Newbie Wammer
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Solanum

  • Rank
    New Wammer

Wigwam Info

  • Turn Table
  • Tone Arm & Cartridge
    Akito, Adikt
  • Digital Source 1
  • DAC
  • Power Amp/s
    2x 2250/D
  • My Speakers
  • Trade Status
    I am not in the Hi-Fi trade

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I know this is another topic, like cables, that can get very murky, but I've had an interesting experience lately. I've never had a lot of time for the subject of power supply, all my gear (see profile info) has mains filters built in and I would expect they are fairly effective and sophisticated filters given the price of it. On top of that I've never noticed any particular problems with the quality of the power supply and other devices (although we have overhead lines in the area and possums like to electrocute themselves giving regular brief power cuts). I have had everything just plugged in to a standard (switched) six outlet surge protected power board. However, I recently came across an Australian product (I am here in Oz!), which claimed to have sophisticated mains filtering (as well as protection) for only a couple of hundred dollars. I claims to have an active filter that works on the upward and downward curves of the sine wave, not just the peak. Obviously this is not a cheap power board, but cheap enough that I thought I would give it a try. It's a Thor A12BF Smartboard, dunno if others here have come across it? Blow down with a feather if it hasn't had quite a significant impact on the sound of the system, certainly on a par with an improved stylus for instance. Overall the sound is richer and the stereo placement seems better. I'm not about to spend thousands on power conditioners, but I am at least converted from a cynic to an agnostic.
  2. One thing I've been wondering about on this front (if you'll excuse the pun) is whether you can set it to pass-through full range on the L-R stereo channels? This would allow someone with an *EDSM and Exaktbox (e.g. me), to run a passive stereo set-up if need be? e.g. for testing speakers, coping with an amp problem, money problems! It's obviously not listed as an example (as it defeats the purpose of Exakt), but would increase the flexibility and use-case of an Exakt only system like mine.
  3. As an aside, isn't it depressing how quickly you get used to big upgrades? When I got my AEDSM/Exaktbox (after the testing mentioned above), everything I listened to just blew me away. After a year or so, the music still sounds superb and I sometimes hear something amazing and look up as if the performer is in the room, but mostly I'm used to it and just expect it to sound great! I still really appreciate it, but mostly it doesn't amaze me any more. :-(
  4. Sorry, I wasn't implying that (I don't know I'm afraid!), but it was definitely available on the most recent pre-kat version as that was what I tested.
  5. If you look at how sensory testing is done (and hearing is definitely a sense!), it is difficult to demonstrate small differences with A-B. Much better is duo-trio testing. This is where you have three choices of which two are identical. The test is to pick the odd one out. You can sample each of the three options as many times as you like and in any order. The brain is better at doing this and you can easily do statistical analyses of the results. Note that you are not looking for 'better', but simply, can you perceive a difference? If you can't perceive a difference, neither is 'better'! Food/wine etc. is normally done this way. It is obviously more difficult (expensive!) with Hi-Fi, but would still give clear data. You can do it with a trained panel (audio buffs / hi-fi reviewers) or the general public, it doesn't matter, although the trained panel would hopefully have more reliable results. It also fits with the Linn TuneDem method as you can do it with short snippets of music. I would love to see this done with some Hi-Fi products and the data published.... The A-B methodology leaves too much wriggle-room as it doesn't test whether a person can identify a difference or not, simply a perceived preference.
  6. That was the one, sorry I couldn't remember the term used. It was available on the latest ADSM immediately prior to the Kat upgrade. So I guess it depends on how old the ADSM the original poster has. My experience, as stated, was that it is only worth it if you don't have Exakt and you either don't need or don't want SO. The difference was slight between the all analogue path and the digital path without Exakt or SO. I guess the A-D is pretty good!
  7. Unless it has changed with Kat, you can have an all analogue chain. In Konfig there is an option (with the analogue in source possibly) to bypass the A-D. Obviously that means you can't use Exakt or SO. Have a rummage around in Konfig, the option should be there. I have an AEDSM, but trialled an ADSM and did the comparison. I found that using analogue only with the LP12 was better than going through the A-D and D-A, but that using Exakt (so using the A-D) was a significantly bigger improvement with my set-up. SO may well make the digital path worthwhile as well even you don't use Exakt.
  8. I spent some time doing these comparisons at an Akurate level, I think I posted about it in the old forum, but obviously that no longer exists. I looked at (almost) Akurate level LP12, Akurate DSM, and Exakt. Using the LP12 through the Akurate DSM analog path vs digital path without Exakt and with SO turned off, the analogue path was slightly (not not much) better, suggesting the Akurate level A2D in the DSM was not as good as the full analogue path. My understanding is that the Klimax A2D is significantly better than the Akurate one though. Using the LP12 with Exakt was much better than the LP12 through the analogue path, so the quality gain with Exakt was significant and more than made up for any loss in digitising the LP12 signal. Without Exakt I felt the (digitised) LP12 was a little better than a 16 bit FLAC through the DSM. With Exakt and with the benefit of lots of time now I think the (almost) Akurate level LP12 has a richer and more pleasing sound than 16 bit files and is as good in terms of detail, if not better. With Exakt I find it much harder to fault 24 bit files vs the LP12. If there is any difference, maybe the LP12 is a smidgin better, but then suffers from surface noise of course. I do have a couple of albums where I have decent vinyl and 24 bit files (one a late 90's record, the other a mid-2000's record), and it is really hard to pick a difference in quality. At moderate volume especially, there is a slight difference in feel perhaps, but it is hard to pick; at louder volume the amplified surface noise makes the 24 bit file perhaps nicer to listen to. All this is moot with classical recordings as there are few LPs of modern recordings or music and the surface noise of an LP makes a much bigger difference due to the high dynamic range of the music.
  9. I second this. I have the later Ninkas rather than Keilidhs, but after many years of listening I removed the trim and found that mad/bass drivers had got quite loose and tightening the allen (or torx, I forget) bolts improved the sound a bit. I also found that removing the grills (metal not cloth for these) did improve the sound very slightly, but not enough for me to warrant kids and animals getting at them more easily.
  10. Any formal news (4th December has passed)? I note here in Aus there is some news (but no price): Haven't seen any elsewhere though (including Linn's own tonearm page). Maybe they just wrote the article based on this thread!!!!
  11. I'm going to regret this, but I think we can go there, the 1s and 0s are identical and the transport medium doesn't affect that (I am assuming they all get there of course), also, the timing is dealt with by the streamer these days, so the old problems with CD transports/DACs don't exist. Surely, the question is whether the transport medium is transporting noise in along with the 1s and 0s?
  12. I'm sure you are right about the Kairn being an evolution of the LK1, as the Klout is of the LK2, but I guess the question is, just how much of an evolution! I've always found the power amp to have a bigger impact than the pre-amp, even though the pre-amp offers a huge potential to screw up the signal.... It would be really interesting to take an LK1-LK2 system, compare with a Kairn-Klout system and a more recent system and work out just how much difference we are paying for, vs the usual way where we upgrade one bit at a time and enjoy that bit of difference. Especially with appropriate era speakers.
  13. I originally had an LK2-75 (I think it was originally an upgraded LK2-60), running with an original Majik-I and then a Kairn. This was swapped out with an LK280 (with Kairn). I briefly bi-amped them, but preferred the 280 on its own. All of these were quite old when I got them. I didn't think there was a huge difference between the two, but the 280 was a bit smoother and more detailed. These were with the original transformers, no Spark. Could make a fair difference if it is anything like the impact upgrading later amps to Dynamik had. I then swapped the 280 for a Klout (big improvement in every aspect, especially with volume/demanding loads, but didn't totally blow the 280 out of the water), followed by two Klouts aktiv. Speakers were Ninkas throughout. Never had an LK1, but it certainly looked a bit rudimentary and I find it hard to believe it compared favourably with the Kairn (which wasn't far behind the Exotik I replaced it with). How did the resurrection go?
  14. Really? I had a Lk2-75 and an Lk280 and thought the latter distinctly (but not massively) better. You really prefer the LK2? I'd be interested to know why.
  15. There used to be some nice guides on the old forum, someone might post one here I guess, but to be honest you don't need them. Just take a bit of care taking it apart and you'll be fine. The battery is on the front board of course, not the main PCB.