Ron's System

Thank you Michael and Sonic for your answers...

Yes, I am referring to the Redwood tuning blocks.. Harold advised me they should be ready by end of the month.

I really can't wait! I am certain I will be ordering more if the initial results are what I think they will be.

Sonic:

How are you applying the tuning blocks in a row under cinder block to achieve a chorus of sorts? I am genuinely intrigued!

Thanks In Advance,

Ron

Michael Green wrote:

Hi Ron

I keep forgeting to tell you, but with components you really shouldn't be running a CDP on-top of an Amp. That's a signal no-no

I kept wanting to mention that and then when I'm doing something else I think of it "OH no Ron has that player on-top the amp".

better late then never



Also (sorry for playing audio dad) you do know it takes at least 3 months for DAC's to warm up to a system?

It looks like your doing fast plug & play testing according to what I have read, and equipment takes a lot longer than this to start to warm up to other components. Doing testing with components at 50% or less their potential can lead you to a never ending plug & play life. I mean that's ok if that's what you want to do, but I just wanted to give you a heads up, that's one of the reasons more seasoned hobbyist don't do the buy based on magazine reviewing.

Michael:

That is honestly funny, for I sincerely have already learned to place the CD Player *next* to instead of on top of the amp! Probably just as you were realizing the audio "mistake" I made, I had also realized it! However, I can't take credit for doing it for the tune, so to speak...I merely felt the amp was very warmer than usual! Lol! I almost put pictures up, but I think I'll wait until I get the tuning blocks and definitely until the unit's own internal DAC has had time to "season".

I had totally forgotten about that very serious fact...I was lucky enough to get a DEMO version of my PS Audio DAC, and so that rule did not apply. But I will definitely bear that in mind as I audition the NAD.

Best Regards,

Ron

Hi Ron

If you went to my post of May 8 on my active thread you'll see how I placed a long row of Low Tone Redwood blocks on the concrete window sill of Sonic's room. And these added something beautiful in tone to my room in the forward space behind the Magneplanar loudspeakers which filled the tone in the centre zone of Sonic room. Very good this is!

Sonic

Sonic:

That again intrigues me... though I could not locate a thread in your name under "Home Audio Systems"...could you kindly explain where it is or provide a link?

Kindest Regards,

Ron

Hi Ron

Here's Sonic's thread, he's in the international section.

this should take you aroung May 7th

https://tuneland.forumotion.com/t258p210-tuning-my-musical-journey

All:

I am intending on isolating the two transformers in my NAD 516 with Mu Metal as well as cork for the circuit boards as was positively documented and experienced by the Pittsburgh crew.

I looked online and found there are several varieties and thicknesses of Mu Metal, all the way down to a flexible tin foil.

There are also many varieties of cork and thicknesses.

Could anyone make my research a lot easier and provide a recommended thickness of Mu Metal and source as well as a recommended thickness and type of cork and source?

Thanks In Advance,

Ron

Michael & Sonic:

Thank you to the specific link to Sonic's system. That gentleman has done a LOT of very good write-ups and work! I am impressed!

Respectfully,

Ron

Greetings Ron

Sonic has little experience with mu metal -- beyond knowing it is widely used as a shield and that is mostly nickel in composition.

Where does the cork come in? The last time I tried cork anywhere in Sonic's system it was as a turntable platter mat and it didn't work -- a loss in warmth and upper bass projection.

Can you send me a link to what those people in Pittsburgh are advocating -- would be a good read. I might learn something.

One thing which is a dead end Sonic can point out from experience in my system and from non-tuned systems belonging to friends. It is the use of ferrite -- like those clips we find on our computer cables.

Even in unturned systems, clamped just on power cables they cause the sound to get midrangy and lose any natural ease in the music there might have been before the ferrite was introduced. And when they are clamped on signal cables the system sounds artificially clean, sanitized and shrunken in scale.

We are led to think that CD/SACD/DVD players are evil sources of RFI, EMI and all sorts of fields given all the switching in the MHz range going on but is truly the case? And then how do we quantify the effects if there are indeed any? A moot point that the Tunees look at in a different way.

Sonic

Hi Ron

Welcome back

I personally remove my transformers if they interfere with the circuit on CDP's. Other components I will work with the transformers close by sometimes if I can get them to behave, but on CDP's they either work for me (smaller transformers) or I try to remove their effect from the player.

As a note, I also noticed that once again on Stereophile they are saying Isolation as a term meaning something else. That being an intellectual talk over there you might want to remind them that the mu-metal tweak is a shielding tweak and not an isolation one.

With your background and desire to write I think you could help the folks there if you took the time and studied the actual uses of the terms they use and help them out. Here's why. Further down the road if they do actually begin to take their systems further they're going to run into a problem with the term isolation. It may not look like it now to you but it will if and when you go a little further.

I would like to give you some feedback on this side of the fence and maybe others will want to join in too. This hobby had developed a problem in the late 80's with terms (I was there), and have never taking the time to turn that around. Instead they built ontop of these terms and started to create things that failed in the biz horribly. This has cost the industry sorely and they're still trying to dig their way out using the same failures. Not all though. There are some designers who are very keen and just keep away from the others (I know them too). As you start looking into this stage of your adventure do a little history study and look at the guys who went down the road of some of these "audiophilish" ways only to turn around later when products started to be returned. One thing tricky about this industry is they move forward sometimes and then discover the problem but at that point they are committed to their stance and can't move until they slowly reverse their designs without anyone noticing.

Let me give you a couple examples and thoughts. And please keep in mind I'm being straight up with you and looking at the positive potentual.

About 25 years ago there was a massive movement with dampening materials being added to stock products that at first people thought was a good thing with basic listening. After a while though thousands of these listeners dumped their products and started again. Many of these guys we were doing the acoustics for and these folks were furious with the industry and never came back to the pages of the audiophile way of thinking again.

Your NAD is a good example of this. Look at how many CDP's that cost up to 10 times more the price of the NAD are getting beat up by it. You have guys replacing their $1500.00 units all over the place to go to the NAD. The rags are not going to push this side of the story necessarily but if you read between the lines you'll read exactly what I am saying. So what is it that the NAD is doing different from these other guys? The build. NAD making a "cheaper" product has actually made a better product than the over built guys.

topic two, back to the words

Your a scientist correct? What do scientist do? They make theory into practice. Two sides of the scientific world, and choosing the theory side is cool, but now you are starting to do, and as a scientist can no longer use the theory approach to audio as your conclusions. Now let me ask you a question. Is isolation an absolute or a variable? If isolation is used as an absolute, then when your done "isolating" the NAD, you according to science will not be able to make vibratory changes anymore.

Now with your scientific mind (I'm giving you credit here BTW) go look at the Pittsburgh boys thread again. They were successful with one setting of their tweaking and unsuccessful (different) with another part, go read it. While doing their "isolation" they made an adjustment. They varied the sound It wasn't one setting and done, then they disappeared from the scene more than likely because of the trolling I was told. One thing I promise you, they didn't stop tweaking.

This is up to you and you can proove yourself as someone who is going to go with the crowd or you can be someone who looks at the terms and the practical application and make a difference on that forum, maybe the industry.

Just consider this Good Will Hunting , do you want to use that term isolation if it really doesn't apply in full or do you want to find the correct term and help make a difference? I see two things right now. The term isolation is being used with too much of a slant, and I see isolation being used when the real word for the use of Mu-metal is Shielding.

You have told me you want to explain things, right? Well here's your chance. As you start tweaking look carefully at those terms. Right now go to bing and type in Mu-metal and what do you see http://www.bing.com/search?q=mu-metal&pc=Z161&form=ZGAIDF&install_date=20111120&iesrc=IE-Address "shielding".

When you get your Mu-metal don't just cover things and stop. Take the time to do a serious study and you will find that every size of Mu-metal sounds different, one cork sounds different from the next. How close you have these materials and the shape of them makes a difference. And one more important thing that no one has told you yet. They're telling only about "isolating" the transformers but they never mention to you what they just did to the other parts. They're being changed by the Mu-metal too. You don't "isolate" fields. Do your own research and you will find the same.

OK you have differences in the thickness and size and did you know there are different types of Mu-metal, and they all sound different. I'm not talking thickness here I'm talking different manufacturers of the metal itself. And they sound different from each other. Lab listening studying is so much more than one setting.

The opportunity is yours my friend and you can join the club of "isolation" or you can make a difference by getting into the particulars and connect your scientific brain to the practical application side. Ask your intellect, are you saying "isolation" in varying levels or "isolation" as an absolute? If isolation is an "absolute" than you will not be able to make changes to the sound once applied. If it is a "Variable" than you need to change the wording and rewrite the book and I'll help. If the MU-metal is Variable in it's effects, than you need to start thinking about what your role really is. It's not changing things here on TuneLand my friend, we've been doing the practical application a very long time and know the answer.

If you truly are convince of "Fixed" than you will not be able to make a change because "Variable" is far more scientific, and "Fixed" is only one point of view inside the context of variable.

You want to know if you belong on TuneLand or not? Start by proving to yourself and others what Isolation, Shielding, and Tuning is without looking or using webster and without an argument. A scientist doesn't recite theory, he writes proof. Clerical scientist write and talk theory, that's anyones bag, and I would like to see the deeper you as you tweak your NAD. That will tell me if you are a scientist in name or in practice. My friend if you can do this you will proove your credentials to all.

See this post as a positive one, cause it is.

Hi Guys

I'm looking forward to all of us looking at this with our experiences. I believe a few words need to be re-thought or at least better defined for forums like Stereophile and audiophiles in general.

This is all very good stuff and through the "doing" we can come to real conclusions and that's what the industry needs.

Should be fun, and Ron if you feel challenged or put down in any way try to find the good it what we are saying and our desire to be not only honest but your friends. I might come off more forceful than some, so look at that as me speaking to thousands and not just you. That will help.

Sonic is a good man, and has looked into many audiophile adventures, not only by himself but also within audiophile get togethers. Plus he's up on audio history, especially the Japan Tweaks & Systems.

lets have a good time:!: and remember I speak like I do because I want to be yours and everyones cheerleader who seeks truth and peace.

Michael:

Thank you for welcoming me back to the forum.

I am a very fast learner. I also totally grasp the concept of misused "memes" of sorts; in this case isolation, when we are really talking about shielding. Got it.

As for proving my science, I would like to address this immediately. Here are in fact a few links to my post-doc paper within the field of Computational Neuroscience I co-authored as mentioned previously. As a funny side note, academics can have rather large egos, and so long ago it has become standard practice to list the authors alphabetically by last name!

The Universities should be very recognizable by all members:

Cornell:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.2352

Harvard:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011arXiv1105.2352I

Caltech:
http://authors.library.caltech.edu/42849/

The Journal Of Theoretical Biology:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022519313005274

This early in my already rocky start here on Tuneland, I feel like clarifying my very important reputation as a credible scientist; and mean nothing more than that important goal to myself.

Back to topic:

I plan on trying out Mu Metal shielding as well as cork underneath the logic boards.

I am depending on yours and others' considerable knowledge as I don't want to waste my time re-inventing the wheel and am seeking which type of mu metal works best; as well as thickness. Same goes for cork. If you've done all of this, share the wealth and please don't make me re-invent the wheel. We certainly are all about knowledge sharing both in the corporate world and especially in the Academic world. Why not the Audio world too? I think we can! In fact, the more I read on this site, the more excited and inspired I get! We can learn from each other's successes and failures, and pass on the successes and stop repeating failures.

If you have already tried Mu shielding and cork, and found moving the transformers outside of the chassis to be the exact solution in this case; as a pure project, I am willing to do that to my inexpensive (in audiophile terms) NAD 516. Lead on, Jedi Master!  


Warm Regards,

Ronald R. Stesiak, PhD
National Science Foundation

Sonic & All:

Here is the link to the Stereophile sourced article on success with a DAC utilizing Mu Metal shielding and cork... if your scroll to the pictures, that's where the meat of the article starts.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/tuning?page=1

Kind Regards,

Ron

All:

Since upgrading my digital chain, I found my analogue chain somewhat lacking. Therefore, through the advice of some other members on Stereophile as well as applied theory and research, I chose for my budget the Vincent PHO-8 phono stage. Further I took in the practices by many members here on Tuneland of isolating the power supply as a positive practice...I already find the Vincent has a deeper bottom end with more clarity than the outgoing Cambridge 551p. As it burns in, it will no doubt sound better and better. My records are already sounding better in these early days of owning it.

Again, I think it will appeal to members on Tuneland due to the two-chassis design: one holds the RIAA circuits, the other the Power Supply.. they also beefed it up as opposed to many units and especially as opposed to the dreaded Wall Wart! I also am a firm believer in powerful analogue power supplies feeding components; resulting in improved soundstage.

Here are some pictures I took:

At home in my rack:


Power Supply Internal:


Power Supply Closeup:


RIAA Circuit:


So it is sort of already at least partially tuned by "isolating" the power supply...

Kind Regards,

Ron

Hi Ron

Thanks for giving us insights into your scientific background. For Sonic my work puts me side by side with engineers, medical researchers and lawyers so although I am neither an engineer, a researcher nor a lawyer Sonic understands and works within the rigour these disciplines instill in their people.

In that sense, we have something in common in terms of mental process (recognizably yours is far above and ahead of mine).

In any phenomenon Sonic looks for a credible scientific or engineering hypothesis. Next up is how the idea is implemented to reach the targeted outcome. At the Tune, I learnt not there is any "new science" but things that conventional industry design models have overlooked. Of course, there is the intersection between engineering and marketing in audio. Just like in cars, designers are required have to engineer in a certain sound or tactile feel when pressing a switch on the dashboard though these things have no impact on the performance of the car.

An idea that drives Sonic's thought is the best things have a clear underlying philosophy and an implementation that eschews unnecessary complexity. I know Einstein said something about this, though Sonic is unable to recall the quote, but I have to say this is not my original thinking.

So porting over a conversation we both are having from the Stereophile thread -- yes the Magnavox while a valid tuning tool may not be for me. The NAD C516BEE is on my radar screen as a possibility for Sonic's system. If I go this way, I will have nothing to play my small number of SACDs on. Of course, I could:

a. play just the CD layer because in something like a tuned C516BEE and of course the Magnavox the improvement in sound will be worth the switch

b. or I could set up the SACD player in a secondary system and transfer the sound from SACDs (both layers) to tape and play it on Sonic's main system.

Oops, do I hear alarms bells going off somewhere?

Also Sonic went the route of the standalone DAC -- I used a Musical Fidelity. As you read my earlier writings you will see this. I tuned the DAC and used a Picasso cable from Mr Green as digital cable. Finally, the player alone when tuned sounded better.

Sonic

Hi Ron & Sonic, nice to see the budding relationships

Ron, thanks for the invite! I always feel weird about jumping in until invited, especially if the thread owner might have strong opinions before starting down the path of variables.

a little on my view of tuning and being in tune, from my experience, and of course point of view

You'll notice on all the threads I try to move the listeners toward becoming master of their own system, which separates my approach from what you have seen on Stereophile. Sonic makes a very important statement and is maybe my biggest contribution to the hobby " At the Tune, I learnt not there is any "new science" but things that conventional industry design models have overlooked."

My life's work is about exploring audio on it's deepest level "the doing". Choosing to do this means I forfeit the rights to a lot of credits, that I hint to from time to time, for the fun of it . I have found to be a truest to the art, I must let the credits fall where they may and just enjoy the end results. If I hung on to my ego for the sake of me I might never find the Magnavox-es of the world.

I try to remind people here that the audio signal itself along with nature is the teacher and all of us are the students. How we place ourselves and others according to our own ego is a completely different issue. Music does not know price ranges, marketers do. There's a difference between saying all things are equal, and all things are equal according to my mindset, lifestyle or any other contitioning. For example what Hiend001 discovered today was a place that very few listeners at whatever level or degree have been. They don't even know it exist and therefore would even question that it does. Or they might think in their own ego mind that they have been there, but they haven't of course because only those who have understanding where that place is and can recognized if someone has or hasn't been by their descriptions.

Man gathers unto man for recognition, but expertise is something no man can theorize. There is no label man can give to the true student of doing. And the true student of doing can be of any status of life according to man. The student of doing is based on an art and the experience and disciplined practice of that artform. Formal schooling teaches what the artist has done, it doesn't replace the artistry itself, and it can't fabricate the doing, aside from the actual doing. People picking up the art of playing piano without ever taking a lesson is a truest in that particular field. As I have pretty much done all my life is try to do what I said earlier, help you guys become masters of your own listening. All the influences that you guys encounter and have to deal with to get you to your personal highest level is something I can do nothing about. The only thing I can do is continue to be a student of the art and give credit to the art itself for teaching me and being my guide. I don't see this as anything man can teach as much as it is something that is formed within us as people with egos, desire the will and of course practiced skill. We can't force a soundstage to happen with electronics. We can only see it happen when we get out of the way and let it happen. When we let go of self and follow the laws of physics for what it is, "natural" then and only then is when we start getting somewhere truly meaningfully deeper in listening. It's as much letting go as it is taking in.

Hi Ron

The highest level in any tuning is when you don't need corrective materials or added circuitry. What is the best Mu-metal? The type you don't need because you have figured out how to voice the energy of the system in such a way that allows the audio code to respond to the recorded code in a balanced fair exchange. As you do this hobby you are going to have times you stop and say "that's it, I got it" and tell the world you have arrived, we all have done it. Everyone is guilty . After this comes the learning because you are going to put on another piece of music that shows you how bad, or different of a job you have done. Remember the goal of this hobby is to be able to hear as much of the recording as I can, and as many recordings as I can successfully. Success is what you are going to describe for yourself, always remember this too. The guy next to you may do the exact same thing and it be unsuccessful. Put you on your guitar, and you can judge your success or lack of. Lend your guitar to someone else and they are going to have a completely different level of success. Follow me? Same guitar different level and point of reference and view.

Tuning is about understanding all these variables are possible and designing your method that is acceptable to your own getting there.

The whole shielding thing to me is a mixed bag at best. Nature has a plan for energy and that is to work in harmony. During the process your going to have odd outs but the over all process is energy looking for a way to do two things be "active" (expanding) and be in "harmony". The odd outs have a place as you mentioned fractals, but concerning music the method is about formations of patterns in harmony. That's what gives music's it's strength. When you inject the Mu-metal into the equation, you just put a capo on the system. Yes things are different and for certain recordings and certain size staging this is all good. Same with any type of dampening. But it also means you have limited that system to the sound of that capo and taken away from some of the flexibility. Where my questions come in, are you trying to hear the system or the music? What your doing with all of this is shaping the sound. Tuning is about making systems that give you more flexibility, which as listeners grow in the hobby is something they desire most of the time. So the choice really comes down to you and your wants and is something I could only guess at. What kind of capo you choose to use really in any part of your system is something that will come down to your own journey, and how involved you want to get.

As for me obviously I like setting the system free, and make it so simple that I have control over the variables as they happen. Shielding for me is a bit of a cop out, but that's me and the way I like to listen. I feel the same way about most added parts, or even bigger parts. I mean I tune everything I am handed and do my best, but for my own listening I want to be in control of the flavors and even create them. The recordings have so much info on them that I enjoy looking at the same recording many times from several different view points, kinda like what I said on Stereophile. As you climb that mountain and turn around you will see a different view each time, and the same goes for where you are facing around that mountain. Speaking for myself, this is extreme listening at it's best.

Shielding is focusing on part of the signal as you close in the electromagnetic fields influence, but this is not really giving you more of anything, it's dropping off some of the harmonic structures so you can see certain parts of the music more than others. nothing wrong with this, just a little bit more of a limited view.

let me show you something



See those cable ties? On my system these would be the first thing gone. This is limiting those cables and the parts next to them to "one" sound. Those would be gone and I would spread out those cables, let them relax, and then start voicing the fields.

Michael:

Thank you for the very thought provoking and detailed intro to this art & science of tuning.

Understanding i have processed most of what you said and understand it, let's get our hands dirty!

For the NAD, I am guessing I should go ahead and do unto it as I did the Creek..remove the ties, free the wires, etc.

Then, you are proposing rather than pushing the harmonics down in a partially pleasant way with Mu shielding; which may in fact affect the signal negatively in other areas and properties, that I skip that method entirely and move forward with removing the power transformers (carefully) perhaps mounting them on wood (non-conductor and easy and cheap)? I can totally logically process this as a superior and even cheaper method.

I have zero problems modding the NAD to FUBAR. (A top secret military term)

It is through the NAD I hope to truly exercise you and your forums' practices to the fullest. If I like where the NAD goes, I may move on to other components. I also can definitely mod the Vincent per your suggestion; but I don't want to start too many projects and would like to stick with the NAD for now.

So what do you think? Move the transformers off-site? See what it does to the sound? Then....I should be getting the tuning blocks....

My Dad once said when I was very young and ambitious "If you're going to be a bear, may as well be a GRIZZLY!".

So, I have largely adopted that attitude in healthy ways in my professional life and I am prepared to apply that level of devotion here too. I think this could be seriously fun.

"Let the games begin!"
--as said by the serial killer "jigsaw" in the SAW movie series


Respectfully,

Ron

Sonic.beaver wrote:

Hi Ron

Thanks for giving us insights into your scientific background.  For Sonic my work puts me side by side with engineers, medical researchers and lawyers so although I am neither an engineer, a researcher nor a lawyer Sonic understands and works within the rigour these disciplines instill in their people.

In that sense, we have something in common in terms of mental process (recognizably yours is far above and ahead of mine).  

In any phenomenon Sonic looks for a credible scientific or engineering hypothesis. Next up is how the idea is implemented to reach the targeted outcome.  At the Tune, I learnt not there is any "new science" but things that conventional industry design models have overlooked.  Of course, there is the intersection between engineering and marketing in audio.  Just like in cars, designers are required have to engineer in a certain sound or tactile feel when pressing a switch on the dashboard though these things have no impact on the performance of the car.  

An idea that drives Sonic's thought is the best things have a clear underlying philosophy and an implementation that eschews unnecessary complexity.  I know Einstein said something about this, though Sonic is unable to recall the quote, but I have to say this is not my original thinking.

So porting over a conversation we both are having from the Stereophile thread -- yes the Magnavox while a valid tuning tool may not be for me.  The NAD C516BEE is on my radar screen as a possibility for Sonic's system.  If I go this way, I will have nothing to play my small number of SACDs on.  Of course, I could:

a. play just the CD layer because in something like a tuned C516BEE and of course the Magnavox the improvement in sound will be worth the switch

b. or I could set up the SACD player in a secondary system and transfer the sound from SACDs (both layers) to tape and play it on Sonic's main system.

Oops, do I hear alarms bells going off somewhere?

Also Sonic went the route of the standalone DAC -- I used a Musical Fidelity.  As you read my earlier writings you will see this.  I tuned the DAC and used a Picasso cable from Mr Green as digital cable.  Finally, the player alone when tuned sounded better.  

Sonic    

Sonic:

Do you have a digital front end where you are able to store FLAC and other digital files? If you also have a standalone DAC, you may already also have this digital front end. Mine is an Apple Macbook Air and a NAS. (really just need a computer with local or remote storage to get started). I am saying all of this as a suggestion on ripping your SACD's to FLAC or ??? format and store them digitally; thus freeing you up to pursue the NAD or the Magnavox without fear of "losing" the music on your SACD's.

Forgive my ignorance on SACd's.. I'm thinking they are "rippable" to FLAC or some other electronic standard dsd/dxd? that can then be passed to your DAC. But then, your DAC will need to be capable of playing dsd/dxd!?! And on it goes! Such is this hobby!

I have googled where folks have successfully transferred SACD's digitally...but a lot just do it via analogue; which sounds like what you have done or are suggesting. I just want you to be sure you don't feel "bad" about "losing" the SACD ability and are able to preserve the files either digitally or in the analogue domain freeing you to explore with the CD Players.

Perhaps another member more familiar with SACD could render an approach as well...

Respectfully,

Ron

[rand][/rand]

Hi Ron

Where's that down view pic you took of the 516? That was a good view. Let's post that on here and we'll use that for some tuning.

How long is that cable going from the circuit board to the transformers?

Once I find that pic, I'll do up some drawings. Well maybe I'll get some rest first then do some. Haven't got caught up on sleep for a few days now (a problem I have when in design mode).



Oh, heck yeah Tuning is a blast "addictive". I think your going to have a very good time, and make some good friends. I'm glad we all got over the bump in the road, but I certainly understand how people hit the bump. I have stories of guys furious with me till they started the actual tuning. Some of them I hear from years after, and we have great times, laughs and good memories.

Sonic's a great guy Really makes me happy that you guys can relate and have some good conversations from various views and various topics. I think when people see this type of thing from outside the forum it makes it easier for them to jump in and enjoy the fun.

I also appreciate that you guys let me stay hard-core about the method and products. Sometimes when I get too close to the audiophile edge, I feel I'm doing a disservice to those who expect me to go all the way. Which is more than you guys know and see up here. So when I see more audiophile talk, I think it's cool as long as I don't have to weigh in too much, cause if I jump in I have to decide whether I ride the straight line or conform a little and that's where it gets tough for me. I really do hate to drop heavy loads on folks. I understand their words are saying tell us the truth, but a lot of times saying it and delivering something that might sting a little is an awkward place for me to be. I'm thinking do they really want me to lay it out there, or a softer version that might feel better.

You guys ought to see herns and I tune together. It's take no prisoners. I love all the levels but there are for sure levels to this. I think you'll turn into a madman and have some laughs when you look back.

Hi Ron

sorry was posting while you put the above post up

Keep in mind, this is not a DIY forum. Not sure the plan shown was, but wanted to give you a heads up if you headed that direction, TuneLand would be the wrong place for that. I bend the rules some to help people with certain flavors of the tune and if they are out of reach sometimes and need a quick fix while waiting for product, but any real designing done outside of our testing wouldn't be something we would be interested in pursuing on the forum.

Michael:

No worries! That is a very theoretical, early stage prototype and probably belongs in a different thread eventually...

Back to Earth, here is the overhead pic of the NAD 516 I took:


Some early remarks:

It looks like they are going more and more surface mount and modern; like Creek does with a lot of ribbon connections but still some analogue and non-surface mounted doodads....but the transformers would be very easy to separate off the main chassis to start; if that is what you recommend instead of Mu Metal.

Any concerns over wire distance and gauge? Or just pretty much go for it?

Best Regards,

Ron

Michael Green wrote:

Hi Ron

sorry was posting while you put the above post up

Keep in mind, this is not a DIY forum. Not sure the plan shown was, but wanted to give you a heads up if you headed that direction, TuneLand would be the wrong place for that. I bend the rules some to help people with certain flavors of the tune and if they are out of reach sometimes and need a quick fix while waiting for product, but any real designing done outside of our testing wouldn't be something we would be interested in pursuing on the forum.

Michael:

That makes total sense! Tuning keeps everyone busy enough! I will respectfully actually remove the post and I truly do understand and agree.

Respectfully,

Ron

Hi Ron

Our wire is based on 22guage heat & vibratory treated if that helps.

Thanks Ron, I appreciate that. DIY projects here would end up being a disaster in the making.

Plus how would I feed my 27 children

On the other side of this though, I'm thrilled to see your wheels turning