best preamp ever - cost is no object

You just don't get it! Tweaks such as tube rolling and such are there for the people that want to extract the most out of their system but do not want or have the funds to spend on more expensive solutions, based on substance. In the case of your system, a system with a retail value in the $200K range, tube rolling is out off context! Yes, at the level and the amount of money that you have spent in your system you have systematic solutions based on knowledge and science and you do not need to do the trial and error dance, unless of course you find enjoyment out of it and don't mind blowing your money.

It has become quiet clear and obvious to me that some people bring nothing more to this quest than a big wallet, to those like you and others which do not possess the in-depth knowledge of mastering techniques, physics, acoustics, psychoacoustics and electronics may I suggest that you just hire a professional to get you the rest of the way there instead of keeping spending outrageous amounts of money while spinning around and getting nowhere.

This is just my honest and scientifically backed opinion.

Carlos269, one of the things that all tube equipment manufacturers face nowadays is that tube quality is nowhere near what it was 30-50 years ago! The EH tubes in the Einstein are a good example- nicely packaged but the tubes are microphonic, noisy if not hand-picked and prone to grid contamination in short order.

In the old days the tube manufacturers made plenty of spares; often they offer significantly better performance for not a lot of extra money. The problems one faces with this are several- the really top performers have a cult price, often the tubes are used when advertised as NOS, and certainly finding significant quantities of any type is tricky at best, which is why OEMs use the current manufactured tubes.

It is also true that NOS tubes may not perform as well- as in the case of 12AT7s, there are no NOS types as quiet as the new Chinese any longer as the quiet ones have been used up. Even so, NOS 12AT7s do sound smoother and more robust.

That said, I agree that setup and the technology itself plays a huge role. I think it is true to say that you and Fcrowder are both correct.

Ralph,
I would agree with you 100% if the reason for swapping the tubes was because of the tubes being microphonic, noisy, suffered from defective construction or were not reliable but I don't believe that is the case here. I believe that Fred just preferred the "Flavor" of the $100 per tube tubes to that of the $19 per tube ones. Perhaps Fred could enlighten us by stating specifically what made the $100 tubes better in his eyes/ears than the $19 tubes? Please let us at the same time know what makes the $2,400.00 Acrolink Mexcel 7N copper power cord better than a $5 stock power cord other than build quality. Please let us know just exactly what it is that this expensive audio jewelry does better than their pedestrian equivalent. I await your answer.

Ralph by the way, I do get what you mean about manufacturers being forced to use mass-produced tubes which leads to the potential to acquire "Better" NOS tubes on the market. The potential is there to get tubes that are less microphonic, quieter, more robustly built and more reliable but it is my view that most tube rollers do not roll for those reasons but for favoring a particular "Flavor" more than other; these is basically trial-and-error "tone control" which is the same practice used in cable swapping and power cord selection.

Carlos, had you not included the required answer question about what makes the Acrolink cable better, I would merely have blown off your incorrect statements about old American tubes versus new tubes.

Basically, you are wrong in saying that microphonics, noise, defective construction, and reliability are all that differentiates tubes. This is grossly inaccurate. Materials quality within, the capability of the individual making the tubes, the geometry of its construction, the level of the vacuum, and the level of quality control all also enter into the picture. If you just consider the Western electric 300B tube, you can see the differences. WE's last run was in 1988. These tubes are audibly inferior to those made in the 1970s and this is evident in the prices they get on Ebay. In turn the 1950-60s tubes are clearly better than the 1970s tubes. Finally, when Westrex sought to restart the WE 300Bs in 1995, these tube were a pale imitation of even the 1988s. Newer production seems somewhat better but still inferior to older production. I have 1995 production, 2006 production, 1988 production, 1976 production, and 1957 production. Chinese construction even with high QC and some design innovations fail miserably to have the realism evident in the old WE tubes.

I know what I hear when I listen to these and to some degree, these can be verbalize which on occasion I have sought to do so, but Fred is under no obligation to prove anything to you. So he prefers the sound, not the "flavor" on tubes that are rare enough now to cost $100. I prefer the sound of WE 300Bs that cost nearly $1000 per tube. If that is how I choice to spend my money what is it to you?

Certainly when you speak of tube choice as basically tone controls, so you can appreciate the concept of a more flat and accurate response as well as a capability to be more dynamic. I seek more accurate tubes.

The power cords are a similar matter. Build quality is hardly the only variation among power cords and you are being simplistic to suggest so. One comparison between two different cables was sufficient to convince me that I had to have one of them. Since that experience 18 years ago, I have found progressively superior power cables, but have been unsuccessful in finding ac filtering that I can use.

I am pretty sure that you are subscribing to the basic notions of those called "objectivists," who dismiss differences among tubes, power cords, etc. If you cannot hear differences don't think you can dismiss those who do.

Norm,
What is it about the cables and tubes that you prefer and that make them better? Please "verbalize" what makes your choices better?

I do agree that tube technology is different but what matters is the end result isn't it? The way in which a tube is deemed good or no good from a quality control point of view is exactly those parameters which I mentioned above.

Yes Fred doesn't own me any answers but last time I checked this is a "Discussion Forum" and that is exactly what we are doing discussing. For the record, Fred has yet to provide a single answer.

By the way, Professor Luttbeg I used to hold your opinion in high esteem UNTIL you started advocating magic pebbles and teleportation tweaks; from that point on your opinion holds no water for me, and many others.

You have been at this for over 35 years, you would think that you would be smart enough to have figured out that most of what gets peddled as tweaks is nothing more than pseudoscience.