Alexx V arrive in NJ

[marty]

The recommendations are using curves as tone controls, the opposite of what’s being claimed, especially regarding the 4th pole. It’s not an opinion! An opinion is that you prefer a different curve than the one that correctly decodes the record. Some things are cut and dried facts and some things are opinions to which everyone is entitled!

Once again, I welcome your thoughts. While I am unaware that of common "tone controls" that alter phase response and not just amplitude, I am indeed curious. Have you listened to vinyl playback with any of Zanden's current phono stages that utilize the t/c circuity (in additon to specified EQ curves and phase settings Zanden recommends?

 

[TrackingAngle]

Once again, I welcome your thoughts. While I am unaware that of common "tone controls" that alter phase response and not just amplitude, I am indeed curious. Have you listened to vinyl playback with any of Zanden's current phono stages that utilize the t/c circuity (in additon to specified EQ curves and phase settings Zanden recommends?

The RIAA curve is a standard used in both the cutting and playback process. The formulas were in the links I sent and describe the “time constants”, which is not purely amplitude based since the system cuts and plays back reading velocity (displacement) not just amplitude depending upon frequency (simply put) so of course it’s more than a tone control but for all intents and purposes it can be seen as that when you purposely deviate from the standard. The cutting curve is the inverse of the playback curve.. Phase and/or amplitude deviations from it may produce pleasing sonic effects and if you like what you hear enjoy! But claims regarding finally hearing records like tape is nothing but hype. What you are hearing when deviating from the inverse curve is of course a form of amplitude and/or phase distortion. It can’t be otherwise! This is why the equalizer in the optical cartridge has been so problematic: the optical cartridge (like ceramic and strain gauge) is amplitude not velocity based. The early optical cartridge from DS had excessive not better bass because it was incorrectly reading the below 50Hz bass shelf inserted to prevent the inverse curve from amplifying low frequency rumble, warp/wow. I’m greatly simplifying but that’s the gist of it…..

 

[LL21]

I always thought the Zanden position was that their curves are actually truer to the original settings when the LPs were mastered/cut? I dont even listen to vinyl, but that was always something from memory that I recall about their approach...they have worked back through their understanding of the different curves to which each label originally worked...and then calibrated specific settings for each major label (Decca, etc).

Again, not a vinyl guy, but that to me seemed to imply they had gone back to historical records (as in written records of how masterings were done) or measurements or something in order to come up with these label-specific calibration settings.

 

[marty]

The RIAA curve is a standard used in both the cutting and playback process. The formulas were in the links I sent and describe the “time constants”, which is not purely amplitude based since the system cuts and plays back reading velocity (displacement) not just amplitude depending upon frequency (simply put) so of course it’s more than a tone control but for all intents and purposes it can be seen as that when you purposely deviate from the standard. The cutting curve is the inverse of the playback curve.. Phase and/or amplitude deviations from it may produce pleasing sonic effects and if you like what you hear enjoy! But claims regarding finally hearing records like tape is nothing but hype. What you are hearing when deviating from the inverse curve is of course a form of amplitude and/or phase distortion. It can’t be otherwise! This is why the equalizer in the optical cartridge has been so problematic: the optical cartridge (like ceramic and strain gauge) is amplitude not velocity based. The early optical cartridge from DS had excessive not better bass because it was incorrectly reading the below 50Hz bass shelf inserted to prevent the inverse curve from amplifying low frequency rumble, warp/wow. I’m greatly simplifying but that’s the gist of it…..

Understood. But an argument in favor or disfavor of Zanden's approach based on direct observation with the gear in question would be far more meaningful. I can appreciate your perspective, but as an empiricist, I frankly prefer to test a hypothesis if I can. "It can't be so" seems a rather unnecessary position and unnecessarily so as listening might easily confirm your perspective. And indeed you may indeed be right. What I'd like to understand better, is whether there is merit to any setting recommendations for things such as phase. As you know, when the phase is correctly set, the sense of space becomes "right". That "rightness" seems to occur more consistently for me, with his recommended phase settings.

If some material sounds more spatially correct with reverse phase? Why? The AES publication on audo equipment connections was published in July 2012 AES14-1992 (r2009)) My understanding of what we call the "standard" XLR connection is basically the standard for broadcast (radio, tv and movies). Ampex which dominated the actual music recording industry inverted the hot pin and cold pin connection. Zanden suggests that because of this, most analog music recordings may not be in proper phase when played on today's equipment which follows the broadcast standard rather than the historical music recording standard. I have no idea if his guidance is correct, but again, its testable and has yielded encouraging results for me based on limited listening (4 weeks). Thus it's motivation enough for me to think that if he is correct about label-dependent EQ optimization (particularly for LPs before the RIAA curve was widely implemented ~1954) and phase, there just might be merit to his t/c corrections that are worth further exploration in my system. We shall see.

 

[ScottK]

Just discovered this wonderful thread and it is a must read for Wilson Audio owners. Having just bought the Alexx V's I have been wondering what impact a new power amp might have. I currently run the Classe Delta Mono's that John Atkinson said in his review slightly beats his JC+ in bass response. I have not heard the JC+ but can say I have never heard better bass that I currently have in my system. Am looking for a sweeter mid but just don't know how to get there in the $60K price range? I live in TN and the idea of the heat from pure Class A is not appealing. My Delta's are biased 35watts per channel into Class A. Oh the joys of this hobby!

 

[marty]

Scott, your dilemma is not unique. Many times audiophiles want a sweet (or "sweeter" midrange). There are several ways to get there but one common method is, as Dave Wilson always said, "you have to put a tube in there somewhere" . I wouldn't spend money on an amp that you think might be highly satisfactory when perhaps the magic you seek can be attained by other means at less cost? I've used "hybrid" systems for decades for this very reason. You already have a fine tube pre in the VAC so perhaps the place to look might be the DAC?. The Innuous Zenith Mk III was my first server and with the Phoenix reclocker it's certainly quite good. But when I changed my DAC from a EMM Meitner DAC to a Lampizator GG2, I found the sweeter midrange (with some considerable magic) that I was looking for. This might be something for your consideration (and is almost certain to be cheaper than spending 60K on an amp).

 

[Golum]

+1 on what Marty wrote...spot on

 

[itay123]

+1 on what Marty wrote...spot on

+ 1

 

[LL21]

Just discovered this wonderful thread and it is a must read for Wilson Audio owners. Having just bought the Alexx V's I have been wondering what impact a new power amp might have. I currently run the Classe Delta Mono's that John Atkinson said in his review slightly beats his JC+ in bass response. I have not heard the JC+ but can say I have never heard better bass that I currently have in my system. Am looking for a sweeter mid but just don't know how to get there in the $60K price range? I live in TN and the idea of the heat from pure Class A is not appealing. My Delta's are biased 35watts per channel into Class A. Oh the joys of this hobby!

Agree with Marty as well. Have not spent a lot of time with VAC preamps. Have you ever looked into options there for your midrange magic? Or even a more subtle change of tube?

 

[ScottK]

Scott, your dilemma is not unique. Many times audiophiles want a sweet (or "sweeter" midrange). There are several ways to get there but one common method is, as Dave Wilson always said, "you have to put a tube in there somewhere" . I wouldn't spend money on an amp that you think might be highly satisfactory when perhaps the magic you seek can be attained by other means at less cost? I've used "hybrid" systems for decades for this very reason. You already have a fine tube pre in the VAC so perhaps the place to look might be the DAC?. The Innuous Zenith Mk III was my first server and with the Phoenix reclocker it's certainly quite good. But when I changed my DAC from a EMM Meitner DAC to a Lampizator GG2, I found the sweeter midrange (with some considerable magic) that I was looking for. This might be something for your consideration (and is certainly going to be cheaper than spending 60K on an amp).

This is indeed great advice! And yes I've also considered upgrading my DAC. I've had the Terminator Plus for a couple of years and it's a wonderful DAC. Apparently the MSB Premier DAC or a Lampizator might also be a good choice. My Wilson dealer in Atlanta is hosting a Wilson event that Daryl and crew will be attending. They will be featuring a new XVX setup. Hoping to get some ideas from that presentation.

 

[ScottK]

Agree with Marty as well. Have not spent a lot of time with VAC preamps. Have you ever looked into options there for your midrange magic? Or even a more subtle change of tube?

I've rolled several NOS tubes through this pre and have settled on a pair of 7308 RTC Mullards. I have found the pre to be a key component. Prior to the VAC I had the Aestheix Calypso. Another excellent pre.

 

[LL21]

I've rolled several NOS tubes through this pre and have settled on a pair of 7308 RTC Mullards. I have found the pre to be a key component. Prior to the VAC I had the Aestheix Calypso. Another excellent pre.

I have the Mullard 7308s from Brent Jessee in the Zanden DAC. Excellent. I have had Amperex PQ White Label, JAN Phillips, and 1-2 others...Mullard has been exceptionally good in the system.

I wonder what would happen if you went with a CJ ART88. Having owned 20 consecutive years of CJ preamps (PV14L, ACT2, GAT 1, GAT 2), they are truly special in the mids and today have somehow managed to carve away the golden glow while retaining an amazingly organic tonal beauty across the spectrum.

 

[ScottK]

I have the Mullard 7308s from Brent Jessee in the Zanden DAC. Excellent. I have had Amperex PQ White Label, JAN Phillips, and 1-2 others...Mullard has been exceptionally good in the system.

I wonder what would happen if you went with a CJ ART88. Having owned 20 consecutive years of CJ preamps (PV14L, ACT2, GAT 1, GAT 2), they are truly special in the mids and today have somehow managed to carve away the golden glow while retaining an amazingly organic tonal beauty across the spectrum.

You and I have followed a similar path. My source is also Brent Jessie, a great vendor. I've run Amperex and RCA's + many more. CJ is a great brand but my VAC has been in my system for the last 10 years. Its the only component left from earlier system and an old friend.

 

[LL21]

Wow! What a great story!

 

[jbrrp1]

I owned the VAC Ren Sig II (not SE) and could only run 8416's in it. Your Mullard 7308's are leaning to the richer side already, IME, for the tube varieties allowed in the VAC, so not much chance of tuning things more the way you want there, IMO. I own the Denafrips Terminator (not Plus) that I run in my living room system, and its a fine DAC. But I compared it first to my Lampizator GG1 and then the Pacific that I upgraded to. Both definitely offer avenues to get more richness, and a more musically informative rendering, in general, IME/O. That would be a move in the direction you are seeking, I believe.

 

[itay123]

About a year ago
I held a shootout in my place, for 7 DACS, some were dedicated Dacs, and some integrated with streaming capabilities.
Prices ranged from €7000 to €30,000
Each DAC took the setup in nature to a different place, each DAC is evaluated one way or another.

Changing the DAC, in my opinion, is a huge part of constructing the result that will be obtained,

I have always considered the pre-amp as an integral part of the "Amplification",
And the Amplification is an integral part with the speakers.

The concept of "speakers" in my experience and in my opinion is also applied to me
Built from 3 equal parts.

1. The speakers themselves - with which we fell in love, desired and moved us, a lot to do with taste and preferences.
2. Their location in the room in terms of position, angle, their adjustment and their integration in the room.
3. Adjusting the Amplification
"Amplification" is actually comes either integrated or in fully compatible parts with complete and perfect adaptations.

After that it's came the Magic of Fine Tuning and direction.
There Enters very strongly as a conductor on the orchestra
The DAC and Transport (which comes in several ways)

 

[ScottK]

Changing the DAC, in my opinion, is a huge part of constructing the result that will be obtained,

I agree. I've always felt a system should be built around the most important component, the speaker (and room/setup). Next for me would be source components. Finally the pre and then power amps. Then of course there is system synergy and component balance (i.e.no weakest link). I'd also add cost-benefit to the equation. Finding gear that is up to the challenge at reasonable prices is important. I'm not interested in owning "Gucci bags".

 

[marty]

Mark Dohmann Arrives in NJ.

The latest enhancement of my system was delivered from Australia by a personal visit from Mark Dohmann about 4 weeks ago. As described previously, I sold my much beloved Goldmund Studio with the T3F arm (that I owned for 30 years) a few years ago and acquired Mark’s Helix Mk2 turntable which has served me well. However, Mark has recently updated his Helix line with a MK3 update that promised some major advances at a reasonable cost. (The 3 dots under the Helix One logo signifies the Mk3 version)



In October 2022, Dohmann Audio introduced the new Mk3 version of the Helix One which has the following improvements over the previous Mk2 version:

New Advanced Composite Bearing
New DC Power Supply
New Drive System
Improved Platter Design
New RSA resonance control technology
New Advanced Composite Armboard (ACA)
New Record Clamp with RSA Resonance Control

More features and detailed comments can be found on the Dohmann website https://dohmannaudio.com/helix-one/ and thus will not be repeated here. It was a genuine pleasure to get to know Mark a little better although we have spoken by phone several times. We spend the first evening listening to my system through the Mk2. The second day found me mesmerized watching Mark disassemble the table and basically rebuild it from the ground up.



Essentially the only thing he didn’t change was the ingenious Minus K suspension system.




Watching him work was a treat. It was like watching a great surgeon who took great pride and infinite attention to detail in completing the surgery which he made look easy but was quite detailed. Here are 2 examples of Mark’s obsessiveness.

• He had to drill two holes in the chassis to install a speed regulating buttons, He drilled the holes and the buttons (and shrouds) fit perfectly. But that wasn’t good enough for Mark. Even though it would never be seen due to the button shroud, he then took the time to countersink the holes he drilled! To be clear, that’s for holes that nobody would ever see. Only a perfectionist with a bit of OCD does things like that. My kind of guy!
• He must have spent 15 minutes adjusting the platter so that it’s out-of-round spec was within 1/1000 of an inch. There was no way he would have quit until he achieved what is the limit of what was possible. I was genuinely impressed (I’ve seen a lot of eye surgery by fine surgeons and wonder if they would have done the same.)

Make no mistake, this upgrade was not a trivial effort. It took about 6 hours of work to complete the task. When all was said and done, there was a pile of innards and metal destined for the trash.



And that’s when the fun began as our listening session began with the latest Mk3 version of Mark’s masterpiece. I’m not sure who was the most slack-jawed at the difference between the Mk2 and Mk3 version. The Mk2 is indeed very good but the Mk3 is an enhancement that was more rewarding than I thought a mere upgrade could have delivered. The results were exceptional which may have been why it was tough to call it a night a 2 am. I for one, could have danced all night!

What is important to note is that prior to the upgrade, we removed the Reed 5T/ZYX Uni II and replaced it on the new armboard without changing any arm/cartridge set-up parameters at all (arm height within 1/1000 of an inch; no change in VTA/VTF or azimuth). In other words, by changing only the table, it was essentially as close as possible to a single variable experiment, which is the kind I favor for direct audio comparisons.

Although we often talk about comparing digital to analog sources, it is not often that I have read about comparisons that do this in the most rigorous manner possible which in this case, was the following. We used the famed RCA Royal Ballet and compared the LP to the Qobuz FLAC 176.4/24 bit digital version (through the Extreme with switch and LPS using Roon with Taiko’s the latest upgrade). We hit play in Roon when the needle dropped at the beginning of the LP. The digital and analog outputs were balanced (easy to do on the Soulution 725) and we used to remote to switch inputs (which were blinded) from the listening position. The instantaneous comparison afforded the best opportunity to hear the obvious differences in a very meaningful way. Simply put, and not surprisingly, the SQ of the LP exceeded that of the digital source. Put another way, by the middle of the side, Mark and I both had no desire to continue the comparison. The digital rig (Extreme/Lampi Horizon) was excellent but the LP via the analog rig (Helix One Mk3/Reed 5T/ZYX/ Zanden 1200 MkIV phono) was easily superior. I’ll naturally do this comparison with the new router/DCD and every future advance such as NSM and possibly the BPS. Perhaps the day will come that the comparison yields fewer differences in SQ. We shall see. But for now, the differences are clear and favor the analog source and not by a miniscule difference that is hard to perceive.

My last comment is subjective and the topic is value. There is hardly a week that goes by that one learns that yet another uber TT comes to the market at prices that exceed 100K. New TTs that retail for 250K and 500K TT’s are always fun to read about but the only chance most of us will have to hear them is at audio show where they generate a lot of oohs and aahs more so because they are audio jewelry than because of the sound one hears at most shows. But back on earth, spending even tens of thousands of dollars for a TT is a boatload of money and therefore out of reach for most of us. Although I believe the Helix One Mk3 is capable of upper echelon performance, its retail price is ~75k (also not exactly chump change). While this may look like a bargain compared to the latest record spinners that costs 250k, the real bargain in the Dohmann line is its little brother, the Helix Two Mk3 which is basically identical to the the Mk3 but can only accommodate one tonearm and cost about 55K. I use a Mk3 but have zero desire to add another arm so this would have been perfect for my needs. Had I not picked up the Hellix One Mk2 used, I surely would be looking at a Helix One Mk3 instead. Hell, rather than spend 250K for a TT, once could buy a Helix Two Mk3, a great arm, cartridge, electronics, speakers and enough cables to hang yourself for the same price and still have money left over for a great bottle of wine to celebrate your purchase.

In these parts (NJ/PA/NY) I’d like to give a shout out to my venerable dealer Doug White at the The Voice that Is (in Philly) for coordinating my upgrade and Mark’s visit.

Over the last 4 weeks, I’ve gotten to appreciate the merits of the Mk3 in great detail with a wide assortment of LPs. In conclusion, all I can say is that I know I won’t be around in 30 years, but I have every confidence that the Mk3 will still be delivering the goods to a listener who I hope will appreciate the wonderful music it makes with this antiquated yet constantly improving music reproduction technology!

 

[wisnon]

You better be around in 30 years Marty. We need you!

 

[dminches]

Marty, congrats on the new turntable. I would have loved to see Mark do all the work. That experience is as enjoyable as listening to music.