Preamp Deal of the Century

The First Sound is an excellent preamp--it has a "blacker" background than I have been able to achieve with the Syrah, and is incredibly dynamic. However, I believe the Syrah has a much more layered sound and just seems more "right" to me. By comparison, I felt the First Sound's presentation was slightly compressed. For what it's worth, I am using a Plinius SA-102 with the Syrah and have not tried a tube amp with either the Syrah or the First Sound, so you may want to cast about for another opinion. All I can tell you is that once I heard the Syrah, I have never looked back and never get the itch to upgrade my preamp. Only when someone convinces me that the new Cortese is that much better than the Syrah will I consider selling it.

Recently I replaced the Italian Sicte6sn7s on Syrah with CBS5692s red base. My Apogee Stages' high frequency get bright ,hot and tend to be noisy. It made me very fidgeted. After I return to Sicte. The music comes back. The Apogees sound liquid,transparent and relax. The backgrund became quiet. I can't understand the differeces made by Sicte and CBS. Is anything wrong? My Syrah was produced in 2001.

Rcn, thank you for your response. Yes, all is different - quantum energy arises into different forms. But, are you really saying that because there is a range to human objective hearing (the mechanism of the ear) that that physical means is wholly determitive upon the mind's perception therefrom? In other words, while I know that scientific materialists always want the mechanism to be ALL (and tend towards, um, symptomatically, Bryston pre's...), does the ear between you and me make all that much difference, assuming that one of us is not deaf?

I mean, rather, isn't it even more logical that with a sufficient physical mechanism it is the mind - the will of the mind to go deeper, or its lack - that would be a more determitive factor in what is heard/perceived? You never touched the concept of the subjective, other than implying that all minds are equal because all mechanisms are equal... I wonder why?

Normally endowed ears, the physical, hear within a range that is sufficient for that mind to get what it needs to to then make a choice: to choose to go deeper or not to. Those that believe in matter as primary to mind - perceived determines perceiver - tend to be attached to stereos that produce a soundfield where singers are bounded and a sterile space bounds these sound-objects further, ie they are attached to a near visual experience of sound as objects, just like the matter-objects that they believe determine all things. Scientific materialists, whether they are self-reflective enough to know they are or not, are determitevely drawn to the material; to the material explanation, to the material experience, to the material concept, all to the exclusion of that which perceives the material. They are attached to things, to our power over things, to the idea that that power is all that there is...and on audiogon, tend to like Bryston pre's and stop there (because, I mean, scientifically speaking, where else could there possibly be to go, its all relative between ears so what could be more?). Hmmmm.

I know a very famous reviewer who is getting on in years and has lost some hearing acuity, in a physical sense, to the higher frequencies, but his mind - his will to hear deeper, to allow his active, object-seeking cognition to fade in its desire to be primary and for his mind to become a receptive vessel for a perception of still deeper beauty - still "hears" to a far greater range than most others. In other words, experience is, of course, in relation to the physical, but the physical is not wholly determined upon that arising quantum matrix.

Again, what about the mind? Are they equal in their will to know, both objectively/actively or receptively, from one to the other? Does this make a difference?

A man once said, "Argue for you limitations, and sure enough they are yours."

Its a cause/effect dynamic of consciousness development that science hasn't found yet...

Hey, though, I'll have to scrounge up some of those GEC KT66's...

Just got THE email from Mick. He is building my cabernet right now. It'll take about a week to finish building it and then he runs it in for awhile before he ships. I hope to take delivery within a month.

Hello Asa,

Thank you as well for your writings. I had responded with some thoughts, responses and references and lost all the information before I could send.

So anyway....I stated before I am void of "reference" speaking primarily of actual experience of various types of higher end audio equipment comparisons as described here on Audiogon.

I am presently building a somewhat neutral or reference system to me that I can learn and grow from. I carefully chose a Bryston 4B SST Pro Amp (new)(it was to be Bryston or Belles amp., I may try Belles 150 Reference later) and have purchased a couple used Bryston Preamps BP20 and BP25MC. I do want to revisit my record collection again and wanted a phono stage integrated in a preamp thus is the BP25MC with MM and MC select. Depending on the outcome, I'll keep the BP20 and purchase an external phono stage or use the BP25 with the internal phono stage (I still need a turntable).

I'll first try Nordost SPM 1M XLR Reference cables (used) between the Amp and preamp. My initial CD player source will be a Tascam CD-401 MKII (used)with Nordost Red Dawn RCA cables (new) between the CD and preamp. Speaker Cables will be low impedence Silverline 6 wire speaker cable. I will set the speaker cable up in a bi-wire configuration as such:

4-lengths of cable 8.5' in length, 2 cables per speaker. Each cable will have six strands of wire on one end connected to a single spade lug. The other end of the speaker cable will have 3 strands each to 2 banana plugs. One cable will supply (-) polarity and another cable will supply (+). I want some separation between polarities (not handled in the same cable, example, 3 wires (+) and 3 (-)).

This cable is advertised at $15.00/ft. (Shop around, you may find it less :-), Audiogon/Ebay)

My gut aches at the cost of the inter-connects. I still paid $664.00 for 4 inter-connects (2-bal. XLR, 2-RCA). I shopped carefully and know they cost much more. Shielded microphone cable may be all I really need for interconnects for the high impedence connections but I'll probably try those also at a later date for comparison.

I will use existing speakers, Monitor Audio 3i smaller monitors just to get started with sound and burn in the system. These are only 80 Watt speakers and the Amp is capable of 347 WPC. Must keep the power out low! I'm thinking of purchasing Linbrook Signature Series Monitors (200 Watt) from Ty at Tyler Acoustics (looking at used right now).

I also have a new SVS 20-39 PC Plus powered (active) 525Watt
subwoofer to use with this system. My listening room is small at 12' x 13' so I'll just use good quality Monitor speakers and compliment with the single subwoofer (at this time :).

OK Asa and other Audiophiles, please review my "Reference in the making and please make comments and suggestions. I'm just waiting for all the cables to come in now. All items are purchased and all but cables are in (no turntable).

Thanks to all,

Rodger