Ron’s New System

[Ron Resnick]

To experiment with Mike's suggestion that the room is slightly over-damped overall, I removed one pair of sidewall absorption panels behind the speakers. The remaining pair I positioned to absorb any rear-ward sidewall first reflections.

I also removed the small carpet rectangles in front of the towers.

 

[Carlos269]

Thank you for your comments. This why it's a subjective hobby!

Understood, but where do you go from here? Your house guests all seem to be thrusting you in all kinds of different directions and you seem keen to listen to their advice. If you think that your system sounds as good as it can then live with it but if you are truly trying to get the most out of it you need to stay focused and stop listening to everyone’s advice, pick a target sound and pursue it without compromising yourself or the aesthetic integrity of your room like you have been doing. If I were you I would have an actual reference instead of mystical mirages as your target. The hardest question that you will have to answer is always how do you avoid the trial & error and instead choose a more educated approach to achieving your objectives. Will be curious to see how this saga unfolds.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I'm a little puzzled that Mike wants me to start at square one with loudspeaker tower positioning. He doesn't realize how severe the two room modes were with the woofer towers closer to the side walls.

This is a technical question for a four tower expert like a Gary Koh, but I am skeptical that the woofer towers can be located well behind the ribbon panels without the ability to adjust phase continuously or to effect some digital delay.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Understood, but where do you go from here?

I plan not to go anywhere. Except for my interest in Wavac 833s I'm pretty pencils down.

If I feel like seeing if I hear a difference plus or minus a couple of acoustic treatments it's a zero cost afternoon of experimentation.

In a few months I'll consider having Scot Markwell come visit, and see what he suggests about tower positioning.

Your house guests all seem to be thrusting you in all kinds of different directions and you seem keen to listen to their advice.

I am extremely curious to hear their advice. This is very different than implementing their advice.

Michael Hobson has two of the very most experienced ears alive today. I think anybody who hosts Mike would be a fool for not being curious about his suggestions.

(Incidentally, Mike told me that many audiophiles, unlike me, have big egos about their systems. Such people want visitors simply to applaud how great the system sounds and vindicate how much money they spent on the system and how wonderful it all is.)

 

[Ron Resnick]

If you think that your system sounds as good as it can then live with it

I am not qualified to know whether the system presently sounds as good as it can sound. I think there likely has to be room for improvement.

But this is a separate point from the point that if I never change a thing I'm very happy with it just as it is.

 

[Ron Resnick]

The hardest question that you will have to answer is always how do you avoid the trial & error and instead choose a more educated approach to achieving your objectives.

I understand that when you're selling hammers, everything looks like a nail.

 

[pjwd]

I'm a little puzzled that Mik wants me to start at square one with loudspeaker tower positioning. He doesn't realize how severe the two room modes were with the woofer towers closer to the side walls.

This is a technical question for a four tower expert like a Gary Koh, but I am skeptical that the woofer towers can be located well behind the ribbon panels without the ability to adjust phase continuously or to effect some digital delay.

Ron .. the woofers crossover at 250hz so are still directional ( down to say 170hz) so side wall reflections are reduced with woofers inboard and I am certain speaker distance to chair offset would be a problem as well. Woofer Position does not change room modes but it sounds like the impact at listening point is reduced so quite compelling to leave as is.
Does anyone suggesting this give a clear reason other than tradition

Phil

 

[Carlos269]

I plan not to go anywhere. Except for my interest and Wavac 833s I'm pretty pencils down.

if I feel like seeing if I hear a difference plus or minus a couple of acoustic treatments it's a zero cost afternoon of experimentation.

In a few months I'll consider having Scot Markwell come visit, and see what he suggests about tower positioning.



I am extremely curious to hear their advice. This is very different than implementing their advice.

Michael Hobson has two of the very most experienced ears alive today. I think anybody who hosts Mike would be a fool for not being curious about his suggestions.

(Incidentally, Mike told me that many audiophiles, unlike me, have big egos about their systems. Such people want visitors simply to applaud how great the system sounds and vindicate how much money they spent on the system and how wonderful it all is.)

Well from your last couple of posts it sounds like you are happy with the sound of your system and enjoying it tremendously. Case close. If you are happy, you have reached your destination. Congratulations!

I think that the reason you keep getting advice, whether solicited or unsolicited, is that those that hear the system, either in person or through videos, appear to think that more can be done.

I agree with what Michael said about most audiophiles.

 

[hopkins]

I am not qualified to know whether the system presently sounds as good as it can sound. I think there likely has to be room for improvement.

But this is a separate point from the point that if I never change a thing I'm very happy with it just as it is.

I'm in the same place - happy as is - though I know things can always be improved. There's a time for tweaking/upgrading, and there is a time for simply enjoying music. Tweaking takes a lot of time - time that you don't spend listening to the music you really like. You get caught into the game of comparing tracks, especially if you start watching online system videos, and then producing your own I find it healthy to be able to take a break and stop stressing out about the "system".

 

[Mendel]

I'm in the same place - happy as is - though I know things can always be improved. There's a time for tweaking/upgrading, and there is a time for simply enjoying music. Tweaking takes a lot of time - time that you don't spend listening to the music you really like. You get caught into the game of comparing tracks, especially if you start watching online system videos, and then producing your own I find it healthy to be able to take a break and stop stressing out about the "system".

Since you have pretty much found your end game gear, tweaking could be the way to get that last 5 or 10 percent out of your system. Things like component support/footers, emi reduction, electrical contact enhancement, fuses, etc. The audiophile voodoo dark arts. For me the best have been:
1) Walker EST extreme contact enhancer. There are other good ones but this is what I use. Absolutely critical IMO for cartridge pins/clips, the smallest most delicate electrical connection in your system. Great for interconnects and speaker bananas/spades and even fuses.
2) Synergistic Research Tranquillity Pods/Plateforms. Yes I know SR is considered snake oil/voodoo arts by many. But in my system these things work spectacularly, have no idea why or exactly how they work. I had never heard of them, my dealer lent me 2 to try (he uses 4 in his $500K display system), one under my amp, one on top of my phono stage/preamp (with my Node streamer on top to make a pod sandwich) A friend made me upgraded ground and DC cables, they got even better. Most dealers will lend them out for trial, you have nothing to lose.
3) Good footers under every component. I use SR MiG 3, best I have tried in my system. Lots of other good ones out there. They all make your components sound a little different, but it’s worth finding the right ones for your system.
4) I’m sure you use upgraded fuses. Here I prefer HiFi tuning, just seem to blow to many SR fuses. Again, they all sound slightly different. If your output tubes are fused like my Rogue, these are critical.
5) SR PHT “transducers “ to put on your cartridge. Again total voodoo/snake oil. But they work, even if nobody can explain why. Even Fremer agrees.
I don’t consider tube rolling to be a tweak, but it is critical to get the most out of tube equipment.

 

[hopkins]

Since you have pretty much found your end game gear, tweaking could be the way to get that last 5 or 10 percent out of your system.

I did not mean to say that my system was "end game" for me - I know there can be improvements, but I enjoy it a lot and enjoy taking a break from tweaking/upgrading. Anyway, your suggestions are good, and perhaps they were more directed towards Ron. This is his thread so I won't derail it further...

 

[Mendel]

I did not mean to say that my system was "end game" for me - I know there can be improvements, but I enjoy it a lot and enjoy taking a break from tweaking/upgrading. Anyway, your suggestions are good, and perhaps they were more directed towards Ron. This is his thread so I won't derail it further...

Yes comments were mostly directed towards Ron, but you used the term “tweaking” in you post so I quoted it. Cheers!

 

[Ron Resnick]

Since you have pretty much found your end game gear, tweaking could be the way to get that last 5 or 10 percent out of your system. Things like component support/footers, emi reduction, electrical contact enhancement, fuses, etc. The audiophile voodoo dark arts. For me the best have been:
1) Walker EST extreme contact enhancer. There are other good ones but this is what I use. Absolutely critical IMO for cartridge pins/clips, the smallest most delicate electrical connection in your system. Great for interconnects and speaker bananas/spades and even fuses.
2) Synergistic Research Tranquillity Pods/Plateforms. Yes I know SR is considered snake oil/voodoo arts by many. But in my system these things work spectacularly, have no idea why or exactly how they work. I had never heard of them, my dealer lent me 2 to try (he uses 4 in his $500K display system), one under my amp, one on top of my phono stage/preamp (with my Node streamer on top to make a pod sandwich) A friend made me upgraded ground and DC cables, they got even better. Most dealers will lend them out for trial, you have nothing to lose.
3) Good footers under every component. I use SR MiG 3, best I have tried in my system. Lots of other good ones out there. They all make your components sound a little different, but it’s worth finding the right ones for your system.
4) I’m sure you use upgraded fuses. Here I prefer HiFi tuning, just seem to blow to many SR fuses. Again, they all sound slightly different. If your output tubes are fused like my Rogue, these are critical.
5) SR PHT “transducers “ to put on your cartridge. Again total voodoo/snake oil. But they work, even if nobody can explain why. Even Fremer agrees.
I don’t consider tube rolling to be a tweak, but it is critical to get the most out of tube equipment.

Thank you very much for these suggestions!

At this point my state of mind is no footers for me, no exotic fuses for me, and no SR. I believe each of these kinds of things either change the sound or do not result in a sonic difference I can hear. If they change the sound, it might be for the better or it might be for the worse, on a net basis.

I just have no desire to conduct lots of comparisons.

I believe that having the source components and the other front-end components in a separate room obviates a lot of worry and experimentation and comparisons and effort and expense on footers and on vibration isolation devices.

I was happy to experiment with two or three options on tubes in various positions in various components. I was happy to compare a couple of different interconnects.

Other than high-power SET amplifiers and a DS Audio ION-001 and maybe an isolation transformer for some power supplies I'm pretty much pencils down on components or tweaks.

 

[thomask]

My recommendation is to upgrade Baltic to Pacific.

As good as Baltic is for the price, it is not in the same league as your other components.

Source component is very important.

Garbage in, garbage out.

It would make huge difference in dynamics and soundstage.

If you mind cost, used Pacific is available around 15k $.

 

[Ron Resnick]

My recommendation is to upgrade Baltic to Pacific.

As good as Baltic is for the price, it is not in the same league as your other components.

Thank you, but my Baltic 4 is very deliberately not in the same league as the other components. This is because I have no personal interest in the digital playback of analog recordings.

I have my modest digital streaming system only because I think it's really nice to be able to hand an iPad to a visitor and have the visitor play whatever is his or her favorite music.

 

[cjfrbw]

I’m unsure how someone can gauge this in an unfamiliar system. He must posses powers well beyond those of normal humans. Or he is just simply speculating.

Carlos cracks me up. I guess the ouija board audiophile isn't in his ken.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Two cartridge/tonearm combinations are working, thanks to J.R. Boisclair, set-up maven extraordinaire, of WAM Engineering!

 

[Ron Resnick]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

 

[morricab]

Two cartridge/tonearm combinations are working, thanks to J.R. Boisclair, set-up maven extraordinaire, of WAM Engineering!

View attachment 123383

View attachment 123384


View attachment 123385

Hi Ron, does your Brinkmann Balance use the Sinus motor? I see you have the RONt III power supply. That motor is a lot like the ones used in the Oasis, Bardo and Taurus, i.e a no cogging design.

BTW, I now, in addition to my Yamaha GT-2000 and Exclusive P10, I now have a Brinkmann Bardo with 9.6 arm and basic power supply. I have read the power supply makes a big difference (it definitely did with my Yamaha when I compared the onboard PSU to the exteranl PSU that was optional and I have)...did you even try your Balance with the lesser PSU units? I might eventually go with the RONt PSU and the 10.5 arm (supposed to be a major upgrade over the 9.6) to complete the TT but right now it sounds very good right out of the box, so to speak.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Hi Ron,

Hi Brad!

does your Brinkmann Balance use the Sinus motor?

I don't know.

I see you have the RONt III power supply.

Yes – with real valves.

That motor is a lot like the ones used in the Oasis, Bardo and Taurus, i.e a no cogging design.

BTW, I now, in addition to my Yamaha GT-2000 and Exclusive P10, I now have a Brinkmann Bardo with 9.6 arm and basic power supply. I have read the power supply makes a big difference (it definitely did with my Yamaha when I compared the onboard PSU to the exteranl PSU that was optional and I have)...did you even try your Balance with the lesser PSU units? I might eventually go with the RONt PSU and the 10.5 arm (supposed to be a major upgrade over the 9.6) to complete the TT but right now it sounds very good right out of the box, so to speak.

No, I did not try the Balance with the base model power supply unit.

Michael Fremer recommends the RoNt, as do numerous WBF members. So that was more than good enough for me.

My other angle of thought is that if Helmut feels strongly about it -- as he apparently does -- that is also good enough for me.