[R-390] Audiophools

[blw]

What you are saying makes sense if you think about it in terms of
boatanchors and sandstate boxes. Personally, I can't stand most sandstate
boxes. I hate everything about them, except a few quality boxes, and there
is always something I don't like about those. But, look at all the hams and
DXers out there who would never listen to a boatanchor. I never know how to
relate to those guys because I know what I know about my radios. Same thing
about audio equipment. Some people are happy with music that is digitized
from start to finish. Some people hear the difference in sandbox receivers
and tube units. 

I have a very big late 70's to early 80's tower of stereo equipment that I
bought when I was in the Army and everyone had a small fortune in stereo
gear. I have some good stuff. I've run R-390A and SP-600 audio thru it for a
long time and it never sounded better than thru my naked Bogen M120 amp. My
home stereo gear has Bose Acustomass 5 speakers, equalizer, stereo remixing,
DBX processing, blah blah blah and the Bogen has only an off brand guitar
speaker box hooked up. There is a huge difference in audio between the two
systems, and that Bogen certainly isn't home hifi grade stuff either. I'm
sure it is a real slouch compared to the Fisher receiver that was given to
me last weekend.  I'll take my boatanchors and  the tube system running thru
a single speaker any day.


Barry


> I was, for a few years, in the largest audio company in the world and met some
> of the real nuts of
> this type.  Most of them don't work for the company but must be dealt with in
> some way or other.
> Many of them write columns.  One of these so-called "golden ears" claimed he
> could hear the
> difference between cables.  He also claimed that cable ends are "sexed" and he
> could hear it when
> a cable was installed "backwards".  Pure bullshit.  But we had beer and I let
> him know what I
> thought of that.  He challenged me to blind tests - using a curtain between
> the equipment and him.
> We connected one set of cables and then the other and had him A/B them.  He
> picked the nitrogen
> filled hard line over the monster cable 22 times in a row.  We then sexed the
> cables and he told
> which was the "right" way - blind listening still.  Then we scrambled them and
> he picked the
> correct sexing without error 14 times.  At that point I decided I didn't know
> as much about the
> world as I thought I did.  If this was a parlor trick, then neither I nor my
> companion who is one
> of the most respected engineers in the audio field were unable to figure out
> how he did it.  And
> we were the ones that set up the test - using our lab, our gear, and with us
> doing the work with
> no one else in the facility that could have been tipping him off.  I don't get
> it and it made we
> wonder.  But I'm still not a believer in that crud.
> 
> The "warm" sound of vacuum tube audio amps is a proven effect, however.  As is
> the difference
> between one tube and another.  The tubes cause distortion and that distortion
> happens to result in
> a pleasing sound - much like the distortion caused by a certain type of wood
> in certain string
> instruments etc.  It turns the amp from a transparent device into something of
> a musical
> instrument with its own characteristic sound.  This distortion of tube amps
> has been measured and
> characterized.  A number of companies now make solid state DSP processor units
> that implement this
> distortion and provide the "warm sound of a tube amp".
> 
> 
> --- Ron  Kolarik <rkolarik@neb.rr.com> wrote: