That Audiophile Thing

Jmcgrogan2, you must have read my mind, because that's exactly what I was thinking, "I'm too old for that shit". The more I thought about it the better my system sounded.

Rrog, in all my travels, I never heard a 300B and at a glance they don't seem to have enough power, although I'm sure they do; at any rate I'm not ready for the unknown.

2chnlben, I meant enough to buy the stuff, not have "Jeeves" the butler put it together for you. You must be thinking about the rich audiophile that was in Stereo Review's funny strip.

Enjoy your music, on your system, I'm sure it sounds good.

Like magic, this 300B system would appear at your door in boxes, but you can't sell it ever. Plus, like me, you don't know squat about a 300B system; would you take it? And I'm sure it's going to sound exquisite as 300B systems go, however that is, whenever you get it together.

Orpheus10, for the last thirty years or so, I have had a system that is by, most standards, pretty complex: air bearing tonearm, big tt with separate ps, flywheel, etc., tubes, crazy-inefficient speakers (Stax). I have always enjoyed the "gear" side of the hobby, and have dabbled with modifications, hardwiring, etc. My system sounds great and serves the music very well; which is my priority.

But, I confess that as I get older (55), I am more and more intrigued by the idea of a simpler system along the lines of a 300B-based high-efficiency speaker system; something that will occupy less space and requires less futzing. I have heard some 300B/high efficiency systems that sound fantastic. As Rrog points out, they do some things very well, but have their limitations. Very true, but I have heard few systems that I cannot say that about, and that brings us to the issue of sonic priorities. For me, simple, well matched triode tubes/high efficiency speakers can convey a purity and directness of musical purpose that simply pushes a lot of the right buttons for me. There can be a sense of clarity that is very appealing. I don't just mean clarity in the sense of being able to hear all the usual audiophile things, but a clarity of musical line, interaction between players, subtle dynamic shadings, etc. They may have some trouble with rock, fusion jazz, but with acoustic jazz by smallish ensembles, they can be fantastic. There simply seems to be less "stuff" getting in the way on the way from the LP grooves (or cd) and my ears. Knowing what I do about your musical tastes, I would not be too quick to abandon the idea.

You make it sound so complicated! Sure there are some things to learn, but the little that is needed is not overly technical. A foolproof way to try out 300b tubes would be to get a full Coincident system, preamp/amp/wire/speakers and match it with a high quality source. Of course, you could spend the next 5 years reading magazines and perusing on-line forums looking for the perfect synergistic match of components. One path is real easy, the other less so. Now if you're the type of person who feels that changing electrical outlet plates produces profound changes in you system performance, then there's really no choice between the two paths.

I would strongly encourage every serious audiophile to have multiple systems. Having secondary systems really helped me put the main system in perspective. The secondary systems should be high quality, but they don't have to be perfectionist oriented. It really is quite easy and highly enjoyable to relax and listen to music without getting into the audiophile thing.

"understand that the Quads sound better with tube amps"

The best I have heard Quads was with Gradient subwoofers and Quad solid state electronics.