Infinity RS-1B, Altec 604H, VTL MB-450 Series I

Click pics to enlarge. My earlier Visit 1. VTL MB-450 monoblocks have replaced the previous CJ Premier 8 on the amp racks. Between the Infinity panels is my Thorens TD-124. What are the dishes? Clockwise from top: Pocket Pastry with Chives and Eggs, plus Chinese Flatbread; Fried Eels; Spicy Tripes; Mustard Green with Other Vegetables; Braised Pork.

NY Diary (19-15): Infinity RS-1B and Altec 604-H Redux
VTL MB-450 vs Conrad-Johnson Premier 8

As mentioned many times before, our friend Kevin is a dynamo. Just chronicling his quest is enough material to sustain my Blog! :-) This is the latest update.

VTL MB-450 (Series I) After my last visit (peruse for the other equipment used), Kevin bought a pair of VTL MB-450. This is the same amp that Andy (who inspired both Kevin and Mark to get into Infinity) has used for over 10 years (here). This is the series I, which has a much plainer look (that I prefer) than the later II and the current III.

Talking about product longevity, this amp actually harks back to the even earlier MB-300, which is why this Stereophile archived review link grouped all the MB-300 and MB-450 Series I and II reviews together. Quite a good read, with some caveats, as we shall see.

Each MB-450 uses a 12AT7 and a 6350 to drive 8 x 6550's, switchable from Tetrode to Triode Operation. Andy's Svetlana 6550's had lasted him for over 10 years and that is astonishing given how hard they have to work driving the Infinity panels. Kevin's amps on the other hand are now tubed with current production Gold Lion KT88's. As with VTL, fixed bias for each tube.

Visit 1 Not long after, I got to hear them. As soon as I heard the first piece, I said I preferred these to the CJ Premier 8's. Kevin laughed and said, "I predicted you are going to say that and I mentioned it to Andy last night!" Well, we know each other well indeed; I know myself well too, as I too knew even before the visit that I was to prefer the VTL.

So why my preference? I have thought of writing a CJ Overview as I have heard plenty of them and used a few, but...Well, I find CJ products too colored. To use its rival ARC as an example, if I compare their products of the same vintage, I almost always prefer ARC, for its more neutral sound. Some tube warmth is undoubtedly desirable, but CJ over-eggs it, especially as it evolved. Basically for a long time they just added more and more, and larger and larger, capacitors, particularly in the preamps. The Premier series preamps are widely used in our circle, but I personally  do not favor them. As for the amps, I find them even more unacceptable. To me, CJ's use of high bias and current on the power tubes wastes power, leads to short tube life and frequent failures, produces a tight sound, but somehow does not translate into power when the going gets rough. Here, the CJ LP275, a latter day (but less well built) version of the Premier 8, was a wimp compared to the diminutive EAR 509, a neutral amp closer to the VTL in sound. That said, the popularity of CJ must owe a little to the remedial effect it has on lean systems (prevalent). It should also be said that more recent CJ products have moved towards the more neutral side.

And so it proved here. The sound of the MB-450 was surely more neutral than the CJ, more powerful too as I expected. Kevin preferred Triode Operation because of its sweeter sound. In this system, with Kevin's audio preference and the ribbon panels, there was really not much sweetness, but I left pretty satisfied. It should be noted that in one of the Stereophile's reviews, a much younger Michael Fremer favored the sound of the CJ Premier 12 (which can be thought of as a smaller version of the 8) to the MB-450. Horses for Courses.

As predicted (see link), the Altec 604-H (right pic) sounded better with the McKintosh C20/MC30 combo. Things fleshed out. On James' Lenco 78 turntable, Kevin replaced the original arm with a modified Rega 300, and the result was enormous, much better balance and bass, a tribute to the Rega arm.

Visit 2 Just yesterday we met again. In the interim, Kevin had built new power cords for the VTL's and according to both him and Andy it made a big difference. Indeed the sound was a little fuller. Kevin is now using the Tetrode Mode for its greater control and power. He said the power cord smoothed out the sound enough for him to make this choice. Kevin had switched cartrdiges. The VAS-modified Ortofon 2M Red sounded better than the Decca on his Thorens TD-125/ET arm (this arm is said to be light in bass, and so it proves). The Decca Gold (VdH stylus) also sounded better on the VPI. A good switch. On this occasion, we also heard his digital system with a Wadia 2000 transport, which sounded pretty good. It was too bad I had to leave early.

The job is not quite done. While I liked the more neutral sound of the VTL, I do think the system could use a little more warmth, but that is surely to come soon.

Note my Thorens TD-124 now has a 12" arm board made by Kevin. Lunch is Seafood Pan-fried Noodles.

Denon DL-301 Mk II VAS Repair

Review: Denon DL-301 Mk II (VAS Repair), Part II

Denon DL-301 Mk II Review, Part I

Time flies, I cannot believe it has been 7 years since I wrote Part I. What readers don't know is that right after I wrote that article, an accident ripped the cantilever out! I got it at a quite inexpensive price (I lament that Comet Supply doesn't seem to supply Denon's anymore), so was not prepared to re-tip it. But now, with VAS service available, I grabbed the opportunity. It seemed to need no running in and the Denon impressed from the word go!

What a Joy! Its return coincided with my reconfiguration of System 3 (last article; below). As the result is so wonderful, I shall be quite brief with this review. Not much qualification is needed. No if's, and's or but's.

• On my Audio-Technica AT-PL120 in Station 3 (see sidebar), playing into all 3 phonoamps, Mofi Studiophono, Micromega MyGroov and 47 Labs Shigaraki 4718 the sound was excellent. Finally I settled on the 47 Labs for its most detailed sound, but not before changing the interconnect to DIY 47 Labs. Downstream are the Schiit Saga used as buffer, Langevin 102 preamp, Akitika GT 102 amp and Audiomaster LS 3/5A.  The sound is neutral through the audio band, full of air and vitality, and no discernible MC peak. Perhaps it is slightly less a drama queen than its more famous cousin, the DL-103, but in many systems this will be smoother. I listened to every genre of music, and I can detect no serious weakness. One illustration suffices. Rostropovich/Britten's never surpassed performance of Schubert's Appregione Sonata (London, LP) was incisive, the best I have heard (cello can be a little bloating in many systems). What I wrote in Part I stands.

• On my Technics SL-1200 Mk II in System 2 (see sidebar), it played into the AQVOX 2CI Mk II (also undergoing further evaluation, more in an article later), Shindo Monbrisson, Elekit TU-8150 and my YL horns with aplomb. In the same system is the Thorens TD-309 fitted with the Koetsu Black, and the Denon is not far behind, just lacking a little the special magic of the former. Sweet!

• Comparison with a stock DL-301 Mk II Serendipity! My friend RC has this cartridge, so when I visited him I asked him to play it in his system (here). I heard more or less the same things as in my own systems. This proves that the VAS re-tip is an excellent job.

Micromega MyGroov MyDac, Meridian 200, Akitika GT-102, Schiit Saga

Click pic to enlarge. On rack, from top, Thorens TD-125, Audio Technica AT-PL120, white Micromega MyDac atop Meridian 200 and a bit of 47 Labs Shigaraki phonostage , Schiit Saga; lower middle, Micromega MyGroov in front to MoFi Studiophono; right, Pioneer PL-10.

Let's Get It On: Akitika GT-102 + LS3/5A, A Happy Union
What's Going On: Reconfiguration of System III, a Cheap and Effective All Solid State System
Review: Micromega MyGroov, Part II
Review: Micromega MyDac, Part III
Review: Akitika GT-102, Part II

Review: Meridian 200 CD transport
Review: Schiit Saga, Part III

Review: Monoprice Toslink Cable

Micromega MyGroov, Part I
Micromega MyDac, Part I
Akitika GT-102, Part I
Schiit Saga, Part II
47 Labs 4718, Part III
Pioneer SW-8 Subwoofer, Part II

Many of my articles are basically housekeeping. In the process I try to seek a moderate improvement or some insight into some of my under-used equipment. This article is one of them. It doesn't really review anything new; instead working things out and going deeper into things. 

From time to time, I reconfigure my systems. Usually this is brought about by a particular piece of equipment. In this case, it was because I moved the Thorens TD-309 from System III to I for my Koetsu Black, which weighs a little heavy. Also, as it was basically not used, to reclaim space I dismantled System IV in the living room, so quite a few pieces of equipment were again available for use.

System III This is by my seat. For someone as overreaching as I, it is not easy to cram everything onto one rack, so I tend to use things with small footprints. Ever since the arrival of Schitt Saga (here) and Akitika GT-102 (here) they have been used together with the Audiomaster LS3/5A to great effect. The crispy and fast sound of the Schiit actually suits the Audiomaster LS3/5A, the darkest of my 3 pairs. Thinking to improve things, I propped in the Nagra PL-P and was surprised at the somewhat rolled off sound. Not synergy and so out it came. Then I focused on reconfiguring my sources.

For digital, as I had moved my Sparkler CDP to System I, for some time I had been using the Linn Karik CDP. Desiring to be able to occasionally play albums on my computer, I decided to go separates. I recruited my ancient Meridian 200 transport and Micromega MyDac.

For Analog, the Pioneer PL-10 with Rao's MC mono cartridge remains, but is assigned to an adjacent shelf. In place of the Thorens TD-309 I swapped in my Audio-Technica AT-PL120 with the Shelter 201 MM cartridge. This turntable, with removable headshell, is great for comparisons, but for the near future I may keep it an MM turntable (with maybe 78 rpm option in the future). I also added a third turntable. My Thorens TD-125 (with SME 3009 and Denon DL-304) from System I, now displaced by the TD-309, claimed the top shelf as I shoved the AT to the shelf underneath (just enough room to carefully maneuver without the cover). Needing a third phonoamp I added the Micromega MyGroov. The Kondo Shigaraki phonostage is MC only, but both Micromega MyGroov and MoFi Studiophono are MM/MC, making the system highly configurable. I tried multiple combinations.

Micromega MyGroov (official link)
Aside from European (French and Spanish) reviews (link) there are virtually no other for this humble component. In Chinese, there is a surprisingly good one from Taiwan's HiFi HiVi. Switch Mode Power Supply and Surface Mount technology are used. See Part I link above for my previous, very favorable, impressions.

Micromega MyDac (official link) This one has been rave reviewed by many when it came out but surprisingly I don't see it mentioned much afterwards (perhaps it is too cheap for its own good). In my detailed Part I review you can read my utter enthusiasm for it. Actually before this round I briefly tried it out in System I with Theta Data Basic (btw a great transport) and the combo went almost head-to-head with the formidable Sparkler S306, which is my reference. Kudos!

Meridian 200 CD Transport I have used or heard quite a bit of Meridian digital products (to me their specialty,) from the first 200 series to the much later 800 series, and they in general offer excellent sound. Perhaps one day I shall write an overview. The 200 is Meridian's first CD transport. It was initially paired with the 1-bit (bitstream) 203 DAC, which I used to own in HK but sold for its ultimate lack of resolution (though it was musical). Meridian's own archive has this excellent early review of the 200/203. Meridian later replaced the DAC with the delta-sigma 263 (see Stereophile), which is likely much better as I still own (in HK) their 206, a similar one box CDP. Another reason for loving them is the styling - early Meridian had the most elegant industrial designs. Yet another is the longevity of the Philips CDM-4 mechanism, and the sound of course.

Sonic Impressions

• Akitika GT-102 + LS3/5A As before, the combo with Schiit Saga and LS3/5A worked a treat, especially with digital. The LS3/5A are placed near field and in front of my horns, and they just disappear. At low level, the images are relatively small, but crank it up to normal listening level, the images flesh out. In fact, one could easily mistake the sound to be coming from the large horn system behind. From vocal CDs to Bruckner LP, the sound is highly articulate, just enticing. Few bookshelves can equal, let alone surpass, the LS3/5A.

• Schiit Saga This round reaffirms that the Schiit Saga is a very neutral device, not for systems already on the lean side. I started using it as a passive preamp, but soon found myself running out of gain for analog, especially my DL-304 (0.2 mV). I then used the Saga as a buffer amp into my Langevin 102 preamp and the analog sound fully fleshed out. More discussion below...

• Analog + Passive Preamp? t shows once again that a passive device is not optimal for an analog based system. I know there are purists out there who insist on passive preamp but who also use analog. Maybe with a high output MM (like the Shure 44-7) one can get away, but with a low-output MC it is just lacking in muscle.

• Micromega MyGroov This is not the most "precise" (as in pinpoint details) phonostage, but it is a highly musical one (Perhaps one can view it as a somewhat upgraded Schiit Mani). It musical warmth and finesse more than compensates, and it proves to be a much better match with my Thorens TD-125/SME3009i/Denon DL-304 than the leaner 47 Labs. It is very cheap and unjustly neglected. My Part I impression stands.

• 47 Labs 4718 As mentioned in Part III (link above), it is getting run-in. Sound is smoother now but still can be insistent occasionally. As mentioned, it did not gel with my Denon DL-304 (nor my mono rig for that matter). But a later sub of Denon DL-301 Mk II (review coming) was very promising. I then switched in DIY 47 Labs cables and it was superb. This is the best sound I have heard from it.

• Micromega MyDac/Meridian 200 I first connected the DAC with my Linn Karik and the sound was lovely, so I was totally shocked when I switched in the Meridian 200. Synergy! It was like flowers blossoming, everything was alive with colors. It went head to head with the vinyl systems. I liked Marvin Gaye's Let's Get it On so much that I pulled out his What's Going On - just did not want to stop. Absolutely superb combination. USB The MyDac played my humble iTunes/AIFF files very well too, (in fact in this setup better than many CAS setups I have heard) and that will be sometimes useful. Toslink What was most amazing was that the Optical Input, connected to the same Meridian 200 with a $6 Monoprice cable, sounded virtually indistinguishable from the coaxial input (Belden 1694A). I checked my notes (see link above) and, my, I forgot I made the same observations before. It is good keeping a blog to check on oneself. I'd guess there must be some effective re-clocking or de-jittering in the MyDAC for every input to sound alike. In such a small product, quite an achievement. The Micromega MyDac is a serious rival to the Sparkler digital products.

And so I arrived at the current configuration:

CD: Meridian 200 Transport and Micromega MyDac (Belden 1694A coaxial; Monoprice Toslink)
Turntable 1: Audio-Technica AT-PL120
Turntable 2: Pioneer PL-10 with Rao's MC Mono
Phonoamps: 47 Labs 4718 Shigaraki, Micromega MyGroov, and MoFi StudioPhono
Buffer Preamp: Schiit Saga
Active Preamp: Langevin 102
Amp: Akitika GT-102
Loudspeakers: Audiomaster LS3/5A (15 ohm)
Subwoofer: Pioneer SW-8

Subwoofer Finally, I added a subwoofer, the cheap and excellent Pioneer SW-8 (see link above). The LS3/5A does not reach deep, but its subtle mid-bass hump gives one a satisfying feeling that is frequently enough. But not quite for classical music, at least not for Bruckner and Big orchestral and Piano music. It took me a while to dial in, but the result was more than worth the effort. The fuller sound actually gives more support and air at the top. I went through an entire Bruckner cycle (LP, Jochum, DG) with great satisfaction. CD playing benefitted greatly too. The piano sound of Radu Lupu's Schubert D845/D894 (CD, Decca) was resplendent, not quite like my horn rig, but very reasonably close. Especially in Schubert, the often foreboding rumbling bass notes are very important in the overall feeling.

In this system, if I only play digital, I can get away without using the active preamp. And if I switch out the tube in the Schiit Saga, the difference will be minimal, and it will be an excellent and all solid-state system! A bargain to boot!

Nagatron HV-9100, 360CE, JTR-3, AQVOX 2CI Mk II BMC MCCI

Click pics to enlarge. Top: Ah, the struggles of life. Nagatron HV-9100 on the Garrard 401/SME 3012.

NY Diary (19-14): Nagatron Cartridges, Part II, AQVOX 2CI MkII, Part II

Revised November 8th with two valuable Nagatron pics added, courtesy of Andy.

This is a quick write up to tie up some loose ends, organized in several parts.

My previous article on Nagatron has all the background details.
AQVOX 2CI Mk II, Part I has all the details.

Right pic: Luxman turntable with Nagatron 360CE.

Nagatron Cartridges and AQVOX 2CI Mk II
This re-visit came about because my friend RC (more below) has a Nagatron, which he uses with a SUT; but he became curious about Current-Amplified Phonostages. Although I thought the 0.04 output of the Nagatron is still too low for the AQVOX 2CI Mk II, I agreed to the project and then to lend him the unit.

First, RC came to Queens to audition my system. In lieu of the resident Aurorasound Vida I connected the AQVOX. First, we listened to my Denon DL-301 Mk II (more on this in a later article) on my Technics SL-1200 Mk II, the captured cable of which I had to use a RCA female-to female connector to connect to the RCA to XLR special cable for the AQVOX (see link above). Despite this, the sound was marvelous. The was complete absence of noise. I then was able to directly connect my Thorens TD-309/Koetsu Black and the AQVOX did it absolute justice. Though different, it was fully the equal of the much more expensive Aurorasound (less punchy but calmer). RC and I marveled at the quietness and the composed and luxuriant feeling of the AQVOX.

At Andy's, we heard again the 2 Nagatron cartridges I wrote about (see link at top), though the turntables were different from last time (see pics). We connected them with the AQVOX. They sounded pretty good but gain was pretty low even with the horns. Now, Andy is quite picky, but even he praised the sonic quality, though noting that the sound homogenized the difference between cartridges and records. Most amazing to me was the complete absence of noise even when maxing out - imagine asking your phonoamp to do this for a 0.02 V signal, at least 10 times lower in output that your MC!  BTW, the Luxman (as if he doesn't have enough, donated by his relative) was too soft, as is true for all classic offerings of this company (the preamps are even worse), not one of my favorite companies, though I have to say they look so good.

Home Visit
RC took the AQVOX home. I went visiting a few days later. The complicated system has changed quite a bit (previous system here). In his own words:

Speakers: Klang & Ton NADA (Madisound link) + 4- REL Q201e Subs  

Amps- VTL 100 mono blocks using 2 KT150 tubes; for the Summer months, Classe Audio DR8 SS amp 

Pre: Bent Audio Tap X, Dave Slagle Autoformer volume control, DSPeaker Antimode 2.0 for the Sub woofer system 

Anolog: Technics SP10MK2, Sony PUA1600l Tone arm and various cartridges 

Technics SH305S SUT & a Valab LCR-1 Phono stage 

Digital - Mac MIni server, Focusrite Red Net 3 transport, Mutec MC3+3 re clocker, Antelop Audio Live Clock world clock, Audio Note DAC3.1X balanced DAC 

Sonically, the sound was improved from last visit. The new loudspeakers obviously have faster transient speed and more dynamics. The subwoofers were reasonably well integrated. RC played both the Denon DL-301 Mk II and Nagatron JTR-3 (with SUT) for me, and they were very good, still better than the elaborate digital system. The Nagatron's fast transient is unmistakable. I also love the looks of the Sony arm.

It was too bad RC had dismantled my AQVOX before my visit, so I could not hear it, but although the gain was not quite enough he was quite enamored of the sound that he wanted one. Guess what? He obtained one from Ebay, not the AQVOX, but the more expensive BMC MCCI by the same designer Candeias! It arrived today. Stay tuned.

This DEAD-QUIET phonoamp is a winner!

Lunch at Andy's: Beef with Hot Peppers, Pork with Bamboo Shoots,

Fish in Sichuan Sauce and Eggplants 

Rare Nagatron Transformer and Headamp

A Record Store I'd have loved to have visited. The mesmerizing
Anna Karina in Jean-Luc Godard's Vivre Sa Vie.
The captivating score was by Michel Legrand.

Full-Range Drivers, Audio Nirvana, Tonewin, Lowther, Cabinets, Mark Audio, Voxativ

Full-Range Drivers, A Guide
"Full-Range" and Hyperbole
Letter: From Russia with Love - Where is the promised Audio Nirvana?
Tonewin VT-2806

This is a sprawling article. You have been warned. But I think, should you be patient, you may be rewarded with an unusually interesting read, with an insight into how I see things that no amount of digital tracking or AI can provide...On the other hand, you can also skip certain sections to what you're interested in:

Section 1 is about my email policy and why I chose to make an exception to one. It is below in italics, which some of you may want to skip:

This article was inspired by an email I received from a Russian audiophile who knows no English but used a translator. Basically he is using a Full-Range driver with an amp from the same company. He did all the "right" things, yet the sound disappoints.

This happens to be a topic close to my heart. I appreciate full-range drivers, have experienced quite a few, still own some, and know them very well and have heard many such systems over the years, including many from my yahoo cheaptubeaudio group days. Given my preference for large scaled music, I have very firm opinions about the pro's and con's.

I did some research on what this reader used and dissected the issues. I was a bit unsettled by certain things. In audio, there are a few things I frown upon. One is hyperbole (pervasive), the other is not fully disclosing the true provenance of products (not unoften). Before getting down to business, a note about emails.

An Exception, and A First
I accept comments in this blog. Within a confined subject, dialogue is easy. But email is a different thing. Although I provide my email in this blog, I discourage directly emailing me and state clearly that I cannot and will not answer every email. Aside from time constraints, because of strong personal preferences there are just too many things out there that I am not sympathetic to. For every email I do answer there are several that I just let go. The subject has to be close to my heart. That said, even with limited engagement I have met some friends from all over, and I do hope audio makes the world a better place (certainly we can do better than politicians!).

Given their highly inequitable societies, I know many Russian audiophiles, like their Mainland Chinese counterparts, have mostly very limited budgets, and my heart goes out to them. I know well that expectation, that yearning for improvement and, most terribly, being unsure how to choose or navigate the sea of information on the internet. I am not sure how much I can help, but to my disdain not a few audio manufacturers actually pander to this sector, to lure by making usually exaggerated claims.

Section 2 starts to answer the email:

The Email So, in order to explore the subjects, I decided to make a one-time exception and actually publish this letter in an article. Here's the email in small fonts. The sender knows no English and used a translator. My editing and response in normal fonts:

Pic shows the reader's 8" full range loudspeakers. Click to enlarge. Below the A5 and 6V6 amp on a platform.

My problem is this - there is no magic)), but I really want to. The system (photo) at the moment is as follows: CD player musical fidelity A5 - connecting cable Belden 8402 (70 centimeters) - push-pull ultra-linear amplifier (lamps 6v6, 6sn7, 12akh7) - acoustic wire mono-conductor - acoustics audio nirvana alniko 8 "... power wires - normal high-quality computer cords.The equipment is on heavy maple blocks (vibration control).

What does not suit the sound? - I would like a deeper scene, greater clarity, musicality (by this I understand ... I’ll try to explain - you can hit the clay cup and the sound will be poor, or you can have a crystal glass - the sound will be colorful).

Some well-recorded discs with vocals sound pretty nice, but still there is no effect of presence. Classical music lacks hardness (there is no dryness and no brightness, namely a natural timbre - the sound is too soft).

Translation is difficult, but I think this is what you are saying: my problem is, the system has no magic. I'd like a deeper soundstage, better definition, presence and dynamics. Especially classical music, which lacks punch. (Notes: lamp = tubes; 12Akh7 is Russian for 12AX7) 

There is always not enough money and therefore the source should be digital, but I'm afraid to sell musical fidelity to A5 - most players sound even worse (up to $ 2000) ... In your blog you wrote that the figure and analogue can be very similar - you can pick up natural tone. I like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yyj-Keg3dk . Please advise me what to do ??? - replace the source? and on which? (the sparkler seems to me like a child’s toy, it has obviously poor mechanics ... + the Japanese are crazy about high frequencies and all that they are doing now is a sharp ringing sound ... I heard that many people don’t like 47 laboratories - they call their sound primitive / simplified ... it is amazing how the Japanese made Sony ES 7... in the 70-80s - but these devices were already destroyed by time). If you try the DAC, then you need transport (and this is 2 extra wires + it's difficult to synchronize the clock) ...

After evaluating your email and doing some research I think I have some thoughts which I will go into much greater detail later. Here, I agree with you that your source is not likely the main problem. Musical Fidelity made reasonable CD Players and DACs. And your cables are not the problems either. Although the Belden 8402 is not the last word in presence, it is nonetheless a neutral cable and unlikely to be chiefly responsible for your system's woes. That said, Gotham will give you a little more "jump factor".

It is also true that in some quarters Japanese gears are associated with sharpness, but personally I am an admirer of the Japanese hi-end. As for minimalist Sparkler and 47 Labs, they sure use very few parts, and not boutique parts either, but they sure sound good to me, with exactly the kind of qualities you miss in your system (like presence). Of course, the DIY people, whom you have obviously aligned yourself to, think by using better components and more complex supporting circuits things can be much better but that is likely not the case. Different philosophies, which I know quite well and will touch upon again later.

Have you heard this? http://www.chiaki.cc/Transport/sdtrans192.html

No, I have not heard it personally, but I do know using SD cards as "transport" is popular in some quarters, and there are many people, DIY or small outfits making them. A friend in HK always talk about that, but computer as server is not my cup of tea really.

P / S classical music You probably know better than me - but here are a few performers as an example ... in America they can sing like that? )) .... (verses are very deep - this is not consumer goods) . If you like it - you can always find CD or LP

The reader is obviously proud of his Russian heritage. He gratuitously included around 50(!) youtube links, mostly vocal, a few classical and the rest pop. I leave only two links here:

https://youtu.be/t2CVUOEfVKI?t=17 . Dmitry Hvorstovsky (recently died) - this is the most favorite concert of all the people ... who now can make the auditorium cry ???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHaHObdCu0Y (He was a virtuoso - stronger than Glenn Gould) (editor: Sofonitzsky)

The artists he included links for include: Владимир Высоцкий, Александр Градский, Александр Малинин, Григорий Лепс, Тамара Гвердцители, Николай Носков, Елена Ваенга, Пелагея, Александр Розенбаум, Анна Герман, Полина Агуреева, Алексей Архиповский, Александр Малинин 

Section 3, the most serious part of this entry, will analyze aspects of the problem/system:

Full Range Driver

• Full-Range Drivers are ubiquitous We all listen to full-range drivers everyday. They come in all sizes. The smallest are in earphones, cellphones and other devices. They are used in TV's and cars (where some of the larger ones can be found). These drivers can usually be relied upon to faithfully deliver the vital midband so important to human speech and daily communication. We all know the voice of famous personalities, musicians or not. If that voice sounds off in your hifi, blame only yourself. The best example in my HK experience is the voice of the Cantonese opera singer 梁醒波, who is known to everyone in HK by virtue of his ubiquitous presence on TV (in old movies). His voice is favored by HK audiophiles, yet many of the poor systems that I have heard got his voice wrong - usually the more expensive, the more inaccurate. Such is the off-kilter world of the "high end".

• My Experience I am an admirer of full-range drivers and have quite a bit of experience. For more than 20 years, I owned one of the best full range loudspeakers ever made, the original Lowther TP-1. To me, its performance is unsurpassed. Regrettably, I had to sell it before I left HK a year ago. Not having really listened to it for more than 10 years, a simple hooking up with Sun Audio 2A3 just filled the room with music (details here which you should read as it gives my view on Lowther and wannabes). You should have seen the grin of the buyer! And my grin, because I loved selling it to someone who actually appreciates it. In HK, for the last few years I have used the much smaller 47 Labs 4737 alnico full-range (here) and am also familiar with the astonishing Sparkler S301 (here,) which uses a Mark Audio driver. Many years ago, throughout the period of my Yahoo Cheaptubeaudio group, I was also very pleased with my friend jules' over-performing bookshelf Loth-X Amaze (I know, it has a whizzer cone). That was a very good company, regrettably defunct. Of course, countless DIY Fostex systems too. I have also heard very reasonably priced Goodmans and Altec full range drivers to excellent effect. Others that I have heard include Beauhorn, expensive Japanese field coils and even Voxativ (twice), but they did not make a lasting impression. Here in NYC I still own the iconic WE and Altec 755's, purportedly the best ever, which I still haven't put into use.

• "Full-Range", Utopian or Dystopian? There are idealists, and then there are fanatics, and many full-range aficionados are a mix of the two. Their "one-driver is best" mantra can actually be agreed to even by those non-aligned. Who would not want a crossover-less driver that can do everything? But real conditions are not so simple. Over the past three decades, I have heard probably close to a hundred full-range setups (including my own), some from manufacturers of finished products (most recently, the unconscionably expensive Voxativ Ampeggio, the cabinet of which is dead-ringer for a Lowther-derivative,) but mostly in DIY cabinets. My Observation: Most DIY full-range setups are in some ways, if not woefully, inadequate, not to mention not at all full-range, and many users are unsatisfied and in a state of limbo, like our Russian friend here. That is not the kind of testimony one is likely to find in a seller's website! I know many people who have a bunch of different full-range drivers, yet is not satisfied with any. They also end up with many different cabinets, none satisfactory in the long term. And you cannot even give away the cabinets you have no need for. Mind you, I like full-ranges for what they are, but there are very good reasons why other people, including me, ultimately prefer other means of delivery, be it horns (my YL) or line source (Infinity), or planars (my Magnepan 1.7), and for smaller footprints, the LS3/5A I am using now. There are many reasons for this, and let us examine them.

• Musical Preference Know your Advisor If someone waxes lyrics about full-range, it pays to examine what music he listens to. Audio Nirvana, which we will examine in more detail later, actually has a page on music they use; it is maybe 1/3 audiophile material, the rest pop stuff. There is not one single classical music entry. While everyone has a right to listen to whatever he wants, I personally believe without using some classical music as reference the system will never be voiced right. This is ironic because true full-range can only be found in an orchestra. It is also likely the list includes no classical music because they know their replay is more difficult. For the same reason, I dismiss the reviews of Ken Kessler in HiFi News; the man also uses no classical music. Know Yourself It is also important that the end user knows what he wants. If classical is part of the diet, like our Russian friend, full-range drivers by themselves are likely to fail the mission. Next we talk about the difficulties of implementing a full-range driver.

• The Biggest Obstacle: The Cabinet Material Almost every seller tells you his driver works well with his cabinet plan. This is not so. The plan maybe a start, but there are too many factors. To start, the choice of material influences the sound greatly. For full-range drivers, I have rarely heard an MDF cabinet sound right, and this includes some of the "authorized" Lowther replica cabinet makers I have heard in HK. None of the reproduction Acousta, Fidelio, not to mention "TP-1" (how ambitious!) sound remotely right to me. There are people who don't think much of the original (UK) Lowther cabinets, but they are seriously mistaken - they always sound right, and I have heard them all. So use wood, which is another big topic I will not go into. Size Matters Understandably, because of space constraints and simple construction, most DIY cabinets take the form of slim line towers, but I personally have not heard many truly successful efforts. The fact that ports are almost invariably used indicates that bass always needs help. Even then, it is usually not enough, or simply not right. The lack of bass foundation makes the treble stand out too much, especially exposing the problems of "advanced" driver designs. Baffle Width If we take baffle width into the sonic equation, argument for a full-range driver housed in a slim line tower makes even less sense. The full-range has a built-in advantage of point source and soundstaging, which does not need extra help, whereas the bass does, which means a wider baffle likely helps. Even if we consider conventional dynamic loudspeakers, most of the ones that impress me with the bass are housed in wide and large cabinets (say, Spendor SP-100, B and W 801, not to mention Tannoy's). Usually loudspeakers adjust for the baffle "step" effect in the crossover, but the full-range does not have this option.  Not Everyone is an Artist By this, I mean, cabinet making is an "art". Just a simple box likely fails 99 out of 100 times, which is why people experiment with damping materials from cotton wool to bitumen. The repeated tweaks and listening evaluations can be pretty draining and disheartening. Open Baffle The people who advocate open baffle is evidence that the colorations of the box is a serious challenge. While it is true open baffle indeed works, the fact that for a full-range you'll need a very large baffle and likely corners/walls to get any bass just does not work for the majority of people. Incidentally, not a few multi-way loudspeakers mount their tweeter and midrange in an open-baffle fashion (Alon, Nola), even without baffle (Dahlquist, Vanderstein), and, more recently, super-high-end Zellaton actually even has an open-baffle bass (but with side panels; open in the back.) Back Loaded Horn It is my firm belief  that full-range drivers sound best with a back-loaded horn design (this is in contrast to Audio Nirvana). The problem is it is much more difficult to build (hence after-market services), and one still has to choose the right wood etc (witness the failures of the MDF Lowther replica cabinets I have heard in HK). A good original UK Lowther cabinet, all back loaded horns, never shouts, as US reviewers seem to suggest Lowthers always do (including Art Dudley). They simply haven't heard the real things. Bookshelves After hearing so many failures of DIY big boxes, I actually think, for full-range beginners, it is better to start with a bookshelf, and augment, as we shall see later.

• Efficiency Let me spill the beans: No Full-Range driver is as efficient as the spec's suggest. Period. I shall start with Lowther, My fat-lady Lowther TP-1 is iconic, and it works with Sun Audio 2A3, but it would not work well with Sun Audio's even lower powered VT-25/10Y amp (estimated 1.5 wpc), with which it clips just too easily. The same VT-25/10Y amp however works much better with my Klipsch La Scala (yes, 3 horn drivers, plus crossover, but higher efficiency at 104 db). All this with a preamp with gain for the punchiest first-watt. In my experience, Fostex and Mark Audio are efficient  (as exemplified by my friend's Sparkler S301 (here,) and Kevin's Fostex (here) - both sound decent with SET tube amp. Not so the 47 Lab 4737 alnico full-range, which works better with solid-state (here). Also, read this dagogo review of the Voxativ Ampeggio, where veteran Jack Roberts states that solid state actually worked better than SET (I believe him). So not all full-range drivers prefer tube. Dynamic Conditions Under dynamic conditions, the full-range driver struggles to reproduce the full frequency range and, in the process, reveals itself to be not as nearly efficient as under static (or test-bench) conditions. It is after all still a driver, susceptible to everything that any driver faces, e.g. break-up's, what have you. All you have gotten rid of is the crossover, not all evils (but you also lose room for compensation). And how that is  forgotten! Basically, the user puts all his faith in the omnipotence of the driver/designer. Mind you, I am not at all against the full-range, just questioning some people's quasi-religious attitudes.

• Augmentation More often than not, indeed in the majority of cases, if one wants to listen to all kinds of music, some augmentation is needed. In almost all cases, bass augmentation is needed. In some cases, treble augmentation is beneficial too. But I hear battle cries: "What? Pollute the purity of the driver with others? Sacrilege!" Tweeter, or "Supertweeter" With time, as the drivers improve in bandwidth, it seems an additional tweeter is not needed. This seems so - I had no need to augment the treble of the 47 Labs or Sparkler (Mark Audio) mentioned above. Indeed, even back many years ago, the single driver Loth-X Amaze bested its predecessor BS-1, which had an additional tweeter (first-order) and which I enjoyed. With older full-range drivers, like Goodmans and Altec, even some Lowther's, adding a tweeter is often beneficial, even mandatory, opening up the soundstage and, believe it or not, tightening the bass. This is true too of many vintage loudspeakers, like vintage Tannoy (e.g. my Tannoy Gold Lancaster 12"). But, why not use a modern driver with better extension, you ask. Well, judging from what I have heard so far, many modern drivers, in an obsession to improve spec's, lose the soul. Personally, I'd pick a driver that has the best midrange rather than the best extensions, and work from there. Which is why I am still a Lowther fan, though I do like some others (like Mark Audio). Subwoofer In my opinion, the subwoofer is essential with most "full-range" systems, which under dynamic conditions become lean in the bass, especially when driven by flea-powered amps and a passive preamp fashionable in DIY circles. No-No. Nyet. Big Mistake.You need the Jump Factor, the precious First-Watt. Or else it is just a stagnant pool. Actually the suffix "sub" is a misnomer - what the subwoofer does, more than adding the missing octave(s), is supplementing the inadequacy of the woofer! And under dynamic conditions, the so-called "full-range" leaves a lot to be desired. My own 47 labs 4737 is a good example, as it benefits greatly from addition of a subwoofer (here). Crossover Point There are people who believe in spec's, so dial in the subwoofer at or below where the woofer supposedly rolls off, but that is too low in most cases, as in real-world and dynamic conditions the woofer rolls off much quicker. Let's say your loudspeaker is supposedly -3db at 50 Hz, start at 100 Hz and go down. I personally find better integration at higher crossover points but lower subwoofer volume rather than vice versa. Lastly, if you ask me, the subwoofer benefits most bookshelves and, if set up properly, is more than competitive with tower speakers of similar footprints. Keep in mind, the larger the cabinet, the more the coloration problem, particularly in the bass. Take Home Message Dial in your tweeter or sub by making sure you just cannot hear it, but can just feel it. If you can hear very clearly the contribution, it's already too much. Purists will reject all of this, because they claim the raison d'etre for using a full-range is not to have any crossover. In the idealist vacuum, I agree; in reality, more often than not, no. To have your music portrayed faithfully is the goal, not to be loyal to your/other's doctrine.

• 2-Way Loudspeakers with First-Order Crossover Many very good loudspeakers in my experience are basically a more-or-less full-range augmented with a tweeter connected first-order. The aforementioned Loth-X BS-1 is a budget and overachieving example. Even more shining examples are the older Reference 3A's. More recent mass-market examples can be easily found, such as the B & W CM-1 (here) and Vienna Acoustics Haydn (here). At the higher-end, you may be surprised to learn that many of the classic (not now) Sonus faber loudspeakers (call me a fan) utilize first-order. Just one cap. How much sonic degradation is there, you ask? Don't forget, whatever the compromise, we only may hear it in the treble frequency, whereas the midrange driver derives much benefit from being able to concentrate on the bottom, where most 'full-range" falter. Mind you, I don't necessarily think a capacitor is bad, as it may just temper your wrong choice elsewhere. Too many factors, too many theories, too little critical listening.

• The Best Driver? Lowther Call me conservative, but to me the best is still Lowther (preferably heard in their own UK cabinets), whose classic (PM series) offerings are evergreens. As with woofers, my preference for paper is absolute - they just sound more tactile, with greater PRaT. There are many imitators (like AER), but they almost always sound more sterile. A well done Lowther just has soul. Damn the Surrounds As much as I love Lowther's, I dissuade people from using them. The gap between the voice coil and magnet is less than 1 mm, and that is great trouble. In the less humid parts of the US, like the Northern or even Eastern states, it is better, but if you are in the humid South (say, Florida) or, even worse, in HK, Southern China, Southern Asia, I really would advice against it. The paper doesn't respond well to humidity and deform, and then you get a rubbing problem that necessitates a repair. Truing the cone is not a simple task and few can manage. The foam surrounds are problems too in humidity, necessitating periodic repairs. A little known fact is that early Lowther units have rubber surrounds, which is likely to last longer and which Lowther still repairs! Call that service! Others There are numerous Lowther imitators (like expensive AER) but, as mentioned, I usually find them sterile sounding, not worth the money. I have heard the ridiculously expensive Voxativ Ampeggio twice, but it was just good enough, not spectacular (I detest Jonathin Valin's rave review in TAS of its subwoofer'ed brethren; what does JV know about full-range, I ask) and certainly would not hold a candle for my departed Lowther TP-1 original. But I do support the budget driver sector: both Fostex and Mark Audio, to name just two, make superb value-for-money drivers. In terms of sound I'd think Fostex is very neutral and listenable, but I prefer Mark Audio for its consideration of rhythmic savvy, shown to stunning effect in the Sparkler S301 (link above). Audio Nirvana I have never heard their offerings, so I cannot comment. But the hyperboles on their website makes me feel highly uncomfortable. They say "...Are you tired of all the hype from advertising driven websites, magazines, and dealers just out for your money? Tired of '4D' speakers? Dead, dull, dark, and distant. Ready to be amazed?..." That sounds like hype to me, and our Russian reader is definitely not amazed. Mind you, Lowther, which has lasted more than half a century, and is likely to go on forever as a proverbial foil, is almost incognito, and has never said similar things. Mind you, hype can be everywhere, but it is imho actually more prevalent online than in trade magazines. Worst are the head-fi forums touting every new DAC and headphone. Avoid.

Now, problems can also be due to other system issues, which we will analyze below. But first, this...

"Manufacturer-Direct" and "Factory Built"
We all love manufacturer-direct, cutting out the middleman, but let's look at this in depth. Audio Nirvana's amplifiers all said "Factory-built", but let us look at what factory that is. Our Russian friend is using their older 6V6 amplifier.

This Polish site curiously juxtaposes Audio Nirvana with Tonewin, and one of the links included is actually the manufacturer's commercial information.






Another Polish site sells the Tonewin VT-2806H amplifier for 2000 Zloty, which is about USD 500, and that includes the very high 23% VAT, which makes it around USD 400 before tax. I am sure you could have bought this from China for less. There is no question the Audio Nirvana 6V6 amp is basically the same as the Chinese Tonewin amplifier. But, there are differences in the 2 pics. A limited number of components have been added or removed, and the wiring is slightly different. It is possible Audio Nirvana did modifications on the Tonewin unit and gave it a different faceplate and knobs. It is also possible that Tonewin itself had different versions (not uncommon) and Audio Nirvana only changed the external look (front plate and knobs). Whatever, it is safe to say the so-called US Audio Nirvana "factory built" 6V6 amp was designed and built in China, at most slightly modified.

Tonewin itself appears to be defunct, so Audio Nirvana is no longer selling their 6V6 model. If you ask me, all their current amplifier offerings are dead-ringers for made-in-China offerings. There is nothing wrong with selling made-in-China stuff, but it would be better if the seller would say so.

Having heard tons of lower-end Chinese amps, I'd say the quality of the transformers is definitely not a given, and that is a real consideration for good sound.

Tube "Integrated" Amp
Most people equate an amp with a volume knob (and maybe source selector) as an integrated amp. This depends on how you define an integrated amp. If anything that allows you to adjust volume and connect more than one source is an integrated, then it is. But, for me, an integrated amp has a preamp section that has gain, wedded to an amp section. This is actually very rare, particularly in the budget sector.

Most tube "integrated" amps are just amps with a passive volume knob. There is no preamp gain stage. Sun Audio, Elekit, and innumerable other Japanese and Chinese amps. Likewise, many solid state "integrated" amps, like Densen, are also just amps with a passive volume.

I do not have the circuit of the Audio Nirvana Chinese amp in question, so I do not know whether it actually has an active preamp stage. Even if it does, it is a rudimentary one.

DIY, Preamp, Passive Volume Control, First Watt and Low Powered Amp

• Is an Active Preamp necessary? Audiophiles are divided into the pragmatics and the theorists. The former will try anything if it makes the system better. The latter believes in numbers and have strong beliefs on many issues. There can be no more contentious issue than whether an active preamp is necessary. Take the standard CD player output of 2V, if you run that directly into your amp, it will be ruinously loud. So the preamp actually attenuates the signal going into the amp. The classic active preamp has gain, sometimes a lot, but in the end the signal is also attenuated before going into the amp. Many people take this to mean a passive preamp is all one needs. Why amplify and then attenuate? In theory this is correct, but in practice things are very different - the setups I have heard with passive preamps (including my own and those with source going directly into an amp with a passive volume) easily number more than a hundred, and in no more than a handful of instances did I not long for an active preamp. Let's look at this in detail.

• Passive Volume Control (PVC) Basically this is a volume pot. You can easily build one with a cheap volume pot, or you can spend thousands using boutique parts and ultra expensive resistors. My Audio Synthesis Passion V (a pic from the net to the right) costs a lot, and the cost of the parts add up to more than the second-hand price! Here are some factors influencing performance: Amplifier Sensitivity Amplifiers with high input sensitivity, such as Leak, works well with PVC, whereas those with low sensitivity, like Quad, would not. Source Output Most CDPs output a standard 2V, but there are exceptions. The vintage Muse Model 2 was supposed to be a very refined sounding DAC, but it has an unusually low 1V output. I heard it once many years ago in Opera Audio in HK. The late Stanley Chu had it in a system with 300B amp and Klipsch La Scala, but I just found the sound dull. On the other hand, Audio Note UK is known for the very high output of its DAC's. My vintage DAC-2 (here) has a monstrous 10V max. It was designed to be able to drive AN amps (those with volume knobs) directly. High Source Outputs work better with PVC. This is why imho people who play vinyl should NOT use PVC. Signal Loss and Buffer One reason why  preamp with gain drives the amp better is that a PVC by nature can only use a short interconnect. Preamp with gain can drive much longer interconnects. Even more important, many active preamps actually buffer the output, which has a great advantage in impedance matching. Transformer Volume Control (TVC) This is now all the rage. Since a transformer naturally "buffers" the output, it has advantage in impedance matching with the amp. Some can even have gain, which is a plus, especially for those who use analog sources. But TVC's are not without problems: 1) expense - all are very expensive, more so than a very good active preamp; 2) non-linearity - I don't care what they claim; ALL of them cannot be linear across the range due to the compromises in winding; in fact, non-linearity can be severe. All the claims for better cores, wires etc are exaggerated. It is ironic that the DIY enthusiast can put so much faith into TVC, as they cannot easily measure the TVC's performance under dynamic condition. That said, so do sound reasonably good.

• First Watt I am a firm believer of First Watt, which has to be: 1) of good tonal quality; and 2) of good dynamic capability. The former is not hard to achieve, but the latter is often ignored. In forums I see many DIY people using flea powered amps with PVC for "pure" sound, but most of those setups are severely lacking in dynamics. There are many people who like the "economy" of an integrated amp, but in almost all cases their "integrated" amp is just an amp with a PVC, incapable of a glorious first watt. There is a reason why a company like Audio Note, which specializes in low-powered amps, use high-gain everywhere else, be it a CDP, preamp or phonoamp (I am actually not a fan of their sound, but I know why they do what they do).

• DIY Woes This is too big a topic for this article, so I shall be brief: I have literally come across hundreds of DIY people in my audio life and, sorry to say, much of the experience is a waste. Too much trust in science and material, too little cognitive insight, too much reliance on internet opinions, too little equipment to compare with. I don't care what you DIY, have a good source (say, an old 16-bit CDP or turntable), integrated amp (say, the cheap NAD 3020) and loudspeaker (say, the Yamaha NS-10M) on hand to compare, and be honest with your failures.

Vibration Control If you ask me, most "vibration controls" do more harm than good. This is also a vast topic, so I shall just go over only our Russian friend's setup. Amplifier I am totally against placing the amplifier on anything but the floor. Here is an example of a costly, but detrimental effect of isolation. Source and Preamp I do think some isolation here could be beneficial but, again, most products are detrimental. What I like is cheap Vibrapods (here). Wood The effect is variable. If the sound is too lively or too lean, wood helps; but if it does not have enough life, don't use wood! Overall, wood is not a good solution, certainly not as good as sorbothane (Vibrapod).

For Our Russian Friend

• Lack of Power You do not have enough driving power and control. Your "full-range" is not as efficient as you think; and your amp is not as powerful as you think.

• Active Preamp Consider adding an active preamp, it will open up the sound.

• Buy or borrow an integrated amp to compare Any old integrated amp with enough power to compare. NAD 3020, Cyrus 1/2/3, or an old Japanese, whatever. You may be amazed.

• T-amp Or Buy a very low-cost T-amp; it likely will perform better. Chinese SMSL is very good (see my experience here, where it performed much better than many tube amps).

• Add a Subwoofer This, I think is very important. Just get a very cheap second-hand one, and it will make a difference.

• Put your amp on the floor. Don't use the woodblock.

• Put your CDP higher up on something else. Don't use the wood block.

JBL Hartsfield 375 HL-88 Western Electric Classic Turntable Company Garrard 301 Power Supply Speed Controller

Click pics to enlarge. Top, JBL Hartsfield pair with 375/HL-88 and 075 on top. In the background on the right edge of the photo is another single idle Hartsfield. Strewn on the floor are some DIY amps.

NY Diary (19-13): JBL Hartsfield x 5!!!

On Monday Andy had to see his accountant KW. Kevin and I went with him. Why? Because KW has the legendary and highly desirable JBL Hartsfield, and not just one pair but two, plus another single one! While Andy and KW were working, Kevin and I played many records.

KW is a vintage buff as well as DIY man. He has two operating systems, on the ground floor and in the basement. Both have a pair of Hartsfield and a Garrard 301 with Power Supply/Speed Control. Both use SUT and Harman Kardon Citation 1 as phonoamp. And of course both use DIY preamp and amps. We only heard the ground floor system.

It should be noted we didn't hear the Hartsfield per se. KW is only using the bass driver in the enclosure. As you can see in the top pic, the 375 is attached to a JBL HL88. Andy said previously he had heard the Hartsfield as is, which is what he prefers. I asked KW why, he said most of his friends prefer the HL88 on top.

The Preamp and Amp both use lots of expensive vintage components (Western Electric, UTC etc). KW told me just the parts cost for the 2-chassis preamp was $5K, sans tubes! And the 2 WE tubes he uses in the PS would easily cost more than the parts, Wow! I shall let the pics tell the story. We only heard the vinyl system. I wish we had time for the digital system, which employs the excellent Meridian 500/566 transport and DAC.

The room is a long rectangle. The Hartsfield are placed along the long wall. Given the lack of corner reinforcement and relatively short listening distance, the sound was shy in the bass and mid-bass. Fleetwood Mac's eponymous album was lacking in the power range. Otherwise the treble and midrange were pretty good, and I enjoyed his collection of old Hong Kong Polydor albums. Surprisingly, jazz was not too impactful; the large number of oil caps in the preamp and amp may have slowed down the transient a little. Even with 2x 300B each channel (~16 watts), there was audible clipping at higher volume, attesting once again that JBL's are not that efficient compared to Altec and Klipsch. I personally would place these with one side against each long wall and firing down the long walls. One wall is better than none, and the listening distance can be drastically increased.

The Hartsfield was created to compete with the Klipschorn (see this wonderfully informative link), but without corners I did not hear what I heard in the Klipschorns (here). Too bad there is no room in my den - I'd love to relieve KW of a pair! Here are more pics and descriptions:

G/F: The elaborate Preamp power supply unit uses WE 274A and WE 300B!

Also a 6X5, 6SJ7 and an OA2.

G/F: The Preamp section uses CX 301. The socket is floating, to combat microphonics.

G/F: The monoblock amplifiers use 2x 300B per side. Not WE though, no doubt due to cost.

All cables are DIY.

G/F: Grease bearing Garrard 301 with Classic Turntable Company PSU,

Ortofon AS-309s/SPU and SME3012/Ortofon SL-15

Downstairs: Another Hartsfield pair.

Downstairs: Also DIY preamp and amps

Downstairs: The SUT uses WE 618C (600 ohm) with impedance matching transformers.

Downstairs: Garrard 301 with speed control and Accuphase CDP