Tim, are you using the Belden 1192a balanced or single-ended? What type of connectors do you have?
Ron’s New System
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Very impressive and admirable that you had the patience to make these comparisons! Do you remember anything about the sound of the Mogami (2549, perhaps?) versus the sound of the Belden?
Is “disciple” Resnickian for a person who buys audio gear from an experienced and knowledgeable friend who happens to be a dealer? Why such silly language? David was once your friend too, and you spoke to him for years about audio and the development of your room and system.
You told me you solicited David’s advice for all sorts of things, from the room design, acoustics, and grounding schemes, power delivery, to the turntable, arm, and cartridge choices. The rack, cables, final table assembly and set up, and then overall system set up and fine tuning. You engaged in discussions for years, and sought his advice often, including how to deal with the wood panels your contractor installed and window treatments. You should not now diminish the role you had asked David to play in the final result of what you had hoped to hear from your system. We also discussed the impact of canceling your turntable order would have on set up and final results.
You solicited David’s advice for other things too and chose not to do what he suggested. You told me your method is to solicit the advice of multiple experts and then you sort it all out yourself from the various options what to do. This seems to be behind your frequent solicitations here on the forum too.
These types of cables are cheap. There is nothing preventing you from trying the Mogami wires. Just buy them and listen. You are in fact left to your own devices. No one is preventing you from trying alternatives to what David suggested. You chose not to listen to many of his suggestions.
No; a lot of people buy audio gear from experienced and knowledgeable friends who happen to be dealers without becoming disciples of such dealer. I still consider David to be a friend.
Why does the characterization of "disciple" rub you the wrong way? I would think you would be proud to be David's disciple.
Through specific tests you conducted over time based on David's advice you became more and more confident of the value to you of David's philosophies and practical implementations. Eventually, you adopted his philosophies and practical implementations in their entirety. You now actively advocate those philosophies and practical implementations. You speak of David and your experiences with David in a very reverential way.
You found somebody whose knowledge and experience you trust, and you have chosen to follow that person's advice. You have described how David has bestowed upon you valuable and proprietary audio wisdom which you are not at liberty to repeat. This is all great, and I'm not criticizing any of this in any way.
But I will leave to readers to judge whether all of this, as well as your reflexive propensity to jump to David's defense, rings as kind of disciple-y -- something much more than just a typical friendly dealer relationship.
I am not sure what this means, but I think you are suggesting something broader and deeper than what actually happened. I enjoyed discussing audio with David and getting his opinions, just as I enjoy discussing audio with many people and getting their opinions.
David has a lot of experience in a lot of major areas of audio. Also, before David got into horns and SET I believe that David spent years with Apogee panels and high-power tube amplifiers. So I like that he had an appreciation for why I love panel speakers. Panels provided a common starting point of sorts.
By saying I "engaged" David on the turntable I did not mean to suggest that I did not enjoy discussing a lot of different audio topics with him. By "engage" in that sentence I meant that the turntable was the only David suggestion which resulted in a business transaction.
I don't know what this means.
I took David's suggestion on the Belden cable, and I took David's suggestion not to use a wool carpet pad.
David has a different personal preference than I do about the level of audio reflections in a listening room. We also have different views about the value and utility of commercial acoustic room treatments.
We also have different views about cables. David believes that fancy expensive cables are deleterious to the sound, or a waste of money, or both. I believe that all cables function as fixed parametric equalizers (thank you Phil Ressler) regardless of whether they are expensive or inexpensive. This means that in a particular application an expensive cable may be preferred subjectively to an inexpensive cable.
Yes, this is correct. I ask lots of people about their opinions on things. David kindly gave me his opinion on lots of audio issues.
I am not sure to what this is a reply. Yes, nothing prevents me from trying other cables. But presently I am happy with the Belden even though I have not compared it to anything else.
This is correct. Nonetheless I think David is the world's leading expert on the SME 3012R tonearm. I think David is one of the world's leading experts on turntables.
Last edited:
Can I ask why relying on David advice if you own a system that technically and sound-wise is the opposite of his preference?
Not at all. I am addressing the fact that the single-ended output is wired in parallel with the XLR output line and the load of this output phase will be very different from the inverting phase.
As i spit coffee on my keyboard!
Please contact Webster to make this a formal entry to the english language.
Sorry that is funny.
I am sure Ron has the sense of humor to display that badge with honor.
Nice to know about some of the different preferences. Can you share with us some of the shared similar preferences, other than the Belden interconnect?
As i spit coffee on my keyboard!
Please contact Webster to make this a formal entry to the english language.
Sorry that is funny.
I am sure Ron has the sense of humor to display that badge with honor.
Very funny.
Tim, a skilled wordsmith, came up with the term and used it publicly recently in a post in my system thread addressing Ron and Al M. There are some classic phrases in that post, "Resnickian" being only one of them.
tube electronics
SET amplifiers
Lamm electronics
non-servo turntable motor drive systems
analog playback
CD over streaming
non-fatiguing sound
copper wire over silver wire
skepticism about multi-way dynamic driver loudspeakers with complex crossovers resulting in low-ish sensitivity
similar values in music reproduction such as a focus on naturalness and emotional engagement and not on hi-fi attributes
live unamplified music as a reference
horn loudspeakers for jazz music
panel loudspeakers
simple and basic electrical and grounding infrastructure
not overdamping a listening room
Last edited:
You are mixing up different issues here. I am very comfortable relying upon David to identify an interconnect cable which does not obviously adulterate the sound.
Simple. The more capacitance you add the less forward a stereo sounds. I don't mean in the forward to back spatial sense. Capacitance relaxes the sound, which can be dynamic loss to some or careful tuning to others. The amount per foot may mean more than total.
IMO you fail to understand David holistic approach to cables - his cable recommendations apply just to gear that does not adulterate Natural Sound TM - something you do not own.
David will not tell Wilson Audio owners to use his preferred cables! FIY I still own cables I got from David. Good for the Lamm's, horrible and harsh in our VTLs.
Your list deserves an ambiguity prize.
You even focus on some broad sense aspects that are shared by many people who completely disagree with David. What is the point of calling skepticism and live unamplified music as or electrical and grounding of "preference"?
Or stating your love for Lamm or speaker types that you did not want to own?
My good deed does not go unpunished by you.
So what? This has nothing to do with the question you asked me.
Other than for the purpose of being argumentative, I do not understand this question. It is obvious what I meant in my response to your original question.
Sorry I did not give you as much fodder for pointless argument as you expected.
I answered your original question honestly and in good faith. I'm not going to waste my Sunday fencing with you.
Last edited:
i do agree with micro and not your post 2810. I can make that list to agree with most people
Maybe I missed that in the long thread. If you don't mind, why doesn't he recommend wool carpets? What and why do you use instead?
David feels that wool carpet padding is too acoustically absorptive. I went with a plain synthetic carpet pad which is less acoustically absorptive.
The designer of my new listening room told me the same about wool rugs.
He recommends sisal.
He recommends sisal.