but, you know, everyone is in different places, just trying to get there, whether they know it or not...whether they like 62's in public, and then, the tonic when they are alone... (sorry Tom, just want you to talk more, you know...and, of course, see how many hyphenated words I can work into one run-on - oh, there I go again - sentence...:0).
Question: Isn't the frustration only a frustration at where you once were? Hmmm.
Great music in the next room right now, and good people here, "difference" doesn't matter; they are all going towards "quality."
The Supratek ain't a bad place to start...
Mark |
kryhst, and evryone else...sorry, got off on a detour out there, somewhere.
Hi Zaikes. Soup sounds great. Thank you for remembering me. Merry Kryhstmas :0)
Khrys: hmmm, discretion is the better part of...would you like to pick a subject with me? I will let you pick it, and go first. Say, a Ch. Lafite Roth '86, or why a scientific instrument's product may deviate from what you say is the truth, or, better, what you say is the Truth...hmmm, references, not-so-obtusely to socio-economic class, I wonder how/why you did that, just for credibility sake - that's the context you impliedly offer - but, is that true (ask yourself...)?
Well, the question: what is your system that your socio-economic status has wrought? As in, the context for your aspersions, beyond the pat-old-and-tired irrational regressive one, sans argument or evidence...or context. You know, the first requirement of empiricism applied; that evidence asserted exist within a context of events to minimally qualify to be subjected to a peer group. I think even Tesla would tell you that one, or Descartes, or Kuhn, or...bwhite.
What are you doing now? Do you think I know? I think I do.
Come a little closer, come a little closer, so I can see you better...said the cat.
Mark |
Ecclec: yes, I hear you, but now, here, do you see? I'm not much of an appeaser. Besides, I know who Krhys "is", so I knew it wouldn't go far; anonymity is the hobgobblin of small minds. I called him out and the rest did the rest. But I know what you are saying and thank you for reminding me (6ch hits me with a stick!). BTW, you have very good ears.
Khrys, thank you for your, er, conciseness in the face of such..I would have picked Borderline Narcissistic Disorder, however, so you might want to pick another subject...
Carry on. |
Good morning everyone. Snowing here, 6 inches they say, or said...Chicago in winter. But last night, with only 12 hours until the storm hit, the meteorologists, who get their data from the NWS, a bunch of scientists, are now off on the timing of the arrival of the storm by 8 hours. How could they be so wrong, so close, with all of their advanced science and all? Does this pattern seem to be increasing, even as technology becomes more complex, or is it just me? A lot of gulls in the midwestern parking lots feeding at the edges these days, don't you think? Strange Attractors, in a turbulence theory sense, showing up in greater iterations?
On Krhys: I thought he was funny too. Yet, underneath, I know what he is saying, and it may be a little closer to what I've alluded to above, and to what Supra owners find when they purchase the pre and why they are actually here also. What could possibly be the connection between Kryhs's attacks (challenges?) and to what we have found, and the gulls for Christ sake?
Khyrs is sensitized to the fact that "science" -its toolmaking, the consequences its assumptions engender (and even though he may not see this in himself, be able to admit the heresy as yet) - will not necessarily give you the Answer. He swoops in, a missionary to help us see, to pierce our unreflective bubble, as he assumes. He's frustrated with the scientific true believers who adopt any piece of gear (scientific instrument) just because someone else has told them it will save them, give them beauty. But here, he's been mistaken; this group has found an instrument that produces "beauty" at a "good" value, relatively speaking; he has found the people that he wants the scientifically attached to be (again, even though, in the mirror of himself, he may still say he is whole bread "scientific").
So, basically he's more like us than he thinks (and you to him...). Here's a question, for Kryhs too: Do you think it was a coincidence that Kryhs landed here in his frustrated search? Hmmm...Welcome Krhys. And, yes, more funny please. Love the funny!
On Bob: Great Bob! Eccle, good point, how about this also: that the Supra is able to be inserted into many systems, yes, but also, thereafter allowing a long progression in the other components evolution around it? Some products, although great, have a "personality". Not just in their sound, but in how they intra-act with the rest of the system, both intially and as the system changes in toto. Some components "personality" doesn't show up right away; they can play with their neighbors fairly easily at first, but then, as other components move up to that level in quality, they become more "dominating." This can be very hard to hear and leads to much angst (and spending of money). I've found that over time, the Supra maintains its, for lack of a better word, personality and "suseptibility" to integration with other components over time. That is not to say that it does not have a sound, which brings me to...
Eccl, don't you think/hear that the Supra is on the "clear side" of harmonic complexity? I mean, it seems that the Supra, while neutral towards other components, itself seems to respond better to an increase of "lushness" (hence, the black Kens, etc.) in the core harmonic pojection than to a decrease in what people mistakenly refer to as "noise floor" of space? Noise floor seems acceptable to most here, but complexity in harmonic fabric seems to be what people are going after. Just an idea...
And this why, personally, I recommend it to many people who are at the place of making that jump from perfecting accuracy (usually at a place of overly euphonic tube pre mated to good SS amp and, er, neutral skr/IC wire, chosen to then balance back the other way) to "something more." They are at this balancing place, the merry-go-round place, but feel there is "something more"; can feel it in their bones but don't know how to get there. And yet, a too lush pre inserted into their advanced SS-sensitized ears sounds not "clear enough". The Supra seems to be a great "bridge" pre for many of these people to get the "accuracy" they intially value and, at once, not be scared off by too much euphonics, and yet still get a pre that does many of the things that tube guys talk about at the upper levels of tube systems. And, to boot, as said above, allows significant evolution of the system after that with minimal integration problems.
Just a few ideas, certainly I could be wrong, hearing things that aren't there, but I'd be interested in what some of you think as you've had it a while.
Thanks again for the talk. Incidentally, can anyone answer the unanswered gull part? Is it "inciden-tal, ie hopelessly tangental? Why are you so happy, and defend it so valiantly to Krys, with the "beauty" you found?
I know, I know, that Asa pie-in-the-sky bastard, off the thread again!! Hope springs eternal... |
Eccl: nice response, thank you; I just knew there was some juicy-good experience lurking back there...:o) Yes, agreed, NOS tubes are different in different applications, but I guess what I was trying to say: Which one do you reach for first when approaching any system with the Supratek? The initial orientation, I would resubmit, is to reach for an insertion of the "organic" first, reaching for the Ken's, that act being itself a symptom of the slight leaning of the Supratek in the opposing direction towards "clearness", in a general sense. And, yes, Mullards, particularly vintage EL 34's in a CJ, might make me pause with the black Kens. I assume you were using that extreme as illustration... (and, so you know, eccl, I'd like to respond to a lot more of what you said, maybe later).
On auidiotweak, generally, well, mostly generally:
I know what audiotweek is saying - that we must be careful that we are not hearing what someone has told us we should hear, or that we want to hear. Or, even, that we don't tell ourselves, in that self delusion, that the euphonic "color difference" is the "organic" that catalyzes the listening mind towards deeper experience of the beauty and meaning within music (as opposed to just listening to "colorations" in sound). And yet, even as I say the above, can't you perceive the obvious difference in those two orientations? Jim said it well, and, er, more concisely than moi: different is not synonomous with better.
A focus on "different" can be seen as analogous to a focus on changes in relative quantity (different "colors" but really just the same in ability to catalyze deeper listening experiences), while that orientaion which is conoted by "better", addresses concepts of "quality" (and which I would submit means, in our context, a component that is "better" able to catalyze a deeper relationship between mind and sound/music). What jim says is, and what I was trying to clumsily say above about people at a transition point when approaching the Supratek, is that people here seem ready to get past the merely quantitative, some perhaps just at the precipice; of now looking for that "something" in their system that transcends the quantitive search for accuracy in its comparison of the same "colors", or "details", or....its now about the pull of "quality" that brings people here as a primary motive of will. And having just arrived there/here, naturally, they seek out an informed peer group; informed both quantitatively AND qualitatively.
I think audiotweak knows this deep down, he's just spent too much time selling gear to guys with money and no ears (ie the will to go deeper in themselves as secondary orientation, desire to induce coveting in others primary). Seeing this too much can lead to a bit a post modern malaise, eh, audiotweak? :0)
Remember, though, if you want to take on the mantle of teacher, one teaches through inspiration - as in, inspire the qualitative will towards deeper musical experience - not just the conveyance to others of "method" or "design", or "implementation" of method and mechanos (all quantitative-orientated words, something to self-reflectiveley ponder given the above...).
Einstein said, "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."
Inspire first, towards that "something" beyond mechanos, even while explaining the implementation of empiric comparison. Yet never forget, the former is primary in our search, whether it be for "better" sound, or "better" mathematics, or better "design", or...I think you know this too, audiotweak.
You know, making inspiration towards "quality" the primary orientation doesn't always and necessarily mean irrational regression...That's where hope rests. |
Damn, Bryon, you are getting jaded in your "old" age! It didn't take you very long, did it? Do you remember? Anyway, you don't have to answer (but, are you ready to?). Very proud, if I might say, if you allow me; wish I could give you a million dollars to blow on WAVAC amps! But, then again, you may not now. Funny how that happens...
Here's something odd: as I wrote the above I kept wondering - What happened to bwhite? And there you were, two seconds after the post, checking my spelling with this wine in my hand. Just randomness, I suppose, can't prove it to another, so it must be not-real...Must be the wine, yea, that's the easy answer...
Where are you "at" with the Supra? And, with all else? Hit another desert, yet? |
Tom, don't quit. I really don't think bwhite wants you to either; its the desert and all, all the 62's...
You are a bright person, and bigger than that. We may disagree, but not really.
Consider that...
I challenge you, in the best way, to shrluff it off and bring up another subject, in the stereo concept of course.
You've talked about what others have done, but I've been holding it out to you (to pick the good to talk about, or choose to ignore, or choose...): what stereo piece really makes you swoon? And, why?
And, finally, if bright, you must say what constitutes ignorance. Its only fair, all around.
Mark |
Rcn: nice on the...poetry (I liked it, actually, quite smart!), but are you trying to say you are a relativist, ie. that all fingerprints are equal? Haven't met many scientists that feel that way...Really though, I'd be interested.
Question to start you off, if you choose to start there: What is "natural"? If sound is defined, as a scientist would, as a materialist phenomenon, then all sound is in nature; in that all sound you hear is in "nature," as that all sound is in reality. Ergo, the stereo sound is as "natural" as any other sound.
So, assuming, arguendo, that all sounds are, um, real, then there must be some other "reference" that you are using than merely the materialist objective. Which, of course, leaves the subjective. Or, more precisely, the mind's relationship with the objective. Which necessarliy implies, that the difference you are citing between stereo sound and, um, "natural" sound, is one of perception by the mind. On the other hand, maybe you mean that a stereo will never replicate the objective sound propogation of an orchestra, which seems to be an obvious given, so it couldn't be that. Which then makes one assume that, again, you must mean the subjective, and...well, maybe you should say what you mean clearer. You can leave in the fun too.
Tom: disappointed that you can't seem to come in out of the cold. Consider this: the root of the word "ignorance" is to ignore...
bwhite: you are a scrappy guy, no doubt. Just be careful, though, don't get lost in that forest of rectifiers (like I've done in the forest of Toms!)
Yea, tubegoover: I never understand these guys: give 'em a bit-o-knowledge or socio-economic leverage - I'm a physicist, I'm a rich guy, I'm a dealer, I, I, I - and they think that the world falls away. Credentials don't answer the question, WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT WAY AND WHAT ARE YOUR LOGICAL/EXPERIENTIAL REASONS FOR SAYING SO?
It seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Or, is this just a small white guy sword fight with no faces/answers? |
Tom, nice post, thank you. Although I know what you mean by some posts on this site - most sites, actually - it is also true that many times a similar affliction is one of patronizing criticism without rationale, which, ironically, hypocritically, or at least in my book, is of a similar-in-kind offense as the one you cited. I do not think that citing an offense on the latter constitutes being "whacked." But enough of that...
I agree with you completely on your post, but with all the do-dads out there it sometimes takes a lot of experimentation to "see" the fluid thing. You can change a room a lot, but its best to let it breath. In the best of these types of rooms, some people initially call them live rooms, but as you said, its more than that, although, metaphorically, the room does seem more alive, as in organic, symmetrical in how sound "moves" (propagates/dissipates). The mind, on an existential level, is very sentitive to time/space incongruencies and a damped-type room can many times worsen things on that level while, on a level of perception that is less deep (where the mind is not listening as deep) some things may be perceived as improved. Which is why its tough to get a room right. Some rooms are well nigh impossible, but if you have a decent starting place you can have a room that is receptive, as in, one that allows energy to flow (its a vessel, as you say). Or rather, the room allows a simulcrum of the illusion of non-stereo produced music through a stereo instrument. The sound is not the same as heard in an orchestra, BUT the mind's perception of that musical event is catalyzed to similar depths of perception; the sound may be different, but the experience of the mind is similar (that's for you, Rcn...). A good, en-livened room can be a vessel for that message to be heard and experienced.
I remember I once visited the good men at Shun Mook at their homes in CA. The man who owned the company collected violins and when he placed a certain violin hanging by a thread centered in space behind the speakers, the dynamic/spatial nature of the room became a touch more "organic", continuous, etc. Even more strangely, he then put up a very rare and beautiful sounding violin in the same place and the room was utterly transformed, all the above traits seeming to be released and settled into each other, until all you did is fall back into the music and forget those traits at all; the mind was not cued to deep spatial incongruencies of sound movement and so you went deeper. It was an interesting experiment...
|
