Preamps... nothing is perfect.

[Steve Williams]

I agree about private emails.

Thread has been sanitized.

 

[DaveyF]

I avoided writing earlier, but I believe I was the one who first let PeterA and Al M know that Ian's CAT preamp was highly veiled and colored. I don't think they believed me at first, but apparently they eventually did. The system's sonic signature became quite obvious to me very quickly, and Ian and I took the preamp out within half an hour or less. Basically, it presented the music in a euphonic and veiled way - "fake news" if you will - and all the information came back in a more realistic way when we took it out. However, digital was somewhat thin, and I attribute that to DACs just not being able to drive amps directly. Analog was much better - after gain there was adjusted much higher - but in the end, that also left me wanting more, and for example, I liked Steve Williams' ZYX set-up over Ian's; I am also no longer a fan of unstabilized pivot arms, and I think Ian's is one of them. I believe he'd be better served with a different (and better) arm. But the sheer fact that we had to increase phono gain significantly (12dB?!?) tells me those amps just can't be properly driven directly from sources.

FWIW, I get the same detailed but thin sound from my digital driving my Spectrals - and all Spectrals I've ever had - direct, because simply put, the 1mA DAC output is just not enough.

At the end of the day, I can see why Ian is still looking for a truly transparent preamp that can drive his CAT amps, though I have not heard the DartZeel. Bottom line for me: I just could not stand the coloration and masking of detail of his CAT preamp, and just to give an example, I pointed to specific information missing, like triangle hits, and I believe I had also pointed to solo piano being all over the place. Perhaps the tubes were bad, but I can only judge what I heard. But I can attest to the CAT amps being really good, and I suspect they sound better now.

PS: I HATE Ken's writing style, and I base this on many emails I have seen over the years with others.

Tasos, I believe you when you say that Ian’s preamp did not sound great! It confirms to me that something was very wrong with his particular unit! The Legend preamp sounds better than any of Ken’s amps...when it is working correctly. Ken has always voiced his amps around his preamp...the preamps are generally known to be the work horse of the whole system. So, the fact that the amps sounded better without the preamp tells me that not only was the preamp faulty, but that the whole system must be skewed to sound incorrect in some manner with that particular preamp in place.
Too bad that a return of the preamp to Ken was apparently not undertaken, because I think none of this thread would be under discussion if it was. Personally, I have never heard a bad sounding CAT preamp, and I have heard many....and of course, as you know, I utilize a heavily modded version myself. Naturally a faulty unit can occur occasionally with any electronics, which is why it is nice to have the factory there in case you need them. Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that this preamp was never allowed to show what it can do...

 

[ack]

Tasos, I believe you when you say that Ian’s preamp did not sound great! It confirms to me that something was very wrong with his particular unit! The Legend preamp sounds better than any of Ken’s amps...when it is working correctly. Ken has always voiced his amps around his preamp...the preamps are generally known to be the work horse of the whole system. So, the fact that the amps sounded better without the preamp tells me that not only was the preamp faulty, but that the whole system must be skewed to sound incorrect in some manner with that particular preamp in place.
Too bad that a return of the preamp to Ken was apparently not undertaken, because I think none of this thread would be under discussion if it was. Personally, I have never heard a bad sounding CAT preamp, and I have heard many....and of course, as you know, I utilize a heavily modded version myself. Naturally a faulty unit can occur occasionally with any electronics, which is why it is nice to have the factory there in case you need them. Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that this preamp was never allowed to show what it can do...

Davey, I am afraid the situation may not be as clear-cut. I know Ken visited Ian, and the question is, was it when the preamp was already in the system, or before. If the preamp was there, Ken would figured out faulty behavior. And second, according to Ken's own email to Kevin - now deleted - I interpret the designer's version of "transparency" as intending to voice the preamp in such a way as to present the music in a certain "natural" way. I believe Ken has simply failed with these preamps, at least when it comes to true transparency: "nothing added, nothing taken away; meant only to drive amps and switch inputs".

 

[microstrip]

I avoided writing earlier, but I believe I was the one who first let PeterA and Al M know that Ian's CAT preamp was highly veiled and colored. I don't think they believed me at first, but apparently they eventually did. The system's sonic signature became quite obvious to me very quickly, and Ian and I took the preamp out within half an hour or less. Basically, it presented the music in a euphonic and veiled way - "fake news" if you will - and all the information came back in a more realistic way when we took it out. However, digital was somewhat thin, and I attribute that to DACs just not being able to drive amps directly. Analog was much better - after gain there was adjusted much higher - but in the end, that also left me wanting more, and for example, I liked Steve Williams' ZYX set-up over Ian's; I am also no longer a fan of unstabilized pivot arms, and I think Ian's is one of them. I believe he'd be better served with a different (and better) arm. But the sheer fact that we had to increase phono gain significantly (12dB?!?) tells me those amps just can't be properly driven directly from sources.

FWIW, I get the same detailed but thin sound from my digital driving my Spectrals - and all Spectrals I've ever had - direct, because simply put, the 1mA DAC output is just not enough.

At the end of the day, I can see why Ian is still looking for a truly transparent preamp that can drive his CAT amps, though I have not heard the DartZeel. Bottom line for me: I just could not stand the coloration and masking of detail of his CAT preamp, and just to give an example, I pointed to specific information missing, like triangle hits, and I believe I had also pointed to solo piano being all over the place. Perhaps the tubes were bad, but I can only judge what I heard. But I can attest to the CAT amps being really good, and I suspect they sound better now.

PS: I HATE Ken's writing style, and I base this on many emails I have seen over the years with others.

Just a naive question - wasn't a CAT dealer involved in this process? I hope the preamplfier was not coming from eBay ...
BTW, what was the DAC being used?

 

[ack]

The DAC was either the Yggy or the Vivaldi 2.0, which I no longer care for, both in Ian's system or at Goodwin's. It presents music in an unnatural way. I was told that Ian has now sold the Vivaldi.

 

[Al M.]

The DAC was either the Yggy or the Vivaldi 2.0, which I no longer care for, both in Ian's system or at Goodwin's. It presents music in an unnatural way. I was told that Ian has now sold the Vivaldi.

As far as I remember, it was the NADAC back then. I don't think Ian had the Vivaldi yet, but I may be mistaken.

 

[PeterA]

The DAC was either the Yggy or the Vivaldi 2.0, which I no longer care for, both in Ian's system or at Goodwin's. It presents music in an unnatural way. I was told that Ian has now sold the Vivaldi.

Could the DAC have been the NADAC? I think Ian already had the cat amplifiers and when Ken came he brought the preamp with him so he heard his preamp with his amps in Ian‘s system and he obviously thought nothing was wrong. I agree with you that Ken’s definition of transparent seemed a little bit strange. But nor is it about leanness and fake detail. That was actually pretty interesting series of comments in that email.

 

[microstrip]

The DAC was either the Yggy or the Vivaldi 2.0, which I no longer care for, both in Ian's system or at Goodwin's. It presents music in an unnatural way. I was told that Ian has now sold the Vivaldi.

Thanks. I only asked because the output sections of both DACs are very different - technically commenting on interface between DAC and other components is futile unless we know what we are addressing. If the Vivaldi 2.0 presented the music in an "unnatural way" IMHO you should blame the system/room, that was not able to handle the information and dynamics presented by this DAC.

Can I ask again who was the supplier of the preamplfier?

 

[ack]

Thanks. I only asked because the output sections of both DACs are very different - technically commenting on interface between DAC and other components is futile unless we know what we are addressing. If the Vivaldi 2.0 presented the music in an "unnatural way" IMHO you should blame the system/room, that was not able to handle the information and dynamics presented by this DAC.

I blame the Vivaldi 2.0 - and no volume setting was satisfying enough. My experience with the entire stack at Goodwin's is now fairly extensive. This audition was about 3-4 months ago. It might have been the Classe CDT-1 transport, but this transport sounded good with the Yggy. To say the Yggy killed the Vivaldi in terms of clarity and palpability, with everything else remaining constant, would be a bit of an understatement; though it still has superior control when the signal gets complex. Like so many products in the high end, the Vivaldi is apparently voiced to do certain things, which are not necessarily in the recording.

 

[microstrip]

I blame the Vivaldi 2.0 - and no volume setting was satisfying enough. This audition was about 3-4 months ago. It might have been the Classe CDT-1 transport, but this transport sounded good with the Yggy.

Nothing related to volume setting. Transports and tweaks can help, but are not essential. However after reading the technical thread on "the other" forum I feel I now understand why some people can prefer the Yggy on their systems - nothing wrong with such preference. BTW, I only looked at the graphs, I did look into the debates ... I often do the same on Stereophile measurements ...

 

[Al M.]

If the Vivaldi 2.0 presented the music in an "unnatural way" IMHO you should blame the system/room, that was not able to handle the information and dynamics presented by this DAC.

That is such a funny comment, Francisco. Not being "able to handle the information"? Your armchair criticizing of a system with outstanding resolution that you have never heard is hilarious.

And just for the record, I do not think the Vivaldi presents the music in an unnatural way (what I hear does not meet my standards for such a fundamental negative claim). Satisfied?

 

[microstrip]

That is such a funny comment, Francisco. Not being "able to handle the information"? Your armchair criticizing of a system with outstanding resolution that you have never heard is hilarious.

And just for the record, I do not think the Vivaldi presents the music in an unnatural way (what I hear does not meet my standards for such a fundamental negative claim). Satisfied?

It is not armchair criticizing, it is what I consider a possible explanation, I have seen it happening in several systems. Apologies if it does not please your expertise. IMHO outstanding resolution does not have anything to do with "being able to handle the information".

But since fortunately you do not think the Vivaldi presents the music in an unnatural way, what is your local explanation for Ian's preference?

 

[Kingsrule]

I agree about private emails.

Thread has been sanitized.

Should have let the post remain. The quoted email was not asked to be removed by it's author. There were no personal attacks in the email or nothing egregious.

"Sanitizing" posts presents dangerous ground Steve.

 

[microstrip]

Should have let the post remain. The quoted email was not asked to be removed by it's author. There were no personal attacks in the email or nothing egregious. (...)

I think it should go the reverse way - when we want to share private emails we have to show evidence that the author was asked for and granted permission of quoting him. As usual YMMV!

 

[Al M.]

However after reading the technical thread on "the other" forum I feel I now understand why some people can prefer the Yggy on their systems - nothing wrong with such preference. BTW, I only looked at the graphs, I did look into the debates ... I often do the same on Stereophile measurements ...

Another great armchair critique. Have you ever heard the Yggy? Have you ever heard Yggy and Vivaldi side by side?

 

[ack]

Micro, do hear the Yggy if you ever get a chance. My only problem with a home audition of it is that prolonged break-in time, which effectively leaves one with just a couple of days worth.

 

[bazelio]

Nothing related to volume setting. Transports and tweaks can help, but are not essential. However after reading the technical thread on "the other" forum I feel I now understand why some people can prefer the Yggy on their systems - nothing wrong with such preference. BTW, I only looked at the graphs, I did look into the debates ... I often do the same on Stereophile measurements ...

I'm just curious, what is the "other forum"? Audiogon?

Yggy comes from a company who specializes in "personal audio". And while it may be the crème de la crème of the headphone space (discounting perhaps Chord DAVE), I have found its voicing for high end two channel systems somewhat lacking. Particularly in soundstage reproduction. Yggy has always created "tunnel vision" in every system I've heard. And I've owned a Yggy myself, as well. They released a Yggy2 fairly recently, which amounted to an update to the analog output section and was an attempt to make Yggy sound more like vinyl. Essentially, they added color. I don't think this affected its staging, however. As far as detail reproduction, Yggy doesn't leave much behind. The original Yggy, however, succeeded at microdetail at the cost of noise floor. The noise floor was audibly excessive compared to every other DAC I've ever heard, and it created a "tape hiss" sound. The lack of a black background was never, in my opinion, a worthwhile tradeoff for enhanced microdetail resolution. It also had the effect of pushing microdetails too forward, i.e. a lack of nuance and finesse. Yggy2 might improve upon this particular problem, from what I've read.

 

[Kingsrule]

I think it should go the reverse way - when we want to share private emails we have to show evidence that the author was asked for and granted permission of quoting him. As usual YMMV!

In general I agree but in this case email author said he was aware of this thread and was commenting on it without any stipulations....

 

[Steve Williams]

Should have let the post remain. The quoted email was not asked to be removed by it's author. There were no personal attacks in the email or nothing egregious.

"Sanitizing" posts presents dangerous ground Steve.

I think it should go the reverse way - when we want to share private emails we have to show evidence that the author was asked for and granted permission of quoting him. As usual YMMV!

Perhaps it does however there is zero doubt in my mind that posting a private email without the author's approval is unwarranted and wrong hence my decision which BTW was the collective opinion of the readers.

We had a former administrator here who felt it to be OK to post private emails and we will never again go through the backlash that his digressions caused.

 

[ack]

The noise floor was audibly excessive compared to every other DAC I've ever heard, and it created a "tape hiss" sound. The lack of a black background was never, in my opinion, a worthwhile tradeoff for enhanced microdetail resolution. It also had the effect of pushing microdetails too forward, i.e. a lack of nuance and finesse. Yggy2 might improve upon this particular problem, from what I've read.

Higher noise floor is not the same as tape hiss. I am more curious to try the Yggy2 now in my system