 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.196.145.134
Well, my used Pass Labs X2.5 preamp arrived today and it sounds wonderful - so much better than the preamp section in my HT processor - which is to be expected. So overall, I am very pleased with the sound.But, I think the user interface on the Pass Labs preamp is pretty convoluted and a royal pain in the arse! Up down left right... I can't get to what I want easily w/o major navigation using the four button remote while keeping my eye on the front panel display. Same issue with the Left Right Up Down mess on the front panel. It's not so bad if used just as a preamp but setting input 4 to UNITY GAIN and getting to it (and getting out of it) via remote is ridiculous!
I still think BAT has one of the best interfaces in the high-end world. Pass needs to hire a ergonomics / UI designer!
Follow Ups:
AbeThe Pass interface is simple, although it does require you to to scroll through the menu to switch between components. Coming off a HT processor user interface, I can understand your angst, but give it sometime and once you've had the hang of it, it's really a no-brainer.
The reality is that most of the time, you will only be using the volume up and down anyway.
Going from Input 1 (CD Player) to Input 4 and selecting Unity Gain for theater pass through mode took ELEVEN button presses (I counted!) on the Pass Labs 4-button remote control. Un freak'n believable!And this isn't a one time "setup" issue. Input 4 is the only one that can be assigned unity gain for theater pass through. To complicate matters, Input 4 will not remain at Unity Gain. You have to select Unity Gain EACH and EVERY time you go to Input 4 !
The designer must have thought there was a shortage of buttons so he designed the entire user interface with just four of them. It must have been some personal engineering challenge to see if could be done with just four. Of course there was ZERO regard for the user experience. Talk about frustrating!
If it weren't for the fact that I like the way this preamp sounds and that it matches my Pass Labs power amp, I would chuck it in the trash.
The Pass Labs x2.5 preamp gets my vote for Rube Goldberg machine of the year!
As Charles has stated, there is really no right or wrong answer when it comes to options; we all have our preferences.I have owned the X2.5 and wholeheartedly agree with Abe, the interface is a dreadful design! Besides being a very cumbersome design, I hated the remote and found that at its lowest possible listening setting it was still too loud at times. (To the credit of Pass, they were more than willing to adjust the gain for me if I wanted to send it in.)
For my use, I bounce between inputs regularly, I can be watching TV while listening to music and want to jump back and forth quickly, as well as adjust the volume and have access to mute. These steps are not quick one button actions with the Pass, via the remote or on the unit itself. The unit itself was made VERY well though.
The Classe is a users dream, at least for this user. There may be those here that think the options are unecessary and/or degrade the sound, but I find it hard to believe that if they used one for awhile, they wouldn't enjoy the flexibility.
I also owned a Mark Levinson No.383 in the past and this also was/is a users dream. As long as I am mentioning products, I had a BAT VK-30 that had plenty of options, I didn't care for the readout compared to some, but at least it had one!
My Mac C46 obviously has a lot of function built in and one thing I really like with thr remote is that I can change to any input with the push of 1 button, the remote has a separate button for each input.
Abe,As far as the best user interface going, I have to give it to the Classe' Delta gear. It is so easy to navigate that it is ridiculous. Classe' continues to improve it on a regular basis too. Having a component whose feature set can be modified or added to via a software update is something that has to be seen to be appreciated.
I have the CP-500. While I'm sure that there are pre's out there that may surpass it in sound quality/neutrality (the CP-700 among them), the ergonomic design of the Delta gear along with very nice build quality have led me to step off of the electronics merry-go-'round.
Speakers - I'm still playing with that. But after years of trying different components I no longer have any desire to upgrade my electronics.
Scott
Too bad it doesn't sound good. The Classè Delta series are one of the worst sounding "modern" SS gear I have heard recently. Dreadfully boring sonics.
Sorry to hear that the Classe' gear is dreadfully boring. I was really enjoying my system too.I guess I'll have to sell it all off now and start again from scratch.
Thanks for the tip.
Scott
Don't mention it. When you want to get gear that worries more about sound and less about bling you just let me know.
WWhen you want to get gear that worries more about sound and less about bling you just let me know."So in your view, having an delightfully ergonomic user interface is bling! The stuff that escape out of that pandora's box of yours.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"So in your view, having an delightfully ergonomic user interface is bling! The stuff that escape out of that pandora's box of yours"If it is counterproductive to the primary function of the unit, which in this case it arguably hurts sound quality, then yes its bling. Take care of the primary objective first and make sure that the secondary and tertiary goals don't degrade the primary goal. In this case it could be argued that Classè didn't take that into consideration. Is the screen defeatable when music is playing? I know that some manufacturers have so that the whole interface shuts off after some seconds because they know that it sounds better this way. Nevermind that its not a very good sounding preamp anyway, easily bettered by any number of SS and tube preamps, it can potentially sound better without the bling.
... first EAR 864 (and bought it) and then S&B TVC.For a long time, I thought money can't buy better than X2.5 (after having it for almost for a month in my system).
My last impression of it is that it sounds really poor in comparison with the S&B based TVC.
I will not consider a preamp that doesn't have remote control and a theater pass through. I know there are better sounding units out there... I've owned a couple. But w/o a full function remote and theater pass thru, it's not welcome in my setup.
If one takes a gander at the pre-amp interface:
:the blue touch-screen offers a bery logical and flexible interface - with cascaded sub-menus and, due to the micro-processor controller, offers the ability to customise the legends on each menu item as well as program the four "Function Buttons" on the supplied remote.
Also available are the following functions:
- Individual level/balance adjustment per input
- Maximum system volume setting level (caps maximum level selectable)
- Deactivation of menu options for unused inputs
- Screen legend language selection
- Display brightness & timeout parameter adjustment
- Volume control "behaviour" customisation (volume change vs rotation)
- Menu selection of Phono gain (if phono stage installed)
- Programming of the two 12v trigger output logic (on/off/toggle)
- Menu selection of "SSP" for Unity-Gain in HT application
- Teach IR option for programming of universal remote controlsIn addition, a "Sensor Status" display provides real-time read-outs for:
- Internal operating temperature
- Mains line voltage
- Earth/ground presentBest of all, the screen and menu approach seems much more acceptable to the fairer sex.
Similarly, on their disk players, the same technology is used, but - understandably - using different logic due to the functional differences:
All in all, I've found this User Interface to offer the ideal combination of strengths:
- comprehensive control
- flexibility
- simplicity
- configurability
- ergonomicsWell done, Classe' !!!
DevillEars
...using that type of interface adds a lot of electrical interference inside the component:-- There has to be a microprocessor running at all times to control the screen. This means a high speed digital clock is running at all times.
-- The display itself has multiplexing (switching the display elements on and off rapidly) or scanning. Either method creates high-frequency electrical noise.
-- The touchscreen sensor also has scanning, both vertically and horizontally. Again, more noise is generated
All of this creates a considerable amount of high-frequency noise. Some, but not all, of this noise can be filtered out. The remaining noise generally degrades the sonic performance of the audio circuitry. The degree of degradation is difficult for anybody but the manufacturer to determine, as you would need to listen to the same unit with and without the extra noise-generating circuitry.
But in the end, if you are happy with both the sound and the interface, then you should be happy indeed.
I am not sure if what Charles says has an appreciable affect on the sound, but I did recently switch from tne Classe CP-700 to the ARC Ref3. Yes, the Classe interface is incredible. The amount of user friendly features makes one of the best preamps to operate and use on a daily basis. I am not sure if the lack of complexity is the reason, but I do prefer the sound of my ARC Ref 3. The more and more I get into this hobby, the less and less fancy bells and whistles means to me. I just want something with a limited set of features that sounds great! I admit the ARC Ref 3 is really ugly and it has no real extra user features other than the tube hours counter but I really like the sound.
Charles,I must say that I am surprised to see comments such as this made about a competitors product by a man in your position.
One must assume that Classe' has enough experience to be aware of, and address, any kind of problem that an interface such as theirs might create.
Of course the menu can be configured to be on all of the time, or to switch itself off after a predetermined time. I run mine with the menu off, but I have not been able to distinguish a sonic difference in either case.
IMHO, it's about time that some of the high-end manufactures actually offer high-end features for those willing to go beyond the standard box-store offerings.
Scott
A couple of the Delta series features like volume control behavior and overvoltage shutdown are useful, but how much does all the extra bells and whistles add to the cost of Classé's products ? I really don't care for features like temperature readout, line voltage readout, etc. For those who want those things that's fine, but others who don't need them should not have to pay for a lot of unnecessary features they don't want.
< < others who don't need them should not have to pay for a lot of unnecessary features they don't want > >Just to be clear, the expensive parts in a fancy display like that are the display screen and the touchscreen control. Once you have made the decision to spend that money, then most of the other features don't add much expense at all. Instead it's just a matter of programming the microprocessor.
In fact that is one of the problems with today's electronic devices in general -- they keep getting more and more complex to operate. Once the microprocessor is there, it's just a question of programming to add more features. Whether or not the user really needs those features is a different story. Linked below is a nice article on this phenomenon.
Designers who choose not to use complex noise generating display interfaces will not have to spend the extra effort and cost to suppress the noise that they created in the first place.In my opinion, Charles was simply stating facts about noise generating electronics which need to be delt with in any component that uses a fancy disply interface. I don't think he was singling out Classe as a "competitor".
Just about every single feature in a preamp will degrade the sound to some degree. For example, an input selector switch will degrade the sound compared to just having a single hard-wired input. Similarly, a volume control will degrade the sound compared to having a fixed-gain circuit.So both the designer and the purchaser are constantly having to make decisions about trading off performance for convenience. In the case of an input selector switch and a volume control, just about everybody wants one. But even in those cases there are some tough decisions to be made.
In the old days, before remote controls, it wasn't too hard to find a manually operated rotary switch that wouldn't degrade the sound too much. And if you spent a lot of money on a mil-spec switch with solid-silver contacts, the degradation was negligible. But for remote controls, it is a different story. It is a lot trickier to get good sound with a remotely-controllable input selector switch.
And don't get me started on volume controls. The old manual potentiometers weren't all that great sounding, but at least their faults tended to be subtractive and non-offensive. But creating a remote-control volume control that doesn't degrade the sound is definitely a non-trivial task. In fact, this is probably the single biggest reason that surround-sound processors don't sound as good as a good stereo preamp -- they all use a terrible-sounding op-amp based volume control.
My intention was to educate and not to disparage. There are just a series of choices to be made. There are no right or wrong answers. As long as you are happy with the sound and the user interface, then there are no problems. Some people favor performance over convenience, and some the other way around. And sometimes it is possible to offer both, but this normally comes at a higher dollar cost.
In an ideal world, the education is something that the magazines would do. But for whatever reason they don't generally do so. I was pleased to see in the April Hi-Fi News that Paul Miller pointed out that switching power supplies require extra attention to make sure that they don't degrade the sound.
There are plenty of other things that could also be discussed. For example, when we were first designing the V-3 in the early '90s, we considered using a vertical "tower" format. Tower computers were just coming into vogue, and it seemed like a "cool" look. But when you look at the physics of the situation, it is a decidedly non-optimal solution.
If you take a typical solid-state power amp where the fins run along the sides, you can make some generalizations. Making the amp twice as deep will double the cooling capacity. But making the amp twice as tall will only increase the cooling capacity by 41% (square root of two). This is because a the top part of a taller fin receives air that has been pre-heated by the bottom part of the fin. It's simply not an efficient use of heatsink material.
But again, there are no right or wrong answers. As long as there is sufficient cooling to get the job done, the only penalty to a vertical amp format is an economic one. And so it may be worth it to some people to pay extra for a certain look (or the ability to fit into a specific sized area).
"My intention was to educate and not to disparage."Charles,
After re-reading my initial post, I realize that I came off sounding like an a**hole. My apologies - please accept.
I realize that, as you posted, your message was to educate.
Although I have not had the opportuniy to own any of your products, I did get to listen to a pair of the new monoblocks running Wilson Sophia's a few months ago. Very nice indeed!
Again, I apologize,
Scott
I didn't think your post was at all offensive. In fact, I think you were correct in questioning my motives. Hopefully my follow-up post was clearer and more educational.
rw
A remote is nice and I use mine but I could live w/o it easily.
.
Believe what your ears say - not hearsay.
I would never buy a preamp that functioned like that.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
