Ron’s New System
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
I understand. I guess I’m just surprised with the basic premise that everything is a series of trade-offs, and the hobby is basically about finding the right compromise. Do people really approach it with that mindset? I know some people who do not think of the hobby in those terms. I don’t think Ron thought in those terms seven years ago.
So much for Stevie Nicks voice, how do Mick Fleetwoods drums sound on the rest of that album ?
In my experience, it’s not so much about trade offs. I think you’re on the wrong track if you buy one component to mitigate the impact of defects introduced by another.
For me it’s about removing obfuscations in the path from the performance to the reproduction.
We all know the idea that two wrongs don’t make a right. This is similar. Defects at one point can never be rectified by introducing counter defects elsewhere in the path.
My philosophy in general, and on WBF specifically, is to encourage readers on WBF and subscribers on YouTube to accompany me on my personal journey of audio exploration. If I make a wrong turn, or I end up in a ditch, I am very transparent about that. I have no ego in this, and I have nothing to hide as I explore things, refine the system, research things, change my mind, and refine the system again.
I have no issue with listening preferences causing my beliefs to evolve.
Also I don't think the hobby audio journey necessarily is a straight line.
This is a prelude to stating that I don't believe in the concept of feeling like I have to "defend" my hobby audio component decisions, as though I am a graduate student defending a dissertation or a portfolio manager defending a stock market position. I have no problem admitting if I made a mistake on a purchase decision or admitting if I made a mistake on how I think about something. So the idea of defending the VTLs as a "position" -- like holding a hill against an enemy onslaught -- simply is not the way I think about this process or this hobby.
Last edited:
One of the things I admire about Tango is that he approached the hobby with an extremely open mind. He bought, he listened, he experimented, and he discarded components he did not like always moving closer to his goal. There is no ego to damage. He knows his goal, and he understands how to get there. No apologies and always moving forward. I think it is now about the music for him.
Peter, of course you should not start out with a fatalistic mindset which settles easily for any compromise. There is always striving for perfection and there should be.
Yet the hard reality is that in audio, just as in live music, necessarily there is always compromise.
In the home it starts with speaker positioning. Even the most expensive speaker needs optimal speaker positioning in a room (no amount of money beats basic acoustics), and there is no speaker positioning where all the parameters are equally optimal. There just isn't. And that's not even mentioning system electronics.
As for live music, there is not a single concert hall which is equally suited to all kinds of music. Even some famous concert venues like the Berliner Philharmonie have added their own chamber music hall. Chamber music simply sounds better in a small venue, just like large-scale orchestral music sounds best in a large venue.
Again this is simple acoustics. There is a limit as to how far the sound of instruments can carry, and no one wants to hear a string quartet from the back of Boston Symphony Hall. Also, reverb times come into play. On the other hand, with a large orchestra the hall must be sufficiently large since otherwise you get acoustic overload (even without thinking of seating capacity for musicians and audience).
So yes, also in live music compromise rules. There is no venue that is optimal for all music, and choices are made.
In extension, why then should one assume that a single system can do everything equally well, and perform optimally on every single parameter of every single kind of music?
high profile posters with well discussed systems always have to defend their choices. defend = justify, rationalize. no one holds a gun to our heads to be very open about our systems, but when we do that, scrutiny comes along, and the back and forth and 'defending' is fun and makes the forum a richer place for all. no worries.
so maybe my use of the word defend related the wrong feeling?
i went through the same amplifier rationalization issues when i did my compare with the Lamm and VAC a few years back. was i defensive? maybe. but i certainly stood my ground and responded. everyone seemed to enjoy the process.
Last edited:
I don't know yet, but I think it's going to get pretty close, mainly because the 5T allows the relaxed, unfrenetic quality I hear from tape.
The slightly frenetic quality of pivoting tonearm vinyl playback is not apparent until one hears vinyl playback without that quality. Like so much in this hobby, one doesn't know what one doesn't know -- until one hears it.
I really think the Reed 5T is very, very special! I know Michael Fremer respected it, but he did not fall in love with it, but I think that reflects differences in sonic priorities and subjective sonic preferences. For example, Michael would not give up the powerful, grounded bass he loves from the SAT.
Marty can explain why he believes that the 5T is literally unique in the tonearm world (finding it theoretically superior to air bearing linear-trackers because, I believe, of the way the grooves pull the needle across the record, putting differential pressure on the cantilever).
As an aside, the 5T is amusing to watch in operation. It's like there's a little brain inside that is deciding where the cartridge has to go.
Last edited:
I believe I did think in these terms seven years ago. I think you will find this in my public musings and reviews about electrostatic panels versus ribbon drivers. I wrote about sacrificing one iota of transparency with electrostatics for two iotas of corporeal body with ribbon drivers -- things like this.
Until we achieve a perfect suspension of disbelief -- which would imply some sort of hypnotic state where we believe we are listening to a live performance in a concert hall even though we have not left our living room -- I think by definition compromise is endemic to every audio system.
Last edited:
Another "tool" I use is how the plurality view of visitors changes over time. Early on there was a strong consensus that there was a edginess or brightness around 4 to 5 kHz. I heard that clearly myself.
Nowadays the average view is "little to no brightness or edginess," with some people (who report no brightness or edginess whatsoever) feeling I have moved the sound to being a little bit too smooth. So this makes me wonder if maybe I don't want EL34s after all -- as EL34s might nudge the sound further in a smooth direction, maybe resulting in too smooth a sound, with not enough real life "bite."
Nowadays the average view is "little to no brightness or edginess," with some people (who report no brightness or edginess whatsoever) feeling I have moved the sound to being a little bit too smooth. So this makes me wonder if maybe I don't want EL34s after all -- as EL34s might nudge the sound further in a smooth direction, maybe resulting in too smooth a sound, with not enough real life "bite."
Last edited:
Well, it helps to have an "open mind" if you don't have to think about the money you have to spend on experimentation
.
Maybe I should end the "alternative fantasy amp" project kind of where it started: high power SET. Maybe I should just look for used Wavac HE-833Mk.IIs or HE-833V2s.
Last edited:
I think great! The drums on "In the Air Tonight" sounded great!So much for Stevie Nicks voice, how do Mick Fleetwoods drums sound on the rest of that album ?
I'm meeting Don for dinner and I haven't been able to pull myself out of the listening room.
I am very happy with how the system is sounding.
We changed the ZYX tracking force. The ZYX is sounding richer and better at 2.1 grams than it did at 1.9 grams. (Thank you, Marty!)
I replaced the EH KT90s with Ei KT90s. (Thank you, Phil!)
I am loving the sound, just as it is right now.And I have not yet even installed the Cardas Clear Reflection.
I'm taking my hands off the dials, and I want to live with the system like this for a while. I don't know if I need to do any more nudging of the upper bass to lower midrange.
I don't know if I need EL34s now. I'm not even sure if I want to put those fancy NOS Mullards into the JA100s anymore. Maybe Telefunkens are the right medicine there now?
The 5T punches back at the Studer right in tape's heart (the relaxed, unforced quality of tape I have been talking about for months).
It is sounding so good to me right now I'm now a little bit afraid to change anything.
We will see what Don says tonight. . .
As of this moment I would say Wavac 833 would be my top "alternative fantasy amplifier" choice.
I am very happy with how the system is sounding.
We changed the ZYX tracking force. The ZYX is sounding richer and better at 2.1 grams than it did at 1.9 grams. (Thank you, Marty!)
I replaced the EH KT90s with Ei KT90s. (Thank you, Phil!)
I am loving the sound, just as it is right now.And I have not yet even installed the Cardas Clear Reflection.
I'm taking my hands off the dials, and I want to live with the system like this for a while. I don't know if I need to do any more nudging of the upper bass to lower midrange.
I don't know if I need EL34s now. I'm not even sure if I want to put those fancy NOS Mullards into the JA100s anymore. Maybe Telefunkens are the right medicine there now?
The 5T punches back at the Studer right in tape's heart (the relaxed, unforced quality of tape I have been talking about for months).
It is sounding so good to me right now I'm now a little bit afraid to change anything.
We will see what Don says tonight. . .
As of this moment I would say Wavac 833 would be my top "alternative fantasy amplifier" choice.
ZYX UNIverse Premium on Reed 5T with 2.1 grams tracking force
Ei KT90s
Ei KT90s
Last edited:
As it is ”hobby-money” we are talking about - the bank account is always bottomless, hehe… don’t forget that?Well, it helps to have an "open mind" if you don't have to think about the money you have to spend on experimentation
!/ Jk
Ron, the latest discussion is about matching your amp to you speakers. You and Al are describing whatever combination you come up with as being inevitably a choice between trade offs. And that this is an inherent aspect of the hobby.
I cannot think of a single compromise in my amplifier and speaker combination. I did not make any trade-offs when combining the two. I chose them as a package and a specific combination. I have other friends who feel the exact same way about their amplifier and speaker combinations.
I simply do not except your premise that every decision involves trade-offs. You find yourself in this position because of choices you have made. You need powerful amplifiers to drive the speakers you chose, but it seems the amplifiers that can drive your speakers do not have certain sonic attributes that you want. You can justify it however you wish, but that does not mean everyone is condemned to the same fate or that it is an inevitable aspect of a hobby.
Last edited:
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |