Jump to content

blubliss

High Rollers
  • Posts

    1,087
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by blubliss

  1. Bottom line for me is that I would never, ever pay $5k for such an amp, especially considering the people that come to its defense and how crazy they seem (not all of them but 2 come to mind).  You really don't see the same kind of fanatics/clueless shills for Headamp, EC, ECP.  You did see the same thing with Mikhail's crap...

  2. You wonks can say that the tubes shouldn't matter in the BHSE, but my experience is that they do matter in the BHSE.  O0   I started with the stock new production Mullard EL34s (I think that they were Mullard), and was not in love with the sound because that is how I always heard the amp.  Then I bought some NOS xf2 Mullards and I have since loved my amp.  Voodoo, mind games, placebo, whatever.  I am not an exotic tube nut but this combo works for me (and others).

    This is my experience too, definitely hear some change.  I went a bit overboard buying 24 metal base tubes  ??? but it was an investment  8) . Thing is, I paid a lot.  Anyone wanna buy a $1600 quad of EL34 metal base....

  3. Yes, I think the upgrade is $500 so used unit upgraded to DSD would be a good route.  It costs a bit more if you do not have the Hi-Res option installed.  Comparing the two, old and new QB-9 would probably not work since the DAC chip is new??

     

    Here is some info on the QB-9 DSD:

     

    I think the first units will ship next week, and the US retail price is going up $500, from $2750 to $3250. We were going to keep the price down by using less expensive master clock modules (one each for multiples of 44 and 48 kHz), but in the end decided to go for the gusto and just put in all the improvements that we made to the DX-5. The DX-5-DSD will still sound a "bit" better as the analog circuitry and the power supply are more sophisticated. The changes to the QB-9-DSD include:

    1) Changing the DAC chip from the Burr-Brown DSD1792A to the ES9016S.

    2) Replacing the audio master clocks with low-phase-noise modules running at twice the frequency of the previous ones, which allow the ESS DAC chip to perform at a higher level.

    3) Changes to the analog audio circuitry and its power supply that improve the audio performance.

    4) Addition of an AC line powered supply for the USB circuitry. This provides for uniformly superior performance, regardless of the quality of the USB Vbus power supplied by the computer.

    5) The ability of the USB Audio input to accept and decode native DSD files from computer sources.

    The updates will take a long time. We can only do five or ten a week and there are thousands of QB-9's out there. You'll just have to be patient...

    Thanks,
    Charles Hansen
    Ayre Acoustics, inc.

     

    The original location of this info is in a thread that is hilarious.  Some dipsticks argue with Charles about DSD, happens later in the thread.  I can't believe how much Charles responded and the incredible amount of information he provided.

     

    http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/ayre-wants-%241-5k-dsded-qb-9-a-15650/

  4. Hey Andy, we like you too!  However, I'm going to have to politely disagree w/ your assessment here.  We both listen to a lot of 80s music but we also listen to a lot of just about everything.  We both have rather eclectic musical tastes.  I can say that my genre preference is just about everything except for Dubstep.  You can see what tracks we've used for our reviews in the past here.  My tracks are on the far right, purrin's are on the left.  I'd say that's a pretty wide breadth beyond '80's music'.  I believe many HD800 listeners tend to prefer strings, classical and more specific genres that do less to spotlight issues w/ the HD800, so our tests seem to me to be quite rigorous by most subjective standards.  They simply have flaws, all phones have flaws of some sort, we can hear them and measure them and have done so. 

     

    I have to say I'm surprised you say you prefer the HD800 as they are, if I recall they aren't even in your top 5 or maybe even 10 favorite headphones?

     

    I also agree w/ Tyll that we do NOT prefer over warmed syrupy sound.  In fact, most of that type of gear is on our shit list.  Now, we also wouldn't characterize a sound that has adequate dynamic representation below 500hz to be syrupy either.  Nor would we characterize that same absence as 'accurate' but more as thin, dynamically flat, dull, and over analytical.  If you recall at that meet, I did mention that something seemed off w/ how your rig was sounding after which you found your Amarra has the treble boosted by accident.  Now maybe my syrupy ears were just too sensitive to the added brittleness, who can say. Based on your comments I'd have to say you seem to not like how the HE90 or 007 sounds w/ the Aristaeus.  Is that syrup in your opinion?  All I know is, a well recorded binaural violin or piano needs to sound like the same type of violin or piano I still remember playing as a youngster.  If the best recordings out there all sound like you are sitting at the very back of a performance w/ all the detail and dynamics diffused out, or it seems like you are just listening to simple dull 2D recording, then something is amiss IMHO.  Anyone is entitled to like whatever they like, but I know what an instrument I and others have played sounds like to me.  I have no other standard. 

    Ok, fair enough.  But, I still say you guys prefer warmer stuff than me.  At our mini-meet, that PWD you had was very warm, IMO, and I owned a PWD II for awhile and thought it was quite inferior to both of my other sources in the end.  Too muddled.  You guys seem to use the PWD as a benchmark and I think it is just a fair source.  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.