I had a big smile on my face when I read this Ian 
Congratulations and I am looking forward to seeing the reserved posts fill up over time.
Congratulations and I am looking forward to seeing the reserved posts fill up over time. 
My CH Precision/Magico System
- Thread starter MadFloyd
- Start date
Thank you for the tour Ian - your system looks impressive. Each of the Boston Brothers has unique gear and surely it's a treat to rotate amongst your rooms, each so different in approach. I can only imagine your mutual discussions are vigorous.
I see a variety of acoustic treatment behind the seats and some behind the gear. Are those 'slats' on the double door also treatment?
As one who likewise enjoys classical music, would you mind sharing some of your favorites? With the power you have I'll guess that you appreciate full orchestral?
Thanks again, I will enjoy seeing your system thread expand further.
I see a variety of acoustic treatment behind the seats and some behind the gear. Are those 'slats' on the double door also treatment?
As one who likewise enjoys classical music, would you mind sharing some of your favorites? With the power you have I'll guess that you appreciate full orchestral?
Thanks again, I will enjoy seeing your system thread expand further.
I am not sure what you are hearing in the CAT pre is distortion per se. I am sure if you look at the measurements the CAT pre has distortion of less than 0.1%. . If that is predominately 2nd or 3rd harmonic then at that level you won’t be able to hear this. Not sure what you are hearing exactly but I doubt it’s actual distortion.
Ian
Do you judge people by which chair they sit in ?
A cool array
Oh and the gear is pretty good as well
Phil
I might really enjoy it, but I hear every cartridge produced is different and a bit of a crapshoot.
Besides, I dream of upgrading to a SAT arm which is supposed to be killer with Lyra.
Yes, our systems are vastly different, as are our rooms. I find I have to 'acclimate' when I first start to listen to someone else's system as the differences are initially distracting.
Yes, the 'slats' on the double door are acoustical treatment (ASC Soundplanks). They make a subtle difference - for better or worse. I don't think they're ideal; while I certainly don't enjoy reflected sound off glass, I suspect they absorb more frequencies than I'd like... They come on and off easily and are not there all the time as they block light into the kitchen...
The treatments behind the listening seats is to tame the bass reflections. Barely visible in the one photo of the listening chairs is a chair behind my main chair. I often go and sit there as the presentation there is superior in some ways (I'll spare you the nitty gritty details of my room challenges) and because that puts my ears close to the walls (none of which are parallel and create havoc) the treatments help in calming down the reflections.
Yes, I adore full orchestral music, especially early 20th century (or late 19th). Some of my favorites:
Stravinsky (the usual culprits plus some of the other not-as-popular ones)
Shostakovich (the 5th never ceases to amaze me)
Debussy
Ravel
Bartok (Concerto for Orchestra,
Mahler (I like the 2nd and 4th a lot; still exposing myself to more)
Bruckner (9th)
Tchaikovsky (his Violin Concerto is my favorite but I like a lot of his compositions)
Holst
Some lesser known American composers such as Hanson, Kennan, Fine etc.
That said, I very much appreciate earlier classical as well - especially chamber music. I listen to Bach with my morning coffee every day without fail.
When it hurts my ears and it sounds gritty it's usually distortion... whether it's the fault of the component or something like bad power can be debated. That was my impression at the time but wasn't the only factor in my deciding it wasn't for me.
Hello Ian,
How do you know that that grittiness is coming from an electronic component in the system or from bad power, and not from the M Project loudspeaker?
You live in a beautiful, uncongested, suburban area. What do you mean by "bad power?"
Thank you.
Last edited:
The CH is tonally leaner sounding in the midrange but more accurate to my ears. For example, violin comes across to my ears as sounding more realistic. While I totally enjoy a tonally full-bodied violin sound that I hear in some systems, I find it doesn't necessarily represent what I hear live.
I think the CAT may have the edge with tonal density on cello - and produces more rounder images, however the resolution on the CH is superior, especially in the lower frequencies where things can start to 'blur' somewhat on the CAT.
That's a great question, Ron. Can I say that I truly know the answer? No, I cannot. I'm guessing from the way you're saying 'diamond-coated' and 'beryllium' that you're of that opinion? When the M-Project came out, many trumpeted their new tweeter as one that 'disappeared' (or didn't call attention to itself). I'm certain no tweeter is perfect and there must be tradeoffs with any approach. If you're close to the speakers, you're going to hear the tweeter, no doubt about it (unlike panels). There is certainly a minimum distance for all the drivers to converge and sound natural... and whether part of that is to reduce the effects of an imperfect tweeter can be debated. I've also read that many tweeters rear their ugly heads at louder volumes due to them heating up (how true this is I do not know).
Usually when we replace a component in our systems and experience a reduction in distortion, artifacts, grittiness, whatever, we tend to blame the component that is no longer in the system. In my case, I've experienced this a fair amount and whether it was a fair judgement or not I can never know for sure. I went from the CAT preamp to a Dartzeel and the difference to my ears was profound. I also had a CJ GAT 2 in my system around the same time and since tried a fair number of preamps, including a very good passive one. I think we all listen for different things and it's a given that no component is perfect so one picks their poisons so to speak.
To my ears and what I perceive as distortion and/or artifacts that is produced by my tweeters is much reduced with the full CH Precision chain.
Absolutely. If you sit in that white fluffy chair that my wife insisted on I'm probably going to wonder about you.
Thank you for this introspective and analytically logical reply!
I actually don't have an opinion on the tweeter. I was just sleuthing for alternative suspects. My suspicion landed on the tweeter not from any personal experience of mine, but from my interpretation of Jonathan Valin's and Robert Harley's reviews of later generations of Magico Q Series or M Series speakers in which, in retrospect, they suggested that they found the earlier generations to be a little bit aggressive sounding.
I am very happy for you that the CH Precision electronics provide you the sonic purity and resolution you are seeking! Many CH owners report liking CH electronics for, among other reasons, resolution and sonic purity. When CH comes up I always recall that Arnie in Texas with Rockport Arrakis replaced his VTL Siegfried IIs (indeed replaced all of his electronics, I think) with CH.
Last edited:
congrats, Ian, on your system evolution. nice to get in update of a known system here on WBF. great data point to your contributions.
and your room is a very inviting place to listen. love the pictures.
i've always enjoyed my experiences with CH Precision. and i share your views on tubes verses solid state as i read them. or at least tubes verses the right solid state. i want my solid state as close to tubes as it can be, but still retaining the transparency and truth as the music gets energetic. ideally solid state never shouts 'reproduced' or 'not real'. i do appreciate those magical tube moments, but then in my experience they get colored too in some form or fashion. so each involve trade-offs of some sort, just that my solid state has fewer trade-offs than other choices i've been exposed to.
YMMV, just my 2 cents.
and your room is a very inviting place to listen. love the pictures.
i've always enjoyed my experiences with CH Precision. and i share your views on tubes verses solid state as i read them. or at least tubes verses the right solid state. i want my solid state as close to tubes as it can be, but still retaining the transparency and truth as the music gets energetic. ideally solid state never shouts 'reproduced' or 'not real'. i do appreciate those magical tube moments, but then in my experience they get colored too in some form or fashion. so each involve trade-offs of some sort, just that my solid state has fewer trade-offs than other choices i've been exposed to.
YMMV, just my 2 cents.
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
well as Dave Wilson used to say, every system needs a tube in it.....just my 2 cents and YMMV
Well said, Mike and I'm not surprised to hear it. I've watched from the sidelines as people have tried to convince you to switch and you've been steadfast with your dartzeel (as has Fremer and other devotees of the brand). Totally agree about tradeoffs and choosing a product that offers fewer tradeoffs and I think dartzeel definitely falls into that category.
I think most systems DO need a tube in it somewhere. I have tried all solid state before and always went back to having some tubes somewhere! And that's why I'm not selling my CATs anytime soon.
But when I would keep reading about people who 'successfully' went from tubes to CH I got very curious. I say 'successfully' because when they remain with it for years it goes beyond flirting and more like marriage.
And to be honest, it's taken me a bit to understand what it is about CH that speaks to tube lovers. I do not think CH sounds like tubes - at least not what I considered to be the typical attributes of tube electronics. Nor do I think CH offers all the positive attributes of tubes. It's more a case of the brand offering an absence of the negative sonics of solid state audio reproduction such as grain, edginess, whitish sound etc. One of the positive aspects of good tube electronics is how they convey beauty when called upon to do so. CH can do this.
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
i think i agree Steve. currently i have 2 tubes, one for each channel of my CS Port phono. and it's a great fit for my system.
in a month or so my Aesthetix Io Eclipse 3 box phono stage will arrive with 20-30 tubes.
i'm certainly not anti-tube. the pull of tubes is strong. but i prefer to live with my choice of solid state as my dominant system companion. maybe if i had a smaller scale system with different large scale music expectations maybe my trade-off preferences might change. i could see that happening at some point. i'm not a solid state or die kinda guy.
Last edited:
Similar threads
