Ludicruous? I apologize for saying that vibration gives warmth to the Music Halls. It is actually the particle board, which magically vibrates at room temperature and gives that characteristic & beautiful "warm" sound...
Come on, Roni--use your head and think. Particle board sucks from a sonic standpoint. That's widely known knowledge in these forums. If those plinths were made out of Moca wood the sound would be clear and open. Maybe the molecules in Moca wood move slower!
Viridian, you are totally accurate by stating that my "opinions offer a genuinely different hirearchy on what is of sonic importance."
I want my digital and analog rigs to sound as close to each other as possible. I don't want my analog to sound warm, sluggish and artificially bloated in space. I don't want my digital to sound harsh and sterile either. So, how do I get them closer to each other? The first step is to get proper power delivery/noise control measures--especially for digital. Noise induces jitter in digital equipment, so much it's tragic. It has taken me over two years to conquer electrical noise. It's not easy.
When I went to purchase a new DAC I told Dusty Vawter that I had a modded 1200 and that I wanted it to be in balance with whatever DAC I purchased. After hearing what my analog rig was like (I use Monolithic phono pre), he said his Channel Islands DAC and my creature on steroids would be a great match. Analog does not have the low noise floor, dynamic range and perfect pitch of digital--digital lacks the smoothness, ease of presentation and delicate imaging. How do I make this happen? I need to start with a TT that offers speed and rotational stability plus neutral sound. Since I don't have a cost no object Rockford, I will have to mod and compensate for my TTs weaknesses. In this case, the tonearm and the noise floor. On the digital side, the Channel Islands DAC has a reputation for beign *musical* and very lenient on poorly recorded CDs--especially those from the early 1980's. It is one little gem.
I know what I'm doing and I have a goal...
With psychic power and primal intensity,
Come on, Roni--use your head and think. Particle board sucks from a sonic standpoint. That's widely known knowledge in these forums. If those plinths were made out of Moca wood the sound would be clear and open. Maybe the molecules in Moca wood move slower!
Viridian, you are totally accurate by stating that my "opinions offer a genuinely different hirearchy on what is of sonic importance."
I want my digital and analog rigs to sound as close to each other as possible. I don't want my analog to sound warm, sluggish and artificially bloated in space. I don't want my digital to sound harsh and sterile either. So, how do I get them closer to each other? The first step is to get proper power delivery/noise control measures--especially for digital. Noise induces jitter in digital equipment, so much it's tragic. It has taken me over two years to conquer electrical noise. It's not easy.
When I went to purchase a new DAC I told Dusty Vawter that I had a modded 1200 and that I wanted it to be in balance with whatever DAC I purchased. After hearing what my analog rig was like (I use Monolithic phono pre), he said his Channel Islands DAC and my creature on steroids would be a great match. Analog does not have the low noise floor, dynamic range and perfect pitch of digital--digital lacks the smoothness, ease of presentation and delicate imaging. How do I make this happen? I need to start with a TT that offers speed and rotational stability plus neutral sound. Since I don't have a cost no object Rockford, I will have to mod and compensate for my TTs weaknesses. In this case, the tonearm and the noise floor. On the digital side, the Channel Islands DAC has a reputation for beign *musical* and very lenient on poorly recorded CDs--especially those from the early 1980's. It is one little gem.
I know what I'm doing and I have a goal...
With psychic power and primal intensity,