Quote:

Quote:

Wow! That is a refreshing attitude, John. How do we clone you?

I believe they broke the mold on this man! I really wish he would do another excellent, low-cost preamp like the Adcom from a few moons ago. Awesome that he is sharing with the writers and the forum!

If I remember correctly, the Adcom GFP-750 was designed by Nelson Pass, not John Curl, though both are great American amplfier engineers.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Quote:
It is not a 'random' design change. Usually, I have NOT gone far enough into the 'magic' or 'over-the-top' phase in designing amplifiers that made the differences.

I hope I didn't imply the change would be random.

I understand what you are saying. Thanks for the insight into the process.

I still find it incredible.

Quote:
Thanks for the insight into the process.

I still find it incredible.

Yes. It's kinda like having Clint Eastwood drop in on your community college film class, huh?

The really odd part is that John is like this all day on the DIYAudio board and he catches a lot of hell for it. The guys on that forum will eventually be the 'leaders' in audio design, themselves. Hopefully, by that time, most of them will have enough battle scars to grow up a bit, to move away from the mosh pit of strict augmentative dogmatism that quite few there tend to practice. I'm not painting myself as being innocent, either.

It is a fact that many people do not believe that the differences in audio products are often not easily measured. This is unfortunate.

Quote:
It is a fact that many people do not believe that the differences in audio products are often not easily measured. This is unfortunate.

Why do you think the differences cannot be easily measured?

Do we not know what to measure? Do our ears/brains respond differently than measurement instruments?

>>> "Why do you think the differences cannot be easily measured?

Do we not know what to measure? Do our ears/brains respond differently than measurement instruments?" <<<

I would suggest that, in many instances of the 'sound' being described as having changed, that it is the ears/brain which have been doing the changing !!!!!

That in quite a number of cases of 'sound' being reported to have changed, the 'measurements' are the same, irrespective of the changes having been made, and that the changes are occurring elsewhere.

The audio signal is the audio signal, the audio equipment is the audio equipment and people seem to want to centre all their attention in those areas and the "living, breathing, coughing, sneezing" human being, having to resolve the musical information being presented into the room, is so often ignored.

Before people react (as usual) I KNOW about the audio signal, I KNOW about audio equipment and I also KNOW when something has changed the sound when it should not have done (from a technical point of view) OR when something was expected to improve the sound and did not - or actually made the sound worse !!!

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

Quote:

Quote:
It is a fact that many people do not believe that the differences in audio products are often not easily measured. This is unfortunate.

Why do you think the differences cannot be easily measured?

Do we not know what to measure? Do our ears/brains respond differently than measurement instruments?

My two centavos:

What's the point of providing measurements since all systems sound different, and people have (often widely) differing hearing capabilites/experience. Not everyone is trained to listen for grain or air or liquidness. A high end amp or cable or cartridge will sound different, even dramically so, from system to system, room to room and person to person. And an amp or cable or cartridge will usually sound quite superior AFTER a break in period. Would they not measure the same before and after break in?

A cartridge that measures flat 20 Hz to 18 kHz in an anecolic chamber will most likely not SOUND flat or MEASURE flat in ANY room or ANY system. A cable or interconnect with certain L, R, C measurements will sound different from system to system and from person to person. There no avoiding it. Thus, the whole argument is moot.

I seem to be having a bad day, today. Either I push the wrong buttons (I am 1/2 blind at the moment) or I am censored on two websites. I hope the former.

John,

I fully agree and we all understand that there are just too many other variables including ones own hearing deficiencies to conclude a totally correct summation. My guess is that the minute differences between two great amplifiers could be masked by merely a cable change, internal or otherwise. I also wonder if we really have the capability to really measure all the pertinent electrical by-products from any piece of gear.

I would hope you are not banned here.

Quote:
I seem to be having a bad day, today. Either I push the wrong buttons (I am 1/2 blind at the moment) or I am censored on two websites. I hope the former.

John,

I hope my question did not come across as challenging you or made in anger.

I really would like to know a designer's view on this issue. I have heard many non-designer's opinions and guesses but am very curious as to how you see it.

Elk, I wrote a detailed message today, to you, but it disappeared. I probably pushed the wrong button. However, I wrote an equally detailed message on Diyaudio.com and it also disappeared. In that case, I think it was deleted.
You see, nobody believes me when I explain what I do to make a successful audio design. Only serious audio designers and listeners seem to be capable of accepting differences in components. I do not know why this is so, perhaps propaganda from the AES.

Quote:
Elk, I wrote a detailed message today, to you, but it disappeared. I probably pushed the wrong button. However, I wrote an equally detailed message on Diyaudio.com and it also disappeared. In that case, I think it was deleted.
You see, nobody believes me when I explain what I do to make a successful audio design. Only serious audio designers and listeners seem to be capable of accepting differences in components. I do not know why this is so, perhaps propaganda from the AES.

ARGH!

I would have loved to read this.

Thanks for the effort however. It was kind of you.

Elk, I have been contributing, on line, for more than 20 years. John Atkinson can attest to this. Rather than repeat myself, here, I might send you a long pdf of my past contributions on almost any audio subject, compiled by a Russian engineer named Dimitri. It is 3 megabytes, but it does answer most questions about my design philosophy, what I find best in other audio designers, etc. Drop me a line, if you can, and I will attempt to send it to you.

John,

PM sent.

Thank you!

Quote:
Elk, I wrote a detailed message today, to you, but it disappeared. I probably pushed the wrong button.

Just to confirm: We haven't deleted any of your posts, John. I'm sorry the message was lost.

I also received John's materials this morning.

Very cool (and kind of him).

I enjoyed Michael Fremers review of the Bryston 7B SST2.....i really dont see the big deal and why so many took it to heart as if his word is gospel.......he gets paid to review products and gives his opinion.Some i agree with and some i dont.....however i still respect his views and look forward to reading more of his reviews in the future.
I own a Bryston 4BSST2 and BP 26 MM/MC Pre Amp and a Bryston BCD-1 Cd player.......i listened to the 7BSST2 as well and decided that the xtra $$$ it took to buy the 7BSST2 was not worth it...especially when i listened to the 4BSST2 which i feel is a better value overall.