[West]

I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

Cordially,
west

[Eeyore]

West wrote:

I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement.

Why the hell would you imagine that ? Other than you haven't a clue about the
science ?

Any decent (brand of) ordinary commercial grade metal film resistor is
essentially audibly blameless.

Graham

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"West" wrote in message news:CMhkj.975$hk4.885@trnddc03...
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step
Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.



Hi West. Your thinking follows on from the comment made by
Morgan Jones that "no preamp is better than any preamp" but then
you have to have a gain control. Fitting this to the power amp is
an excellent solution. I use DACT (Danish Audio Connectors)
stepped attenuators 100k stereo.They are 24 position.

http://www.dact.com/html/attenuators.html


If you insist on finer resolution then there is TKD P65CS
available with up to 60 steps. There is a considerable difference
in the price.

http://www.tkd-corp.com/02_products/p_04variable_a.html


For a stand alone stepped attenuator, I have been experimenting
with a 1:1 audio transformer with a multi-tapped secondary.

Best regards
Iain

[Eeyore]

flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
West wrote:

I'm wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement.

Why the hell would you imagine that ? Other than you haven't a clue about the
science ?

For heaven's sake, he just asked a question, Why can't you just give
an answer?

Since when did West ever ask a question that wasn't intentionally 'loaded' ?

Graham

[Patrick Turner]

West wrote:

I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

Cordially,
west

I have demonstrated very finely made amps and speakers to audio club
gatherings and obtained very
favourable opinions about the gear.
I have used a motley collection of cheaply made interconnects with asian
generic gold plated RCA sockets and plugs
and with RG58 screened coaxial cable.
The resistors where chinese carbon film mainly, very cheap generic
electro caps and pots in the
preamp were $4 carbon track types chosen from a few so that track
matching balance was about right around
the listening position.

In fact I have been using sich terribly ****in awful pots in some amps
amd test gear now
for 10 years and they all still work OK without crackles or noises.
Distortion and noise contributions by the 5k carbon pot used on the
output of my low
distortion oscilator is well below the 0.002% THD, mainly 3H created in
the active circuitry.
So whatever horrible things cheap pots are supposed do to signals can't
be too horrible if
I can't measure the horribility!

People say the sound is simply marvellous and better than what they have
already.

In gear I sell I spend the extra and get a an Alps pot which I find
blame free, and I use
some decent metal film R and lots of vastly overrated wire wound R.


The guy who designs and builds all this stuff he has demoed to the audio
clubs does have some idea about
how to rig up a triode or tetrode circuit, and says how how you do all
that is what really matters,
not the brand of wire, solder, resistors, caps, diodes, tubes, chassis,
connectors and
all the other bits you can list that have to be used in audio gear.

For all the basics which you MUST get right BEFORE cables and quackery
and or snake oil could ever possibly
make any favourable difference, just read all you see at
http://www.turneraudio.com.au.
Quite a few other internet sites also contribute to the total of real
wisdom about good sound.
Not many have a large focus on interconnect importance.

I quite like integrated power amps with preamps included, so that
interconnects between
pre amd power are NOT there, usually, a 40mm piece of wire is the only
interconnect....

But a decent power amp with two channels is going to weigh a large
amount,
so TWO amp chassis are a must with possibly separate PSU for each amp
chassis,
so a separate preamp is a must.
My steroe pair of 300 watt amps have two 25Kg PSUs, and two 25Kg amp
chassis,
so having an integrated amp with two channels on the one chassis is not
wise.

I have supplied 5050 and 8585 with included preamp, hence no pre to
power interconnects
but the 8585 was a backbreaking 35Kg.

Probably its not a bad idea to have two 85 watt channels on a chassis,
each with 4 x KT88/90
and include the preamp then have a separate chassis for PSU for both
channels.
I have done this which meant the weight was less than 25Kg for each unit
neded to be moved,
and the massive PSU couldn't intefere with the preamp due to close
proximity.

The aother alternative is to rely on having enough power amp sensitivity
even with loop
NFB so that no preamp s needed; so a stereo power amp need only have a
source switch and dual gang attenuator.
But with low µ input triodes for best sound and lowest THD and with loop
FB,
usually sensitivity ends up at a volt or two, and people seem to want
gain
if their source is an old fashioned 200mV maximum.

Leak made their amps sensitive to 100mV, so no problem but they used
EF86
and 12AX7 for input/driver combos sometimes, even in their AB1 60 watt
mono,
and it leads to "gushy gooey sound, due to the slidshod abilities of the
EF86 and 12AX7 driving KT88/6550. Musos like these amps though.
NO amount of cabalistic wire changes will change the sound very much,
somewhat less precise
than I normally prefer.
And of course you must have really very good speakers situated in a
blame free listening room
before any tweaks with cables are at all worthwhile IMHO.

My 2c worth,

Patrick Turner.

[Tynan AgviÐr]

"West" wrote in news:CMhkj.975$hk4.885@trnddc03:

I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects
are no interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo
(L-type) step Ladder attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The
amp now looks like an integrated amp but the preamp part, is of
course, passive. Has any one else used these step attenuators with
good results? I'm wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique"
resistors really make an improvement. You have to use a bunch of them.
I'm using Dale resistors for now. At least I know that the sound
outclasses any of my interconnects. That's why I opened this post with
the best is nothing. Any improvement I can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

Cordially,
west




look up "anti cables"

[robert casey]

West wrote:
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects.

IIRC, "interconnects" is the fancy name for "patch cords". Those
shielded wires with RCA connectors on both ends. You need these cables
if you want to get the signal from the CD player to the amp. Unless all
you ever do is listen to FM radio stations on a receiver...

But what you were talking about was a fancy volume control...

Maybe you wanted to avoid a wiper on a conductive resistance film or
track inside a pot, but you trade that for switch contacts. Not sure
what that gets you.

[robert casey]

Other than you haven't a clue

For heaven's sake, he just asked a question, Why can't you just give
an answer?


Well, the OP used the fancy name for overpriced patch cords, and then
starts talking about overpriced volume controls. But we all had to
start learning sometime after we were born, and the OP may not realize
that he had things mixed up...

[Eeyore]

robert casey wrote:

West wrote:
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects.

IIRC, "interconnects" is the fancy name for "patch cords". Those
shielded wires with RCA connectors on both ends. You need these cables
if you want to get the signal from the CD player to the amp. Unless all
you ever do is listen to FM radio stations on a receiver...

But what you were talking about was a fancy volume control...

Maybe you wanted to avoid a wiper on a conductive resistance film or
track inside a pot, but you trade that for switch contacts. Not sure
what that gets you.

If used as much as a pot sometimes is it'll get you worn out contacts !

Graham

[West]

Now that you've enlightened me, I now have a clue. Thank you.

west

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


West wrote:

I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement.

Why the hell would you imagine that ? Other than you haven't a clue about
the
science ?

Any decent (brand of) ordinary commercial grade metal film resistor is
essentially audibly blameless.

Graham

[West]

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi...

"West" wrote in message
news:CMhkj.975$hk4.885@trnddc03...
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are
no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step
Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors
for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement
I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.



Hi West. Your thinking follows on from the comment made by
Morgan Jones that "no preamp is better than any preamp" but then
you have to have a gain control. Fitting this to the power amp is
an excellent solution. I use DACT (Danish Audio Connectors)
stepped attenuators 100k stereo.They are 24 position.

http://www.dact.com/html/attenuators.html


If you insist on finer resolution then there is TKD P65CS
available with up to 60 steps. There is a considerable difference
in the price.

http://www.tkd-corp.com/02_products/p_04variable_a.html


For a stand alone stepped attenuator, I have been experimenting
with a 1:1 audio transformer with a multi-tapped secondary.

Best regards
Iain

Thanks Iain for the informing and kind words. At this point I am not really
interested in mathematically precise attenuation, but more an analog purist
approach in keeping the signal, let's say unadulterated. Thus I would
endeavor to know if certain type resistors are superior than others in
passing a signal. Thanks as always.

west

[West]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


robert casey wrote:

West wrote:
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects
are no
interconnects.

IIRC, "interconnects" is the fancy name for "patch cords". Those
shielded wires with RCA connectors on both ends. You need these cables
if you want to get the signal from the CD player to the amp. Unless all
you ever do is listen to FM radio stations on a receiver...

But what you were talking about was a fancy volume control...

Maybe you wanted to avoid a wiper on a conductive resistance film or
track inside a pot, but you trade that for switch contacts. Not sure
what that gets you.

If used as much as a pot sometimes is it'll get you worn out contacts !

Graham

There is no question that any contact will have a shelf life. However, I
will wear out before some of the better contacts do.

west

[Peter Wieck]

On Jan 19, 9:35*am, Patrick Turner wrote:

My 2c worth

Patrick:

You are actually building things (that also actually work), so
naturally you will have a rather dry opinion of non-contributory flash
and eyewash. I am not surprised that you have found no real benefit
beyond at-least competently-made parts and pieces.

My take on such things based on my experience is that Euro makers such
as Revox or Tandberg (B&O not so much) use very high-quality pots and
switches which are typically sealed and difficult to clean if
necessary (difficult, but not impossible). Makers such as Dynaco used
the cheapest parts they could find on that particular day - often
mixing makers in the same amp if that was what was in hand at the
moment. Brands such as Scott, AR, Fisher, later Harmon-Kardon and
various other US makers tended to switch makers all-at-once, but what
they used was not substantially different than what Dynaco used -
perhaps from the next-tier in quality (Lincoln vs. Ford) but no more.
And much easier to clean. I have not had enough experience with
Pacific-rim stuff to comment other than those few pieces were about
the same as the US stuff.

It is rare that I find pots or switches that require replacement
unless they have been abused. Often cleaning but little more.

As to patch-cords, I recently gathered an HK 2000 cassette deck with
the OEM patch-cords - this a beast from the mid-70s. They worked fine.
Looked nasty but looks are mostly inaudible.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Andre Jute]

West wrote:
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

Cordially,
west

Looks like my reply to this went astray.

I haven't used a pre-amp for fifteen years. I build only integrated
linestage amps. DACT stepped attenuators do me fine: they're built by
really tender, caring robots using SMT on Swiss medical-grade
switches, they're better than the "audiophile" crap, and they don't
cost much more, in some cases much less.

A trick about resistors is to use only 2W, unless bigger is required
of course. Beyschlagg is good; Kiwame is what I use myself and mostly
in the 5W size which runs even cooler and quieter than the 2W size.

I make my own cables from Cardas 5TC and always attach the drain first
at one end and then at the other to see if I can make the combination
more silent. I wire amps with Cardas too because I like the aesthetics
of the Golden Mean multi-size stranded construction.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

[Eeyore]

West wrote:

I would endeavor to know if certain type resistors are superior than others
in
passing a signal.

Most resistors are remarkably linear and therefore audibly transparent.

All resistors however add some noise. Part of it is 'thermal noise' and this is
basic physics and can't be overcome. Added to this is 'excess noise' which is a
consequence of materials and construction.

The noisiest (worst) are carbon composition, followed by carbon film, then
metal oxide and metal film and the very least excess noise comes from 'bulk
metal' resistors.

I wouldn't use carbon composition if you PAID me to.

Carbon film performs very adequately in most circuits but the lower noise of
metal film may be beneficial in low-level (mic or pckup cartridge level)
sensitive high gain stages.

I know of no circuit where bulk metal would have any real advantage other than
show-off factor.

Wirewound resistors are basically like bulk metal but unfortunately have added
inductance (which is bad) unless specially wound to avoid it.


Resistors also have a temperature coefficient of resistance which varies with
the precise material used. I have discovered this can gives rise to distortion
in some high power wirewound load resistors I one used when driven with a high
power signal.

Graham

[West]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


West wrote:

I would endeavor to know if certain type resistors are superior than
others
in
passing a signal.

Most resistors are remarkably linear and therefore audibly transparent.

All resistors however add some noise. Part of it is 'thermal noise' and
this is
basic physics and can't be overcome. Added to this is 'excess noise' which
is a
consequence of materials and construction.

The noisiest (worst) are carbon composition, followed by carbon film, then
metal oxide and metal film and the very least excess noise comes from
'bulk
metal' resistors.

I wouldn't use carbon composition if you PAID me to.

Carbon film performs very adequately in most circuits but the lower noise
of
metal film may be beneficial in low-level (mic or pckup cartridge level)
sensitive high gain stages.

I know of no circuit where bulk metal would have any real advantage other
than
show-off factor.

Wirewound resistors are basically like bulk metal but unfortunately have
added
inductance (which is bad) unless specially wound to avoid it.


Resistors also have a temperature coefficient of resistance which varies
with
the precise material used. I have discovered this can gives rise to
distortion
in some high power wirewound load resistors I one used when driven with a
high
power signal.

Graham

Good description of the pros & cons of various resistor types. Let's not
forget a stray "C" component that can affect spectral bandwidth response.

west

[West]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...


West wrote:
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are
no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step
Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors
for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement
I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

Cordially,
west

Looks like my reply to this went astray.

I haven't used a pre-amp for fifteen years. I build only integrated
linestage amps. DACT stepped attenuators do me fine: they're built by
really tender, caring robots using SMT on Swiss medical-grade
switches, they're better than the "audiophile" crap, and they don't
cost much more, in some cases much less.

A trick about resistors is to use only 2W, unless bigger is required
of course. Beyschlagg is good; Kiwame is what I use myself and mostly
in the 5W size which runs even cooler and quieter than the 2W size.

I make my own cables from Cardas 5TC and always attach the drain first
at one end and then at the other to see if I can make the combination
more silent. I wire amps with Cardas too because I like the aesthetics
of the Golden Mean multi-size stranded construction.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

I just checked a DACT dealer (http://diycable.com) and they want $180 for a
CT2, stereo step attenuator. What do you think of that cost effectiveness?

west

[Eeyore]

Peter Wieck wrote:

My take on such things based on my experience is that Euro makers such
as Revox or Tandberg (B&O not so much) use very high-quality pots and
switches

And what audio products do Tandberg make ?

What Revox products use pots (or switches carrying audio) ?

They USED to use the likes of Preh parts IIRC which are reasonable but not
anything special.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Bret Ludwig wrote:

Complete agreement. No preamp, no interconnect.

What's wrong with either of those exactly ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

West wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

Good description of the pros & cons of various resistor types. Let's not
forget a stray "C" component that can affect spectral bandwidth response.

The words spectral and response in the above are superfluous btw.

I forgot to mention that excess noise is related to the applied DC voltage, so
may be more or less of an issue in different circuit configurations, depending
whether there's DC bias present.

Graham

[Eeyore]

West wrote:

I just checked a DACT dealer (http://diycable.com) and they want $180 for a
CT2, stereo step attenuator. What do you think of that cost effectiveness?

A COMPLETE waste of money.

Graham

[Patrick Turner]

Eeyore wrote:

West wrote:

I just checked a DACT dealer (http://diycable.com) and they want $180 for a
CT2, stereo step attenuator. What do you think of that cost effectiveness?

A COMPLETE waste of money.

Graham

I built a preamp with a CT2 about 9 years ago for a guy who supplied me
with it plus a DACT
source selector switch to instal into the preamp.
This preamp, the Nemo was sold to another guy for $2,000 in about 2002,
and has been in daily use since then.

The DACT parts have never let the man down and only ever provided
accurate attenuation and reliable source switching.

It seems the more you use the switches, the more the metal becomes
polished and
oxide free so contact is assured.
You'd understand if you looked real close at one of the Dact range.

Looking closely at the DACT attenuator I used the resistors are all tiny
little fragile looking
surface mounts on a PCB board. Cost in the Thailand plant tp make the
bloody parts is probably
less than $5 total for everything.
If the pcb cracks, your'e stuffed, and need to buy a new one.

So buying a 24 position rotary switch and soldering in a chosen set of
1/4 watt metal film
quality resistors is better practice.
But a dual 24 position switch of quality manufacture isn't cheap eh....

Bu comparison an Alps Black 27mm square dual pot 100k, costs about $80
here now
and also is expensive compared to a cheapo generic Taiwan made pot
bought
now from general electronics stores for about $5.

While I have had very little trouble and have had good sound from the
cheap generics
while they remain in good working condition the Alps and DACT are
definately better
for me to instal in gear I handcraft simply because its better quality.

Just after I began manufacture of custom amps one customer did return an
integrated amp with a cheapo asian made pot after 2 years
because of noise, and I have had a couple of duds which gave
intermittent connections to tracks and wipers because the
some ****ing asian makers still don't know how to make a reliable
pressure contact between
a solder lug and a track.
So I learnt only to instal at least Alps which have never failed.

The asian cheapos can be improved by giving all clamp connections on the
pot a good
squeeze with long nose pliers in a vice, and taping over the ****ing
open hole these
dumb arsses leave to allow dirt and worse to enter; eg, soldering flux
droplets which
smear all over tracks when soldering up in a point to point circuit.
Its common to get noise in a cheap pot that is un-taped up and
unqueezed.
Contacts are sometimes quite loose after manufacture and when purchased,
and sure will be after
being heated first time during soldering.

I'd always prefer to place decent pots, switches and the best of
everything in all I make,
but customers hate paying for the best won't pay me more than
1/2 the price ARC or CJ etc try to charge, yet its a one off I am making
and i should get FOUR TIMES THE PRICES OFFERED for the gear made.
So I don't put silver wire and 50% nikel/50% GOSS cores in the OPT
and don't use the most expensive R&C and other parts that can be had
unless
someome insists upon it. So Aurie polypropylene caps don't come
standard,
let alone other caps far more expensive and entirely pretentious even in
my
cynical opinion.

Once you get the parts in a am amp set over the reliablility hurdle,
and the matching hurdle where needed, there is little better music to be
heard.

Cost effectiveness like class A efficiency percentages of triode SE amps
are not
sonically obvious except that both lead to very good sound
providing the circuit design topology and use is optimized and sensible.

Patrick Turner.

[Patrick Turner]

Peter Wieck wrote:

On Jan 19, 9:35 am, Patrick Turner wrote:

My 2c worth

Patrick:

You are actually building things (that also actually work), so
naturally you will have a rather dry opinion of non-contributory flash
and eyewash. I am not surprised that you have found no real benefit
beyond at-least competently-made parts and pieces.

See another post re DACT and other bits for my distilled opinions based
on the facts
of experiences....


My take on such things based on my experience is that Euro makers such
as Revox or Tandberg (B&O not so much) use very high-quality pots and
switches which are typically sealed and difficult to clean if
necessary (difficult, but not impossible).

Yeah, well many samples of this grand old junk are now full of stray N&D
due to a litany of little failings here and there.

Much OLD electronics gets like that....

Makers such as Dynaco used
the cheapest parts they could find on that particular day - often
mixing makers in the same amp if that was what was in hand at the
moment. Brands such as Scott, AR, Fisher, later Harmon-Kardon and
various other US makers tended to switch makers all-at-once, but what
they used was not substantially different than what Dynaco used -
perhaps from the next-tier in quality (Lincoln vs. Ford) but no more.
And much easier to clean. I have not had enough experience with
Pacific-rim stuff to comment other than those few pieces were about
the same as the US stuff.

Gee I've serviced plenty of the US mades you mention.
I cringe when I see what's been used and the see the circuit designs....


It is rare that I find pots or switches that require replacement
unless they have been abused. Often cleaning but little more.

Failing switches are a very common PITA when the switches are
de-ruggedized and miniturized to
suit PCB use for ccheap nasty manufacture.

Many splendid old bangers made in the 60s to 80s languish for lack of
replacement switches
which have failed dismally, and the switches are complex one of a kind
type which cannot be
replaced with a rotary or press button generic which might fit in
somehow, even if not
as the original was placed directly into the PCB board.
The cost of using non original replacements and the necessary ****ing
around to modify
the circuit is non viable; customers will want to abandon the unit
rather
than pay what's needed for the fix.


As to patch-cords, I recently gathered an HK 2000 cassette deck with
the OEM patch-cords - this a beast from the mid-70s. They worked fine.
Looked nasty but looks are mostly inaudible.

Looks ARE inaudible, on this I agree, so I don't waste manufacturing my
precious time producing
the kind of looks to generate sales as used so stupidly in McIntosh, ARC
and CJ amps, etc, tec, etc.

But it IS AMAZING just what ancient old crap which myself and my
technical contractor assistant
do manage to keep road worthy as the years of inevitable decay roll by.

Patrick Turner.



Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[West]

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Peter Wieck wrote:

On Jan 19, 9:35 am, Patrick Turner wrote:

My 2c worth

Patrick:

You are actually building things (that also actually work), so
naturally you will have a rather dry opinion of non-contributory flash
and eyewash. I am not surprised that you have found no real benefit
beyond at-least competently-made parts and pieces.

Patrick is tired of obsequious and ad hominem tweaking tossed at him. He's
intelligent enough to know when a compliment is pure from the heart (seldom
is) and when its purpose is to interject a thought or emotion or to design a
veiled diatribe at someone else. In of itself there is not much harm done,
but it shows a lack of respect for the person to whom it was presented to, a
kind of manipulation. IOW Got something to say...SAY IT DUDE.

west

See another post re DACT and other bits for my distilled opinions based
on the facts
of experiences....


My take on such things based on my experience is that Euro makers such
as Revox or Tandberg (B&O not so much) use very high-quality pots and
switches which are typically sealed and difficult to clean if
necessary (difficult, but not impossible).

Yeah, well many samples of this grand old junk are now full of stray N&D
due to a litany of little failings here and there.

Much OLD electronics gets like that....

Makers such as Dynaco used
the cheapest parts they could find on that particular day - often
mixing makers in the same amp if that was what was in hand at the
moment. Brands such as Scott, AR, Fisher, later Harmon-Kardon and
various other US makers tended to switch makers all-at-once, but what
they used was not substantially different than what Dynaco used -
perhaps from the next-tier in quality (Lincoln vs. Ford) but no more.
And much easier to clean. I have not had enough experience with
Pacific-rim stuff to comment other than those few pieces were about
the same as the US stuff.

Gee I've serviced plenty of the US mades you mention.
I cringe when I see what's been used and the see the circuit designs....


It is rare that I find pots or switches that require replacement
unless they have been abused. Often cleaning but little more.

Failing switches are a very common PITA when the switches are
de-ruggedized and miniturized to
suit PCB use for ccheap nasty manufacture.

Many splendid old bangers made in the 60s to 80s languish for lack of
replacement switches
which have failed dismally, and the switches are complex one of a kind
type which cannot be
replaced with a rotary or press button generic which might fit in
somehow, even if not
as the original was placed directly into the PCB board.
The cost of using non original replacements and the necessary ****ing
around to modify
the circuit is non viable; customers will want to abandon the unit
rather
than pay what's needed for the fix.


As to patch-cords, I recently gathered an HK 2000 cassette deck with
the OEM patch-cords - this a beast from the mid-70s. They worked fine.
Looked nasty but looks are mostly inaudible.

Looks ARE inaudible, on this I agree, so I don't waste manufacturing my
precious time producing
the kind of looks to generate sales as used so stupidly in McIntosh, ARC
and CJ amps, etc, tec, etc.

But it IS AMAZING just what ancient old crap which myself and my
technical contractor assistant
do manage to keep road worthy as the years of inevitable decay roll by.

Patrick Turner.



Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Andre Jute]

On Jan 20, 12:41*am, "West" wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message

...





West wrote:
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are
no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step
Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors
for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects..
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement
I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

Cordially,
west

Looks like my reply to this went astray.

I haven't used a pre-amp for fifteen years. I build only integrated
linestage amps. DACT stepped attenuators do me fine: they're built by
really tender, caring robots using SMT on Swiss medical-grade
switches, they're better than the "audiophile" crap, and they don't
cost much more, in some cases much less.

A trick about resistors is to use only 2W, unless bigger is required
of course. Beyschlagg is good; Kiwame is what I use myself and mostly
in the 5W size which runs even cooler and quieter than the 2W size.

I make my own cables from Cardas 5TC and always attach the drain first
at one end and then at the other to see if I can make the combination
more silent. I wire amps with Cardas too because I like the aesthetics
of the Golden Mean multi-size stranded construction.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps athttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

I just checked a DACT dealer (http://diycable.com) and they want $180 for a
CT2, stereo step attenuator. What do you think of that cost effectiveness?

west

Looks like bargain to me. Have you checked the prices of switches
with a high "audiophile" profile that have *rivets* in them? The late
Bill May, a most meticulous man with his instruments, tested a whole
raft of switches from the outrageously expensive Penny & Giles and a
Ben Duncan job that was beautifully made, down (in price) through the
DACT and several ALPS from the Blue and the Black down through
switches labelled ALPS that were plainly massproduced Asian rubbish,
and finally to everything we could order from RS and Farnell (local
equivalents of Mouser). The DACT shone as the most noiseless switch
and, taking quality of construction and longevity into account, a
stunning bargain. In fact we decided, after analyzing the technical
results and making listening tests with a dozen switches in
series,that if you need a cheap switch because the customer won't pay
for the best, the Noble is better than a cheap ALPS, that the better
ALPS should be our midrange, and that only one attenuator was good
enough for our own amps, and that was the DACT. I got a dozen or so in
a range of values back when they cost under a hundred dollars each.
They've been in and out of prototypes ever since and there are no
signs of wear on even the hardest-used. Here's a tip: don't solder
them into PCBs, fit the pot to the chassis and get some little
pigtails with three or six point sockets on the other end and use
those to make the connection; that way you keep your attenuator fresh
and reusable. DACT, the last time I spoke to the boss, actually sold
such pigtails, complete with gold plated contacts; I didn't get any
because I just had just stripped enough to last me for a while out of
an old VCR.

To add to what Patrick was saying, I have also had good results with
ALPS selector switches. Big and ugly but very convenient to solder in
valve work and pretty sturdy.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

[Andre Jute]

On Jan 20, 4:50*am, Patrick Turner wrote:

Cost effectiveness like class A efficiency percentages of triode SE amps
are not
sonically obvious except that both lead to very good sound
providing the circuit design topology and use is optimized and sensible.

Patrick Turner.

The thing is, people like us *start* design and construction far, far
out into the ever-decreasing marginal utility fractions where an
improvement of a part of one per cent can easily double or triple or
quadruple the price of a component. You add little bits of quality to
an amp, carefully selected and matched tubes, lower ESR caps, lower
excess noise resistors, the correct weight of wire, shielding where
required, good solder and clean working, a stepped attenuator rather
than a scratchy and inaccurate pot, but you can't precisely say that
any individual piece sounds better or why. However, all the
improvements are cumulative (in fact, a better pot is amplfied
throughout the amp...) and eventually all those tiny decisions to
choose quality over crap together become audible in the gestalt and
then you know it was worth it.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

[Andre Jute]

On Jan 19, 11:08 pm, Eeyore
wrote to West:

I wouldn't use carbon composition if you PAID me to.

Reliable photographic evidence off geosynchronous satellites carrying
high-res camaras suggest that the masked fat man sneaking around in
the dead hours of the night buying up Allen Bradley carbon composition
resistors is one Graham Stevenson, aka Eeyore, aka Poopie.

Okay, Poopie, so West cannot pay you to use carbon comps. But then who
*is* paying you?

Andre Jute
For light relief take two Exlax

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


West wrote:

I just checked a DACT dealer (http://diycable.com) and they want $180 for
a
CT2, stereo step attenuator. What do you think of that cost
effectiveness?

A COMPLETE waste of money.

He is being ripped off, added to which the weakness of the USD
makes this component expensive for West.

Iain

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"West" wrote in message
news:xMwkj.9868$8A4.8777@trnddc02...

I just checked a DACT dealer (http://diycable.com) and they want $180 for
a
CT2, stereo step attenuator. What do you think of that cost effectiveness?


That's pretty expensive, and considerably more than I pay. The weakness
of the USD and perhaps the high markup at every step of the retail chain
makes your price expensive, prtocvularly if you are buying only 1 pc.

But think of it this way, you buy a blank switch (Elma) plus the
resistors. You spend two or three hours soldering under a magnifying
glass. The end result is about the same cost as the price of the DACT
with nothing like the quality or reliability.

Also, you could have used those two or three hours in some
much better way.

Regards
Iain

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Bret Ludwig wrote:

Complete agreement. No preamp, no interconnect.

What's wrong with either of those exactly ?


Surely, these days the preamp is superfluous.
A CD player can give you 2V. Most tube power
amps have an input sentivity of say 1V. Why
should anyone need a preamp in between?

I have an aquaintance who uses a mu-follower
(24dB gain) after the CD player and then attenuates
this with a stepped attenuator on the power amp.
He claims it sounds better that way.

Iain

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"West" wrote in message
news:3iukj.9316$8A4.7230@trnddc02...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi...

"West" wrote in message
news:CMhkj.975$hk4.885@trnddc03...
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are
no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step
Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors
for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement
I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.



Hi West. Your thinking follows on from the comment made by
Morgan Jones that "no preamp is better than any preamp" but then
you have to have a gain control. Fitting this to the power amp is
an excellent solution. I use DACT (Danish Audio Connectors)
stepped attenuators 100k stereo.They are 24 position.

http://www.dact.com/html/attenuators.html


If you insist on finer resolution then there is TKD P65CS
available with up to 60 steps. There is a considerable difference
in the price.

http://www.tkd-corp.com/02_products/p_04variable_a.html


For a stand alone stepped attenuator, I have been experimenting
with a 1:1 audio transformer with a multi-tapped secondary.

Best regards
Iain

Thanks Iain for the informing and kind words. At this point I am not
really
interested in mathematically precise attenuation, but more an analog
purist
approach in keeping the signal, let's say unadulterated. Thus I would
endeavor to know if certain type resistors are superior than others in
passing a signal. Thanks as always.



Yes I understand your point of view. In my own experience,
building an accurate attenuator (regardless of the quality of the resistors
used) is a pretty time consuming business. A DACT stereo can be
had for probably less than the cost of parts and the cost of
labour to construct something similar but inferior.

The mathematical accuracy is necessary during attenuation
(moving stop to stop) you wish to keep the centre image
rock steady.

As to the boutique resistors, you must decide for yourself
if you can see or hear any benefit in their use. A Japanese
company recently sent me their catalogue of "superior
non.magnetic resistors" I could find no-one who could
think of a tube amp audio application in which they
could be proved to be superior.

However, on the otherhand, I do know a couple of bespoke
guitar amp builders who use the old style carbon resistors
(cracked carbon, I think they were called) in certain places
in their amplifiers for their particular sound.

Best regards
Iain

[tubegarden]

On Jan 19, 1:08�am, Eeyore
wrote:

Why the hell would you imagine that ? Other than you haven't a clue about the
science ?


Graham

Hi RATs!

Poor Graham. Anyone who posts anything which does not seek his
approval is dumped on.

Science is a parlor game which is a bit over-subscribed, unlike some
intruders with fat heads ...

If you can hear any music, ever, your system is much better than any
human deserves ...

My system is better than nothing. Well, better than some lesser
nothings ...

Happy Ears!
Al

[Peter Wieck]

On Jan 20, 12:08*am, Patrick Turner wrote:

Yeah, well many samples of this grand old junk are now full of stray N&D
due to a litany of little failings here and there.

Much OLD electronics gets like that....

To a hammer, everything looks like a nail... I have an ESR meter, a
very good VOM, a pretty-good in-circuit diode tester and patience.
Much stuff can be brought back to top-notch with a little care and
attention to caps, diodes and other prone-to-aging parts.

Many splendid old bangers made in the 60s to 80s languish for lack of
replacement switches
which have failed dismally, and the switches are complex one of a kind
type which cannot be
replaced with a rotary or press button generic which might fit in
somehow, even if not
as the original was placed directly into the PCB board.
The cost of using non original replacements and the necessary ****ing
around to modify
the circuit is non viable; customers will want to abandon the unit
rather
than pay what's needed for the fix.

I was also lucky enough a bit ago to come across a rotary switch kit
with a bucket of spares, wafers and shafts of various lengths and
configurations. See "patience" above. Unlike you, I fix this stuff as
a hobby, so the cost of my time is irrelevant against the challenge of
making it sing.

And, there is nothing quite so visually appealing as competent machine
& metal work.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Peter Wieck]

On Jan 20, 1:12*am, "West" wrote:

Patrick is tired of obsequious and ad hominem tweaking tossed at him. He's
intelligent enough to know when a compliment is pure from the heart (seldom
is) and when its purpose is to interject a thought or emotion or to design a
veiled diatribe at someone else. In of itself there is not much harm done,
but it shows a lack of respect for the person to whom it was presented to, a
kind of manipulation. IOW Got something to say...SAY IT DUDE.

Last I noticed, Patrick was quite competent at writing for himself.
IOW, he needs no ignorant pillock doing it for him.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA
west

[Patrick Turner]

Andre Jute wrote:

On Jan 20, 4:50 am, Patrick Turner wrote:

Cost effectiveness like class A efficiency percentages of triode SE amps
are not
sonically obvious except that both lead to very good sound
providing the circuit design topology and use is optimized and sensible.

Patrick Turner.

The thing is, people like us *start* design and construction far, far
out into the ever-decreasing marginal utility fractions where an
improvement of a part of one per cent can easily double or triple or
quadruple the price of a component. You add little bits of quality to
an amp, carefully selected and matched tubes, lower ESR caps, lower
excess noise resistors, the correct weight of wire, shielding where
required, good solder and clean working, a stepped attenuator rather
than a scratchy and inaccurate pot, but you can't precisely say that
any individual piece sounds better or why. However, all the
improvements are cumulative (in fact, a better pot is amplfied
throughout the amp...) and eventually all those tiny decisions to
choose quality over crap together become audible in the gestalt and
then you know it was worth it.

Well yes you could always say the amp with an exotic and perhaps
expensive price list
will improove sound in a large number of tiny increments adding to a
good solid marginal
improvement.

A scratchy pot is not tolerated here for very long, and I do prefer
resistors which are linear with temperature and applied voltages.

But what I said was that even with the very nicest selection of parts,
and amp not optimally set up cannot be as good as one that has been set
up better.
Load mismatches are the very worst evil in so many amps I have had to
try to re-engineer,
and good bits don't address this very common problem.
ARC and CJ and many others commonly select loadings for very high power
max, low % of pure class A,
and basically they all now make pretty looking PA amps with mediuum NFB,
and medium measurements,
and sound that although is initially impressive, can easily be improved
upon, but
IF they only were to sacrifice some maximum power.
But no, marketing cowboys who now guide the design process
scream "Watts, more Watts!!!!" at the apprentice engineers.

When we come to SET amps, appalling loading mistakes are very common in
both output stages AND driver stages.
The apprentices sometimes have appalling basic knowledge of anything!

The 845 amp I have just got running has exemplary measured performance
for an SET amp. I gave the OPT two ways of arrangeing the secondaries in
a no-waste
constant current density manner with a section of either 4 ohms or 6.6
ohms.

The usual load for all negatively biased class TRIODE A1 SE output
stages is
(Ea dc / Ia dc) - ( 2 x Ra ) where Ra is at the Ea/Ia quiescent point.
For beam tetrode its 0.9 Ea / Ia, and a slightly different set of rules
apply, but lets just stick to triodes for
simplicity.
Thus you'll get a maximal PO allowable with cut off and grid current
occuring at equal
extremes of Ia. Max THD for Triode with such a load in the 5% area
usually, so if the PO max is high, then
at a few watts likey to be used, THD is pretty low.
THD increases dramatically if the load is reduced to 1/2 the above
calculated figure.
But I see samples where the makers have set it all to make max PO into 8
ohms, but
most modern speakers are anything but 8 ohms, 6 ohms average if you are
lucky and
often with mid band dips at say 300Hz to 3 ohms.
No amount of fancy shmancy R&C etc will make the amp perform better than
it does with such an appalling load mismatch.

So if any error in loading is ever allowable, it is to make the load
HIGHER in ohms than too low.
This ALWAYS means the OPT must have more turns or iron or both and many
makers baulk at
giving their lamentable products such wonderful attributes as having a
flexible OPT
which is very generous in size, weight, bandwidth and with low losses.

In the case of my 845, it is impossible to escape from the fact the
output stage
will make 5% into 4 ohms at 50 watts ( 2 x 845 ) when loaded with the
load of 4 ohms for
approximately max PO according to the above formula.
Since learning that my customer is using quite good quality "4" ohm
large floor stander speakers by Piega,
I selected the 4 ohm tapping, reduced Ea a little, increased Ia for max
PO into 3 ohms,
while still allowing considerable voltage headroom for bass frequencies
where there
will probably be a high resonant peak.
With the amp set up like this the spread of power, amount of power is
good, and distribution
of current and voltage abilities is about optimized.

The EL84 driver stage has to make a maximum of about 120Vrms to power
the 845.
The 2H distortion gives maximal 2H cancelation at 9 ohms load with
KRAudio 845, and with Chinese 845
it was at 6 ohms. Cancelations are such that at 9 ohms at low levels
there is ZERO 2H,
and only a small amount of 3H and higher H.
I tried lowering the resistance loading on the EL84 drive stage
to benignly increase the driver 2H and therefore produce maximal 2H
cancelation
at a lower load where the output stage has more 2H.
But I didn't like the spectra change.
So I have left the driver stage alone with its approx 2% THD at 120Vrms
drive.
The means by which one IS ABLE to effectively reduce THD in most SET
amps
WITHOUT increasing NFB, or indeed using any NFB is to raise the anode
load,
so it could be more like Ea dc / Ia dc, simple, but then the max PO
will may become only 30 watts instead of 50 in the 2 x 845 case.
The drop in THD is quite beneficial if no stage in the amp is
deliberatly
set up to distort to give cancelations where the output load is low.
Just about any SET amp will contain the same cancelation phenomena
occuring at some value of RL.
All will benefit from maximizing 2H cancelations over as wide a range of
loads as possible.
Because SE triode output stages produce less THD as the load value is
raised, and we usually like to have linear driver stages
with high R values then for low total THD a higher RL is needed in the
output stage.

SO, how does one overcome the problem of matching when its not available
as a
result of maker using say only ONE lousy winding set for 8 ohms?
A matching transformer from ZeroImpedance is a real boon.
These toroidal auto trannies allow a 4 ohm load to appear to the amp to
be somewhere
between say 6 and 20 ohms.
If set up for 20 ohms, the amp becomes less sensitive, and cannot seem
to make the full
amount of spec'd power, but if 25 watts is enough rather than 50 watts
max possible,
and THD is 0.02% at 3 watts instead of 0.2%, then something major has
been achieved.
Also the step down tranny likie this improves the damping factor.

I don't have shares in ZeroImpedance, but two guys here have bought them
to find the sound
became better. One guy got the trannies in their cheap form and
un-boxed, and I boxed them for him
in screwed plywood full of compacted sand and with 4mm banana sockets.
I tested the trannies. at 30 watts BW was from less than 10Hz to 1MHz,
and losses were negligible, and capacitance was low.

Replacing generic Wima polypropylene caps with Auri caps didn't seem to
make any difference to my ears.
And you'd NEVER see any measured betterment. But changeing load matching
ratios
with a load matching tranny makes a huge measured difference to THD and
possibly also to the sound.
Some audiophiles will cling to the idea that transformers all veil the
sound and that
more of them always places more veils. That's simplistic ********.
Veils simply depend on the physical specs for the trannies.

So the moral of this story is that any SET amp can give better an the
usual mediocre performance
achieved usually by means of intelligent loading.

So instad of 3.5k load for a 300B, it will sound better with 7k.
Sure it will then clip asymetrically, but well away from clipping
the Rout will be 1/2, the THD about 1/3 or much more depending on the
amount
of natural and unavoidable 2H cancelling between driver and output
tubes,
and sound will be better.
If there is not enough power, use MORE 300Bs, and parallel them.

The cost per watt can be enormous for an decently performing SET amp.
So what? Why do people worry about such costs when they spend absurd
amounts
on cars, house extensions and pleasing silly women ?????

If you like music, then spend what you need to get where you want.
Don't complain here about it when you have just been forced by she who
must be obeyed
says she wants new carpets and and a better car.

If people were more consistent in their money spending habits
they'd seek out the deeper truth about what makes good sound.

And maybe that new carpet might be better than the timber floor in the
listening room....

Better than spending zillions on silly parts.....

Patrick Turner.







Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

[Eeyore]

Andre Jute wrote:

On Jan 19, 11:08 pm, Eeyore
wrote to West:

I wouldn't use carbon composition if you PAID me to.

Reliable photographic evidence off geosynchronous satellites carrying
high-res camaras suggest that the masked fat man sneaking around in
the dead hours of the night buying up Allen Bradley carbon composition
resistors is one Graham Stevenson, aka Eeyore, aka Poopie.

Okay, Poopie, so West cannot pay you to use carbon comps. But then who
*is* paying you?

My clients pay me.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Iain Churches wrote:

A Japanese company recently sent me their catalogue of "superior
non.magnetic resistors"

Somewhat moot since I have yet to find any magnetic resistors. And even if they
were magnetic it wouldn't matter tuppence.

Graham

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

A Japanese company recently sent me their catalogue of "superior
non.magnetic resistors"

Somewhat moot since I have yet to find any magnetic resistors. And even if
they
were magnetic it wouldn't matter tuppence.

Graham

Precisely.
I bet someone buys them, though:-)
Iain

[GerryE123]

"West" wrote in message news:CMhkj.975$hk4.885@trnddc03...
I think that I have come to a conclusion that the best interconnects are no
interconnects. In my amp I have installed a 100k stereo (L-type) step
Ladder
attenuator with a 4 way stereo select switch. The amp now looks like an
integrated amp but the preamp part, is of course, passive.
Has any one else used these step attenuators with good results? I'm
wondering if some of the real hi-end "botique" resistors really make an
improvement. You have to use a bunch of them. I'm using Dale resistors for
now. At least I know that the sound outclasses any of my interconnects.
That's why I opened this post with the best is nothing. Any improvement I
can make?
All constructive replies are most welcomed. Thank you.

West:

My SE 45 amp has a pair of built-in Goldpoint attenuators. Of course this
allows me to run my digital source directly into it. Goldpoint and DACT are
the two most popular high-quality attenuators. Here's a link to a photo of
the underside of my amp (the Goldpoints can be seen at the top):

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...123/set45c.jpg

Here's a link for information on the Goldpoint attenuators including prices:

http://www.goldpt.com/prices.html

Gerry

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"GerryE123" wrote in message
...

My SE 45 amp has a pair of built-in Goldpoint attenuators. Of course this
allows me to run my digital source directly into it. Goldpoint and DACT
are the two most popular high-quality attenuators. Here's a link to a
photo of the underside of my amp (the Goldpoints can be seen at the top):

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...123/set45c.jpg


Nice amp, Gerry. Can we see a pic of the top also?
Your impressions of SET, and why you chose to build
one, would be of interest.

best regards
Iain