Jump to content

rabski

Moderator
  • Posts

    30,382
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    224

rabski last won the day on September 14

rabski had the most liked content!

Reputation

10,368 Excellent

2 Followers

About rabski

  • Rank
    Everything in moderation
    Veteran Wammer
  • Birthday 17/06/1956

Personal Info

  • Location
    Kettering
  • Real Name
    Richard

Wigwam Info

  • Turn Table
    Well Tempered /GL75
  • Tone Arm & Cartridge
    AT50ANV /AT95EN
  • SUT / Phono Stage
    Hashimoto /valve DIY
  • Digital Source 1
    PDS/Micromega T
  • Digital Source 2
    Computer/modded D10
  • DAC
    DIY AD1865/assorted
  • Integrated Amp
    One or two
  • Pre-Amp
    DIY valve
  • Power Amp/s
    845 SET/others
  • My Speakers
    Living Voice
  • Headphones
    AKG/Grado
  • Trade Status
    I am not in the Hi-Fi trade

Recent Profile Visitors

7,692 profile views
  1. It's incredibly sad, but there is a major lesson in this. You absolutely always have to check who is liable and what insurance is in place when you buy anything with shipping. The other part of the lesson if the seller has not agreed to ship an item, then ALL the responsibility is yours as the buyer, to make certain it's correctly packaged and fully insured. Sorry, but you cannot assume something is insured and properly packaged just because the shipping cost is high.
  2. I've seen that article many times, but a lot of it is over-generalised, and some of it is simply wrong. As always, implementation and context are vital. Transformers, valves, and anything else in the signal path for that matter, do not have to add distortion, harmonics or non-linearity. In fact, they can do the opposite. Valves and transformers (correctly operated and specified) can be incredibly linear and low distortion, and can attenuate high-frequency artefacts and resulting distortion. In many cases, a preamplifier can help by simply ensuring that the impedance match between the source and power amplifier is correct, and that the gain ensures the power amplifier is running in a suitable operating range. On the other hand, some preamplifiers deliberately add things. But then so do some power amplfiers, some sources, some cables, etc. There is no 'one size fits all' approach, because equipment needs to match and work together properly from one end of the chain to the other.
  3. rabski

    Oh Lord, another DAC

    Even with the 12SN7s paralleled, a back of fag packet calculation suggests quite high output impedance. I prefer the sonic presentation of them in paralleled anode follower, and I can live with high output impedance and lower gain. The alternatives involve different circuits or output transformers, so there's no point really in the context of my own setup. A bit of scribbling suggests at least 4 or 5uF to get the 3dB point under 10Hz. I just happened to have some 10uF Vishays in the pile, and all the others I've got are 2 or 3uF. It's still really only about run in, so I can easily swap some lower values in and see where the bass goes. Calculating the output impedance is a bit hit and miss, so as bigger caps can't hurt... why not?
  4. Euphonic colouration and distortion? Maybe. Maybe not. What that doesn't explain, as far as I can see, is how a good active (or possibly passive of some types) preamp can add to the apparent illusion of the soundstage by making it seem larger in every direction.
  5. rabski

    Oh Lord, another DAC

    Thanks Chris, I've got a fair old heap of assorted caps here and I've tried all sorts. The Mundorf silver-gold-oil are seriously good, but I've found they can be a touch 'edgy' and bright. Just slightly artificial sounding. The Audio Note copper do seem to open things up a bit, but you need a circuit that has little 'sound' of it's own, or it can all get too much. I've got Audio Note copper in the spare phono stage and they made a pleasant improvement there. I'll try them in other spots at some stage, so the jury is out here. Some suggest the V-Cap CuTF are the absolute ultimate, but at those prices I am never going to find out. It's just plain daft. Ditto the 'serious' Duelund. The Miflex copper are pretty decent too. The original Hovlands (the yellow ones with a green and a red end) were stunning, but they're long out of production and apart from the odd fake on auction sites, you'll never find them. I have just one pair that are in my preamp, and they're going nowhere. I seriously rate some of the Russian teflons, but only some of them. The problem with them is the physical size. The 0.1uF are a small coke can. I've got quite a few, but very little they'll actually fit in. The earlier version of the DAC (picture in the thread somewhere: it's the one-box job) has a pair of the newer MusiCaps, which aren't at all bad. Find of the year, as a few people have pointed out, is the Vishay DC link. Just the DC link, though, as they're constructed in an unusual way. They're comparatively very cheap, don't have even the slightest whiff of foo and are available in nice big values and voltage ratings. They do some big values for power supplies and cathode bypass, but I've tried them as coupling caps and they're what's in the DAC. They seem to do absolutely nothing to the sound, which is exactly what I want.
  6. Can't see the pics now Steve, but I saw them earlier. Bloody cracking job that. Stops any issues with running cables too close to each other, and looks first class.
  7. Prince Phllip would have had something to say about that... As for the question, yes, there are plenty of ways to tidy up cables. Unfortunately, ideally you shouldn't. It will inevitably mean running all sorts of wires close to each other and parallel to each other, which is unwise. Rejoice in the mayhem.
  8. Nothing to be guilty about IMHO. Whether the music is to your taste, there is little doubt that ABBA were extremely good, and so were the Carpenters.
  9. rabski

    Armstrong 730

    Weak link? I'd say probably the preamp. No matter how good at the time, it's a 1970s design based on an integrated circuit gain stage. Never come across your XTC, but their stuff is generally quite well regarded. Where are you based?
  10. rabski

    Armstrong 730

    You could start off by filling in your profile. We'd then have a better idea. Mind you, be prepared for an avalanche of people happy to spend your money for you!
  11. Well, to be fair, there are certainly measurable potential improvments in some aspects, though not massive ones. Separating power supplies inherently ought to reduce noise and interference pickup. A separate DAC makes sense, if for no other reason than future upgrades. So, assuming funding permits, I can see the sense in a transport and a DAC, both with external power supplies. To my mind (and ears), the jury is out when it comes to clocks. That, I really don't see the point in when there is just one transport and one DAC.
  12. Others will have the answer, but SACD can output a digital signal via HDMI, so you need some sort of converter to turn this into an SPDIF. I've never done it, so I don't know whether it's simply a cable conversion, or whether it needs some sort of processing.
  13. Not so simple, unfortunately. SACD will not give a digital output through coax or optical thanks to copyright protection. It would work OK with normal redbook CDs though the coax output, but not SACD.
  14. None of this has any reference whatsoever to my point. My point refers simply to the AUP here, and the requirement (requirement, not request) to abide by it.
×
×
  • Create New...