Shenzhen Audio Show II

Letter from Shenzhen (23-5): SIAV Audio Show, Part II

For Part I and Part III, roll up or down or click link.

Note: Coverage of the show follows no particular logic: Very good is Green; Good is Yellow; and Average is Red. Believe me, I'm very lenient! More so towards others than myself!

***

Horns Canor LampizatOr Sikora This can be termed the East European Tube Room. Slovakian Canor drove the Polish Horns loudspeaker. Horns is a new company to me, but I’ve heard of the others. Despite my reservation in general about plastic round horns, sound was surprisingly decent, smooth and musical (if you ask me, it sounds better than the similar looking Avantgarde). Looking at the size of the amps, I asked if they employed KT150. The sales took a while to remember and replied yes. Now, the most interesting thing to me was the tube thing on top of the rack. No, it’s not an amp, but it has as many tubes. It is Polish LampizatOr DAC! Many readers will be familiar with the name. Writing this article, I researched that this was the flagship Horizon DAC, selling in North America for USD 49,000. Wow, do you spend this kind of money by clicking buy and checking out your cart? Surely, though, it has contributed to the good sound. As I don’t see a CDP (rare for this show) I think files were played through Aurender. I didn’t get to hear the handsome Polish Sikora TT. This is one of the rare cases where 2 Poles managed to screw on the light bulb in my head (with assists from neighbors). Well, to clarify, this is a paraphrase on the old “Polish Jokes” that used to be prevalent in the US (haven’t heard them in a long time). Mind you, I love all things Polish (including Kielbasa) and would love to visit the country, especially to visit the sites that are in Kieslowski’s Ten Commandments and Double Life of Veronika.

Perlisten Canor Given my good impressions of the Canor’s, I was a bit surprised that they had failed to warm up the Perlisten. Indeed, as with so many things, this loudspeaker shows up what is wrong with the US (vs the old world above). Probably some would like the “accuracy” and “neutrality” but music should not sound frigid. Worse, there was also some grain on the top, which I’m sure did not come from the Canor’s. I do reckon the choice of an Esoteric CDP (usually kinda cold) is a mistake here. Doing some research, I see the loudspeaker company is into materials like Beryllium and carbon, both of which in my experience usually do more harm than good right (but when done right, as in the use of beryllium in the immortal vintageYamaha NS-1000). I also read that their loudspeakers have complicated crossovers, another minus in my book. So, Perlisten gets a red flag but Canor not responsible!

ATC Playback KR Audio When I walked in, I noticed the Special Edition of the ATC 100, much taller. Unfortunately, it was not playing, rather a smaller pair was on duty (I prefer the early ATCs; I loved my first gen 20). Digital duties were performed by US Playback Designs (which I suspect is defunct, as there is no recent news and their website is down). The Preamp is interesting. KR Audio P135 uses J-FET input, followed by 45 tube buffer and then transformer output. Not cheap (as with anything KR) at Euro 5800 for just a Line Preamp (ss phono board is optional). Amps were ATC’s own. Sound was decent enough, but small speakers don’t usually light my fire (a few exceptions exist, like LS3/5A or this show’s Ensemble Reference).

Tecsun I have long heard of this company because of their LS3/5A clone (model SP80A). The company is the pre-eminent radio manufacturer in China and possibly the world, though for a long time they have developed a full line of digital products and amps. The boss is a fan of the LS3/5A and he later collaborated with loudspeaker manufacturer Ho (何氏) to develop the SP80A. Most HK readers would have heard of Ho, as he had earlier developed a version of the LS3/5A himself. Well, now the loudspeaker line has fleshed out to include the large horn 1501. When I walked in, they were playing their newest SP60A (despite the name, about twice the volume of the SP80A) with their own electronics. This has a titanium dome tweeter seated in a wave guide, and the woofer is paper come with hard-edged corrugated surrounds (I totally approve). Sound was not bad at all. I asked to play the SP80A (front pair on wooden pedestals which are open in the back) and listened for a while until an irritating fellow sat down behind me and leveled all kinds of critical opinions at the manager, who was trying to ignore him. So I couldn’t say I really got an handle on their stuff. So the rating is provisional.

Impeto Boaacoustic This room is dominated by a white pair of the weird Impeto lacquered loudspeakers, driven by Impeto electronics.  Sound was alright. There is a booklet but the only thing I learned is it’s called Warrior-1 and is 8 ohm and 92db in sensitivity. The website only has a front page. The only Impeto products I could find were a few cables on Amazon. Nada, Nothing else. Searching “Impeto” returns a lot of “Impetigo”, a skin disease. Boaacoustic is a German cable brand that is at least honest in admission that high end cables are basically boa constrictors in look as well as sound effect.

KEF D’Agostino Simaudio Finally I got to hear the LS60. When I walked in, the Blade 2 was playing. Sound was decent driven by D’Agostino integrated. Source was Simaudio CDP. When there was no one else, I asked for the LS60, which they fed not by Bluetooth but by coaxial digital cable from the CDP. Sound was in the same vein, though necessarily proportionately smaller in scale. Nonetheless, not bad. I’d have liked to test out the BT (the raison d'etre of this product really), but I didn’t insist. Should have been yellow but I upped it for its simplicity and decency.

Weeput 小沛知音 This product puzzled me. Supposed to be for AV and Karaoke. It is too clumsy in size to be used on a desktop, and the screen is too small to be used on its own. Didn't really evaluate.

legendsound Pylon Falcon Lab legendsound is is the kind of company I detest. Its glossy booklet has "Canada" prominently featured, and it reprints many articles from Chinese press, of course all waxing lyrics. The inner page, like its website, is a joke in terms of English. You must read and you will laugh, Guaranteed! Just one example: "Fantasy CD drive plus DAC is a combination of a separate set." Now, that's jitter and oversampling in language, which I hope does not extend to its somewhat pricey digital products. Tell you what, these companies (registered or not in a western country) are almost certainly run by Chinese. That may not be a problem, but if you are proud of your products, why not show your face or name somewhere? One will not find any details on the owner, sales and designers of these companies. That said, sound with Polish Pylon loudspeakers (black) was not bad. I'd have loved to also hear the Japanese FalconLab (wood). No relationship to UK Falcon Acoustics. Small Italian Atomica bookshelves were also on silent display. So! Red for the cowards legendsound, and yellow for the innocent bystanders.

Ologe Unusual and small multi-national loudspeaker maker Ologe comes with flight case. Sound was pretty good. Equipment used was ad hoc: vintage TT, Lyngdorf, etc. And they were featuring Wonder Audio Labs phonoamp (not played), said to be designed by HK legend William Tam, but I'm sorry to say I don't know who he is! The sales was waxing lyrics, and so I asked him what this WT had designed before and he just could not answer me, but that maybe just his limitation. Maybe someone can educate me. I suddenly recall I have previously seen Ologe in HK shows on display. For the small size, a bonus upgrade from yellow.

Shanling Triangle Veteran Shanling still has a tube-buffered CDP, except it has gone from the first gen's WE2C51/396A/5670 to 12AX7. That brings back memories. I had one of those, and even after rolling in WE 2C51 I concluded that bypassing the tube buffer was the best sound! LOL! Sold it! Now, Shanling has branched into amps and other digi products. Sound with Triangle was not bad. Incidentally, Shanling had acquired French YBA long ago, and there's one on display, but it seems nothing much is happening on that front.

Stereophile KEF LS60 Blade KLH5

Click pics to enlarge.

Two 60th Anniversaries
Letter from Shenzhen (22-12): My Revamped System and a Fantastical Comparison with KEF LS60 Wireless
Narrow Front Baffles and Side-Firing Woofers

Editor: This article is an odd one. It first celebrates the 60th Anniversary of 2 august audio institutions, and then launch into something that is basically a lengthy commentary on the KEF LS60, which I have yet to hear. And then a portrait of my current revamped main system, the loudspeaker of which bears a semblance to the KEF (hence a fantastical comparison). The sections are well marked out, so skip as you want.

Stereophile 60th Anniversary

Congratulations to Stereophile! I hope it lives on healthily and happily. This Tribute (and Remembrance) by ex-Editor John Atkinson is notable for certain reasons. As JA always does, he honors the greatest audio mind of them all, the astonishingly principled J Gordon Holt, who started the whole thing. No pretense, no bull shit, no oversized ego (hint: HP) and, unlike many writers today, who can wax pages of lyrics when a few paragraphs would do (likes of JV of TAS, whose patrician tones are well-nigh intolerable; RH can be full of hyperbole's too, but he’s at least a technocrat; and JVS, but he compensates a little with his gentleness and sweetness, but, hey, spare us your family bliss OK?).

This article also mentions some of the past era's magazines. They bring back memories. I had subscribed to some of these in the 70's and perhaps early 80's, and can attest that they were not that informative (Julian Hirsch and the likes). I cannot remember why I didn't subscribe to the Stereophile (or early TAS for that matter, not the mediocrity now), perhaps out of ignorance or because of the higher costs. I wish I had!

It’s interesting that over the years many writers have gone back and forth between Stereophile and TAS (not that there is much choice out there). Michael Fremer has just switched to TAS (again; he was there before), whereas quite a bit earlier Julie Mullins had gone the other way. For MF, I don’t care where he’s at. I don’t mind him, but I have no interest in oversized, overweight, overdamped and overpraised turntables (and tonearms) that he specializes in (give me a vintage idler wheel or direct drive anytime). As for JM, it’s gratifying to see how she has blossomed with her industrial reports and show coverage for Stereophile - no longer a puppet of JV.

After JA, I think Jim Austin, technically solid (and even more all rounded in outlook), is doing a solid job as Editor. I look forward to many years to come. Post AD, but with writers like HR and KM and others on board, I am optimistic.

KEF 60th Anniversary

This happened just short of a year ago. KEF had always been important, especially in its early days, as supplier of drivers. I have never been a fan of KEF’s own iconic speakers but, as fan of vintage UK and BBC loudspeakers I recognize their importance. I’m not a fan of the hard to drive Reference 105 series but it likely had left its footprint on the equally iconic B and W Matrix Series (I regard the M801 as one of the best ever; and for lesser space, perhaps the 804 and 805). Then, its T27 Tweeter and B110 woofer, used in the legendary BBC LS3/5A, and ubiquitous elsewhere (including larger variants, as in KEF’s own 104AB, with its equally iconic passive radiators, later to be deftly and famously employed by Swiss Ensemble Reference and that Italian master, Franco Serblin). I personally think KEF deliberately killed the B110, as its success and demand stood in the way of company development (does not make enough money). History aside, back to present times. For the past decade and more, KEF had concentrated on their Coaxial (Uni) drivers, interestingly preferentially used in their upper echelon products. As a fan of coaxials (Tannoy of course; but also vinatge Altec, Jensen etc) I paid attention. I even once owned the LS50 and wrote about it, and even have written a brief KEF Overview (here).

LS60 Wireless

In conjunction with their 60th Anniversary Celebration KEF rolled out their 6000 ($/GBP/Euro) loudspeaker that attempts to be all things. It received general critical acclaim (and an EISA award, which is of no great meaning to serious audiophiles). I read about it, and what immediately struck me was how uncannily the LS60 (photos at the bottom) resemble my current reference, the humble Sansui F55 (detailed here).

• Narrow Baffle and Slim Profile Without the Base Plinth, the KEF is 13x32x104cm; Sansui is 14x39x116. This sort of narrow baffle design has its practitioners, as it is appealing for those who want their audio (including AV) to disappear (higher WAF). German Audio Physic (not bad) is a good example. Proac is another example - their iconic Tablette and its derivatives (including Minitowers) were very popular in the space-challenged households of Hong Kong. This kind of design always generates holographic images but is less fleshy, and bass tends to be quite shy in at least the smaller models. Personally, I prefer the fleshier sound of a wide baffle, examples of which are, size for size, BBC LS designs and their offsprings (primarily UK). But I am making do with my Sansui here.

• Coaxial, Tweeter and Midrange Being a Tannoy fan, I am a follower of Coaxials, and had once owned the LS50 (and heard some of their R series), but, good as it is, it never captured my heart. I’d rather have the LS3/5A than the LS50. But KEF’s Coaxial Drivers are not to be scoffed at, as I had heard them (here) perform well in the much higher-end Blade (second-in-line, but more in-line with KEF than the top Muon). While my Sansui emphatically does not sport a coaxial, it does use the next closest configuration, my favorite D’Appolitto Array (also favored by numerous designers, as in Proac, Alon etc), although in the case of Sansui it’s a pseudo- iteration (one more midrange added, not an uncommon design). In terms of total radiating surface, particularly the midrange, the Sansui is multiples of the KEF. The KEF’s coaxially mounted tweeter is a 1.9 cm aluminum dome, whereas the Sansui is a 3 cm fabric. The KEF midrange is 10 cm aluminum, whereas the Sansui is 3x8 cm, which is about twice the surface area of the KEF.

• Side Firing Woofers Of course, with a narrow front baffle, one way to increase bass output is to mount the woofer(s) sideways. Audio Physic had used that in several of their models. Usually woofer(s) are mounted only on one side, as in the case of my Sansui. But the KEF is unusual in that they have (small) woofers on both sides. My experience, as in the case of my Sansui, woofers firing towards the sidewalls is better than firing inwards, for clarity and agility (The KEF has DSP though). In terms of surface area, KEF’s 4x 13.5cm is close to the Sansui’s 2x 20cm. It’s also interesting to me that the KEF woofers are placed very high. I’d venture otherwise the midrange would lack power.

• Placement and DSP It’s funny that even the reviewers don’t comment much, if at all, on this VERY important aspect. Even with DSP available, shouldn’t one just try to place the loudspeakers with traditional skills first and then try DSP? No. Not any of the reviewers. So much for professionalism.

• Amplification The KEF basically uses electronic crossover and separate amps that are built in (Class D). In my case, the closest comparison is the Aiyima T9, being a Digital Amp. Much less power, but then my Sansui is vastly more efficient.

• Wireless and Digital Ability Basically, the LS60 houses a full-featured Streamer with full connectivity (only display is on the App). It’s telling that the Wireless platform does not support the highest resolution (384). It begs the question, even if it does, would you rather use Ethernet for the best result, lest you be left with nagging doubts? Mind you, I am not at all a high-res file owner or Streamer and don’t in general think much of upsampled material. For people like me, my Aiyima does just as much useful things. Having a Feature is not at all equivalent to the likelihood of using it, especially in this case.

• What about Analog Input? There’s a pair of RCA Input. Just like my Aiyima, this would go through digitization. Want to put a turntable on the floor and connect it with a phonoamp and RCA cables? That’ll ruin the looks!

• Cordless? The whole Raison D’Etre of such a loudspeaker is to give the appearance of no cords. But is it possible? Each LS60 needs one power cord. Should it be placed close to front wall, the power cord may not be intrusive. BUT, if you, like me, like to have the loudspeakers in room, then the power cords are almost just as conspicuous as loudspeaker cables. And this is not to mention that sometimes you want to try using the other inputs (say, your nice red book CDP via its coaxial output) and that’s even more awkward situation (maybe put the CDP on a stool and connect it with a cable?).

• Who Is It For? Ultimately, that is the question. It is NOT for a dedicated audiophile’s main system. BUT, perhaps for his second system. It’s likely too expensive for an entry level audiophile to move up to from, say, Audioengine or Schiit. I’d wager KEF would make a more humbly priced version for more people.

This is not at all an article to lambast the LS60. Rather, the opposite, it intrigues me a little even if I’d not use it. Most of all, its physical profile reminds me of my Sansui. But there’s no escape that you get a lot of stuff that you will NOT use. As I don't use Streaming platforms, I'd like to bring my own device and stream over Bluetooth to hear how it sounds. The LS60 is available in Shenzhen, so I can do it, but I'm not at all in a hurry.

My Revamped System in the Study

If you compare to the old setup, things were not moved that much, but it is nothing short of a major move. BTW, I did it not because of sonic reasons, but because I wanted to change the orientation of my desk 180 degrees to avoid lights shining into my eyes (sun in the morning and reflection from buildings in the afternoon). Now the speakers are In-Room rather than flanking the large IKEA shelf. And I am sitting at the desk facing my loudspeakers, rather than between the loudspeakers as before). The source (usually my Meridian Explorer USB DAC) and Control Electronics (my Revox A720) are at my fingertips.

Most of the time, I use the Revox Combo (with the A722 Amp) and the sound is superb. The musical delivery has not really changed from before, but now I have very good imaging and pretty good soundstage. Although the latter audiophile values are substantial bonbons, they do not at all alter my basic perception of the value of the system.

BTW, since I have everything (sources and controls) around me. The only extraneous things I see (not even when the lights are dim) when I look at the loudspeakers are the speaker cables. For me, they are as “wireless” as the KEF. I have always advocated having everything at one’s fingertips (not just via an app) but that of course necessitates long speaker cables (mine are around 15 ft/5m).

Praise to the Revox A720 Preamp, it has so many features that are useful. It has 2 Switchable Outputs. I use one of them for the Revox amp. The other I attach to a long cable (the excellent crazy cheap Canare 2T2A, report to come) to connect to my APPLause 300B amp I placed between the loudspeakers. Late night, I allow myself a little bit of tube bliss, and it is wonderful (the efficiency of my Sansui allows this). The A720 also has Earphone Outputs (2) that are very decent (just switch off the outputs). I only have my Grado SR80e here so I cannot speak of higher impedance cans, but the result is to my ears better than lesser earphone amps (like the Schiit Vali and Magni that I have). More on these in future articles likely.

All in all, I’m very happy with my system now, but of course I yearn for more things, for no good reason. We’ll see.

More on the Blade (and KLH5) Incidentally, Stereophile just published a report of the recent Blade 2 (here). Also, a few months ago I was keen on the recently revived KLH5 (now, that’s the kind of old-fashioned wide baffle that I like). As usual, the Distributor in HK handles China too. So I contacted Nanpeng-Tech by email and got a prompt reply from Mr Joes Tsoi (first name is not a typo). I was really impressed that he was extremely helpful and subsequently communicated with him via WeChat. From the pictures in his wechat I am sure he’s a very busy man! Now, this company uses Blade in its main AV room. Although the company specializes in AV Installations, from our conversation I can tell he’s a serious and experienced audiophile. Both KEF Blade and KLH cannot be very popular in HK (for their bulk) and so I admire him for promoting these products. I look forward to meeting him someday (perhaps even in China!) HK readers should seriously consider auditioning the KLH5 (I wish I can) and also catch the KEF LS60 there. Below are some pics showing their main AV room and presence at the recent HK AV Show. Solid Folks, Good People.

Nanpeng Showroom. Outermost KEF Blade I, then KLH5, then KLH3 

At the recent HK AV Show. You can catch the KEF LS60 in the innermost position. Everyone wears masks

Talk CAS: My Latest Desktop System: KEF LS50

Talk CAS: My Latest Desktop System: KEF LS50
Review: KEF LS50, Part III


posted from the UK

Since I still do not have a pair of proper stands, for quite a while I had been using the KEF LS50 rather casually in my "Go To" system, with great satisfaction (write-up here). However, I did briefly experiment with different placement (see last article below).

One fine day I re-organized my desktop. You can find some of my previous desktop incarnations under the label Talk CAS. The new arrangement allows the speakers to be further apart. Still using iTunes PC USB out to Dared MP-5, I slotted the KEF in and within a few notes knew that was the best I had even had for the desktop:

Coherence Given the close distance of the desktop, speakers struggle to be coherent. The KEF coaxial drivers no doubt give greater coherence than the others I have tried (and they were famous speakers, including Yamaha NS-10M, LS3/5A, amongst others).

Soundstage was also more expansive than previous iterations.

Bass The rear-ports have a few inches' clearance at the back and in this setting the bass line remains superbly clear and surprisingly hefty, in a different league altogether. No "subs" needed!

I know it is extravagant to be using the LS50 in the Desktop system, but they perform so well that I am leaving them in there. The electronics and my computer shall be upgraded in the foreseeable future.

p.s. I won't forget to get some proper stands at some point to try out these in the LR.

Reference System A (Yamaha NS-1000, Western Electric 124, EAR 912)

My Reference System A
Follow-Ups: Yamaha NS-1000, Western Electric 124B, EAR 912
Review: Marantz CD23DA
Review: TAD TSM-2201, Part III
Review: KEF LS50, Part II
Quick Shootout: Yamaha NS-1000 vs TAD TSM-2201 vs KEF LS50

posted from the UK

KEF LS50, Part

Part I: Reference System A
It is time to catch up with myself. I just realized that while I have posted about my current, and scaled down Reference System A (here), I have not described its sound. The system now comprises:

Pic is not up-to-date, but topology is unchanged. Yamaha and the WE amps to the left.

CD Player/Transport: Marantz CD23DA, Studer A-730, Revox C-221
DAC/Headphone amp: YBA WD-202 (connected with Kimber D-60 co-axial)
Preamp: EAR 912
Amp: Western Electric 124B (original)
Speakers: Yamaha NS-1000

At the time of the cited post, the system was not functioning due to outage of one of the midrange units of the Yamaha NS-1000s. Sometime after that I did manage to re-connect the corroded loose wire with some effort. The sound was absolutely splendid and everything that I expected. Here, I'd like to take a little time to detail how I chose the components:

Good Sound Needs Good Planning
With limited space, I had to choose my components carefully, and there were size constraints. Here are the reasons why each was chosen and how each contributes to the overall picture:

Yamaha NS-1000 because I believe you should always have the largest woofer/loudspeaker you can get away with. Two 8" woofers may equal a single 12" in surface area, but I will take the latter anytime!

• Close-to-Wall Placement Previously I had these in-room in my old house, and I got a cavernous soundstage (here). In my new place, I do not have this luxury and the Yamaha's are placed close to the front wall (balcony doors actually). This did not faze the Yamaha's, which are monitor speakers after all, designed to have little boundary effects;

• Soundstage and Imaging No longer in-room, the soundstage is necessarily not deep, but images are of good size, fleshy and superbly well focused;

• Bass The 12" woofer delivers very clean bass that goes satisfyingly low even with pedal points; Although this setup cannot plumb the depths my Canterbury setup can, I am happy with what I have.

• Realism Again, although not as uncanny in its delivery as the Tannoy system, the illusion of live event is reasonably well conveyed. Let me state that I believe good bass and imaging that is fleshy and of good scale are two vital factors in delivering the realism that we crave for; the sort of sharp and small images many modern speakers deliver (and audiophiles work towards) are more often than not artificial and work against the music.

• Efficiency As stated below, the fact that they can be driven by low-powered WE amps attests that the Yamaha NS-1000s are not really difficult to drive - but you need high quality amplification. Too many people use gears of lower quality and simply cannot make the best of them. Of course, keep in mind that if the room is much larger, you're certain to need more power..

WE 124B amps These were chosen simply because their sonic uniqueness are irreplaceable (previous posts here);

• High Resolution and Clean Sound These belie the common misconceptions that vintage gears are euphonic - the best are not if brought up to good electrical conditions. The resolution extends to the smallest details, including the all-important harmonics and hall ambiance clues. And by cleanliness I mean an airy feeling and treble of the highest purity, and very low background noise.

• Power This may come as a surprise to you. The WE 124B employs a pair of WE350B/6L6 in push-pull configuration. With the 6L6Gs I am using, rated power output is about 12 watts. Now, 12 watts for the notoriously "hard-to-drive" Yamaha NS-1000? You bet! IF those 12 watts are of the highest quality! This gives credence, yet again, to the notion that the first watt(s) is/are the most important. WE users know that the WE amps deliver a lot more than their ratings say, and match well with many speakers. It is notable too that the bass control is superb, evidence of high quality output transformers.

• The Western Electric Magic But all these considerable virtues do not  describe the WE magic. PRAT As described in more details previously, Western Electric's supremacy is in the way it delivers the music. Every little rhythmic accent, dynamic nuance is conveyed like nothing else I have heard. Even SETs have to make way.

EAR 912 I wrote about this briefly in my EAR Overview. Its balanced sound leaves little to write about, though I can imagine some tube aficionados may find it too starkly "modern". Suffice to say its neutrality (just slightly on the warm side) just lets the signal through intact and does not mask the qualities of other components in the chain. This is important as the true sound of WE is reflected. Another most welcome feature of the EAR 912 is its surprisingly compact size for the full functionalities on offer (I harbor a secret wish to re-install a turntable).

Digital Source The setup has changed quite a bit, and constantly evolves, partly because CDPs need to be run, at least occasionally, to be kept in condition. The EAR 912 has balanced inputs and outputs, so I am in the process of installing my trusted Studer A730 and the Revox C-221. But first:

Marantz CD23Da (info at thevintageknob) This one-of-a-kind player certainly looks different from any other. In Chinese circles it is referred to as the "Rice Cooker" 電飯煲 due to its round glass top (newer rice cookers have done away with the glass). There were several iterations of this classic of the 1-bit era, which utilizes the TDA1547 chip. Mine is the last Da version, which can be used as a DAC with the RCA coaxial input, and employs the plastic CDM-9 instead of the metal CDM-9 Pro. Its performance impresses:

• Analogue Output The full bodied sound is a joy to hear. The best of the TDA1547 machines have beautifully sweet treble that their multi-bit and delta-sigma counterparts struggle to equal, and the CD23 is no exception (this is one reason I like the YBA as its treble is sophisticated, albeit in a different way). Compared to the YBA WD-202 (with the Marantz as transport) the midrange is more forward but its fleshy texture paints a more vivid picture. Overall, the boldness of the Marantz is just as enticing as the more subtle YBA. This is one of the best Marantz 1-bit players, certainly superior to the more common CD-72, CD-16 etc. Only a few makers, like Micromega, made 1-bit machines that are as enticing. Transients are typically a little soft, and some may find the music a tad "slow" and so perhaps not for uptempo music.

• Digital Output Used as a transport with the YBA WD-202, the sound is surprisingly similar, with the differences as noted above. Although the Sony BDP-S190 (and predecessor DVP-SR50P) is a pretty good transport, direct comparison shows the older Marantz to be much more flesh-and-blood. All this strengthens further my conviction that the transport is of paramount importance in digital playback, and the excellence of the Marantz CD23 is as much due to the superior CDM-9 mechanism as the well-implemented DAC section. For those interested in the superiority of older CDPs used as transports, I recommend the thorough Hi-Fi Advice Overview of Philips and Marantz CDPs.

• Uncover it! As with all the covered top loading transports I have come across, the CD23 benefits from having the cover removed/opened when spinning. This means you have to find some way of weighing down the spring-loaded button on the rim - I use a small screwdriver handle. The sound becomes clearer and livelier. I have a pic but it is not with me as of this writing and I shall load it later. 

Part II: Yamaha NS-1000 vs TAD TSM-2201 vs KEF LS50

• Important Qualifier: the comparison only shows the results for close-to-wall placement. The TAD or the KEF were placed on top of the Yamaha, and I adjusted my chair/listening height accordingly.

• TAD TSM-2201 Against the wall, and driven by the WE124 amps, the TAD's delivered a completely different sort of performance compared to their normal deployment in my Reference System B. The sound had more than a little semblance to the Yamaha NS-1000's, accurate but big, bold and fleshy. If anything, they were fuller and even more impressive in the midbass. The gain in drama and presence was offset by the lost of soundstaging and hall ambiance, which it does in spades in System B. It is a different set of virtues and different people are likely to respond in different ways. The important thing is, true to its monitor nature, the TAD TSM-2201 works just as well against the wall as in-room.

• KEF LS50 The same did not hold true for the KEF's.The height greatly diminished the bass, even if the ports were close to the wall. The great imaging ability of the KEF was lost and its performance was not even as engaging as in my "go-to" system. or my desktop (superb results, see the following article). Without the monitor TAD's immunity to boundary effects, the KEF's need more careful placement and support to bring out their best.

• Yamaha NS-1000 As good a performance as the TAD's delivered, they were outclassed by the Yamaha's. The Yamaha simply brought out significantly more of the nuances delivered by the WE amps. The older and much bigger 3-way's simply have more details and resolve harmonics and small spatial and timing clues better. And of course they reach quite a bit lower than the TAD's. One thing this shows again that size is important!

Editor's Note: 2012 in Retrospective, Best Buy of the Year

Nothing beats Western Electric (pictured 133 on top and 124B). Click to enlarge.

Editor's Note: 2012 in Retrospective, Best Buy of the Year
Follow Up: Sony BDP-S190, Part II
Follow Up: Sony PlayStation 1, Part II

Revised Jan 6, 2013

Once again, I have failed to write the yearly retrospective before the year's end, but this time I have more excuse than before! The year 2012 had been quite a mad year for me, and personal matters took the helm. This necessarily means fewer things to write about, but it shall not be for naught I assure you. As I look back, my 2012 in audio was idiosyncratic (I like that), and MOST meaningful for rediscovery of "old friends" (I like that even more).

Most Notable Events

• Western Electric Without a doubt, the biggest event of the year was: Nothing New Under the Sun. Western Electric (posted here) 133A and 124 amplifiers worked their magic, and reminded me in no uncertain terms that WE remains supreme in audio achievement, bar none. People have asked me repeatedly why I had put aside my 133A for so long; I can only say: so as to explore other things, worthwhile or not....

• Mono Analog Replay Mono Analog Replay (treated in at least 3 articles here), which some have advocated for years, is definitely not anachronistic, not a step back. It is simply something that makes one re-evaluate what one is listening to. One asks again, perhaps Less is More?

Best Sound of 2012
I am not going to be humble here. The best sound I have heard in 2012 was from my very own Western Electric gears.

Most Important Acquisitions

• TAD TSM-2201 (reported here). This paradoxically at once boldly-styled and low-keyed design was a match made in heaven with Kondo M7 + Ongaku (result here). You are certain to hear more about this.My loudspeaker purchase of the year.

• KEF LS50 The co-axial design is superbly coherent. You shall too hear more about this (preliminary findings here).

• Denon DL-102 Mono Cartridge (reported here). Mono is all the rage. This studio/transcription perennial deserves its fame.This very heavy cartridge needs a robust arm to do it justice.

• Thomas Schick Tonearm is a 12" bargain compared with others more expensive (tested here). One day I'd love to install the Denon DL-102 on the Schick.

• Sony SCD-XA5400ES SACD player for once convinces (reported here).

Best Buy of the Year

• Thorens TD-309A turntable (here) This humble turntable delivers more than one expects. The tonearm performs way beyond expectation, and is a great match with the heavy Denon DL-102 mono cartridge. In terms of one-stop solution, this TT now displaces even formidable rivals like Clearaudio Concept (a previous Best-Buy). I'd love to try out Koetsu and stuff on this arm, but time is in short supply.

• CineMag CMQEE-3440A made famous by Bob's Devices (here). Whether you DIY or buy from BD you are certain to be happy.

• Denon DL-301 Mk II MC cartridge is a dark horse but its superb musicality is instantly captivating (reported here).

• Canare L-2T2S (here) is superbly musical for a ridiculously low price.

• Sony BDP-S190 Blue Ray Player (here) is superb. Follow Up: Since that initial evaluation, I have confirmed the transport section of this entry level Sony Blue-Ray player is as good as any previous DVD models, every bit the equal of the underground classic DVP-PR50P (a previous Best-Buy) (in fact they are indistinguishable). The analog out sound too is very clean, audibly cleaner than the DV-PR-50P but perhaps just a little less warm and emotive. I suspect any Sony BD as well as DVD player shall deliver excellent sound. Best-Buy in digital for sure.

Vintage Rediscoveries

• Yamaha NS-10M (posted here) shows the best of yesterday is fully competitive today.

• NAD 3020 (here) proves it is immortal. 

• Technics SL-1200 Mk II (here) surprises yet again.

• Sony PlayStation 1 (here) shames most current digital products. Follow Up: In one go I performed two of the modifications outlined in the dogbreath page: removing the muting transistors as well as the output blocking caps from the signal path. I am sorry to report that while more details could be had the sound lost some of its musicality - its raison d'etre and its magic. I suspect I prefer the sound with output caps, though it may take some trial and error to reach an improvement. You shall hear more about this PS1!

Suggestion for a US $1k system that will shame your friend's $10k system
This requires you to source used goods, from the likes of Ebay, but you shall be rewarded amply. Not cheaptubeaudio, but cheap audio for sure:

• Yamaha NS-10M
• NAD 3020 (not the i version, please read my link)
• Sony DVD player (as the Blue Ray is more expensive, I am sure the current entry-level DVD players are likely sonically as good as their over-achieving predecessors. I see the DVP-SR210P, successor to the 200P, sells for $30! :-) Even I may buy another one to try!)
• Technics SL-1200 Mk II. Since the NAD only has an MM section, if you use the Denon DL-301 Mk II cartridge, you will need to add a step-up transformer (suggest the cheap Denon AU-300LC or the older AU-250 (here) and that will increase the budget a little. If you stay with MM cartridge, I suggest the cheap and cheerful Shure 97xE (<$80).
• NAD 4020A (here), the original matching tuner for the NAD 3020, if you need a tuner.

Preview: KEF LS50

The KEF stereo pair is likely more perfectly matched than the duo on the TV screen. :-) Yamaha NS-1000 to the L wall, used in against-the-wall assessment below.
 
Preview: KEF LS50, Part I

KEF LS50, Part I, Part II, Part III

Official KEF LS50 Info

KEF Makes Wave 
KEF seems to be on a roll. After the sensational Muon and Blade, KEF introduced the LS50 to mark its 50th anniversary. The look is as bold as its bigger brothers. For my taste, it is dashingly beautiful; just look at the sensuous waveguide!

I previously wrote about my my KEF Overview and Audition of KEF Blade and LS50 at the Dealer. A bit later, I ordered a pair but had to wait 2 months for the new shipment and allocation. It must be one of the few successful new bookshelves!

The LS50 received rave reviews everywhere. The most comprehensive is HiFi News, and there are many others in various languages available at the official site linked above (here is just one, in English from What HiFi). Soon after it won the yearly European EISA Award (for what it's worth).

Quick Preview
For a quick setup, I installed it in my "Go-To" System (description here). The KEF LS50 replaced the Pioneer SP-21BR-LR.

The Go-To System (Gulag 1/Island B), for Quick Sessions of Radio and CD Replay:

DVP/CDP: Sony DVP-PR50P
Integrated Amp: Musical Fidelity A-1S
Tuner: (tentative) NAD 4020A

Fresh out of the box, the LS50 trumped the humble Pioneer in sound. The Pioneer does nothing wrong, but that does not close the gap between it and the LS50, which does everything right! Hey, it better be, as the KEF is much more expensive (though still a bargain). Some observations:

• The sound is direct, open and uncongested. One expects nothing less from a co-axial "point-source" driver. This is a serious rival to the Tannoy Autograph Mini (and I suspect it is quite a bit more potent).

• The sound is lively, with excellent PRaT. (the Pioneer is a little weak here). Transients are fast, and the leading edge is well conveyed (unlike some older/classic co-axials).

• Although highly revealing and neutral, the sound is highly textured and has a sheen, which renders violin replay heavenly. I ran through several Bach violin concerti by the likes of Oistrakh, Szeryng and Menhuin, and it was sublime!

• The solid enclosure is happily rather immune to the environment. Whereas the light-weight Pioneer suffered from colorations introduced by the platform on which it was placed, the LS50 did not, at least not at the admittedly lower volume that I use. Rest assured that I shall test these with proper stands (my Foundation), but that's for later.

When these are run-in, I shall install them in Reference System B to have a go at the TAD TSM-2201. I suspect it shall be a tough fight - that is how good the LS50 is!

Showroom Audition: KEF LS50 and Blade!

pic courtesy of Andrew's iPhone.

Showroom Audition: KEF LS50 and Blade!

Brief Overview: KEF

Sunday was a hot day. I was just languishing and certainly wasn't thinking of venturing far when I made a casual call to my 師弟 Andrew, that man of indomitable spirit. Needless to say, one hour later I found myself joining him and another old classmate Philip in the Kowloon Cricket Club where we just chilled out for a couple of hours.

Andrew had some time before hosting his "back to school" dinner (he has no kids, but plenty of excuses!). I suggested visiting the KEF showroom in Star House to listen to the new and rave-reviewed LS50. A call revealed that the room was being used for a surround system audition. That was the second time I was not able to gain access, as the day before I went to the place before yumcha but someone else was auditioning the LS50.  So it's best to call beforehand.

We then called the Causeway Bay store and within an hour found ourselves auditioning in their really comfortable show room. We were joined there by our friend oozz and his girlfriend.

I must say the service was absolutely impeccable. Staff Mr. Ko was courteous, knowledgeable and very helpful, and he made the experience very pleasant.

Brief KEF Overview
There is no need for me to write much on the background of KEF, certainly one of the most influential companies. In the excellent official website, you can find great coverage of its background and, most commendably, a comprehensive library and photo gallery on older models (something most other manufacturers should do better at). Obviously KEF takes pride in its heritage!

Over the years I have heard quite a few KEF speakers, but have owned few. I think I must have encountered most of the 103-107 Reference series, but there was always something wrong with what I heard (with one exception, see below). Most of the time they seemed rather muffled and overly polite. The bass just dragged and the treble sounded shut-in. I think they probably needed a lot of power to come alive. On the other hand, I had favorable impressions of the later Uni-Q's, usually found in entry level and modest setups. No wonder there, as I am a fan of concentric drivers and a Tannoy user! In the 90's I also helped some non-audiophile friends set up simple systems using their best-buy and decent Coda loudspeakers. Nonetheless, my own interest in KEF was largely for their BBC-related work.

T27 and B110 KEF virtually completely re-wrote history with these two driver units. Of course, these were made famous by the BBC, which used them in the immortal LS3/5A. But they were ubiquitous and could be found in many loudspeakers of the era, including KEF's own kits and the excellent Cresta MkII (sounds uncannily like a LS3/5A, and not to be confused with the Mk I, nor the later Cresta's, which are completely different animals). Of course, the wonderful Linn Kan I also used the B110 but a different tweeter. IMHO, the Kan and Cresta Mk II sound just as good as the LS3/5A. A good pair of the latter is still missing in my arsenal. If you have a pair for sale, contact me! Of course, in the 90's KEF also made several versions of their own LS3/5A's. In general, these have more extended treble, tighter bass and could play louder than the usual ones. Some LS3/5A loyalists like the difference, some don't. I do and I won a rosewood pair.

Reference 104 I used to own a pair of these rather awkward but wonderful speakers (later exchanged for the Yamaha NS-1000). Mine was the later aB version (official link). While it sports the T27 tweeter, the bass unit is a larger version of the B110 called the B200. In addition there is the famous BD139 Radiator, yet another KEF innovation! The sound of the 104 is majestic and, yes, it sounds like a bigger LS3/5A, capable of playing Mahler and Bruckner! I have heard these driven magnificently by a pair of powerful Conrad Johnson Premiere 4 monoblocks. But if you, like me, use only a medium powered tube amp, the sound is just slightly slow and the bass a little ripe. I suspect it will take to a solid state amp, but I never tried it during my time with it. Incidentally, the BD139 is featured in earlier versions of that other magnificent beast, the Sonus faber Extrema (changed to TDL later).

More recently Truth is, KEF in the recent past has lost much ground in the competitive high-end. Many two-channel audiophiles only thought of KEF mainly when it came to multi-channel AV needs. But things started to change for the better after KEF was acquired by Asian Gold Peak, which to its credit has injected new life into the company. Their recent efforts in their Flagship series were bold to say the least.

KEF LS50

This 50th anniversary product is the latest in the Flagship series, sold only directly by KEF in their showrooms. It has garnered rave reviews (HiFi News) and just collected the 2012-2013 EISA award. The first shipment sold out in HK, but a second one is imminent I was told. The cabinet proper has a nice black piano wood finish. The curved front baffle is more unusual, being made of glass composite, which worries me, as it is susceptible to scratches and probably difficult to clean. There is no grill.

At KEF's huge listening room we heard it with the following electronics:

System 1 Marantz KI Pearl Lite SACDP/amp (description here) Mr. Ko explained that this modest combo was used because it is likely more in the price range of potential customers (although someone is using Soulution to drive them!). Despite the size of the room, and although I am not a fan of the Marantz sound, KI or not, the LS50 turned in a decent performance. The soundstage was well spread and imaging was very good - one could sit anywhere and still enjoy it. The sound was just a little too laid back (like too much feedback, probably at least partly due to the Marantz combo) and the bass was truncated and not the cleanest at loud level, though this is a huge room.

System 2 Krell (?Phantom+Evolution) After demonstrating the Blade, Mr. Ko offered to connect the LS50 to the much more expensive Krell system and of course we were delighted. No doubt about it, the LS50 got much better, but too bad we couldn't stay for long!

KEF Blade

The two top models in the Flasghip series are Muon and Blade. Previously I have only seen them in shows and have always wanted to audition them. Both sport fabulous industrial designs. One cannot find many reviews on the net; there is one by HiFi Choice and an informal audition by Stereophile. The point-source driver in the Blade is likely similar to the one in LS50 but not identical. The two pairs of woofers are mounted back-to-back, in quasi isobaric fashion. Mr. Ko kindly offered to let us audition it after we listened to the Marantz combo driving the LS50. Using the Krell electronics, the Blade gave a command performance even of large works. Everything you could possibly want is there: a large soundstage, solidly fleshed out images and tuneful deep bass. And yes, it made the LS50 look and sound like a kid! :-)

Considering we were listening to unfamiliar material, the demonstrations convinced me of the merits of KEF's renewed assault on state-of-the-art. If I can bring a pair of these home, I think it will sound even better! Since the Blade is out of the question, the LS50 it shall be then?

After the audition, we were treated to a fabulous dinner at trendy 浙江軒, complete with several bottles of excellent white wine, including Corton-Charlemagne! It was also nice to be able to dine with several other old friends. Thank you Andrew and Jane!

The Yumcha Diaries 飲茶後記: 18-09-10 (WilsonＷＡＭＭ, Continuum Caliburn)

The Yumcha Diaries 飲茶後記: 18-09-10 (Wilson, Continuum Caliburn)

Part I
The Prodigal Son, His Friend 你既老友, and a Go-Between
On this day JCR33 came back from a business trip and resumed his place at the table. You should have seen how the waitresses congregated around him! It was happily coincidental that we had planned a visit to his friend ML afterward, and it turned out to be a very fine time.

Sometime ago, shortly after our last visit, we got wind that the system of 盧華煇, aka ML, had undergone some major changes:

(1) The Focal Grand Utopia EMs are gone and in their place now are the Wilson WAMMs (moved from home);
(2) The Continuum Caliburn turntable is back from an upgrade.

Of course, we would not miss for the world the chance to hear the legendary WAMM and to pitch the Continuum against the Clearaudio. Again, we relied on 鄔 Sir Sir to arrange things, and made our second visit after yumcha. Apology to the host that the crowd was a little larger than anticipated.

How an Ugly Duckling Turned Into a Swan.
A little background on the WAMM is in order. A good place to start would be the History page in the official Wilson Audio site (just don't read the baloney about the Wiener Musikverein inspiring his newest thinking!). The next piece of mandatory reading is JA's 1990 Wilson interview in Stereophile, in which Wilson offers much insight into the WAMM.

In the pic on the right, you shall note that the Dahlquist DQ-10's, on which the WAMM prototype was initially based. The look of the DQ10's look is a dead-ringer for Quad ESL57. They were famous during their long reign and contemporaneous with the Yamaha NS-1000 (info here, here and here; even J Gordon Holt wrote a preview on a pre-production unit). It's a bit like Vandersteen, all drivers except the enclosed woofer in an open-baffle and time-aligned. Readers with good memory would remember I had a pair of these marvelous speakers and mentioned them in a previous article. On top of the DQ10 sat what looks like a large RTR ESR electrostatic tweeter and at the very top a small Braun (/ads) 2-way mini-monitor (not sure what model; earlier WAMMs used Braun's). Info on both RTR and Braun are difficult to find now. If you have more info on Braun or RTR, let me know.

What has Paul Klipsch got to do with it?
Here is a pic of Wilson's home during the last days of the WAMM , from a Soundstage Factory Tour. Here we have a set of late-production WAMMs. The report took place just before the WAMM was discontinued (article mentioned 53 WAMMs in existence; according to ML, only 55 were ever produced).

This set looks very similar to ML's set (serial #49). In between the 2 2-way mini-monitors (not Braun anymore) is sandwiched an electrostatic panel made up of 9x Janszen (not to be confused with Jensen) units, the whole sort of an augmented D'Appolito Array.

The (sub) bass column has a single 15" woofer mounted rather high, and a small front-firing port. What most interested me in the pic was where Dave Wilson (I think purposefully) placed it, right against the corner, kind of like the Klipschorn (which differs in having a true bass horn that utilizes the corner by design). Many people simply do not know Dave Wilson has very high regards for Paul Klipsch and Klipschorn. I suspect most Wilson users, "modern" hi-end'ers, would instantly dismiss horns as a genre. They should read this article indeed. Another thing of note is what Wilson used himself, including an ARC preamp (he talked about ARC later in the JA interview). Wilson Audio has always used ARC tube products (and vice versa) in their own rooms (here), but for some reasons it's not so common to see HK Wilson users doing the same. Keep in mind Wilson's recordings (one example below) were made with tubes in the signal path too.

Even more interesting are the bass units, the iconic KEF radiators (aka 大球場; I'd guess active versions here). People have derided the WAMM as being LS3/5A + ESL + KEF; in actuality there is nothing LS3/5A about it, except for the presence of the small mini-monitors. If anything, the implementation is more like the pioneering KEF 104AB pictured, very fine monitors that are seriously under-rated (see here). Come to think of it, for a multi-box idea, KEF's 105 was a pioneer too. To digress further, the KEF (and TDL) radiators of course can be seen in many other iconic speakers of the era, such as the Sonus Faber Electa Amator (I own the MkII) and the Extrema, one of my dream speakers.

I note that aside from an infinite number of permutations on aligning the drivers, the equalizer was not flat at all. You can spend a life time dialing in the settings...I am sure that's not the last we have heard of the WAMM. A tweaker's delight!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
It's Lonely on Top
Before I begin to "report", I'd refer you to the picture I drew. Driving the four columns were 2 pairs of Spectral monoblock amps connected by MIT Oracle cables. Here's the current equipment list, including Hong Kong's sole sample of Continuum Caliburn (now with the latest updates):

Vinyl 1 - Clearaudio Statement-Goldfinger
Vinyl 2 - Continuum Caliburn-Cobra arm-Airtight PC-1 on dedicated stand
Phonopreamp - FM Acoustics 222
Digital Transport- Metronome Kalista Reference SE on stands
DAC - Wadia 931 Controller + 922 monoblock DAC
Preamp - Audio Note M10
Amp - Spectral DMA360 monoblocks bi-amping
Speakers - Wilson WAMM (serial #49)
Cables - Oracle bi-amping; Gotham for preamp-amp I believe.

Wilson WAMM = Focal Grand Utopia EM?
In the high-end design world, Form Follows Function is almost an imperturbable dictum. But in the hifi world, where both form and function are not as well delineated, such is almost always not the case. As in live performances, the "form" of the music/sound in any particular setup is contingent upon interactive personal and room factors, and most audiophiles would not hesitate to subjugate the functions of the hard wares in his pursuit. As a result, most systems bear the sonic signature of the owner, and ML is perhaps no exception.

All this only to preface what I observed, that is in this particular room the Wilson WAMM did not sound all that different from the Focal Grande Utopia EM. Of course, as the Focal's were gone we did not do an A/B comparison and I am relying on my aural memory.

Similar as they may be, they are not quite identical. Mostly the same LPs were played to facilitate comparison. Overall, the Wilson's sounded a trifle lighter, looser, and perhaps more extended; the Focal's had more midbass gravitas.

Just 2 examples: on the Manger Test LP, Gelber's Beethoven on Track 3 was more solid on the Focal but the Wilson's had more of the leading edge as the fingers hit the keys, though some of it had me confused for a Bosendorfer for a while (it's Steinway). On Track 2 though the Focal built up the steadily eerie atmosphere quite a bit better.

We also heard some different items. I personally found We Are The World nicely rendered. While it was not quite the usual rowdy rendition, the subtle delineation of the various different voices was quite mesmerizing, if just a little light on the male vocals.

Digital replay is quite different from analogue, indeed more upright and upfront, in other words livelier. Some may well prefer one format over the other. More comments on the sound are reserved for Part III.

As everybody may have his own explanations for perceived sameness, my statement is sure to stir controversy. Before my statement is deliberately hijacked by others to suit their own ill intentions, let me expound further on my own thinking...

Q1. Should 2 loudspeakers sound alike?
I believe this is not a question of "Should", but rather "Can". Yes, I believe two very different systems, not just loudspeakers in isolation, can sound similar. And keep in mind the more subjective "alike" does not equal the more objective "the same". In our hifi world, I believe the accumulation of at least over 80 years of growth and experience, wisdom and follies has greatly enriched us, particularly in the understanding of neutrality and the means to get it. By this I mean for the dedicated there are many paths, using new or old equipment, home or pro gears, to similar results.

Should the Wilsons and Focals sound alike? Who knows! But why not? If you look carefully at the designs, even shapes, you shall start to find more than coincident similarities between the two. In particular, variations on the D'Appolito Array and care paid to time alignment.

Can they sound alike? Not if I had to guess from previous impressions of Wilson and Focal speakers. But yes, judging by this audition. Now, the corollary.

Q2. What's the "real" sound of a good transducer?
Aside from its duty to provide good presence to the music, I believe a good transducer should be responsive to whatever changes in the signal. Unfortunately, this also means two people (designers and audiophiles alike) can get completely different sound out of the same transducer. If this were not true, we would not have the frequent misfortune of hearing anomalies such as ear-bleeding "neutrality", airless panels, narcotizing vintage gears, lugubrious ESLs, bass-shy big JBLs, to name just a few oddities perpetuated by some audiophiles.

In the most exalted realm, it is often said the loudspeakers (and other gears) should have no real sound of their own, their only duty to get out of the way. Do the Wilsons and Focals belong to this exalted category? I believe they do.

Q3. What Factors are Conducive to Likeness?
In short, a higher control, beyond equipment, akin to the supratentorial influence on reflexes. Electrical gears interact like reflexes, but they are susceptible to other controls. Here are some candidates:

The Room: No matter how much care we take in speaker placement and system implementation, we all know the room plays the biggest role in how the system will sound. Here, as discussed in the last visit, ML's unique room is even more of a factor than most, its almost stealthy silence (particularly the stage portion) more of an iron grip than any equipment can be. Incidentally, before I forget, I still think images, like last time, are just a shade elevated even at our listening volume. This could well be alignment or preference, or simply room effect. The bottom line is I think the room is a major player here, as I am sure is ML's intention.

Another reason why some people listen at low volume is a Hong Kong syndrome: the speakers are too large for the room.

Power Conditioning: The best power conditioning is supposed to remove interferences without removing music. Here I must declare a bias. Unlike ML, I'm usually quite strongly against conditioning. Personally, I'd rather have a little more roughness than too much smoothness. But not everyone is the same. My guess would be that in ML's place a little of the sort of liveliness (presence) I treasure has been deliberately removed during conditioning, but I do appreciate the silent background and refinement. There was a huge amount of tiny ambient details on offer, more than in almost any other system I have heard, though presented in an ultra-calm fashion that perhaps betrays a synthetic origin. You can listen to this system for days without fatigue, but wouldn't just a bit of fatigue be more real?

Listening Volume: I have consistently observed this is a pervasive trait among well-known older HK audiophiles (often over-solicitously referred to as "Master" this and that; 各大師，大佬，大大，大_...). Almost down to the last person they guard the volume knob zealously. Let me be frank, for my taste most of them play at unrealistically low volume. It is relatively OK to play chamber music at a low volume, but to play a big symphony at low volume just does not work for me, someone who goes to concert regularly. When we listen by ourselves, we can choose any volume we like, but when there is a gathering it is then a showcase where more realistic volume level is a requisite for demonstration of high fidelity, for what fidelity can there be if the volume is much lower than in real life? I'd venture that too low a listening level easily leads to a feeling of sameness washing over even audible differences. It's like asking which of two girls is prettier and getting an answer of "...the same."

That said, if I have to, I can adjust myself to low listening level and, well, interpolate the rest. In the case of ML, although the listening level is below my norm, it is still thankfully significantly higher than many of his cohorts. Careful listening revealed that, within his own chosen envelope of calmness, nothing serious was lacking. The sound was layered and nuanced, of exceptional refinement. Commendably too, transients were quick when the dynamics changed, and the scale of bigger canvas faithfully preserved, though somewhat scaled down. Within this low-listening-level species, I personally would rate ML a master, and downgrade some of well-known "masters" and "大_" to journeymen, if not apprentices.

Neutrality: Finally it's my firm belief that only in a highly neutral system can two highly neutral speakers achieve semblance.

Silent Presence 無聲勝有聲？
As quoted from JA's 1990 Stereophile interview:

Atkinson: What range does the electrostatic unit cover?

Wilson: It operates above 5kHz. And it operates at a very low level. It functions primarily to provide part of the leading edge of high-frequency transients.

ML asked us to participate in a test. Some of his friends has queried whether the electrostatic panels are functional at all since one can hear almost nothing even standing directly in front of them. We listened to just one cut, Milstein's Meditation twice, with the power on and off. There is little question they did make a subtle contribution to the leading edge of the violin, exactly as Dave Wilson intended.

To me this little demonstration was the singular most interesting thing about the afternoon. A designer took great pains to add just a little information to the leading edge of the notes which he missed from the tweeters. No doubt skeptics will think of this as patching, but I think it showcased Wilson's acute hearing. Thumbs up! Now, where have I placed the telephone number of 教父高, anathematic to some but a hero to me? It'd be time to pay him a visit! I wonder how many drivers he now employs...

Pictured also above is an original Janszen unit. You may want to read the little link at Martin Logan's site, especially if you have been seriously misled into thinking Quads as the only worthy electrostatics on earth.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Vinyl Talk: Clearaudio Statement vs Continuum Caliburn
Shootout Fantastique 擧(手)與不擧(手)
Gulp...after a drink of water we have finally arrived at the real raison d'etre of this article, to compare the Continuum Caliburn and Clearaudio Statement, 2 of the most expensive turntables in the world. For such famous turntables, there are really very few reviews. Whatever there are mostly report on the technical aspects and much less so on the sonic aspects, even severely lacking in thoroughness.

Continuum Caliburn/Cobra: Stereophile ; HiFi Choice
Airtight PC-1: Ken Kessler; TAS

Clearaudio Statement: The reviews need further scrutiny. The TAS review is a thorough one, but IMHO failed to pick up on the Archilles' heel of the Statement (on which more later); Ken Kessler's review in HiFi News was more a site visit than a proper review and said little on the sound; Australian HiFi was downright negligent and ill-informed. Claiming one cut was enough to establish the supremacy of the Statement, the reviewer said: "...I can assure you that listening longer did not tell me anything more about the sound quality than drinking a glass of wine tells you any more about the taste than you knew after the first sip..." Wow, what a "connoiseur" who most likely has had too much Australian wine and not enough of French vintages! And this on the soil of the Continuum! :-)
Clearaudio Goldfinger v2: TAS

Here I must again thank ML for playing various tracks on both TTs even without our prompting. Both cartridges were fed into the same FM222, with the same loading of 30o ohms. The specs of the 2 cartridges differ significantly:

(A) Air Tight PC-1 vs (B) Clearaudio Goldfinger v2:
Output Voltage: 0.6 (A); 0.9 (B)
Internal Impedance: 2.5 ohms (A); 35 ohms (B)

As is frequent with expensive cartridges, there is little information on loading recommendation, not even from the manufacturers. ML believes the Goldfinger should be loaded at 300 ohms. He thinks the PC-1 should be 400 ohms. Curiously, I found at one of the vendors the "Recommended Loading" for the PC-1 is 30-100 ohms, but that may be the vendor's own opinion. But we listened to 300 ohms for both.

As the Audio Note M10 preamp has a stepped volume, precise volume matching was not entirely possible, but the different temperaments of the 2 contenders were instantly revealed. Unlike the case with the loudspeakers, I believe you can easily tell them apart in a blind test and with disparate volume settings. This is important, especially in light of the discussion in Part II. It is also a testament to the neutrality of the system and to the effacing act of the speakers.

The Clearaudio setup sounded rock-solid as usual, with pitch-black background, uncanny imaging detail retrieval and seismic bass. In these departments one is in agreement with the reviews. But what of its weakness? None of the review mentioned a single weakness. I regard this as serious malpractice by the audio critics.

The Archilles' heel of the Clearaudio Statement is a (profound) lack of rhythmic savvy, or (poor) Pace, Rhythm and Timing (PRaT), should you wish. I have said this on numerous occasions, and I have heard 3 Statements so far, and they all sounded the same, so it's not an afterthought after comparison with the Continuum. I quote myself:

July-10 First Visit to ML: "...在背景寧靜和細節重播上，Clearaudio Statement 肯定是優秀的，可是我認爲這個唱盤似乎有點遺漏了音樂重生最重要之一的一環， 那就是節奏感。 這是我聼過 Statement , 甚至於 Master Reference (乃至於大部份 Clearaudio 唱盘) 後都沒能揮去的感覺。..."(addendum: many months ago at another place we actually got to listen to a newly delivered Statement. Comparison with the old Master Reference revealed the newcomer to be rhythmically inferior)

August-10 in a report on the Clearaudio Concept: "...Most importantly, it has a lively rhythm and pace, something unusual for this company. In this aspect, without A/B comparison, I instantly know it is superior to my Champion, and many of this company's expensive offerings..."

September-10 listening to another Clearaudio TT (model unnamed): "...The TT has recently been upgraded. Sound is very dynamic, with black background, but I am still bothered by its lack of rhythmic elan. I remain unmoved by this Clearaudio..."

More than round earth vs flat earth, PRaT is an absolutely integral part of music replay. Without it, music becomes boring. Would you tolerate your favorite drummer, say Art Blakey, sounding four-square like the boy next door? Whatever their individual merits and demerits, this would never happen on a humble Garrad 301, Thorens TD150, Systemdek, to name just a few. For a manufacturer with tall claims to building the world's finest turntable, it is serious negligence.

How does the Continuum setup better the Clearaudio setup in this regard? The Wilson LP violin and piano (Abel/Steinberg) illustrated it for us. At the same sound level, the violin sounded more sinuous, simply more fluent. It was as if bar lines had suddenly disappeared. Even more significantly, the piano sounded louder and livelier as a result of better transients and microdynamics. The leading edge of the Continuum setup was faster and had more presence. I think part of this may be attributable to the difference in cartridges. In the TAS review of the Goldfinger cited above, JV made a similar observation. Overall, as heard in this setup, most of us voted for the Continuum.

To be fair, the Statement triumphed in almost every other department. I also think the newly upgraded Continuum setup was not yet fully optimized. Aside from obvious superiority in PRaT and better transients, it sounded a little constricted compared to the Statement. Perhaps more experiments in loading options shall bring rewards.

What I'd like to hear one day is a different arm and cartridge on the Statement. I wonder who's going to be the first one bold enough to do it? Well, if that's too much to hope for, how about a different cartridge on it? That would be fascinating. It would be boring if everyone uses the same arm and cartridge, same sound. Otherwise, I'd personally prefer to hear more of the Continuum and less of the Statement.

Red and Blue
ML played for us the RR LP of Berlioz, and since JCR33 was there we reminisced about the Everest version heard so unforgettably (the bell!) on his Westminster. ML managed to dig out that recording too, and we had a good time comparing the two. Myself? I prefer the Everest.

Despite some differences in opinions, all was jolly and no one got red and blue.

Acknowledgement: Differences pale next to gratitude. I must give my biggest and most sincere thanks to ML for treating us to so many rarities in one day.