Hi Guys
MickM here- as you know I dont think manufacturers should actively participate in these forums as it is too hard to stay unbiased, and I believe the quality of the product should do all the talking from the manufacturers side.
However, the ongoing issue of noise and microphonics needs to be addressed as there seems to be a basic misunderstanding of it.
It's all related to the TOTAL gain of the preamp/power amp system.
All amplifiers, pre or power, have an inherant noise floor that in a compatible system is inaudible.
The Syrah or Chardonnay , with their gain switches set to max are very high gain preamps. Used with a low gain, or low sensitivity power amp the noise floor remains inaudible, but if you connect a high gain power amp, then the gain of the preamp and the gain of the power amp gets multiplied together and the inherant noise floor, which is hum, hiss and microphonics, also becomes amplified and becomes audible.
Bryan W has noted that his Cortese is very quiet without a sign of microphonics- this is simply because the Cortese has lower gain than a Syrah or Chardonnay with gain set to max.
But if you use the gain switches on the Syrah or Chardonnay, it is possible to adjust gain to approx the same level of the Cortese and eliminate noise and microphonics.
Unfortunately there are some power amps around these days which have ridiculous anounts of gain- they are designed to be used direct with a CD player (horrible sound!)and are more correctly called an integrated amp and aren't ideal for use with a preamp with any gain.
However, realizing that it's not a perfect world, I included the gain switches on the Syrah, Chardonnay to counter this.
With the combination of the two gain switches (top and back mounted) it is possible to remove any noise components from your system, and adjust the sonics to suit.
It does require a bit of patience, but it is possible to achieve your own "sweet spot" using the gain controls.
If you tap the side of the Syrah's 6SN7's with gain set to max, you will hear microphonics. Set the gain switches to "low" and a tap will result in no microphonics.
These refinements make the Syrah and the Chardonnay extremely versatile preamps able to drive any power amp, tube or SS.
Please note that the noise issue has nothing to do with impedance- that's more to do with the drive capabilities of the preamp, but all the Supratek pres have low output impedance and can drive anything.
I hope that makes it clearer - now I can disappear back to my work bench!
I have to say that I never thought this thread would last so long- unfortunately I dont have the time to check it often, but I'm alway's available at supra@supratek.biz to help when needed.
Thanks for all your support-I've made some great friends through Supratek and I hope your enjoyment and appreciation of the joy of music has been heightened by the use of my pres. Which is the sole reason for their existence- dont fret too much about hi-fi, just enjoy the music.
Best Regards to all.
MickM
PS
The tube compliment of the Syrah is 5842,6GK5,6N8P(6SN7),6L6GC and 5AR4.
The tube compliment of the Cortese is E180F (in this configuration just about the most linear tube available),E88CC(6922),6N8P(6SN7)6L6GC and 5AR4.
Regulator tubes can be either 6L6GC,5881,EL34 and KT66 on all models.(And the exotic WE350,7027- although too expensive to justify)
You can use any of these in the regulator position as it is self biasing, but not 6550 or KT88.
PPS- my favorite tweak is a new CD,vinyl. |
BWhite,
Have you had a chance of testing the home theatre pass through yet.
If so, what are your thoughts.
Furthermore, any other modifications you wish you had ordered.
TJackson |
Go Joe! Lets get together and hear each others system and when we do, that we partake in a usefull comparison of mass isolation versus direct coupling..Tom |
Got the platform working! The screws were embedded but we were able to get them loose enough to make it functional. I placed it under my Berning amp and it made a huuuuge improvement. I have used Still Points under my Berning for some time. I thought this helped but while following this thread, I thought I would try my 30 pound platform under the Berning instead. The little platform is clearly better than the Still Points under the Berning. Thanks to theaudiotweak, I now have the 80 pound platform. After playing with the screws, I put it under the Berning. Wow!! Everything got better still!! There is an absence of microphonic hash which results in more low level detail. The soundstage is bigger, images are better, much better dynamic contrast, the top end is much smoother, and the bass is signifacantly better. I can't overstate what an improvement this 80 pound platform made. I hope to get some replacement teflon screws soon and I expect that will also help.
As i said in an earlier post, one man's trash is another man's treasure. Again, I owe theaudiotweak big and can't thank him enough.
Everybody's ears are different and tastes are all over the board. I think this made such a difference on the Berning because it is so light, and Dave pays no attention to isolation. I would think the platform would be especially good on tubes.
This thing outperforms the Still Points which retail at about $275. If you can build or find one I think you will notice great improvement in your system. All this technical talk makes my head hurt so I'm going to fire up the Berning and have some fun!! Thanks again to Tom for the platform that he didn't want, and to Larry for the design. |
Oh, but I do understand, so it is very easy to disagree. You know I had both and now I have only one. The platform was replaced years before this thread was started.Tom |
Hey, can anyone share a backside picture (big enough) of a SUPRATEK preamp (if possible with XLR outputs)? I need to know how Supratek inputs (RCA) and outputs (RCA + XLR) are organized. Where they stand and if they are placed right & left or up & down, etc. A drawing would be perfect also. Thanks! |
More misinformation, and why not, if you don't understand, just disagree.
Well, I said that I wouldn't respond because I wanted to break away, but the statements made are incorrect.
Whether this works or not, is not predicated on the fact that the energy has to "go somewhere" in the sense it is being portrayed here.
The mass of the platform, and its ability to absorb the energy is greater than the devices ability to produce energy or store (retain) energy, and whether or not the mechanical impedence is such that the Platform will accept this transfer. The energy transfered into this mass is converted into potential energy, and suspended in the floating 80# of goo (sorbothane), making it potential energy, as opposed to Kinetic, while taking it out, to some appreciable degree from the device paced on it. The reason the 80# device works better is that it is able to absorb more energy than the smaller one. The key is the mechanical impedence of the top of the platform, and its ability to accept this transfer. Soft, pliant, and massive. Energy will flow in the direction which has the least impedence (or most conducive impedence). Again, don't buy anything from me. Try it if you like.
A short and quick lesson, For this example, Two types of exchange can occur between the system and surroundings: (1) energy exchange (heat, work, friction, radiation, etc.) and (2) matter exchange (movement of molecules across the boundary of the system and surroundings).Two types of exchange can occur between the system and surroundings: (1) energy exchange (heat, work, friction, radiation, etc.) and (2) matter exchange (movement of molecules across the boundary of the system and surroundings). This makes a lot of sense when you consider that the universe is made up of matter and energy--of course they are also kind of the same thing (E = mc^2). Based on the types of exchange which take place or don't take place, we will define three types of systems:
This makes a lot of sense when you consider that the universe is made up of matter and energy--of course they are also kind of the same thing (E = mc^2). Based on the types of exchange which take place or don't take place. This last short inset was taken from text book writings, don't believe me. Just read about it.If you like, and this makes sense, try building the thing.
Please forgive the typos's and misspellings, this was done in a rush.
Good listening.
Larry
|
I'm always open to new experiences. It's fun to hear new components and devices. I have tried a lot of tweaks over the last 15 years, and none have been more effective than the platform, but it needs to be set up correctly. The feet need to be engaged to provide suspension or you lose the benefits. |
84audio I would be happy to hear your system and you, hear mine. 4 teflon feet compressed under 80lbs, plus the additional weight of the resting component provdes no exit of collected resonant energy. Trapped..Tom |
Theaudiotweak said he had no need for his 80 pound platform. He wouldn't take any money, but gave it to me. It was a very nice thing for him to do, but 1 man's trash is another man's treasure. I had 1 of Larry's smaller platforms and I am ecstatic about having a larger one. I'm not very technical but this thing works!! The music is smoother, richer, fuller with more low level detail and much less microphonic hash. My guess would be that what you really hear is the absence of that microphonics that makes everything better. When I got Tom's platform home, I noticed that the feet were recessed in to the platform. No suspension would account for much less improvement. The object of the game is to shunt the energy in to the platform and have it suspended on feet with a very small surface touching your shelf. Without that suspension I would guess you lose most of the benefits. I hope to fix the feet and invite theaudiotweak over to listen to the difference.
The world is full of isolation products. The Still Points do a great hjob and I'm sure others work well. My 30 pound platform is a big step up from the Still Points, and I can't wait to see how much the 80 pound platform makes when set up correctly. My experience has been that this thing makes everything better! I would strongly recommend trying to make one if possible. If not, I'm sure there are many other choices for isolation. I think the Still Points are good, and I'm looking forward to hearing theaudiotweaks device of choice.
Thanks to the tweak for the platform, and to lrsky for sharing a great design which can cure microphonic problems, and make your system sound much better for a small investment. |
Bwhite, Respectfully this is but an 80lb.storage device. There are many others of this same school.. Resonant energy can only be suspended, stored with no place to go but up into the very chassis it supposedly will benefit. What about airborne energy it too will have no high speed way of exit. It will be slowed to exit by the material that it rests upon. Perpetuating the storage of resonance by such devices only regurgitates and continually amplifies the whole procedure over and over again. No way out...Tom |
Theaudiotweak, I believe Lrsky has devised a very interesting solution. While I can only speculate from what I've read thus far, it seems that since the lead is contained or perhaps suspended inside the "fishing worm" goo, I suspect this "lightens the load" of the lead and allows it to move more freely than normal in reaction to vibration, hence dissipating the energy. Theaudiotweak is correct on many levels about dampening and the need to drain (the right amount of)unwanted resonant energy away from the component. From what I perceive thus far about Lrsky's design, it seems that it IS potentially draining energy. Making an assumption that it is only dampening simply because there is lead present cannot be accurate. |
My sole motivation here is for people to get the lead out. Some things are only worth free. Mass loading is old school, dampening is old school,isolation is old school. I am old and have been to all those previous schools. Thankfully I'm not there anymore. Most people I would like to have drop by for a listen. It is very fullfilling to see a friend become excited about some new implementation and benefit of physics. My only payoff is the turn on I receive knowing a friend has now opened his mind and his ears. Tom |
Suspending a circuit within any given chassis will only serve to trap the resonant energy transmitted by the transformer and all internal as well as external wiring. Some of this errant energy will be electro-mechanical self generated by the circuit itself some will be airborne generated. So now the floating board has no way of dissapating this self perpetuating resonant energy. It is now trapped. Oh well.. By the way dampening will only compound this problem.. Tom |
The discussion is over, but careful readers of this thread should separate the motivations of the contributors here.
I offered a hommade solution to anyone who choses to try it. No gain. Apparently theauditweak is selling the Sistrum. Frankly I am surprised that this unabashed selling is allowed in this thread. I am sure that astute readers can separate the sales pitch from the helpful effort. If you contact the tweak, see if he is trying to help or offering to sell you this Sistrum. Of course the free Platform is not as good, he doesn't make a profit. Hey I am a capitalist, but that is not what this site is for.
My last post. Audiotweak should try for maximum effect with a real zinger here. I hope he sells a ton of them.
Good Listening,
Larry |
BWhite,
Your last comments about removing the feet is very telling.
The platform works even with the Gryphon, which has massive sorbothane type feet in the front, and a tip toe type rear foot. This, as well as comments made in email conversations with Flemming Rasmussen of Gryphon, has made it clear that he takes vibrational isolation seriously.
The platform is curious in that it shunts the energy within a given product into suspended mass of about (and I forget the exact weight)80#. When you mentioned that you removed the feet and added mass this tells me that the suspended mass of the platform would probably work just as it does on all pieces like this.
Conrad Johnson, suspends their circuit board inside of their higher end preamps, floating them, so that they are not coupled to the outer shell of the preamp. The platform helps this preamp tremendously, even though they do this.
It may be worth your looking into the platform. Everything that I have tried (Preamps, both solid and tube, amps, solid and tube, integrateds, cd players, d/a converters) have been improved by the use of this. As I have warned, it is noxious to make, and the lead presents some health cautions and issues, but the results can, and have been remarkable. Certainly for someone handy it is worth the venture. We spend multiples of this with much smaller improvements. With a product that has the propensity for microphonics this, I believe is made to order.
Laughingly I tell people that the first experiment of this platform was done using an old Harman Kardon Turntable, circa 1985. The table was on a wall mount to decouple it from floor vibrations as much as possible. At that time we used the little platform @30# or less. The table immediately sounded less like an HK and more like a Linn Sondek. OK, OK not that good, but a transformation nontheless. I listened to Marty Robbins singing a song , I think, 'Among My Souveniers', maybe, but the exact title excapes me. But I was completely and utterly surprised. It works! Sort of like Young Frankenstein, "He lives, he lives!" Funny now but also fun to think back on. If you would like more detailing just email me privately. I have never been ceased to be amazed at this thing.
Thanks and...
Good Listening.
Larry |
It has been my experience that when I have removed the rubber feet from a chassis and placed the component directly on a Sistrum platform there was an immediate and noticeable improvement of sound. Rubber and other dampeners I feel impede the exodus of resonant energy away from what we all wish to preserve and enhance..Tom |
I've been following the latest posts to this thread with great interest. It seems like Lrsky has come up with a neat way to dampen a component however... I think the microphonics issues with some Supratek's would not be solved by a platform. Perhaps I should explain.
First of all, most stock Supratek's are decoupled from the surface they rest on because Mick uses rather soft feet. This eliminates the likelihood that vibration energy would/could be transferred away from the chassis.
The chassis on the Supratek Chardonnay's / Syrah's is rather light. Inside the chassis is a lot of VERY STIFF silver wire which tends to vibrate when the chassis is tapped.
That, paired with the fact that most Supratek users have installed OLD NOS tubes in a preamp - is the real cause of the problem. Furthermore, preamps typically require higher grade tubes and I bet that many in use are simply not good enough or not at the quality level they should be. MAYBE 1 NOS tube in 10 is remotely "preamp grade" I've found.
Anyhow.. the tubes are the transducer for the vibration running through the chassis and the worse the tubes, the worse the microphonics.
I've had the best success with my Supratek(s) by removing the feet altogether and placing them on a heavy wooden surface. Especially the Power Supply! Nice improvement!
The Dampening of the chassis which was done by my technician actually helped the microphonic problem by preventing the transmission of the vibration within the unit itself. I doubt a platform under a decoupled (rubber foot) Supratek would have similar results. |
Good listening for all of those who appreciate my efforts and many others on Audiogon to make the Supratek and for that matter all audio reprodution devices sound better. I am not the only one out here who is a proponenent of the attributes of resonant energy transfer delivered by Sistrum products. Remove your pieces from the dead lead and rubber. Direct couple so you can hear the music. There will be no argument Larry when you try the denial in your own system but do so before you sell off the parts you know. Tom |
Well, I was only trying to pass on the design of a product device which solves the basic problems that most of the thread, Supratek owners spoke of, not simply disagree with someone else. This is a device which is offered free, just for the cost of goods necessary, with no gain to me. Anyone who wants to try it please do so. Or if you don't, you can pass. I try not to follow Audiogon members around and dispute them just for the sake of controversy, looking foolish, making incorrect statements along the way. The Audiotweak still has not answered Tubegroovers questions regarding his incorrect comparison of audio gear and its dynamic output, versus the dynamic output of original instruments,(apparently tied to a lead device) or my question as to how the output dynamic output of an amp can be changed (lessened according to him through the elimination, or I should say amelioration) of microphonics and rf. I am sure we would all like to hear about that. 21st Century application of physics, and all the wonderful scientific discoveries since Newtonian Physics, can't make those nonsensical statements make sense.
With our current technologies, Mick's preamp still suffers from microphonic problems, I only offered one potentially decent solution, for anyone who choses to try. And the private response has been overwhelming.
Good listening for all those who appreciate my effort to make the Supratek sound better.
Larry R. Staples |
Dampening is a storage device with leaks. Try 21st century implemetation of 17th century laws of physics. The science of resonant energy transfer is what works. Wake up and take a new listen. 84 Joe if your nearby I can arrange for you to listen. This thread has been altered and I may be one of the culprits. Tom |
Amen Tubegroover. You get it Audiotweak does not. The laws of physics simply deny his answer, and are not in dispute.
Of couse these are replicating divices, not the actual intruments, who, as a thinking person could confuse the two?
Output should equal input. Speakers, being an electro/mechanical device, have problems with this, and cabinets are designed to "dampen out" their excesses, the same way the Platform dampens out excess brought in through the room interaction.
Tom can easily recoup his loss by selling his to 84. He is so unhappy with them the price has to be good for the buyer.
My guess is that he won't sell.
Good listening,
Larry |
Tom - I certainly understand where you are coming from so far as deadening the sound of a musical instrument is concerned but a pre-amp or tt or amplifier isn't a musical instrument but a component to transfer the signal unadulterated. How can something that minimizes or removes vibrations affect the dynamics of the signal? I would think that a "livelier" foundation might exaggerate dynamics yet also possibly add smearing. Why is damping unwanted vibrations from outside influences a bad thing? |
I know of one you can come and get..Tom |
I got a platform from Larry 15 years ago. Countless components have come and gone in that time but I won't let go of my platform. Every year or so I decide I don't really need this thing and take it out from under my cd transport. When I do, the images shrink. The music is not as open or dynamic. Needless to szay it goes right back in the system. I think it sounds more musical and is better in every way. Unfortunately I only have one so I can't multiply the benefits by using one on the amp or pre-amp. You don't need to be an audio pig to hear the huge difference this thing makes. I'm not at all technical so I can't really speak to how or why it works but it does. If Larry ever finds a couple in his basement, I'd buy the damn things right now!! |
The basic idea here is to rid a given product such as Mick's preamp from "ringing" due to microphonics, or a cd player from going into read error mode.
How exactly can a product such as this, designed for this purpose, limit the amplifiers innate current capabilities? It can't! That is simply impossible.
"Not conducive to the dynamic...structure"...audiotweak, completely misunderstands, the laws of physics here. A product that damps out microphonic energy and shunts rf, and stray energy fields, can in no way, actually limit the desired and stated, accurate output of the amplifier. The current capablility, stability of the amp, how it handles back emf from the speaker all play into that, but a device such as this would not, could not, in any way, limit the dynamic output of any amp, and therefore the "dynamic structure" of any music. This can only rid the product of unwanted vibrations which can in fact, negatively effect its intended output.
As I stated, Gryphon, a highly respected manufacturer, conrad johnson, and most great engineers try to achieve this interally. They recognize this problem and try to 'engineer' these dreaded issues out of their products. None of their solutions, "floating the chasis" in the instance of conrad, limit dynamic output, and neither does this.
So Mick/Supratek fans can improve the sound of their favorite preamp, eliminating the negatives by using such a device, and it is a relatively inexpensive thing to build.
Good listening,
Larry R. Staples |
Dampening Larry is not a good thing but a bad thing! Dampening is but a tourniquet only there to impede the natural flow. The natural flow may be from a good design or a poor design but impede the dampening does. Let us hear from the outset the good and the bad, unimpeded from all the sluuuuuring of lead and slow blurrrr and dulling effects of rubber and their sister products! If a cello with its attached end pin were to be placed upon a leaden rubber base and the cello strings were plucked would you not dampen and alter the natural dynamics of this beautiful instrument? There are much better materials for EMI and RFI shielding and efficient resonant energy transfer than that slow sleepy leaden train. Tom |
These are not "just damping devices", as stated by the audiotweak. They also help ameliorate field energy, a real issue in almost all systems, with some being more sensitive to this than others. As someone pointed out Mick's pre is made in the Outback 'down unda', in an area with much less rf saturation than most of all the US cities. I would think it wise to let each listener make his or her own decision.
Also, as an observation on the comments of theaudiotweak, nothing that I have ever heard sounds like real music dynamically or otherwise, because of the enormous problems in the recording process and the limitations of playback capabilities in all gear, from speakers to amps, and throughout the entire chain. Also, I would personally like to hear any system anyhere that offers "all the dynamics contained in live music", as stated by Theaudiotweak, but no such thing exists at this point in our technology.
That aside, if the idea of cleaning up your system from these field effects and microphonics, appeals to you, and don't mind trying some fun project, and you need help building it, you can email me.
|
Actually my comments were meant to convey that I am interested in hearing more about the Zazen phono preamp that Bwhite mentioned. Getting my motor running.
They had nothing to do with thoughts of hum or vibration. |
Hmmmmm....zazen...hmmmmm, I get it. Laugh. I told you it sounds funny. But if you know just a little, not even a lot, about engineering, you have a basic understanding that the lead can act as a rejection from field effects, and the Fishing worms, (lets make that sound less funny by calling it what it is, a sorbothane type, not exactly, but similar plastic) absorbs energy. We all know that this is used in the heels of some running shoes. So laugh, its ok, don't do it. Those who do will get a great return for the amount of the investment. No different than putting the crossover outside the speaker, or the power supply outside of the pre amp. It may sound goofy since I didn't bother to give the ingredients some secretly coded names, but if you look at the real why's there are fundamentally sound reasons.
One speaker manufacturer who you all know, but I won't mention, after witnessing this change, asked me if he could have my permission to use this basic concept for vibrational isolation, and rf rejection, etc, inside his speaker by putting the crossover into/on such a device. So, if you want to help eliminate microphonics and, help reject some rf, do it. WARNING Do not inhale the fumes, and do not touch the lead while making this.Lead never leaves your body, which is why we don't use lead paint anymore, just fair warning.
Anyone with serious inquiries can email me directly. I only posted this because it works and several people inquired.
Good listening,
Larry |
I own a large and small platform of the exact type Larry speaks about. And yes they did make a difference. These are dampening devices by nature and are not conducive to the accurate portrayal of the dynamic structure of music. Sistrum replaced all the high mass leaden dampening devices in my system and and brought back the live dynamics and staging the performance actually contains. Tom |
Hmmmmmmmm........Zazen.........Hmmmmmmmmm. |
I have gotten several emails from people, regarding this microphonic damping device, and rather than try to answer them all individually, David, the first to inquire, asked me to simply send out the copy of what I sent him. This is a little disjointed, but if you have any questions let me know. Here it is:
David,
Years ago I build a product, called "The Platform".
It is messy and gross but it works better than anything I have ever used for vibrational isolation for preamps, turntables amps etc. My Gryphon is sitting on it now, and even the hardest core, I don't hear the difference people are shocked. Here is how to make it.
You need really solid hardwood for the outer frame. Take 3/4" by 1.5" hardwood and make a rectangular frame of 19x16". Buy some of the fishing worms (several bags) and 8# lead shot. Buy two pieces of thin wood, like an 1/8th inch plywood. Then buy four threaded sleaves and four Teflon screws. Drill the outer frame to allow for the sleeves, (the kind with teeth in the bottom, so they will grip) Do not breath these fumes as they are probably toxic. Melt the fishing worms into a boiling liquid, (just break down the solid mass really), and mix in the lead shot. The outer frame is made this way, finger join it if you can, then put the rather thin wood on the bottom stapling and gluing it so that it will contain the mass. Then pour this goop into the outer frame, obviously with the bottom attached. Then cut the top piece, so that it does not touch the outer frame. Leave about a 1/8 inch all around. (IT must not touch) Then after it cools, put the Teflon feet into the outer frame. It will be normal for the bottom to sag some because this will weigh about 100# (90# was average since you are using about 50# of shot) At the end of this process, you will have a device that will set on top of a mass, that contains lead shielding at the bottom, and is resting on four Teflon feet, that are what did I say 1/8 " in diameter. After it cools David, if you hit it, it resonates at less than probably 10 cycles.
I am telling you as an audio nut, that this sound goofy, but nothing I have ever heard, does what this does. My Gryphon sounds completely smooth and more open at the same time, better bass extension. Every improvement you can imagine, because the energy, microphonic, and RF are shunted into this piece, and because of its considerable mass, it seems to go away. What makes this really cool, is that the Gryphon already employs isolation techniques.
Did I mention that the platform will set about 1/4" from touching, even at the bowed center of it? Wow, I just realized that I had never committed this to paper before (or cyperpaper). All this will cost less than maybe 100 bucks and you will think you spent 5K upgrading your system. It can be replicated and used under cd players also.
Also, there is a less unwieldy 30# unit that we started with, but the return is exponentially better on this heavier one. If you have any questions email me, or even call me, at 502 671 7870. Maybe we can start a mfg company. Good luck, and good listening. Larry Ps This damn thing is dangerous because the mass is so dense. Be careful please and do not attempt to lift it by yourself.(Also, I forgot to, duh tell you to counter sink the Teflon screws. |
A lot of responses have talked about microphonics associated with tubes.(A very real and nagging problem) Years ago I designed a product which solves this knotty problem, and it is really magical, and anyone who is handy can build it. It is nasty to do and takes a wierd combination of products, but works better than anything I have ever seen, including several hundred dollar items. I have used it with preamps, cd players, amps, all with great success. It is not snake oil just good common sense. I am happy to share the method of build, and ingredients necessary to build it, with anyone who wants to at no charge or gain to me. I AM NOT SELLING ANYTTHING HERE, Just trying to help eliminate a problem. email me at
lrsky@bellsouth.net. and I will share the build technique.
Happy listening. |
Supratek experts, what is minimum recommended input impedance of SS power amp which would be good match with SARAH ? |
The new Supratek Zazen, phono only Supratek? I just got a brief mention of this from Mick. Does anyone else have details on this? I'm sure TWL is salivating right now. :) |
Noble, if the Syrah was close to the First Sound with only Ken Rads and Tung Sols, then you didn't hear 50% of what the Syrah is capable of producing. Rolling 6SN7's made the least difference in my Supratek.
A change in the rectifier to a NOS Mullard 5AR4 (or a Bendix 6106 ?) and WE 350B's as regulators and I suspect the Syrah would have been considerably ahead of the First Sound.
However, I am sure if you rolled NOS tubes in the First Sound it would also be an improvement, as well. Both are excellent preamps and I don't think you could go wrong with either one. I suppose it is simply a matter of which flavor one prefers. |
BWhite,
Have you had a chance of testing the home-theatre pass through yet ?
I ordered a Sauvignon (Cortese line stage version) from Mick about 3 months ago, but did not request any modifications for fear of something going wrong.
Mick said that he will probably start Sauvignon in around a month or two. Therefore, I'm wondering whether It's a good idea to request the home-theatre pass through before he actually commences work on the pre-amp.
Also, does anyone who owns a Supratek, tried the unit with the Audio Aero Capitole MK II 24/192 CD Player ?
My System is currently made up of the following:
1. Audio Aero Capitole MK II CD Player
2. Krell KSA 250 Power Amp
3. Osborn Epitome Grand Reference MK V speakers with Bass Units.
At the moment the Audio Aero is running direct into the power amp and actually sounds superior to when a Krell KRC-3 pre-amp was used in the equation.
Furthermore, does anyone know of any good tube suppliers in Australia, preferably Sydney.
Finally, because the Supratek does not fit onto a standard hi-fi rack, I'd be interested in knowing what improvisations people are using to accomodate the unit.
Regards,
TJackson |
I will attempt to shed a little light on First Sound vs. Syrah.
I listened to them side-by-side and must say that they are very close in sound. My Syrah had rolled tubes to Tung-Sol & Ken Rad. I found this change was a great improvement and a must to get close to the First Sound. I did have microphonic issues when touching the Syrah. Dynamics on both are outstanding.The soundstage presentation are very similar with open & revealing sonics without brightness. I do enjoy vinyl and loved the Syrah phono section. But I kept the First Sound as the "stock" preamp had a slight edge on presentation - without modifification, and no microphonic issues. However the cost with an additional phono stage ( ARC PH3SE used) was $1,500 more than the Syrah. This makes the Syrah the best value hands down, but the First Sound has the edge on sonics, plus all First Sound amps can be upgraded. And the debate continues..... |
bwhite - How many hours do you have on the cortese over the course of those 10 days? My cortese is dead quite also, but my chassis is slightly microphonic to the touch. Probably a result of my 6SN7's and not a reflection of the cortese. I am using symposium rollerblock jrs under my chassis and I use hal-o tube dampers also. |
Supratek Cortese - 10 Days Old
It's been 10 days since I received my Cortese and it is still breaking in - slight changes mostly - nothing too dramatic at all.
My current feelings about the Cortese are similar to what they were on the 20th when I unpacked & plugged in the unit.
One thing I will say now is that the Cortese offers me exactly what I wanted from the Chardonnay/Syrah but didn't know it. Does that make sense? :) As we all know, in audio it often takes something better to make clear what we've been missing. The Cortese is sonically similar to the Syrah - yet a bit more transparent. The highs are a bit more refined and the bottom end is a more powerful. Overall, I would say that the improvements make up for the few shortcomings of the Chardonnay/Syrah which - as I said before, I never knew existed.
Other refinements include NO HUM WHATSOEVER in both phono and line stage. Amazing. NO MICROPHONICS when touching / taping the chassis. My Chardonnay used to make "piano" sounding noises when the chassis was touched the wires inside rattled and stuff like that. Annoying. But... this is totally not an issue with the Cortese.
The PROBLEM I have with the Cortese is this...
When the first Cortese's were made the tube compliment was totally different than today's Cortese. 4 regulator tubes, 4 driver tubes. Today, the Cortese has the exact same tube compliment as the Syrah (with the exception of phono)..
A side note - tongue in cheek - if you're planning to buy a Grange, maybe you should do it before it is re-released with the same tubes as the Cortese and the Syrah.
So what differentiates the Cortese from the Syrah? What makes it better? Same tubes and different circuit it seems. Opening up the Cortese exposes about 40 - 60% more wire and different parts than are contained in a Syrah.
Looking at the inside of the Chardonnay, I often wondered why it took Mick so long to build these things. Looking inside the Cortese, I cannot even imagine HOW HE BUILDS THESE. Pretty complex stuff going on in there.. and a very tight spot to work in.
So... after looking inside this unit, I've got to say the problem I had with wondering what differentiated the Cortese from the Syrah is GONE.
While this is certainly not the definitive Cortese review, it is beginning of what is starting to seem more & more like a worthwhile investment & improvement over the Syrah each day. I am very excited to hear what happens over the next 10 days and will certainly report back. |
Agree with you 110% Tubegroover !!
My relationship with Mick Maloney is a bit closer than most of you (see my ealier post on "Am I the Luckiest Man in the World"), so I have to be careful in what I say. But Tubegroover is right - the Supratek Cortese/Syrah will be very hard to improve on within reasonable money (say $10,000USA).
You have no idea the development (both technical and listening sessions) that has gone into the Supratek products. Not only does he have 30 years of valve amp building under his belt and a great love of music, Mick is tapped into an underground network of audio constructors and enthusiasts from Europe to Japan to Australia to New York, and with the wonders of the Internet collaborating, inventing, and improving upon their creations! Out of this melting pot, you have before you things like the Cortese and Syrah, it's not a wonder they sound so good - it's because they are constructed with fresh ideas, years of proven concepts and driven by the sheer enthusiasm of their creator(Mick!).
Never forget also, that Supratek is NOT a big wheel. It has no marketing machine, has no brand recognition like Mark Levinson or Audio Research - yet it is succeeding (or should that be 'exceeding')in this very competitive hi-end scene, purely based on word of mouth of what an excellent product it really is!! If this doesn't say it all nothing does...
Regards,
Steve M. |
I have been withholding this but I think it just needs to be said so no one will have any misunderstanding or apprehension, don't think about it if you are, just do it. If you have a budget that permits it, you can't make a wrong decision with the Supratek. It is impossible unless you are prepared to spend considerably more money. Even so, the decision will still be valid because it can be resold without losing anything or very little and if you don't go ahead with it you will most likely never have the opportunity to hear if you made the right choice or not and the curiosity will never subside until you forget but after so many posts on this thread and still counting, the death of curiosity may prove quite slow.
My reason for the above comment is because I have communicated with a few that are on the fence and I have been too conciliatory to their concerns, the wait and the service. This is the real deal it can't be overstated. It is a 7K or better pre for 2.5K, it really is. I waited 5 months longer than I should have. If only I had believed what I read from the beginning. Read Mark Bucksath review on the Supratek website, and read it very carefully http://www.supratek.biz/review.htm
If you can connect to the contents of his most wonderful descriptives of this product, you will hear the Syrah. Keep in mind this recommendation is based on the extreme value of what you will hear, not in the context of the "best" that may be available. If you are prepared to pay considerably more, you will certainly have more choices. I have NO doubt this is the best pre-amp value at this price point on the planet and it is very easy to say it. |
Hi Larry,
From your description the First Sound pre looks like it's got great potential! I understand your apprehension about waiting a few months for the Supratek, but you know the old saying 'good things come to those who wait'.
BTW, the Supratek also has a solid copper chassis under that shiney chrome exterior.
Regards,
Steve M. |
Stevem,
The First Sound is hand wired with separate power supply. Plus it is completely copper enclosed inside the outer shell, helping with EMI/FR rejection. Even the fans of the wonderful Supratek, (I am one without hearing it) would say that with a one to one comparison it is quieter.
I guess the question is: and this haunts all grail hunters, which one is better?
Obviously sometimes it is a function of matching etc, and not emperically true for everyone.
Mick is a great guy, but I always question 4 to 7 month waits, with associated service issues.
Tubegroover is an obviously good listener, and I already respect his writings. So if he likes it that is enough for me. And I have seen almost all of these things first hand in my travels to 100 stores working inside the industry.
Thanks
Larry |
Larry,
You are quite within your rights to 'question' rather than just 'take a leap of faith' by purchasing a Supratek. But look at the specifications and design implementation of the Supratek, and you'll know it's built like no other.
Tubegoover & Waltersalas have put it nicely, and I don't need to say much more, however:
Firstly, on aesthetics alone the Supratek Syrah is a gotta-have product, it looks like a million dollars and like it's just come out some funky Art Studio. The combination of Jarrah timber and chrome works really well and scintillates. It illicits positive comments from every visitor to my home (without exception so far).
Secondly, it definitely has the sound to match!
Thirdly, I'm not familiar with the First Sound pre, but compare it's construction to Supratek. Is it hard wired with silver or is it full of thin printed circuit boards? Has it got a separate power supply with a huge toroidal transformer the size most 100w power amps have? Is it Single Ended Triode? Lithium Battery biased? Transformer Coupled? does it use valves for Rectification/Regulation? Does it use expensive Auriecaps? If the answer is 'No' to a lot of these questions, then there is no way it will be as good as the Supratek.
Like all things in audio (especially with writings on the net) it is good to question and enquire, sort out the bulls_ _ _ from the truth, but to me there's no contest between Supratek and the others as it provides good value and 'Holy Grail' type sound to boot.
Regards,
Steve M |
Hey, Larry--
The First Sound is an excellent preamp, no question. I had it in my system for nearly a year and enjoyed every minute of it. I could have lived happily with it, I believe, were it not that I wanted to get back into vinyl, wanted a pre with a phono stage, and stumbled upon this thread when it first appeared. In short, I did wind up ordering a Syrah and put in my six months of waiting like everyone else, so I have had the opportunity to compare and contrast these two preamps.
The First Sound definitely paints a blacker background and is less sensitive to tube noise, although the Supratek can get pretty quiet if you fiddle around long enough with isolation and, more importantly, getting good tubes. It takes a little time, but is well worth the effort. Still, advantage in this area goes to First Sound, which has the lowest noise floor I have heard in my system to date. It is almost eerie, especially for a tube preamp.
Also, the First Sound is incredibly dynamic. Matched with components that are up to the task, this preamp will rock your world. It has incredible impact on all kinds of music. If you lean toward solid state, but want some tube warmth in your system, the First Sound may be the ticket for you, as it has NONE of the "mushiness" frequently associated with tubes. It is clean and clear as a whistle, but without any grain or stridency.
The Supratek, on the other hand, is much more liquid and has a far better layering of instruments, WITHOUT sacrificing dynamics. By comparison, the First Sound seems almost compressed. I think this is the main reason so many people are in love with the Syrah. As has been said before, there is something about its presentation that just feels "right." With a lot of audio gear, even the First Sound, I am more aware of listening to the gear--this one does that better, that one does this better--than the music. That can be fun, but it's not really what it's all about for me. With the Supratek, you can let all of that go and just enjoy the music. I have found nothing in high end audio that I would consider as purely musical as the Supratek.
Some people may prefer the First Sound, and it is a terrific pre, but I much prefer the Syrah in my system. Believe me, it was worth the wait. With the best restaurants, it will be the meal you remember, and not the wait. The same thing applies here, I think.
Best of luck.
|
Hi Larry
I think the appeal of the Supratek is the value, aesthetics (if you happen to find the open architecture attractive) and performance. What caught my attention was the description of its sound, which in my experience comes with a much higher price tag. Liquid, dynamic, resolving with excellent bass from a tube pre usually involves a hefty power supply, which aren't done on the cheap. Consistent descriptions of this pre delivering these qualities at 2.5K open ones eyes. At least it did mine.
There are many in this hobby that are value driven for several reasons, limited resources and the fact that some don't want to spend more than is necessary regardless of the resources available. What Mick Maloney has managed with this pre is to offer a product that is within the price reach of any serious music lover without too many compromises other than the fact that there is a wait involved because it is individually hand assembled by Mick himself, another appealing fact.
There is no doubt the First Sound pre is a great piece and its upgradeability is another appealing reason for its consideration. Still it starts at 500.00 more than the Supratek Sarah and doesn't include a phono stage. The point is that the value of Supratek products can not be overstated. There are many audiophiles that will pass on it because they don't want to wait and they would be wary of service from a one-man shop on the other side of the world, something to think about. On the other hand when you hear this pre-amp first hand the considerations should be, do I want to wait and locating a tech who can fix the pre if there is a problem. I would expect that problems would be minimal but would arise initially as they do with most products. These problems could be resolved through Mick. His service ethic is top notch but one must remember, he is a one-man shop and isn't superman.
The price/performance of the Supratek Sarah and Chardonney is definitely worth these considerations. Interestingly enough, I was just speaking to someone last week concerning this pre vs. a First Sound. He is going ahead with the First Sound because he doesn't want to wait and he is afraid of not getting prompt service if something does go awry. I am sure this will keep many folks from considering this great product. I did have a problem during shipping, it seems customs cut an opening in the box to inspect it and "threw" the pre back in without properly repacking it. When I received it, the cans were resting on the bottom of the box without any support, the rectifier tube and cord were missing and 2 tubes were shattered along with some minor damage to the wood case, which I repaired. Everything else was ok. Mick was extremely upset with this development and offered to send a new pre out to me the next day! I was also upset but did calm down a bit after I finally got some tubes in it to listen, didn't have any 6sn7's on hand so had to wait. The point is that he was extremely concerned and responsive and I was just so blown away by the music coming from the pre that the shipping problems I did have just went out the window. I never even bothered to file a claim to Fed-ex since it really wasn't their fault. What I was really pissed at and still am is that the apes working for customs didn't show the respect for personal property that they should and will never will because they are immune from the consequences of their actions.
On another tangent but one worth considering to all that read this is to please report this when and if it happens to you. Only if enough do will steps be taken to change the procedures of inspections. There is really no excuse for the condition of the contents I received. It really did look as though a kid threw the contents in the box without the LEAST consideration for its safe arrival to its final destination. |
Why doesn't the First Sound Preamp get the same enthusiatic response as the Supratek. I think sometimes that the chase, just as with sex, is more important than the catch. I conversed with Mick via email, and while he seemed very, very nice, I came away wondering about waiting 7 months like Tubegroover did for his pre. Kind of like going to the hottest restaurant waiting two hours. Is it worth the wait. I know, I know, apples and oranges, but generally the mystique takes presidence for we groupies.
Right here in Washington, we have Emmanuel Go handcrafting what some people describe as the finest preamp around. Just finished a review in which it was given the nod over the Holiest of Grail pres. Plus the guy is a complete prince to talk to.
I would be the first to agree that other than speakers, which are electro/mechanical, and usually have the strongest personality, that if you have a good source, the pre, driving an amp is the icing on the cake. So the question is; what is so glamorous about waiting 3 to 7 months for a preamp when we have such a great product in our midst. Maybe someone out there has compared these two and found Mick's to be vastly superior. Is that it?
Thanks,
Larry |
Fiddler, the same thing you said about the H-Cat was said when I got one of the first Syrahs and raved about it. |
