Tri-planar vs Graham

Peter,

as you have probably experienced, no other preamp sounds as good as a PASS preamp with PASS amps. What I heard with the Alaap in your system was not ringing. In fact it was just the opposite as I told you in an email. There maybe the first couple of harmonics coming through, but the rest are squashed into one impulse response or tossed out all together. This is just one other approach to music reproduction and it yields a quiet, pleasant rendering of music. I believe that Ian stated at the time he was using the same amps as you, IIRC.

I'm going by what Ian thought and what I can find online but it appears that the Pass amps are all 30kOhms input impedance which would account for the claims of the Alaap sounding rolled off. That is a less than ideal impedance match. The Alaap is pretty generic in loading and will work quite well with a load of greater than 50kOms, with higher loads even more desirable.

Now, my bass horn rolls off pretty fast below 25 Hz so I can't show an RTA plot of the frequency response that would mean much to this discussion. However, I recently brought in a pair of speakers that I helped acquire for a friend. The frequency response of these is well into the upper teens on the LF side when driven by my Alaap and Lectron amps. That Alaap, with the exception of some mechanical switch issue, is perfectly fine.

I might be mistaken but I think the Pass amps drop down to 15kOhms input impedance when using SE.

Peter,

When I suggested Ian’s other preamps were less than first-class, I was of course referring to the two I’ve actually heard. I didn’t know he owned any others, including the three you mentioned.

I didn't know you’d tried his Alaap in your system. I couldn’t comment even if I did know, since I wasn’t there to hear it. :-)

Dan_Ed wrote, regarding the Alaap in your system:

What I heard with the Alaap in your system was not ringing. In fact it was just the opposite as I told you in an email. There maybe the first couple of harmonics coming through, but the rest are squashed into one impulse response or tossed out all together. This is just one other approach to music reproduction and it yields a quiet, pleasant rendering of music.

This sounds like what I've heard from much very good SS gear, not to mention many well regarded speakers with soft dome tweeters, one or two very popular cartridges and a vast number of interconnects and cables.

Harmonics that are tossed out altogether are at least bearable (to my ears and Paul's). Harmonics squashed together will send both of us (especially him) flying from the room in literal pain.

Arthur Salvatore introduced a new sonic parameter in his (long) review of his new favorite speakers, the Coincident Pure Reference. He called it "individuation", meaning the ability of a component or system to allow the listener to identify individual voices and instruments during even highly complex passages.

A component which tosses harmonics out makes individuation difficult or impossible. If the stereo plays an "A" and all you hear is the 440Hz fundamental sine wave, you won't know if it was a clarinet, a violin or a human.

A component which squashes harmonics together individuates even worse, since it not only disguises each voice but also mushes voices together when they're playing or singing in concert. Listen to a live choir without electronic amplification. You don't hear an alto voice, a soprano voice, a tenor voice. You hear Mary and Joan and Fred, hopefully singing in harmony, but always as individuals.

Paul and I have been seeking greater individuation from our system for years (without having particularly named it). It is one of our primary criteria for deciding whether any component, tweak or adjustment is an improvement or not. Any component, tweak or adjustment which damages individuation is a downgrade by our priorities. Others listen differently of course. Even Dan, with whom we agree on most things audio, once said he didn't give a d@#% what a harpsichord sounded like or whether his system could reproduce it well. He might think differently now, I don't know, but if a system can reproduce a harpsichord really well (a fiendishly difficult challenge, harder than piano in some ways) then it's probably capable of reproducing nearly anything well.

Heh! We went to a symphony concert the other night and the sound of the Steinway, from just 9-10 rows back, made me despair of ever getting any stereo to work right. The Steinway wasn't even set up properly, but it still embarasssed the best our system can do. I once set up a new rig for George Walker, the Pulitzer prize winning composer. After 5 hours of work I spun up a piano LP and (foolishly) asked him if it didn't sound more real than his old rig. "Well", he replied, "it sounds better. But it still doesn't sound like my Steinway to ME." He proceeded to demonstrate, playing us a piece he'd written 60 years earlier (he was nearly 90 at the time). He was right, obviously.

Dan and Doug,

Thank you each for your clear explanations. I think I understand what you're talking about now. I have not really identified the importance of harmonics as such in my set of sonic priorites (I just listened to the piano hammer-strikes and decays and overal tone), but you both (and Paul) have me interested now in recognizing specific sonic attributes and learning the vocabulary. I like Salvatore's term "individuation" and I have glimpsed what he means since I upgraded my cartridge and preamp, especially when listening to grouped voices on classical recordings, but also to my recent favorite LP, Muddy Water's "Folk Singer". Incredible Blues guitar and mood. Always something to learn and enjoy.

I appologize to Ian for having highjacked his thread about arm choices. Sorry Ian.

Peter

Harpsichord, smarpsichord. :-0 Actually, I just don't know what one is supposed to sound like. I see many live, rock and some jazz, shows a year. I know what that sounds like in good venues and in not so good venues. In all cases it is reality in modern music. Nothing but amps and PA systems in between. I'm getting very close to that sound, the in your face dynamics, clarity, detailed and integrated all at the same time. I have heard "my kind" of music on Doug and Paul's system several times and it just does not move me. However, for the music that is more in their preferred genre their system does move me. That is just what I hear coming from my perspective on how I want to reproduce music. And, the only real difference in our systems is the speakers. We just prefer a little different blend of spices, so to speak.

I hope I am not coming off as taking pot shots at Pass, and I do think that Peter's system sounds very good. There is no doubt in my mind about the distinct sound of high-end SS, but beyond that I just haven't listened to his system long enough to offer anything more. Hey, I love my Classe SS amp and Aerial 10t's in the theater. It is just a different way to make sound. There is no doubt about the bass handling capability of a quality, big SS amp. I'm not as sensitive to many things, and it usually takes me some listening time to figure out what I'm hearing. I would like to hear Peter's system again someday to get a better appreciation for what it sounds like to me. I'm sure I never felt the need to stop listening in the time I was there. But as Doug can attest to, I can tolerate some awful, awful sounding things while I'm figuring things out. :-)

The more I think about this load mismatch I tend to agree that this was the cause of all things sounding bad with the Alaap/Pass combo. I mean, that is a pretty bad load mismatch and I would expect that causes reflections in the interconnect cables, and that could sound like what Ian described that he heard. I agree with Peter that I don't think we heard that at his house, but it wasn't pretty. Difference in speaker, perhaps? It would be interesting to me to hear that sound again so I could try to dissect the sound, but I would not subject anyone to that kind of torture. ;-)

I do want to say that this kind of mismatch with a walk-in component has happened several times now with a certain dealer up in this area we know. Not surprisingly, things always sound bad unless all of the gear is something they sell. That is just my personal observation. FWIW.

Well, I guess we've gone way off topic. I used to own a 2.2 before I moved on to the Triplanar. I've heard many good things about the improvements in the Phantom. I hope I get to hear a properly setup Phantom some day.