|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.209.143.83
In Reply to: RE: Take a look at this. posted by totosooner@yahoo.com on June 26, 2016 at 01:51:15
One can't help but be impressed by your enthusiasm for McIntosh gear and your obvious devotion to it. However, you also seem to be impressed by the cost of that gear and equate cost with value. I don't think anyone wants to dampen your enthusiasm, but all the respondents are attempting to do is to temper you starry eyed devotion with a slight dose of reality.
A case in point is the KT88 made by SED in St. Petersburg Russia. Yes, it is possible that these McIntosh tubes have a more severe burn in and may be tested to a higher tolerance, that's quite plausible, but to further assert that they are somehow different in construction shows a certain naivete. There are domestic tube vendors that do a very similar burn in procedure because they know from experience what is important. They may charge extra for this service but not even close to the cost of tubes with gold writing on them.
I am happy that you enjoy your McIntosh gear and that you believe that you are receiving good value, but here on Tube DIY there are amateurs that build their own gear that can compete with McIntosh for technical specification e.g., the same frequency response and low distortion of the McIntosh products. That's just a fact. But it is sound quality, subtlety and refinement that we amateurs find compelling, definitely not distortion specifications or frequency response since they are easy to achieve, particularly with negative feedback. There is nothing wrong with negative feedback when properly applied, but many of us have noticed a correlation between negative feedback and dynamics and choose to have realistic dynamics rather than a ruler flat frequency response. That's the point: when you build your own gear you can tailor it to your own tastes, not to some technical ideal. When you build only one or two pieces you can afford to install superb quality components because you are only buying a few of each not hundreds or thousands. There are very clever audio engineers here on this board that build experimental circuits using rare or uncommon tubes. There is no reason to use a 6DJ8, 12AX7, or 12AT7 in gear you make yourself because you are not relying on current production tubes. McIntosh is forced to use tubes that are current production: their market demands it. A case in point is my latest build. I could have used a 6SL7 or a 12AT7 but instead chose the 6K5GT. Why? Because they sound much cleaner and have less distortion than the above tubes, perhaps because they have cylindrical plates. The primary difference is that McIntosh gear is built in large quantities and must use commonly available components; the amateur only has to build one or two examples and can pick and choose from a variety of sources, some quite rare or severely expensive.
The McIntosh gear is intended to be a showcase, to generate pride of ownership (quite successfully in your case); it is gear you can show off to your less well healed friends. It is like showing up at the country club in the latest model Ferrari when your friends have to drive a Lexus or BMW.
Follow Ups:
McIntosh is one of the best as commercial offerings go. But for sonics, this gear is easily bested by a well designed SET or push-pull triodes. That's why some of us build own own, or in some cases, modify an original. Like most things, once the limitations of mass marketing and profit are removed, improvements are relatively easy. Considering the context of this forum, I'm not even sure why we're discussing McIntosh specifications. Really, who cares?
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Again.\, thanks for your thoughts and ideas. They are appreciated. Any day my "truths" are sincerely challenged is a good day.
If I gave the impression the cost of the gear is the gating item,please let me correct that notion. Mcintosh may be expensive but I am impressed by the caliber of its design, and thus its design engineers. I have a BSEE, an MSEE, anMSCIS, and although somewhat irrelevant in this discussion an MBA (Finance/economics). I appreciate the cleverness and committment of Gow et.al. These guys led the way in many respects, as did Hafler, Carver,Shearer,Lansing, and the Chief Scientist at HK (forget his name). Although I took a number of electronics and solid state classes in school, my engineering professional career was in signal processing i.e. Radar and Electronic Warfare systems. Now that I am at the stage in life I am free to pursue things simply for the personal joy of them, I study speaker design, tube electronics, ect. and appreciate the pillars of the crafts irrespective of the retail cost of their contributions.
EX: I just rebuilt 2 PAS preamps. The line amp stage, the Phono stage, and the power supplies are only distantly related to Haflers designs. I just had them tested and they produce .1% THD yet cost a tenth of a Mcintosh preamp. By the way, the boards were designed by a guy named Waters at DynacoDesigns.com. A guy there did the rebuild and the workmanship is a thing of beauty. Extraordinarily clean and the wiring is magnificent. Very orderly and wonderful soldering.Again, because of the quality of the design I would stack these up against Mcintosh and they cost well under $1000 each. They just look like a PAS instead of the Mac glass or super polished stainless. WHO CARES.
And really, if we are discussing cost what does Mcshane charge for his Citation restorations? I think its over $3000 for an amp that was a $200 kit when released. (They are quite pretty)
Stewart
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: