Are SOTA systems worth the effort?

[Atmasphere]

What manufacturers think and what audiophiles think are usually wildly different.

We've been building a SOTA preamp for decades. Even to this day older ones are considerably advanced compared to modern competition as its been one of the very few tube preamps with a direct coupled output made anywhere. I think its still the only one with a balanced output.

But we price it to a formula rather than what the market will bear so its not perceived as SOTA by audiophiles because its too inexpensive. Its a tube preamp; even with our patents we can't do things you can do with solid state and there are solid state preamps that do measure better (sounding better might be a different metric ). So what is SOTA for a tube preamp is probably something entirely different for solid state and how the market perceives it something else altogether.

 

[Argonaut]

What manufacturers think and what audiophiles think are usually wildly different.

We've been building a SOTA preamp for decades. Even to this day older ones are considerably advanced compared to modern competition as its been one of the very few tube preamps with a direct coupled output made anywhere. I think its still the only one with a balanced output.

Soooo ... You are stating that you build the most advanced and presumably best performing /sounding valve pre amplifier on the planet ?

 

[BlueFox]

Manufacturers usually define SOTA as the best that they know how to produce based on their phylosophy - the cutting edge. So for Magico that would the M9, for Wilson it would be the WAMM or XVX, for Tech Das, the Air Force Zero, etc. If you purchase all SOTA components and put them together as a system will it be SOTA in terms of sound? Probably not, as you would need a SOTA room with SOTA acoustics, SOTA power, SOTA isolation, then hire a SOTA sound engineer like Jim Smith to get it to sound good.

Don’t forget state of the art interconnect, speaker, and power cables.

 

[thedudeabides]

Answer to the question. For the vast majority of folks, no. For folks like ML, yes.

 

[tima]

Soooo ... You are stating that you build the most advanced and presumably best performing /sounding valve pre amplifier on the planet ?

Imo, the Atma-Sphere MP-1 is one of them.

 

[stehno]

You're right. And I replaced the receptacles with Hubble units with the brass strap on the backside when I moved in and added another outlet on the right side of the room that had its own line back to the breaker box. I just did that because the house had some really old AC outlets and since I was doing it, might as well do it right.

Let me guess. Man on fire?

 

[Atmasphere]

Soooo ... You are stating that you build the most advanced and presumably best performing /sounding valve pre amplifier on the planet ?

As far as the line stage goes, if you have an amp with a properly designed balanced input, then the line stage of the MP-1 is the SOTA. Not the most expensive, but SOTA regardless- due to its direct-coupled output more than anything else. But of course you can see that there is a very specific arena in which that is the case.

The phono section of the MP-1 was the first balanced line phono section made. Gain and noise was a problem in the early 1990s units although they worked fine with most LOMC cartridges as long as you had good tubes. The later units are better in this regard. One thing I found over the years about phono sections though: many of them have poor high frequency overload margins at the input of the circuit which can cause them to make ticks and pops which sound for all the world as if they are on the surface of the LP. When you fix this problem you also get rid of the need to 'load' the cartridge ('cartridge loading' is really for the benefit of a preamp whose designer wasn't thinking about the fact that a cartridge is an inductor and a tonearm cable a capacitance- the two together resulting in a radio frequency resonance).

As you can see, much depends on some very specific things as to what constitutes the SOTA'. Are there phono sections quieter than ours? Sure. Do they handle the loading thing properly? If no, they aren't SOTA; no more than our phono section isn't since it isn't the quietest out there. We don't make the best single-ended line section. I don't know who does if that's anyone at all. So while our amp is a set of compromises like anyone else's is, if you want to run balanced lines (and supporting the balanced standard AES48) the MP-1 is one of the very few tube preamps made that does so.

Put another way, if you're going to say you have the best, you're going to also need to specify under what parameters, part of which I am doing here since you gave me the opportunity.

Let me guess. Man on fire?

I'm uncertain to what you're referring here. When I moved into my new place I noticed some of the outlets in the listening space were ancient. I've measured what voltage drop can do to the performance of our amps so I changed them out and added an extra line so I didn't have to run a power strip, which can degrade things all by its lonesome since it forces a pair of amps to use the same power cord. Power cords (and AC outlets) are subject to Ohm's Law so their effects can be repeatably measured.

 

[Phillyb]

The hobby due to many reasons is slowly becoming and market for those with large disposable incomes. Middle Class no longer has the extra income even with 2 people working with kids to raise, schooling to pay for, and saving for college. So you have cheap which much of the market and the current high-end market. My whole family members on both sides number 125 people many making good money, none has a stereo system more than $500.00 and years old, and many have none, just XM/Seris, none stream, and the youngest use their phones for listening to music and a music collection only the boomers with their old 60's LP's.

They are amazed when they see my system, and it is chump change for the prices of today and where it's going and for good reason, they are the buyers and mostly overseas sales keep the small manufacture of high-end gear alive. One told me once if not overseas we would not be in business. USA market is just not enough, add to that Audiogon and other sites, selling gear @ .50 on the dollar, the killing of Audio Stores by audiophiles sad to say due to not wanting the stores to make a decent profit, and many due to not being able to afford gear they like so Audiogon they go, and even then they low ball due to their budget. The manufacture needs to go to direct sales and lower their price so more can afford their product because they losing new sales to the used market.

The reality now is they call $20,000 speakers a bargain, $5,000 power cords, and so on. $200.00 fuses and up I've seen one brand asking $2,000, ask my family members and a few in the medical field they look at me like I'm nuts. Ask a family of 3 kids if they got $20,000 for a system or even $10,000. We truly are a small group in the big picture, and I know how lucky I was to get in the hobby early when it was much more affordable and sell, buy, sell to slowly build a good system up.

 

[KeithR]

The reality now is they call $20,000 speakers a bargain, $5,000 power cords, and so on. $200.00 fuses and up I've seen one brand asking $2,000, ask my family members and a few in the medical field they look at me like I'm nuts. Ask a family of 3 kids if they got $20,000 for a system or even $10,000. We truly are a small group in the big picture, and I know how lucky I was to get in the hobby early when it was much more affordable and sell, buy, sell to slowly build a good system up.

Much of high end audio is really just another luxury good at this point. Look at the new Relentless preamp for a cool $150k. I think there are great things at the low end and high end, but not much in the middle.

 

[LL21]

I do agree that as certain hobbies get more and more attractive...prices go up beyond inflation. Look at the price of whisky in the last 10 years..."outperformed" nearly every major index in the financial markets.

That said, doing the arithmetic on the cost of high end audio, the original Wilson X1/Grand SLAMM cost $65,000 in 1994...inflated forward to 2020 price before it was retired as the XLF, the inflation rate breaks back to around 5%.

Additionally, the Maggie 0.7 speakers, the KEF LS50, an accompanying sub...and some amplification from any number of great designers (NAD, Marantz) make a killer system imho.

I think that WBF (justly named) is very much skewed to the extreme end of high end audio...and for those of us who read/participate because it is so well managed and run...it can create a super-warped lens of overall high end audio. Again, I AGREE that audio is skewing to high end and some outrageous prices...I just would hate to see fellow audiophiles feel that 'all is lost' when in fact there are GREAT products at fractions of the cost which make for great, great sound. (And frankly much of the outrageously priced stuff is in areas which nobody even cared about 30 years ago...$2800 fuses?, $10,000 power cables?...so if audiophiles rue that those products exist, the good news is no great audio system of yesteryear even had these...(and some of those systems would still be great by today's standards.)

 

[matakana]

I do agree that as certain hobbies get more and more attractive...prices go up beyond inflation. Look at the price of whisky in the last 10 years..."outperformed" nearly every major index in the financial markets.

That said, doing the arithmetic on the cost of high end audio, the original Wilson X1/Grand SLAMM cost $65,000 in 1994...inflated forward to 2020 price before it was retired as the XLF, the inflation rate breaks back to around 5%.

Additionally, the Maggie 0.7 speakers, the KEF LS50, an accompanying sub...and some amplification from any number of great designers (NAD, Marantz) make a killer system imho.

I think that WBF (justly named) is very much skewed to the extreme end of high end audio...and for those of us who read/participate because it is so well managed and run...it can create a super-warped lens of overall high end audio. Again, I AGREE that audio is skewing to high end and some outrageous prices...I just would hate to see fellow audiophiles feel that 'all is lost' when in fact there are GREAT products at fractions of the cost which make for great, great sound. (And frankly much of the outrageously priced stuff is in areas which nobody even cared about 30 years ago...$2800 fuses?, $10,000 power cables?...so if audiophiles rue that those products exist, the good news is no great audio system of yesteryear even had these...(and some of those systems would still be great by today's standards.)

Talking about whisky, my brother in law’s brother bought a cask some twenty years ago for £1k , it just sold for £ 65 k , not a bad wee dram eh !

 

[spiritofmusic]

That should cover a set of those $2800 fuses.

 

[taww]

I do agree that as certain hobbies get more and more attractive...prices go up beyond inflation. Look at the price of whisky in the last 10 years..."outperformed" nearly every major index in the financial markets.

That said, doing the arithmetic on the cost of high end audio, the original Wilson X1/Grand SLAMM cost $65,000 in 1994...inflated forward to 2020 price before it was retired as the XLF, the inflation rate breaks back to around 5%.

Additionally, the Maggie 0.7 speakers, the KEF LS50, an accompanying sub...and some amplification from any number of great designers (NAD, Marantz) make a killer system imho.

I think that WBF (justly named) is very much skewed to the extreme end of high end audio...and for those of us who read/participate because it is so well managed and run...it can create a super-warped lens of overall high end audio. Again, I AGREE that audio is skewing to high end and some outrageous prices...I just would hate to see fellow audiophiles feel that 'all is lost' when in fact there are GREAT products at fractions of the cost which make for great, great sound. (And frankly much of the outrageously priced stuff is in areas which nobody even cared about 30 years ago...$2800 fuses?, $10,000 power cables?...so if audiophiles rue that those products exist, the good news is no great audio system of yesteryear even had these...(and some of those systems would still be great by today's standards.)

I confess I didn't have the time to read through all 8 pages of this discussion but I will say @LL21 you and I are very much on the same page. Overall though I don't understand what the big debate is here. The perspective Steve Guttenberg puts forth is very reasonable and he never says ultra high-end is utterly pointless, he just says it's a luxury market and it's not for him. I too used to be very dismissive of any systems approaching 6 figures, which seem like the norm nowadays in the magazines and shows. Much of this was purely practical - I lived in an apartment and had limited means, so lusting after that stuff felt like wanting to score a Renoir at Christie's when I had IKEA art hanging on my walls. Now I have more means and room, and my system has crept towards 6 figures, but I still have zero interest in the "megabuck" stuff beyond curiosity of what is going on at the absolute edge of the art. And on one specific example I'm completely aligned with Mr. Guttenberg - I would never consider a full dCS or MSB Reference stack but I'm very interested in the Mola Mola Tambaqui (which is plenty expensive!) as the "just right" price-performance point for me.

IMO "diminishing returns" is also the wrong way to look at it, just as it is with whisky or art or any other collectible or luxury good. I'm also a violinist and it's the same in the instrument market - an old Italian instrument costs many orders of magnitude more than a decent modern one. It's not 100x better and yet there's simply no other way to achieve the same playability and tone on the modern instrument, and of course the simple economics of a fixed supply vs. extreme desirability is what drives the price up and up. No one should be looking for anything approaching a linear return on investment with the high end of any market - it's simply about obtaining the absolute best available at any cost. So there's a transition point where things flip from "value for money" to "pursuit of the best regardless of cost" and here on WBF we mostly talk about the latter.

The real problem with ultra expensive audio IMO is that unlike art and whisky, there's virtually no collectible value outside a very tiny circle of nuts like us and I don't think any of us are kidding ourselves into thinking that a $75k amp or $150k speakers are a reasonable investment in any legitimate sense of the word. Much like all but a select few new automobiles, the stuff depreciates the moment you take it home and the margins necessary to sustain such a low volume business mean the actual value of the product is quite abysmal. And that's ok because again, we're here to pursue what's best and not fret over the ROI. There are plenty of other luxury goods - fashion for sure - that are much the same. That's fine but let's be honest, there's absolutely nothing rationale about this pursuit and we are all at least slight nut jobs here!

 

[spiritofmusic]

And SOTA is an absolute ever-shifting concept. How many people installing $200 SR Orange fuses are compelled to go $250 Purple ones...or God forbid, those $2800 QSA ones?
I pity (actually I don't) the "poor" souls who will invest $225k in the Wadax Reference dac and server, knowing deep down, the "next" SOTA is just around the corner.

 

[LL21]

Talking about whisky, my brother in law’s brother bought a cask some twenty years ago for £1k , it just sold for £ 65 k , not a bad wee dram eh !

WELL DONE! WHEW!

 

[LL21]

I confess I didn't have the time to read through all 8 pages of this discussion but I will say @LL21 you and I are very much on the same page. Overall though I don't understand what the big debate is here. The perspective Steve Guttenberg puts forth is very reasonable and he never says ultra high-end is utterly pointless, he just says it's a luxury market and it's not for him. I too used to be very dismissive of any systems approaching 6 figures, which seem like the norm nowadays in the magazines and shows. Much of this was purely practical - I lived in an apartment and had limited means, so lusting after that stuff felt like wanting to score a Renoir at Christie's when I had IKEA art hanging on my walls. Now I have more means and room, and my system has crept towards 6 figures, but I still have zero interest in the "megabuck" stuff beyond curiosity of what is going on at the absolute edge of the art. And on one specific example I'm completely aligned with Mr. Guttenberg - I would never consider a full dCS or MSB Reference stack but I'm very interested in the Mola Mola Tambaqui (which is plenty expensive!) as the "just right" price-performance point for me.

IMO "diminishing returns" is also the wrong way to look at it, just as it is with whisky or art or any other collectible or luxury good. I'm also a violinist and it's the same in the instrument market - an old Italian instrument costs many orders of magnitude more than a decent modern one. It's not 100x better and yet there's simply no other way to achieve the same playability and tone on the modern instrument, and of course the simple economics of a fixed supply vs. extreme desirability is what drives the price up and up. No one should be looking for anything approaching a linear return on investment with the high end of any market - it's simply about obtaining the absolute best available at any cost. So there's a transition point where things flip from "value for money" to "pursuit of the best regardless of cost" and here on WBF we mostly talk about the latter.

The real problem with ultra expensive audio IMO is that unlike art and whisky, there's virtually no collectible value outside a very tiny circle of nuts like us and I don't think any of us are kidding ourselves into thinking that a $75k amp or $150k speakers are a reasonable investment in any legitimate sense of the word. Much like all but a select few new automobiles, the stuff depreciates the moment you take it home and the margins necessary to sustain such a low volume business mean the actual value of the product is quite abysmal. And that's ok because again, we're here to pursue what's best and not fret over the ROI. There are plenty of other luxury goods - fashion for sure - that are much the same. That's fine but let's be honest, there's absolutely nothing rationale about this pursuit and we are all at least slight nut jobs here!

Hi TAWW...I have genuinely enjoyed reading your reviews...extremely thoughtful, detailed and nuanced...plus I always pay attention when musicians start listening/commenting.

Speaking of your reference to rare whisky, in addition to "matakana's" post just now, I recall walking thru JFK airport (10 years ago or so) and coming across a 30-year Macallan, one of my favorite whiskies of all time. I passed at $400..."very expensive, what if I break it carrying it back, I could get 5 Macallan 18's for that price," the list goes on...

Sure enough, to buy that same bottle today probably cost $6K! Why? Just as you say, TAWW, "fixed supply vs extreme desireability"...and of course with whisky being literally consumed it's "decreasing supply vs increasingly extreme desireability"!

 

[spiritofmusic]

You could get drunk on that pricing.

 

[LL21]

You could get drunk on that pricing.

On the contrary...I found it quite sobering! Hah!

 

[spiritofmusic]

That's after the night before.

 

[LL21]

That's after the night before.

Actually, with Macallan 30-year, you'd quite possibly say it was worth it. It's that good. Of the 60 or so whisky's that I have seriously tried/owned, the only better was a 1977 Glenlivet.

I always found the 25-year's to be overly priced (even 10-15 years ago), while the more expensive 30-year was sensational. And I suspect it still is. I have had a 30-year Port Ellen which was great but not (to me) the same...its just that Port Ellen has been so rare for so long.