Sorry guys, yes a Sonic Frontiers Power 3, running balanced.
Paul McGowan said: I never seem to bite of a small bite.
I have noticed. It is one of the many reasons we love you. :)
Paul McGowan said: yes a Sonic Frontiers Power 3 . . .
This was my stated suspicion from the beginning. One of the few pieces of equipment I wish I had kept.
I wouldn’t argue with Paul. Odds are that we are going to have an even better amp now since he has found a significant (relative) weakness which he was previously not aware of. While it may never match the Sonic Frontiers I would be surprised if Paul does not get it a lot closer than it is now. We all win!
J.P.
@pmotz33@sbcglobal.net
what do you mean " must say, trying to get a $4000 amp to equal (better?) a $10,000 amp that has been modified (to the equivalent of a $12,000 or more amp is a very noble but maddening pursuit."
It has been done already hence the launch of the NCORE NC400 =))
Now I don’t believe the NCORE has been tweaked previously by a company as committed as PS Audio and bringing the product at a realistic price not over inflated as most demand of their creations.
Paul and team is aiming for a sound which they are happy with and the time to deliver this sound quality is their’s alone anyone can choose to have confidence and wait or move on their choice.
Those people who don’t give up are few, and they often succeed with there goal - those who wait for these marvellous creations end up with something special 
the track record specks for itself the PWD is awesome at the price point and other PS Audio products too.
Good things come to those who wait 8->
Anything ever invented has always been bested - Is this fact :-?
Even the mighty SF-P3 which was IMHO a bit dry and clinical sounding required the later tweaks to get to where it finally sounded [SE and E+]. Paired with “wrong” speakers it would not have impressed many of us.
There is also the size, the heat and the tubes to consider so if someone comes close to the detail ability, plus more warmth, plus a small no-maintenence box, then it will be a big winner @4K.
for me, the SF-P3 was a slave to the tube type…hence the dry…whereas same tubes in the contemporary VTLs were always singing, lush where they should be, dry where they should be. I recall Mike Oddie at Alternative Audio in Dundas ON having a pair of MB450s in triode connected to a pair of Dynaudio Evidence Temptation’s, powered by the sota Meridian gear at the time…wow…
@pmotz33@sbcglobal.net Chasing perfection will, in fact, lead to madness because it cannot be achieved. I get it. However, perfection isn’t my goal. After listening at Arnie’s I have reset my expectations, realized I made a classic mistake - I ignored an entire frequency range that neither the Maggies or the IRS made clear - and the amp lacked in this area. I became oblivious to it and, in fact, worked hard at ignoring it. Happens to the best of us.
But I’ve been recalibrated. I’ve also recalibrated the loudspeakers themselves - they were part of the problem. Turns out the midrange drivers (24 of them) have lost their efficiency over 30 years of age - magnets of the type used here do that - and they were about 4dB down. Not realizing this I turned the tweeter controls down to match and the woofer controls up to do the same.
A new friend of mine, who also has an IRS, contracted with a fellow to manufacture a custom set of magnets and learn how to rebuild the EMIMS to factory specs. While not cheap ($3.3K) I bought a new set of EMIMS and over the weekend replaced all the drivers in the system. Holy crap! What have I been missing?
Now the differences in amps is clear and plain. The amp I’ve been working with, the one that went to the shootout, it’s dull - lifeless. Yes it images great, has wonderful bass and tonal balance, but the top end is closed in and missing.
So I am not searching for perfection but I do demand the amp we produce - the amp I use for the reference system - be close enough to the very best that I can put this situation to rest.
I have made significant progress. I am going for another shootout this week - as soon as Arnie can see me. I am not sure I have it where I want it, but I do need to see how much further I have to go.
These shoot outs sound like great fun.
Sort of. I have learned over the years to go without any great expectations of success - as an emotional person, I get crushed easily if my hopes are set too high. I can’t tell you the number of times I have gone certain that I have achieved something great, only to be squashed in the face of reality.
Not many people pass muster here - Arnie’s system is not just speakers, but a collection of the greatest electronics, cables and his mastery of the art - honed over his many years of design, attending live music shows, etc.
I am very fortunate to be able to spend time here and get a full dose of what it’s all about.
You have skin in the game. Were I there to quietly enjoy the shoot out it would be about the privilege to experience the process of prototyping as a bystander. That would be cool from my consumer perspective.
Paul.
Why not have Scott make a video of the whole process. It may well become an important historical document.
G
@pmotz33@sbcglobal.net Chasing perfection will, in fact, lead to madness because it cannot be achieved. I get it. However, perfection isn't my goal. After listening at Arnie's I have reset my expectations, realized I made a classic mistake - I ignored an entire frequency range that neither the Maggies or the IRS made clear - and the amp lacked in this area. I became oblivious to it and, in fact, worked hard at ignoring it. Happens to the best of us.
But I've been recalibrated. I've also recalibrated the loudspeakers themselves - they were part of the problem. Turns out the midrange drivers (24 of them) have lost their efficiency over 30 years of age - magnets of the type used here do that - and they were about 4dB down. Not realizing this I turned the tweeter controls down to match and the woofer controls up to do the same.
A new friend of mine, who also has an IRS, contracted with a fellow to manufacture a custom set of magnets and learn how to rebuild the EMIMS to factory specs. While not cheap ($3.3K) I bought a new set of EMIMS and over the weekend replaced all the drivers in the system. Holy crap! What have I been missing?
Now the differences in amps is clear and plain. The amp I've been working with, the one that went to the shootout, it's dull - lifeless. Yes it images great, has wonderful bass and tonal balance, but the top end is closed in and missing.
So I am not searching for perfection but I do demand the amp we produce - the amp I use for the reference system - be close enough to the very best that I can put this situation to rest.
I have made significant progress. I am going for another shootout this week - as soon as Arnie can see me. I am not sure I have it where I want it, but I do need to see how much further I have to go.
The (to me) obvious lesson here is that when one buys a 30 year old product to be used as a "reference" then it should go through some sort of calibration to ensure it's up to snuff and linear across its entire range. I think Paul was so excited to get them installed in the new room the issue of calibration never crossed his mind.
Oops.
Me, on the other hand, I want to actually retire my 30 year-old amp for the new one--but I sure hope it'll sound better than the Streets otherwise I'll be very disappointed! (Or at least realize how lucky I was to actually get it in the first place. Right now I actually do have that sense I can reach out and 'touch' the instruments in some cases, so it's not like it's been a bad amp or anything)
--SSW
@gordon - there’s an idea
Gordon said: There is also the size, the heat and the tubes to consider so if someone comes close to the detail ability, plus more warmth, plus a small no-maintenence box, then it will be a big winner @4K.
What? No matching T-shirt??
"Pee in Your Pants" Good!
<fieldset class="gc-fieldset">
<legend> Attached files </legend> <a href="/wp-content/uploads/attachments/57195=1987-ff63c595ebfe98a4ea640370f4cab9.gif"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/attachments/57195=1987-ff63c595ebfe98a4ea640370f4cab9.gif" class="gc-images" title="/FileUpload/74/ff63c595ebfe98a4ea640370f4cab9.gif" style="max-width:300px" /></a> </fieldset>
Paul,
Any comments on the shootout? How did you fair?
Paul,
Any comments on the shootout? How did you fare?
Not as good as expected. Still working on it, I think.
--SSW
Made major progress in terms of openness and top end - which is where we were focusing but not good enough. The changes we instituted in the design to achieve the added openness brought the design to its max and there’s nowhere left to go so I am in the middle of redesigning the input stage from the ground up.
The area we’re focusing on is global feedback and reducing it. The design we used was able to have a major reduction in loop feedback but would not allow us to go as far as we want. So we know the direction, now we need a different type of circuit to make it happen and maintain proper specs and performance.
Wow, it’s almost as if the tube preamp discussion could be merged with the PWA front end (Vgain) discussion.
In the for-what-it’s-worth department, I did remember last night that I had the circuit diagram for my AudioResearch LS26 tube preamp that I got a few years ago (I forgot the reason now–I think I had shorted out an output and was afraid I’d damaged something)
Anyway, the gain circuit is stupid-simple. You can split it into 4 distinct parts: input (source) selection, volume control, a FET (tube grid input) stage, and the tube and output capacitor.
In the case of the LS26 the volume control is done with some integrated circuits and are controlled by the microprocessor that also serves as the control for the main display.
The FET circuit is interesting: there are 3 FETs per channel, one each for the balanced high or low portion of the incoming balanced signal (+XLR and -XLR signals) and the third seems to be the bias (voltage supply) for the Source inputs on the other two FETs. (FETs work like a tube–the Source is the input power rail, the Gate controls how much current then flows to the output–called the Drain) The Drain from each FET then goes to the resistor ladder network that feeds the Grid on each half of the tube. (one dual-channel tube per channel, one half of the tube is the + side of the XLR signal, the other half is the - XLR signal) And, of course, the Gate for each FET is fed by the output of the volume control control chips mentioned above.
The tube’s Grid and the FET drain are connected to a three-resistor ladder network. On the high end, the top resistor is connected to the tube high voltage (100V) bias. The other side of the top resistor then is connected to the input resistor on the Grid for the tube and the second resistor of the ladder network. The other end of this second resistor then is connected to the Drain of the FET and the third resistor which then is connected to the ground (return) of the circuit. Voltage at the grid input is about 70V, and about 30 V at the FET Drain (I think-- the print is hard to read)
Output of the tube (Cathode) goes to the output capacitor and another resistor to ground (ground reference, I think) and then via a couple of resistors to the output jacks.
So – No feedback from what I can tell. Incredibly simple (I paid $5k for this???) and yet one of the most amazing things I’ve heard.
Now if only there was a FET that was linear that could operate at 100VDC on the Source and Paul’s problems would go away!
–SSW
I, too, have been thinking the high voltage found in tube designs is a factor.
@streets still works - indeed - that was the direction in which I was headed