|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.253.93.189
Money can be a funny thing in audio. You wish you had endless amounts but in reality it can only cause confusion. So I had a few bucks burning a hole in my pocket. Looking around I started to feel the spend me / upgrade me bug beginning to embed itself (more like take over) into my brain.Finally after years and about two tons of audio gear I finally have what I would consider " a good an audio setup for ME and my needs". So changing anything now would surely end in regrets. So I decided to take my money and fix up various audio parts in need of cosmetic or minor electronic work. Basically fix all those burn out lights and some caps and get a tuner for the downstairs system.
For once I feel really good passing by the hyped up gear that I am SURE in the end can only have mininal good changes, or really big bad changes.
System
McIntosh C-26 preamp
Dynaco MKII mono blocks with KT-88 driver tubes
Marantz 112 tuner (I have been down tuner alley and yes I am very happy)
NAD CDPBackup systems
Marantz 2252b ( I love this thing)downstairs system
Dynaco PAD fully modded preamp
Marantz 250 amp
Marantz 2230 receiver being used as a tunerHere is were I need a tuner.
Follow Ups:
I've been on a rampage the last two years. buying stuff, selling some stuff, then buying more stuff. i need to just stop. thing is you get addicted to trying different combinations out to see what sounds good together...my current game plan is to sell the stuff that i don't use and keep my main system plus some special pieces that i enjoy firing up from time to time.
so far, i love my KEF Calinda/REL Q100 combo. I'm done, that's the ticket for my enjoyment. I'm currently using a Quad 909 with it. sounds great, but i hope to get my modded Quad 405-2 back soon. the 909 does not have the 405-2 midrange magic. it's a great amp though.
my main preamp is my precision fidelity C4, end of story. i only have one digital front end. scottrt built me a fabulous modded technics SL-1600MK2 with 10 coats of lexus mystic gold metallic paint. i love my denon DL-103. so, done on the analog end too.
things I'm keeping anyway:
McIntosh MC60 - we go way back together and have been through a lot. they're like family
janszen Z-200. could easily be my main speakers. sound great with the macs too.
dynaco MKII - maybe I'll finish them one day...
things to spart with - THIS NOT A FOR SALE POST!:
KEF 104/2 - had fun finding and installing the Vifa MG27 tweeters. sound great, but they need a bigger house. they still image in my kitchen like my old bozak 302A urbans. and they are huge black boxes. not very sexy looking. and I'm addicted to the classic Brit voicing of the Calindas and the T27 tweeters.
conrad johnson pv1/pv2a - great preamp. awesome classic tube sound. i just like my PF C4 better.
Quad 34 preamp - thrown in with the 405-2. actually sounds very nice. but i don't need it
Technics SL-1700MK2 - great deck, but the 1600MK2 is better.
M&K VX4 sub - why did i buy this? decent though, going to give it to my uncle.
technics SP10MK2 - need to build a plinth and buy a tonearm. don't care, the 1600MK2 is good enough for me.
Basically most of us don't have the money to own and try truly good stuff (I mean no insult here). I am lucky in that I have a few inmates in my area that I meet with. We all have rather different stuff so it affords all of us a chance to hear different things that we couldn't afford to try otherwise.Maybe one guy has silver cables/interconnects and another has a $XXXX phono cartridge and another a speaker driver that sells for $600 each and another a $5000 DAC/transport and another what would amount to thousands of dollars in power conditioning equipment. I dunno about you but I can't afford to have 6+ figures invested in my audio system. But I do have a few choice items here and there and I am more than willing to let others audtion (and borrow) and decide if it is a good upgrade for their system. My experiences have convinced me that you can't buy stuff as good as what you can make. But quality parts are a great deal more money than "normal" parts. Compare a real NOS 300B with a current production el34....or a high nickel interstage transformer with a 12au7 phase splitter....or a grid choke with a metal film resistor. When you opt to use a part/solution that is 1000%+ more in cost than the norm, prices go up in a hurry!
For me the "proof in the pudding" is the ability to extract and hear things in a well known recording that I couldn't before. I acknowledge that isn't everyone's goal. Heck, I got enjoyable listening sessions out of a car sound system in the 70's.....and an enjoyable buzz out of boones farm wine.....but I have matured and why I can't/won't spend $5000 on a bottle of wine to say I can't taste and appreciate the difference is absurd. But hey, ignorance is bliss and if a bottle of bud and a 70's marantz is living large more power to you. I have been lucky enough to be spoiled and even though I have a 12 pack of bud in the frig and 5 marantzs sitting on the shelf I'm not kidding myself about if they are "good enough". Because "good enough" is only a nice way of saying "I can't afford what I really like".
Agree, up to a point. The system I have now cost under a kilobuck and is musically enjoyable.
The system I would own if money were no object costs $25,000.
For me, there is not much in between that is interesting enough to pursue.
Once you get above the entry level, I really have not found a good correlation between price and sound quality. In fact, some of the best sounding systems I have heard have been well set up systems of fairly modest cost ($3-5000). As far as your list of comparisons of ordinary vs "better" alternatives, I'd have to say it depends more on execution than the specific technology. Further, you can't pick a piece out of a circuit and say that it's categorically better. like a grid choke Vs a resistor. You really have to look at what else is different in the circuit and then figure out if that or the choke is the reason for the perceived improvement.If it floats your boat, that's fine; but it might not float mine.
Jerry
Jerry, do you think that the average guy here considers 5 grand a modest system? I get the feeling that they are thinking a $300 ebay/thrift store system is a world beater.As far as the parts I listed.....the point was to compare different options to the same task that have wildly different price points. It is a given that a poor design with great parts isn't near as good as a good design with any parts.
Upon re-reading my post I see I came off as a bit of an ass. Forgive me. My real point is that I see most hung up in lateral moves, often because of a lack of funds. Finding a way to get together with others and share can help. It is hard to stay current and things do get better. Which reminds me, I have to vist my Boca buddy as he has gone with a PC based music server and a USB DAC. Who knows, maybe that is the ticket? And I have yet to hear a top flight digital amp....the panasonic didn't thrill me.
So I guess I am saying it is important to hear a variety and to never think you have all the answers. I had a nice visit with another inmate on Saturday and we were all surprised by how his system was much different in presentation than what we expected. (200 WPC adcom with Mirage speakers that sounded warmer and tubey than our tube gear!).
I have never owned something I couldn't make better. And I have never owned something that I considered to be anywhere near the best. Maybe that will help you better understand my comments about "good enough". The best I can hope for is to make what "I can afford" good enough to be better than stuff I could never afford. Kinda like the days when we hot rodded a nova or chevelle (couldn't afford the 302 camaro:) and whupped up on the rich kids and their vettes.
I can't speak for anyone else, but for myself I could afford a lot more expensive system than I currently have. I could, but I won't; I just don't think it buys me anything, and I have other priorities.Is $5000 a fairly modest system? For two channels I think it's fairly expensive and it's probably the upper limit of my tolerance for cost for stuff. If it includes both CD and phono and is wanted to play loudly in a large room, you sure can spend $5000 pretty quickly. Back when I had a house with a sound treated listening room and a bi-amped system, I had a lot more than that in 2007 dollars in it. I'd likely buy used to stretch my budget further, but not from ebay (no comfort level there at all) and at that level, not from thrifts either.
My present Advent based system has about $1500 in it and there is no phono, just CD and a good tuner. Everything but the CD player was bought used and at fair prices, but hardly thrift store bargains. The same sound quality can probably be obtained for less than half that by going to ebay and searching thrifts and house sales.
Getting back to the "better" stuff issue, I think a lot of the highly regarded high end items are grossly over-priced and perform and sound no better than much more humble gear. I understand the very limited distribution and small production volume issues, but I really haven't seen where it necessarily buys you better sound. What I do see is a lot of miss-direction and smoke and mirrors and lore of the "everybody knows" variety, backed up by glowing reviews in the "high end" press. Reviews that are very often not supported by John Atkinson's measurements.
For example: Many people over a long period of time have touted triode operation over tetrode. but in converting a given amp from tetrode to triode, the operating point changes and the source impedance of the amp increases by a factor of three. Basically going from a Damping Factor of 15 to 5. That's enough to significantly change the system frequency response. So is the "better" sound with triodes due to triode operation or is it due to the different interaction with the speakers due to the higher source impedance? Seems that nobody has run a controlled experiment on that. Same is true of low NFB, SETs, etc.
Again, for myself, I won't pay extra for that hype. A long time ago, I made the statement that I had never met an engineer, whose professional work I respected, who was a rabid audiophile. Now that's not to say that I believe that all amps sound the same or that measurements tell the whole story. They don't. But neither do I believe that just listening is sufficient.
This is longer than I expected, guess I just got up on my soapbox again. There are guys here who have quite expensive gear, and there are some who only spent $300. I have heard some amazingly good $300 systems, and I have also heard some incredibly bad $30,000 systems. Typically, the difference has been the skill in set up and matching of components. I suppose you could argue that $30,000 worth of gear set up and matched with the same skill would be immeasureably better. But 100 times better-probably not. 10 times better, again, I doubt it. Twice as good, yes, probably. It's a matter of very quickly diminishing returns and it also gets into the issue of the system very quickly becoming limited by the quality of the source material, and after that point is reached, making the system "better" is futile.
One more point and I'll quit. High sound levels in big rooms is expensive. You need big amps or even bi-amping and you need speakers that can handle that power and SPL level. Similarly, deep bass is expensive in large rooms. So my Advents with a 50 watt amp at moderate levels in a 12' x 15' room are one thing, and getting the same sound quality at 10 dB higher levels in a 5000 square foot room is something else entirely. (that's about 25 times the power and power handling I need in the den) So I don't think you can put a simple price tag on it.
Jerry
you and I agree more than we disagree ( I have a lot of respect for your knowledge and experience). Biggest difference is you are older and have already had your fun in this hobby. Me, I am still trying to find out how far I can go (so I get a little excited and full of piss and vinegar at times). Plus building my own stuff is a partly a hobby, partly a way for me to acquire what I want, and partly a lame attempt at self-teaching myself electronics :)I could not agree more about engineering and snake oil. I can't think of any other "technical" area with such a disdain for, and lack of, competent engineering. But then I am someone who would think taking an existing amp and simply triode strapping the output tubes with no other changes is an incompetent act! And don’t even get me started on designs that run parts way outside rated specs.
FWIW I run a tri-amped system with solid state for the bass. All drivers are picked and operated in such a manner that the amps (other than bass) see a constant impedance load. This gives me a great deal of freedom in amplifier design as I don’t have to be near as concerned with output Z and can tailor an amp to the job at hand. I also have a fondness for old solidly engineered parts and designs. Nothing would please me more than to have western electric type designs with a mixture of old and new parts. WE, RCA, Bell labs….now that was when audio had top notch engineering behind it.
Amen to the lack of competent engineering. It reminds me of a debate between John Dunlavy (a real engineer) and John von Schweikert. Dunlavy tied him in knots.There are a number or good engineers in the business. Nelson Pass for one, Floyd Toole at Infinity, and Ken Kantor. Lots of others as well. But there also have been a lot of hacks and pretenders.
I'm still having fun in the hobby and still learning a lot. The odd thing is that I can still get excited about it. I think some of what has me in a satisfaction mode right now is the purchase last year of an RTA and good microphone. I can actually see what I'm doing, and the fact that the modded Advents measured so well was icing on the cake. I really was pretty excited about that.
Engineer or not, your triamped system is the right way to do that. For one thing, if the impedance is flat, there is no interaction with the amp's source impedance, so you're free to pick the amp for other criteria.
I subscribe to Stereophile, but only because of John Atkinson's test measurements. He does a good job of that and it's fun to see some highly touted and expensive speaker have a frequency response that looks like a cross section of the Alps. And it's also nice to see something like the Infinity Primus 360 have such good measurements for only $600. They have recently tested quite a number of $1000 to 1500 speakers which got both rave reviews and fine measured performance. Considering that a pair of walnut Advents built today in the USA would probably go for $1200-1500/pair; that's about the right price point for that level of performance. Of course, today, Kloss could not get away with the Masonite parts, the stamped steel frames on the speakers, and cheap crossover parts. So maybe they would go for $2000/pair in the "audiophile" model, set up for bi-wiring and internally wired with exotic wire.
Do you know of Tom Danely? He is a speaker guy who posts on the asylum that I am very impressed with. Dr. Geddes has some stuff worth looking into and I use waveguides modeled after his work. There is "some" innovation in speakers and they are much better now. Too bad Kantor left NHT but their new speakers get good reviews??...I haven't heard them but have some old ones. And let me tell you I respect speaker engineers since I recently had the gall to think I could build some and am getting my ass kicked despite what I think was a recipe for easy success. A very multi disciplined field indeed. Value can indeed be had in speakers including some vintage ones. I do have the advents but these days I lust more after the altecs and revere the work by the greats like Harry Olsen. Some guys can read the books…some guys write the books!It warms my heart to see you still active and even more to see you say as much. At times I fear my hearing will be too far gone when I finally have the time to really indulge my hobby(ies).
Needless to say I could continue this chat and ramble for hours. Suffice to say I think times are better than they have been in a long time. New technology, superior parts, finally some fresh ideas, vastly superior computer sims/models, as well as a return to old school magnetics, horns/waveguides, high efficiency drivers, and even field coil drivers. And that’s only speakers! And on top of it all, how blessed can we be because I could think of…what?…10 maybe 20 guys that post here that are all people that can command top money as consultants/designers. It is an altruistic thing and a huge leg up to those willing to learn enough to understand what they have to say. Lord knows we didn’t have those resources on tap back in the 60’s-70’s.
If I seem testy at times it is because I strongly feel that many in this forum concentrate on some of the worst years of audio design. A lot of the new(er) stuff, like the 360 you mentioned, offers better value. To me there was like a 30 year period of pretty bad stuff.
Many people over a long period of time have touted triode operation over tetrode. but in converting a given amp from tetrode to triode, the operating point changes and the source impedance of the amp increases by a factor of three.Perhaps for amps like the popular Dyna models where they are "modified" to deliver triode operation. My VTLs come from the factory with a switch that allows for either operation where that generalization may not apply. In any event I get extremely flat measured operation in the bottom four octaves in either mode. Indeed, the top octave does roll off by 1 db in triode, but I simply adjust the HF level to adjust. I don't like the sound of truly flat anyway. Much too bright. There is, however, better articulation in the critical midrange.
High sound levels in big rooms is expensive.
What I've found is that as the purity of the system goes up, the need for high SPLs to achieve realistic levels (save the head banging 120 db+ flavors) goes down. I typically listen to my systems with average levels in the 70s and peaks at the 90 db level.
You have banged the system matching drum loudly and I have subsequently become a firm believer in that concept. Over at Prophead, there was discussion of amps dealing with reactive loads. It seems tube fare better overall than most SS in that regard when you examine the voltage /current operation in all quadrants. Which may be why I prefer them with my stats and prefer SS on the double Advents.
Short of a measurement, it's hard to say what happens in your VTL's. Do they specify anything?It's still true that if you want high levels, you've got to pay for it. My experience is that really clean systems don't seem all that loud when cranked up to the point where conversation becomes impossible. My "non-loud" thing.
I generally like my music a little louder than I can play it here in the condo. The NAD C320BEE has a lot of dynamic headroom, so it clips at around 110 W/ch on musical peaks. So I've got plenty of headroom at my normal 75-80 dB levels, which I consider pretty "polite". The more dynamic music recordings show as much as 16 dB (40:1) ratio of peak to average levels and I try to size my systems around that. That means my long term average can only be around 2.8 W/ch. If you work the math for my room, it works out fairly well with the 89 dB sensitivity Advents and that amp and measurements show the theory to be fairly close and I'm good to around 85 dB long term average.
Yeah, I guess I've really pressed the matching thing for all it's worth, but it does seem to be the key ingredient to get that "magic" we all look for. All my amps measure very flat on the bench, but they all sound different with my speakers. Part of that follows the source impedance interaction theory, but the low bass does not and I have a variety of bass sounds which don't correlate to anything I have measured or to specifications. Could very well be the reaction of the amp to the speaker reactance. After all, the bass range of a conventional speaker is usually the most reactive region.
Jerry
Short of a measurement, it's hard to say what happens in your VTL's. Do they specify anything?While they specify different power and frequency response specs for triode vs. tetrode, there is only a single stated output impedance. It may be because they take a different approach with their output transformers. Instead of the typical multi-tap-for-different-loads scenario, they devote all the windings in their custom built transformers for a single nominal 5 ohm output. The proof, however, is in the pudding. The speakers do not exhibit the roller coaster impedance curve of the Advents and the somewhat arbitrary load SP uses for its tests. As I mentioned, I have measured an exceptionally flat response in the bottom four octaves in my room. I get +/- 1.5 db from 30 hz to 200 hz. There is a small 3 db rise at 25 hz then it dives -10 db to 20 hz. That took lots of experimentation with placement of the speakers, listening couch, bass contour, and a dozen bass traps.
I generally like my music a little louder than I can play it here in the condo. The NAD C320BEE has a lot of dynamic headroom, so it clips at around 110 W/ch on musical peaks. So I've got plenty of headroom at my normal 75-80 dB levels, which I consider pretty "polite".
Perhaps I just have oversensitive hearing, but I really do not enjoy listening much above that level. I crank some pop music a bit, but nothing like a "live" rock concert. This past weekend we went to a musical event at the local university which was sound reinforced. I ended up stuffing tissue in my ears because it was so loud and sounded hard as nails with dozens of wireless microphones for the performers screeching through the PA. Speaking of NAD, I owned a 320BEE for a short period of time until I realized the purchase was stupid in that I really needed an HT receiver. So I traded it back to the dealer towards a very similar sounding T763.
Part of that follows the source impedance interaction theory, but the low bass does not and I have a variety of bass sounds which don't correlate to anything I have measured or to specifications.
It would certainly make things easier if everything were fully understood and measureable. Thanks again for your insight into the matching issues. Perhaps that is why I have favored tube amps and Nelson Pass' SS designs because they do well in a reactive environment. I also like his sense of humor. You may find this manual to one of his "kitchen table" products interesting. I particularly liked the reference to triode and pentode character devices.
Salvation advents modified with much help from inmates, particularly Jerry. Ebay Dual CS 5000 $265. First receiver $10 Technics SA 200 and I was very pleased with the sound. I really enjoyed redoing the Advents as Jerry has stated authorship has its rewards.Enjoying the music and getting to a place where the illusion of "live" to me is a goal. However, I can not nor would I want to spend $5000 on a system. My ears tell me the Advents are truly wonderful. Although different vinyl has different results. Some studio mixes have the air of the artist being in the room while some live lps disappoint. Side one of ELP Live comes to mind. Mostly because my memory of the live performance is to readily available. They created an almost permeable atmosphere in concert and there is no way that can be reproduced with two speakers in a room, no matter how large the room is.
Still I'm trying to get a Marantz 2330B up and running. My job gets in the way at times and its been that way the past couple of weeks. Although the Technics is very modest I'm not sure how much the Marantz will outperform it.
Unfortunately, hmmm...maybe fortunately, my ears are not that good and getting older all the time. So, I'm not sure how much money would benefit me in upgrading components. And, I like the idea of putting something together that sounds awesome that cost very very little.
You're right is a sense. But my second (marantz) system is a garage system, aka outdoors esentially. So I really don't want to put anything of significant value out there. My main system is the Dynaco MKII with KT-88 and for now a McIntosh preamp.The real problem is WAF and cash. Yes, if I had a ton of cash and MOSTLY didn't have to explain to the wife what the UPS man is dropping off at the door, I would definetly enjoy more audio experimenting.
But one thing I have found was one mans trash is another mans gold. As you feel you have a line on better systems, I too have friends that I just CAN'T believe the CRAP they are praising. And some of these guys are what I would call RICH.
For many years, so much of what I did was to move sideways. (crab audio?) Sure, things sounded different, but after the aura of newness wears off, you find little things here and there that still bother you. Funny thing is, spending a LOT more doesn't fix it. I went through that over and over for a very long time. One sideways move after another.Over many years I have owned or used for an extended period (duplicates, like 2 pair of Advents, not counted):
39 speaker systems (mono, stereo pairs, subs)
52 amps, preamps, integrated amps, and receivers
10 tuners
11 CD & DVD/CD players
14 turntables and changers
6 cassette decks
70 phono cartridgesSo here I am, totally satisfied with a pair of modded Advents, an NAD integrated amp, an Onkyo tuner, and a Rotel CD player. I've done all the tweeks I felt were important, it all measures really well and I have spares and backup for everything. Nothing more to do except listen. (and it sounds really good)
So what's different this time around? Several things, I think:
1) I've got a lot of work in the speakers, and it has worked out well with both excellent sound and very good measurements, so there's a lot of pride of authorship.
2) The room match and component match is unusually sucessful. The pieces really do complement each other.
3) There are no loose ends and nothing that's marginal. I'm happy about the performance, reliability, and build quality of all the pieces.
4) It meets all my criteria for an engineered system.
5) Nothing I have heard in the last 2 years has sounded better, or even as good.All those items seem to add up to a sense of closure.
I've narrrowed down my stuff to 2 main systems - one is all mcintosh MC-2105/C-28/MR-77/MQ-101 with ML-2C speakers, and the other is a Pioneer SX-626 with Klipsch Forte speakers. I still go out trolling garage sales for electronics, but I usually turn them around on ebay to get money to buy CDs - I'm in the "music enjoying" mode now and very content with my gear. I always keep a couple of backup receivers around and switch them out with the Pioneer occasionally just to hear a different sound.
i'm with jerry here. after years of tinkering around i went back to my 1975 pair of bozaks symphonies. what sounded so good to me in '75' were the bozaks driven by an ess series '2' eclipse amp and a technics su 9070 preamp. the only difference today is that they are now bi-amped with new crossovers by pat tobin. there are now tubes on top and that eclipse amp running the bottom end. and oh yes, that underrated technics su 9070 is back in place. still experimenting with different tubes in my cd player and the fisher amps but nothing more.
Since you mention no speakers.
...as I don't seem to have the interest in sweating the details of this stuff as much as many of the rest of you do. the cobbled together system I am listening to this morning seems fine, and the sound seemed fine on the theater system last night too.
I've got several sets of drivers in boxes suitable for building more speakers, but the problem is that I don't want to give up on any of the 14 pair of speakers I have already both vintage and home brew and have no room for more. It's tough to get up the enthusiasm to mess around some more if you are not unhappy with what you already have.Come to think of it that's an interesting commentary on life in general. Some people spend their entire lives chasing dreams and unsuccessfully trying to find pots of gold at the end of rainbows, never recognizing or appreciating that the dream and the pot of gold is already theirs if they only took a moment out to stop and look and listen.
I thought you were building a projection theater system at one point..now THAT's an idea I could get enthusiastic about.
Some people spend their entire lives chasing dreams and unsuccessfully trying to find pots of gold at the end of rainbows, never recognizing or appreciating that the dream and the pot of gold is already theirs if they only took a moment out to stop and look and listen.Very true. That was certainly the way I approached audio in my teens when I was constantly searching for "more" where the average age of a component was about a year. When I did finally experience audio nirvana in my early twenties, I was released of my obsession. I had finally reached the summit of the mountain. Today, I certainly enjoy hearing statement systems from time to time but no longer am driven to constantly pursue them.
While the main system does provide an incrementally better "you-are-there-experience", I really do spend more time overall with the vintage one. When the time for me to downsize occurs, I will probably end up keeping the Advents. :)
I wouldn't think so. over the last few years since you first posted on this forum, you've come a long, long way in your understanding. That alone is worth a lot. Second, it seems to me you've refined your tastes a great deal. Also, of great value.So, in that context, why should you feel badly about doing it your way in the light of your improved knowledge. Seems to me to be an "informed decision".
I've got pretty good stuff. For something to sound better than what I've got, it's probably gonna be a speaker upgrade, cause my sorry old ears don't hear a lot of difference in electronics. But because I've already got pretty good speakers, I'll probably have to look at more than 100, maybe 200 or 300 sets of decent speakers at garage/estate/rummage/junk sales before I find an affordable upgrade that is really an upgrade.On a typical Saturday hunt, I'll spend 3 hours, 2 gallons of gas, and be lucky to see one pair of decent speakers. Multiplying all that out and putting a value of about $20/hour on my time, I figure that my next pair of vintage junk speakers figures to cost me the equivalent of about $10,000.
That is a realistic way of looking at things, how true.Why dont you just do one brain surgery and then buy a pair of $10,000 speakers. You will have a lot more time to listen to your gear.
The interesting thing about the hunt is the things you find and like that you were not aware of.
Happy hunting or operating.
Aren't those Marantz 2230 receivers fantastic? How do they sound so good? I am tempted to do the preouts to another power amp just to see what it would be like.I have a minor problem with my 2230's volume pot - slight unevenness in channels in only some positions, but otherwise sounds great.
My problem is I keep stumbling into new (old) vintage gear, so I try it out, and am never satisfied.
Glad you have some contentment, that's nice gear.
an amazing performer.
I just keep going back to it and I've got lots of options although none as nice as Airtime.
The 2230 is clearly a superior piece of vintage gear. I used mine to preamp an ST-70 with terrific results before upgarding to a PAS. The only weak link, to my way of thinking, is the tuner section. I picked up a Kenwood 815 at a church rummage sale ($5) and that solved that problem.People who buy those anonymous black plastic boxes at Circuit City just don't know what they are missing.
Having been a funk-n-rock fanatic, wanted systems which could deliver plenty of clean volume via moderate wattage. Thus efficient two-way speaker designs became a prefered medium. 'Twas through a Fisher tubed amp, coupled with a Sanyo/Fisher solid-state receiver, & Utah/Jensen speaker system moi first experienced hearing recording limitations! Just like what them tech sarges used to point out thru their Fisher systems(Macs-n-Marantz were for officers). Eventually got comfortable with Marantz solid-state tonality, until bein' Sansui 9090 seduced recently. Love that reserve-power sonic solidity. Having hemp-coned Celestions has also been a revelation. Through Mesa Boogie Black Shadows can clearly hear how midrange-centric those vintage amps-n-receivers were. So it's all just a matter of mix-n-match to suit personal tonal taste. Am still vunerable to occasional gear substitutions, only to put the original back in da signal chain. After several months enjoying them smooth Black Shadows, went back to hemp-coned V30s in da living room speaker system. There's sum'pin sumptuous about alnico robustness, even faux in this instance. Especially combined with 60's-era alnico tweets. Harmonic hipster heaven! Would only be tempted by Celestion's new 50 watt Gold driver, which would be sent to Brown Soun for hemp-reconing(if ultimate hi-fi were required, substitute Celestion Century driver). For around a grand total, you'll hear your amp's full glory(hemp cones demand quality amplification). Who'd wanta spend several G's on a speaker that might tank in resale? Better to have spent two bills on an unloved '64 Fender Jag back in '79, which now garners several grand thanks to Curt Cobain!!!
i got the jag too
Totally different vibe from a Strat, plavcam! Never could figure out that damn tone control system, thus it was bypassed. Wired the stock pick-ups in series, & morphed into a Lou Reed-ish Rock-n-Roll Animal! Throughout the 80s 'twas great for wrangling Reed, Bowie, Mott, Tubes, Roxy, et al! Changed to Dimarzio H.S. 3s in 1990 proper, to accomodate stereo wiring. Tech who installed brass nut recommended 'em as ideal replacements. In stacked humbucker mode you'd get pretty close to that stock Jag tone, without all that damn hum, he explained. Then, thanks to those slider controls, it's a snap to switch into single-coil mode. Those other two sliders are for individual pick-up out-of-phase inversion, akin to positions 2 & 4 on Strat pick-up selectors. A veritable tonal palette, with quick-n-easy access to boot. Original sunburst finish arrived with a few finish nicks, which were subsequently joined by several solder bubbles. Damn! Just like real rock-n-roll!!!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: