My Long List of Amplifiers and My Personal Review of Each!
I think a lot of people are assuming ALOT with regards to top end dacs... They don't understand that top end dacs will make you REALLY question the need for vinyl. Mike at Suncoast audio has had customers that traded in their vinyl set up for the MSB Select 2. Just because someone heard a lumin or entry level dac doesn't mean they know what the elite DACs sound like. The select 2 is in a league of its own. It can make many people question their need for Vinyl (assuming they own one). |
@daveyf spot on! |
@keithr The top line MSB DAC’s are very good DAC’s, They bring a lot of what one gets from a good analog rig, but it is not analog. IME, if you really want the best sound from your source, you still need vinyl or tape. Is analog required to get good sound, no, but the cost of the top flite MSB and Wadax gear is comparable or more than great analog. Is digital more convenient than analog, certainly; is it the best sounding source? No it is not, IMHO. |
Enjoyed the video. I was wondering if you had, “jumped the shark” with your power cord Amazon extravaganza : ). However, you have a gift for entertaining video along with your personal insight. I make my own power cords but don’t like to see others attacked for their use of high-end cables or choice of budget cables. Keep it up. You have the most entertaining content on audio that I’ve seen, unique. |
@jays_audio_lab Prefer DAC's? Digital has one thing over analog, convenience....no question. BUT, IMHO 'IF' you are really serious about getting the best sound in your system, you will invest in vinyl or tape, or both. Going into analog these days is an expensive proposition, particularly if you are just starting out, but if one has the funds for a top flite system, then both will reward you with a higher SQ than any other source. |
Jay, agree this is probably not really the place for this turntable discussion.
@viber6 Nowhere do i say that the current Linn is the best available. Yes, it is a different beast than its predecessor’s and superior to all of them, BUT it is not the best available. At the price point, it probably is the best I have ever heard, but compared to a turntable like the Basis Transcendence ( which is the overall best I have heard) it has failings. ( albeit the Basis is several times the price). Also, if you believe in the Linn hierarchy, then the cartridge is fairly low down the pole in importance, below the table and the arm. The hierarchy being...the bearing of the table, then the power supply of the table, then the sub-chassis, then the arm and lastly the cartridge. I dont know how many folks here believe that source is the most important thing in your system make up, but I am one that does. |
Jay, Excuse this turntable interlude in your thread. You may be too busy at present to get involved in analog, but you can see from the discussions amongst Paul, Daveyf and myself that there is so much variation in sound from different setups, that you will want to pursue this eventually. Daveyf believes that the whole enchilada Linn is the best available. At $30K it is much more expensive than the original Linn of 1972, but it has worthwhile improvements so I think it represents good value. Mike Fremer thought his $200K Continuum TT was the best, but careful reading of his recent reviews indicates that SOTA systems can cost a lot less. As you noted, it makes little sense to spend big bucks on DAC's. The differences between cheap players and the best are relatively small, compared to the VAST differences among cartridges. The top Linn is precise, but change the cartridge, and you can get a whole spectrum of sound from warm to analytic. I think you will have more fun with analog than digital. Cartridges are speaker transducers in reverse, so the differences are as great as with speakers. |
@viber6 Good question as to the similarity of the arms and cartridges. We did not use the same arm or cartridge for all tables. This was something that was not possible. However, all the tables in question had their owners preferred arm and cartridge. All cartridges were good MC's and we did try and match up gain at the preamp. I do not believe the arm and cartridge combo's to have such a large influence as the different type of table used. Which goes along with Linn's philosophy of table first. Could it have impacted the results, sure, but not to an extent that was heard IME. |
daveyf, Thanks for your info. I believe everything you say, since I was SHOCKED at the improvement in resolution, spatiality going from the Denon DD to my friend's original LP12. Did you actually use the same cartridge/arm, transferring them to all the TT you mentioned? That's the only way to see if the TT alone is responsible for all the improvements. Perhaps the bearing is the most critical factor in approaching the ideal of the invisible finger of God spinning the record. Maybe the current Linn is comparable to the effortless transparency of analog master tape. I was intrigued with the concept of the bearing in the original SOTA Sapphire TT. But listening showed the TT was a dog--the entire soft wood construction probably explained its soft, mushy sound. |
@viber6 I have been a ’Linnie’ for about 30+ years. My first LP12 was like yours, a Valhalla model from the mid 80’s. The only parts leftover from my original model are the plinth ( a like new afro fluted) and the top plate. Each upgrade I have done over the years has improved the overall resolution and also the ability to dig deeper into what is in the groove. The big upgrades are the new Karousel bearing, which is a major step up over the older Cirkus bearing, which itself was a big improvement over the original white bearing. The new bearing is machined to 5 microns, as such bearing noise is basically non-existent. The new Radikal D power supply is also a huge step up over the Valhalla ( and all Lingo’s). It brings a much more dynamic and extended frequency response to the SQ. I am constantly hearing from folks whose LP12 was built back in the day, sometimes (most times) decades ago, folks this table is only really comparable only in name...both called LP12’s. The difference in SQ is truly astounding and IMHO like night and day. Today, I have compared by AB my table against the likes of the latest Technics 10’s, the new SOTA’s, the top-line Rega 10’s, EAT’s, several Clearaudio’s and Garrard 301’s/401’s...I am still a ’Linnie’ if that says anything!
The tonearm cable does matter a lot, IME. I currently use a Nordost Tyr with my arm set up, it is far more resolved than the stock Linn T-Kable. |
Psnyder149, I never got around to trying different tonearm interconnect cables to the phono stage. This might be significant since it is at the source. Nordost would be fun to try. Avoid stiff cables which would imbalance the Linn suspension. If I did it all again, I would choose the top Rega TT/arm/Apheta 2 or 3 for about $7000. For my taste in crisp, lean sound, Mike Fremer wrote that this is superb value. Actually, he wrote about the expensive Aphelion cartridge at $5K. I would never fool around with an expensive cartridge--one false move, uh-oh. Most cartridges have unpredictable break-in and radically changed personalities with age and day to day big variations. Digital is convenient with excellent sound, outweighing the heartaches of most analog. Even if analog master tapes are king, the few available titles make it only an expensive curiosity. |
The system sounds just fine with the $10 generic power cords. Nordost says that power cords are more important than other cables. My $350 Nordost Vishnu power cord makes a worthwhile improvement in clarity vs stock cord, but other components are much more important, so save the money for these other components. |
Sorry I have not had opportunity to compare. Mine is Valhalla Ittok with some other minor upgrades but have no doubt Lingo and other options vastly improve on an already good design. I did audition a Clearaudio Hana red setup in my system at around $12k and it obliterated the Linn but I have a relatively inexpensive Benz silver cartridge so it was not a fair fight. I spend over 95% time with digital-mostly due to convenience- so I’m not looking to sink major bucks on the TT now. I have plans that would ultimately make sense to invest in vinyl in the future, in which case I will need to seriously audition upgrades and/or replacement. |
daveyf and psnyder149, My LP12 from the early 80's was the Linn Valhalla. I remember the original. Do either of you have the experience comparing earlier to later versions? I lost interest when I got a Goldmund Studio package for half price. By transferring my Alphason/Denon from my Linn to the Goldmund, I demonstrated the better focus and brilliance of the latter. I had fun comparing my Denon cartridge on the Linn, Goldmund, and a Win belt and direct drive table. Like psnyder149, I am no longer adept at delicate cartridge swapping to the arm. I screamed when I broke delicate tonearm wires to cartridge pins and would have to solder new pins, etc. Nowadays I sit back and listen to my CD's tweaking the EQ to suit the recording. I admire anyone these days who carefully does an A/B of different LP12 versions with the same arm/cartridge and setup. So what specific sound characteristics apply to the newer LP12 versions compared to the older? It is very difficult to do home trials of turntable/arm/cartridges to compare with what you have. You would have to remount your cartridge onto the new TT/arm, do the painstaking setup, remember what you heard, go back and forth even only twice. You could do needle drop recordings and compare your recordings, but that is like trying to do A/B's from youtube recordings. A somewhat useful exercise, but not as revealing as live in room experience. But it is easy to take a black box CD playback system, even with numerous boxes from top companies, go back and forth and judge. |
@psnyder149 Agreed, one of the biggest drawbacks to the LP12 is having to take it to a specialized dealer for servicing. However, I think this same thing could be said about almost all gear, and several other turntables in particular. So, in that regard maybe the Linn is no different. Not saying this is a positive attribute, just common. As to Ivor, i do agree he was somewhat visionary, although the vision definitely worked well for his product category. |
Re the LP12, I agree with all that both of you have written. I was really kind of kidding about getting rid of it. I just hate that I have to take it to a specialized dealer that is not convenient for me. To get everything really right I do believe it takes at least a specialist if not a "guru". lol I have poor vision and am incapable of the fine motor skills necessary to do any work on it myself and while the LP12 can still be fantastic, there are now many other TT that are also fantastic. And yes Viber, cheers to Ivor. He is one of the revolutionaries that truly made a great and positive impact by shaking up the audiophile world. |
@viber6 The Linn LP12 has come a very long way since the 80’s. Today with the latest upgrades the LP12 is a very different sounding table to the 80’s version. My LP12 only has its original plinth and top plate from the 90’s. The table sounds nothing like the versions of yesteryear. If you have not had a chance to listen to a current model, i suggest that you go and listen for yourself. |
Psnyder149 and daveyf, I remember the so-called mystery of the magic of LP12 setup. There were setup gurus in the 70's and 80's we all worshipped. Not being too adept with my fingers, I still adjusted the springs for a low suspension or a high suspension, and used my bubble level. It is really a simple mechanical system. As with every tweak, you listen to different setups. No matter what I did, the LP12 had a buoyancy and airy life that eluded the Denon direct drive. The SOTA Sapphire with the same arm and cartridge was like an leaden elephant with its turgid, muddy, bass heavy sound. The original Linn of my friend came with the Grace 707 arm. I was talked into the Mission 774 arm because of its azimuth adjustment through rotating the arm tube, then the Ittok arm. But the Grace 707 had the most lively, buoyant sound. I ended up with the Alphason HR100S arm, which was cooly neutral. I then experimented with the Alphason/Denon 305 cartridge on a Win belt drive and direct drive TT, then my final Goldmund Studio TT, which bettered the Linn at its own game. The Alphason arm was better than the Goldmund T3B straight line tracking arm which was mushy sounding by comparison. That's a lesson to not necessarily go with the same company's products. Later articles from Mike Fremer showed the weakness of straight line tracking arms, despite the attractiveness of no tracking errors. Linn and its colorful marketing man, Ivor Tiefenbrun deserve credit for the principle of Source First. |
@psnyder149 I dont believe that any recent Linn LP12 requires constant ’tune ups’. The days of the Linn falling out of set up are long gone. If you have a model from even two decades ago; if set up correctly in the first place, the table will hold that set-up without issue. If you are having an issue with a more recent LP12, it is because the person who set it up is not doing something correctly...and that can hardly be laid at the LP12’s feet. Today, the new bearing and the upgrades to the suspension plus the improvements to the power supplies are truly set it and forget it. @viber6 Source first is imperative IMHO, but folks like to look elsewhere, as this is a lot easier to do as the new shiny object holds a lot of interest to neophyte a’philes. |
@viber6, My only complaint with my LP12 is that it requires such frequent tuneups which I am completely incapable of doing on my own. I don’t foresee a time when it will be removed from my system, unless I get tired of dragging it to someone who can effectively work on it. I do see a time when I upgrade its cartridge, power supply, bearing, etc… Maybe I should just trade it in for a Clearaudio…! I appreciate your nuanced words that I believe are largely in agreement with my point, that once a certain minimum level is achieved on speakers that the rest of the playback chain is at least as important in value/additional dollar spent.
For those who are focussed on room treatments, I don’t think any of the serious followers of this thread understate the importance of the speaker/room interaction. But I suspect there are many excellent threads on this topic. Last I checked, this was a thread focussed first and foremost on the best amplification and has by virtue of necessity and interest drifted into the rest of the componentry chain. While room treatment is important, and vinyl or R2R also can sound fantastic, and home theater-surround sound have a large following, one of the great things about Jay’s thread is that it doesn’t need to be everything to everybody. In fact it is the specificity of Jay’s quest and his expertise that has proven so very interesting to me. Love the focussed quest for the best of amplification Jay and appreciate that you have also appropriately expanded on the very related topics of pre-amps, processors, cables, power supplies, grounding, etc. Thanks for all of your hard work!
|
psnyder149, I agree with Ivor of Linn that the source is most important. Of course, the speaker has to be decent enough, but not necessarily the best. I have even been shocked that listening to a great recording on the car radio sounds better than a routine recording on a great home stereo. It doesn't matter what the rest of the system costs. I experienced the Linn phenomenon in a friend's system of Rogers LS 3/5a speakers. I brought my top of the line Denon TT and the same Denon 303 cartridge to compare with his Linn LP12 original version with the same Denon 303 cartridge. The Linn wiped out my Denon TT in every way and it was a much greater improvement than any other upgrades my friend had made. Most people are in love with their speaker no matter what it costs, whether cheap or expensive. The speaker/room combo is still the defining criterion of the overall presentation of the sound. It is reasonable to spend as much money as desired to get the best source and electronics. For midrange/HF clarity, there is no speaker at any price that comes close to my cheap Audiostatic 240/Enigmacoustics tweeter combo, after my decades' searching. A great recording then makes the highest experience of reality, especially from analog master tapes.
|
Jay, Did you mention in your latest video what your newest dealer product is? Looking forward to learning about that.
edit: I just finished the video and think I remember you making comment about the next brand you will rep but no naming it yet. Like I said, I'm looking forward to learning about that as I'm sure many others are too. |
"I can’t remove the screen because I also use the room as a movie room. I have to watch Disney flicks with my daughter. When i built the room, it was also for us to spend family time together." Jay, consider a retractable screen. Mount it from the ceiling. Move it forward enough to put acoustical treatments behind the screen. As the screen retracts, you will hear an immediate difference in the audio. I notice you have your speakers pulled well forward of the screen. That's mitigating most the effect of the screen but not totally. |
Acoustic is not simple matter and a bunch of recipes... Nope... For example my screen computer is BETWEEN my speakers on my desk creating a situation ressembling Jay’s situation...The ratio between our two rooms, speakers, and the screen is near one another probably ... 😁😊 Yes it can be bad... But acoustic is NEVER only a recipe... The way some front reflection RATIO to back and side reflections can work for the worst or for the better is related to a ratio which is properly determined by the timing of these waves and the listener position... This precise ratio will determine greatly imaging...Front reflection are not bad in itself only the ratio could be... Then no one room is similar and no recipe is universal...
Only listenings experiments and tuning time works universally... Timing event point reflections in psycho acoustic are in fraction of one hundred milliseconds... I am not an acoustician by the way i only learned how to play with my room...And i succeeded... This is why i can say that for most people who already own relatively good gear to live by they must adress acoustic... It makes no sense to upgradse a 25,000 bucks dac to a 100,000 bucks one BEFORE adressing acoustic for most people especially those for whose money is counted... My best to all... |
@gtaphile Thank you for your response. Like I said, I have heard systems in medium - large rooms with the speakers 8-10' into the room where no treatment was necessary on the front wall. As long as first and second reflections are absorbed or diffused and bass is controlled. I have also heard rooms that were overtreated and either sounded dead or too lively. Every room is unique and every listener has their own preferences. No need to send photos. Simply go to Audiogon's homepage and click on the 'down arrow tab'. Select Virtual Systems ~ Create System. From there you can upload photos of your system along with listing your equipment. Looking forward to seeing your system and room treatments. |
That is correct. I do have her support.
I can’t remove the screen because I also use the room as a movie room. I have to watch Disney flicks with my daughter. When i built the room, it was also for us to spend family time together. I am going to be partnering with a company who will assist me remotely with more room treatments. I will remove my old rectangular GIK Acoustics panels and insert something better. The room will get a lot better but always keeping in mind that movie nights have to be a part of its functionality. Once you go with a projector, you can’t watch TV in a small screen anymore. It’s impossible. There is no going back. Tonight, i won't be listening to music. I'm a little tired and want to sit back and watch a good movie. |
rbach I have only checked in a few times so have not seen anything from Jay on acoustics. I'd be happy to send pics and have asked where to send. I don't believe I have heard a room that added absorption, diffusion or a combination of both on the front wall that did not significantly improve the listening experience. I am not aware of how important HD video is to Jay but if it is a second choice I would remove the projection screen altogether experiment with a large surface area of absorption/diffusion and get the image focus and image size dialed in. I would then replace the screen with a ceiling mount tab tensioned screen and enjoy both systems. Again I have seen the early portion of Jays journey and not much else so these may be moog points. |
