Your space to participate, comment & critique.

For published correspondence September 2009 thru February 2010, click here.
For published correspondence June 2009 thru September 2009, click here.
For published correspondence January 2009 thru June 2009, click here.
For published correspondence May 2008 thru January 2009, click here.
For published correspondence December 2007 thru May 2008, click here.
For published correspondence July 2007 thru December 2007, click here.
For published correspondence February 2007 thru July 2007, click here.
For published correspondence November 2006 thru February 2007, click here.
For published correspondence June 2006 thru November 2006, click here.
For published correspondence April 2006 thru June 2006, click here.
For published correspondence February 2006 thru April 2006, click here.
For published correspondence December 2005 thru February 2006, click here.
For published correspondence September thru December 2005, click here.
For published correspondence July thru September 2005, click here.
For published correspondence April thru July 2005, click here.
For published correspondence February thru April 2005, click here.
For published correspondence December 2004 thru February 2005, click here.
For published correspondence September 2004 thru December 2004, click here.
For published correspondence August 2004 thru September 2004, click here.
For published correspondence July 2004 thru August 2004, click here.
For published correspondence February 2004 thru July 2004, click here.
For published correspondence June 2003 thru February 2004, click here.
For published correspondence June 2002 thru June 2003, click here.

By repeat inquiry, here is the owner's manual of the Garrard 301 vintage turntable [856KB PDF] whose rebuild Jeff Day described in his series of articles.
Srajan -

Well I’m one of those people who can’t leave anything alone. Hey, for me half of the fun of this hobby is trying new things. Anyhow, with the help of your reviews I’ve assembled a great system I never dreamed I would own. But… something is still missing and I can’t put my finger on it, my jaw is not dropping as much as I would like. Here is my system and some thoughts on how to take it to the next level, I’d really appreciate your input on what might be my weakest link.

Speakers: Zu Druid mk IV/08
Amp: Yamamoto A-08S w/EML 45 Globes (love this thing)
Preamp/DAC: Red Wine Audio Isabella w/Siemens 7308’s
Source: Apple Lossless library on my home server, streamed to my audio rack via Sonos and connected to the Isabella via coax SPDIF. This sounds 95% as good as connecting a laptop directly to the Isabella via USB. XXHighend is another matter, but won’t play Apple Lossless, only FLAC.

I’ve been planning on acquiring a pair of Essences for a whil, but now I’m also wondering if I shouldn’t ditch the Isabella and go for the Yamamoto YDA-01 paired with an Esoteric C-03 (used) or ModWright 36.5 to feed the A-08S. A Wyred STP SE is another option, but I gather a step down from the former two.

Keep up the great work!
Ian Butt

The first thing to ask is, what turns you on? For the jaw to drop, you need to be triggered. Some folks get triggered by dynamics and speed. Others get off on tone density and fullness. And so on. All trigger points are equally valid but they do require a somewhat different system voicing or calibration - just like car suspensions are tuned for canyon carving or family vacations, daily commuting or offroading. Which one is perfect for you depends on how you'll use your car. There's no one-size-fits-all formula.

To get anywhere, we first have to diagnose our system's ailment. Why isn't yours going all the way? Without a clear diagnosis, you can't go about a strategic cure. If you don't know what's missing—that would be true for most of us—it's because you don't know what's possible. The best thing I can recommend for that is to sleep around. Hear as many systems as you can (friends, stores, shows) and take note what the ones you like have in common. Some will elicit your respect, many will be boring, a few will engender outright lust - even if they all have certain compromises or aspects you'll consider imperfect.

The mission isn't finding the perfect system to recreate it. Your room will be completely different. The mission is to identify your hot buttons, then determine which of those your current setup misses. Only then can one zero in on what component is the most likely suspect that's holding things back. You've got some home work to do I think...

Srajan
Greetings from the States,

I wanted to point out what I felt (IMHO) was a glaring omission to your Hexateq review. You state, "It seems fair to say that until class D gains more of its own Nelson Pass, John Curl and Charles Hansen equivalents..." I would certainly put John Ulrick's name along side these others. While you may not like the sound of the amps (I've had 3 different Spectron amps with various levels of modification on two of them but am now running a Pass amp), I think leaving his name out of an article that attempts to hit on the "big names" of Class D is an unfortunate oversight.

Cheers,
Joseph Pagan

You're confused. The 'celebrity' designers I singled out are specifically non class D. Class D for high-end is still too new a category to sport designers who have achieved equivalent renown in the minds of most audiophiles. Had I wanted to mention class D celebrities, I would certainly have included Ulrick - as well as Bruno Putzeys, the B&O brain trust and others.

Srajan
Hello Srajan,

Like many of your readers I read a lot of audio sites. And like a lot of readers I recognize that you are heads and shoulders (in what you hear and how you describe it) above the rest. This does not mean that I agree with your tastes (for that Jeff Day is probably closest to what I look for in music playback as his recommendations have never steered me wrong) but it does mean that I will read a review of a $15,000 component that I know I will never own just because I want to read your piece. With a family, a job, me restoring a 100 year old loghouse, and an avid reader of literature my time is valuable so this is the highest compliment I can give.

Over the years I have seen your writing prowess grow, with only the occasional dud along the way. There is definitely an uprising arc in your skill of describing gear. I am writing because I was so impressed with your preview of the Gallo Strada. The energy and flow of the piece was informative and entertaining.

Bravo,
Joshua Jacobson
Hello David,

I’ve been following your reviews of various digital amps for the past few years and it appears you might a comparative grasp on a fair number of them.  I know its hard to say this one is simply better than that, but I’m trying to narrow it down.  Reading your reviews, I’m trying to draw conclusions from various comparisons.   In one of your reviews, it may have been a Mark and Daniel, you’d mentioned that the Winsome Mouse was very close and even hard to distinguish from the Nuforce amps.  It also appeared that the latest 5 channel Dared was at least the equal of the Mouse (in 2 channel mode?).  Then there was the Virtue amp that you liked that I guess was not delivered…but you favored.

The reason I’m asking is that I’ve toyed around with some of the cheaper (sonic t and trends) digital amps and quite like them, making me want to step up to the more costlier versions like the Nuforce or Audio Zone (I noticed one in your photos but don’t remember a reference).  So when I hear that something like the Nuforce is marginally (if any) better than the Winsome…it makes me wonder.  .  I hope this question isn’t too broad.

Also, as a side question, what were you using as a 5 channel preamp in those multi amp systems you were using, there don’t seem to be many out there?  I agree about sending the video straight to the screen, but haven’t found many 5 channels preamps out there.

Thanks very much, David, for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Murray Hutchins

Hello Murray,

You just threw the trickiest question at me. Did I made all those comments? The Winsome Labs was hard to distinguish from NuForce? That must be during one audition session with one particular CD. I clearly remember I reported the Mouse tripping on Orff's Cartulli Carmina driving Mark & Daniel Mini. And up till my recent Dared DV-6C review I reconfirmed that the Winsome Labs are not the perfect match for Mark & Daniel.

Seriously, keeping focus on the USP (unique selling point) of each affordable Tripath amp has been challenging but thanks to the individual designer's effort they all have reasonably clear-cut sonic characteristics that help consumers to make decision.

Let me clarify a few things. First, "can do" doesn't mean "do well". Yes, Virtue TWO can drive Apogee and Dynaudio. But NuForce Ref9 V2/V2 SE unleash the full potential of these speakers.  Winsome Labs Mouse can drive Mark & Daniel. But Symphonic Line RG-3/RG4 or Sim Audio Celeste W-4010 SE make them sing. I hope I didn't convey the wrong message that the more expensive amps are only marginally better otherwise I should have sold them all. Second, affordable Tripath amps do have that "wow" effect on us and without the luxury of bench test in a sound lab, I could only resort to some primitive torture tests to get a more objective reading. If I recall, all of these Tripath or chip amps (Virtue excluded) failed in the most extreme situations. Like I said, I never admitted the Winsome Labs Mouse to be perfect match for M&D speakers. But I did mention that their sonic characteristics (not power though) could be best described as the mini-NuForce. Even with Virtue, which can play all the notes right, there lies somewhere in the space between notes (as Joël puts it) something the more expensive amps can do so eloquently that the affordable amps can hardly match.

Bottom line is, affordable products are compromise but these affordable amps offers such exceptional price/performance value that the compromise becomes ignorable - especially with carefully matching speakers, the space between notes could be handsomely enriched. So my suggestion is start with the speaker you like and be guided by your budget. For my ears, I prefer KingRex with Klipsch F2 or F1.

There's no 5-channel preamp in my Winsome Labs+ M&D setup. I use the Restek Sector preamp for the front channels and a Recoton AV switch box to select the other 3-channel inputs (Oppo/Pionner/desktop PC). In fact, I could make a S-video to RCA adapter to turn the Recoton into a 5-channel switch box.

Hope this helps.

David
Hello David,

Greetings from Alberta. To refresh your memory, I am the owner/op of audioboutique.ca in Southern Alberta who contacted you awhile back. I just got in some John Blue JB4 speakers to add to my growing lineup of single driver speakers.  I was so impressed with them that I sent Sacha Kuettel an Email of which I will quote a portion. I hope you pass these impressions on to Tommy Wu. I have been in audio for over thirty years and heard everything from soup to nuts, but I find the JB4 to be one of the best small speakers I have heard in this price range. I have yet to try them on my TL66 mono blocks, which I feel will take them to the next level. Concerning your "Second and Third Opinion" review I feel the speaker still got a bum rap. The listening room at Oscar the Wide's place was totally inappropriate for the JB4, way to big, on the long wall, and where they are positioned (in the picture at least) they don't have a chance at making bass. I realize a reviewer has a great challenge on his hands when reviewing a product, but he also has a responsibility to the readers to rightly represent a product.

Some of the reviewer's rooms I see the gear pictured in leave a lot to be desired and I also realize a reviewer cannot have an anechoic chamber either, but some effort needs to be made to match room to gear, and gear to gear along with appropriate room dimensions and treatment. While I was writing this email, I listened to the JB4s on my Decware SE84C+ 2w/ch SET with great results in the same room as mentioned to Sacha, but on the short wall. This speaker is easy to place: with flea and low powered tube amps and with low to medium powered chip or tri-path amps in smaller environments. When reviewing a product, a thousand tweaking options should not be mentioned, it will scare off the average audio buyer whom the likes of almost every manufacturer, distributor and dealer are trying to reach. Telling of all the tweaks will only reach the DIYers, tweakers, geeks, and cheapskates who will never buy from us, and will keep some of the best gear from getting into the hands of the average plug and play music lover.

Aside from pertinent images, a review should not cover more than two 8-1/2 x 11 pages with 12 point print. Attention spans are shorter than 50 years ago. Reviews should cut to the chase with only pertinent information and images. I realize the very nature of reviewing audio is subjective, but I feel every effort should be made to make a review as objective as possible. You are one of my favorite reviewers, so do not think I am putting you down but rather just offering constructive criticism not only to you but to your colleges also. I realize you were in a tricky situation when asked to do a "second review" on the JB4, but which is more important, covering a college's tail by doing a "beating around the bush" review or sitting down and doing a straight to the point "David Kan only" review using the most likely amp, the TL66 and being done with it? If Mr. Beudot gets his nose out of joint, too bad, at least the truth was served and a great product possibly redeemed from the "controversial" list.  

It's sad that the JB4 dwells in the shadow of the JB3. The JB3 is terrific in its own right, but the JB4 is in a completely different and superior class. I think part of the problem with both reviews was focusing on Tommy Wu's claim they were like the Rogers LS3/5a when that was not his claim at all according to the addendum at the end of Mr. Beudot's review. Listening to Tommy's products tells me he's got a very refined ear, and chances are both you and/or Mr. Beudot misunderstood the nature of Tommy's claim. Perhaps contacting Tommy for a clarification of his claim before publishing a review would have been more appropriate on Mr. Beudot's part rather than adding it as an addendum to a bad review.  

Best Regards,
Rob Martin   

Hello Rob,

Thank you for your comments and observations on JB4. I have passed them on to Tommy. His feedback: "Rob Martin is a true connoisseur of fullrange speakers. And he fully understands the design concept of the JB4. I'm very impressed." (Back translated from his Chinese message.)

I admire (and begin to share) your passion for JB4 and JB3. As the distributor/dealer of the products you represent, its your personal touch that makes your service unique. As reviewers, its our personal style. The difference is, you'd try to satisfy everybody and we couldn't even try. Your comment regarding attention spans is interesting. I should thank you for your patience knowing that the average length of my recent reviews is about 10 pages in 10-point print yet you rate me as one of your favorite reviewers. I'm glad that you're not alone. My recent Dared DV-6C review is 12-page long in 10-point print and one reader told me that he read and re-read the review and enjoyed it. He bought the amp, was very happy with it and most pleased with the extra informations (including virtual surround from 2-channel input) I provided in the review that he could not find elsewhere. So I guess it's the content that matters. Another review of the same amp elsewhere doesn't even tell readers what power amp chips are used in the hybrid circuit. Easy to read? I suppose.

Regarding the "beating around the bush review", I never felt it that way. And I don't think you should if you could read that just one more time. (It's only 5-page long.) That particular review was a golden opportunity for me to try something new and I have never enjoyed a review so much. I could be wrong but it occurs to me that when you have your distirbutor/dealer hat on, you have less attention span than an average reader. You want the review to cut to the chase so that your potential buyers get the selling points instantly without even thinking. Well, I like my readers to do a bit of thinking.

Again, thank you for taking the time to write down all the constructive criticism. We could all use some from time to time. Don't worry about putting me down - it won't be that easy. At least I don't feel it that way:-)

Best regards,
David
The following exchange had the name of the correspondent and certain identifying details removed to instead serve as generalized explanations for an apparent misunderstanding regarding asking us to remove an article more than 15 months after publication:

Hi Srajan,
hope everything is well and you enjoy living at lac léman. I am in the process of launching an evolutionary ... product and I would appreciate if you could pull the following page - xxxxx

Thank you and hope to see you soon, maybe at the Milan Show.
Sincerely.
xxxx /name withheld

Hello,
We don't pull pages. That's throwing away work we did. Why would I do that? I have more respect for my own time and efforts than that.

Srajan

Hello Srajan
thank you for your quick reply. Here is the relevant text concering Datenschutz in Switzerland... Hope this helps. Feel free to keep a copy of your work on your harddrive. If any questions arise do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,
xxxx /name withheld

Interesting. You solicit me to your house to demonstrate your product and obtain publicity for it in our pages. I take the time to drive out, listen, write the article and publish it. Now well more than a year has passed. You have a new product. The old article apparently no longer suits you. You then invoke domestic law about publishing an evaluation which (very mysteriously) happened against your knowledge to legitimize your request. Hmm.

Our policy has always been and continues to be that post publication, all articles move into our archives like yours. This serves readers as future reference. We do not delete those articles. They don't have an expiration date. They are our property and make up our legacy. If you have new product to promote that 'overrides' the old one, the proper course of action is to submit a news page post or to solicit a review. Requesting that prior articles be deleted—no matter how politely asked—isn't proper. It is also grossly disrespectful of our (unpaid) time and efforts involved to write and publish such articles in the first place. I thus have to deny your request and similar ones other parties might make in the future. Truth be told, I had assumed this would have been patently obvious. Apparently not...

Srajan
Hi Srajan,

Greetings from Pakistan. Congratulations on doing a fantastic job. Just wanted to ask you to please review the Stradas driven by the iDecco because that is the combo I’m thinking of getting. My worry is that the iDecco won’t have enough oomph to work the Stradas so do please let your readers know what you think on that account.

Cheers,
Feisal Naqvi

That's the plan - two potential game changers together.

Srajan
Dear Srajan,

It's an impressive review. What you say represents 12 years of hard work, sacrifice and convictions. So, now I have understood that you wait for the Calliope.21 :-)

You will have to wait a little more because I am obliged to move the factory into another building where we have started to build a new workshop. I need two months and I have to stop speaker production during this time. I started to listen to the records I received and ordered from your list of Year's Favorites and it's exactly the kind of music I want to listen to at the moment!

Have a good week.
Best regards.
Samuel Furon