best preamp ever - cost is no object

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.

Bingo, Carlos, I choose not to participate any further is such nonsensical discussions, which are really pseudo-science lectures. You sir are the one saying things that would suggest our understandings of physical phenomena are complete and that nothing further can be found. You have no scientific basis for dismissing anything such as you have concerning the sound of tubes, power cords, and heaven knows what else. If I have lost your respect it sounds like I have adequately dismissed your limited understanding of what science is all about.

Fred may choose to humor you by responding to your uninformed questions, but not me. I know how well he hears, so when he says something I respect it.

Norm,
The time has come for the student to teach the professor a lesson. With my last post I set a trap for you. In asking you to “verbalize” what make a tube or a power cord better than another, you yourself will arrive at the conclusion that the difference in their sound end up being nothing more than mere tone-control: changes to the tonal balance and sonic palette!

It is not that I think that all tubes and power cords sound the same; on the contrary I indeed believe that they sound different and that you and others are indeed “hearing” a difference. What I content is that these differences can be achieved in a much more elegant way than trial and error. The same end results can be achieved through the use of knowledge of mastering/recording techniques, physics, acoustics, psychoacoustics, electronics and the use of high-end studio equipment and techniques which will result in predictable, repeatable, defeatable and scalable phenomena.

You have been at this long enough and I thought that you were smart enough to have figured out that tinkering is one thing but many of these tweaks are nothing more than snake-oil and an audiophile swindle. Come-on is time to take your head out of you’re as….

Norm I think that you will benefit greatly from my upcoming book: “The Great Audiophile Swindle!”

I will personally sign your copy as you are indeed in need of light being shined on you.

I look forward to continuing my discourse with you here and systematically dismantling each and every one of your views. Let’s get it on!