 "Name" FireWire cable?
July 25, 2009
Editor,
Did you test the Weiss
Minerva DAC with a standard FireWire cable? I didn't see a "name" cable in
your equipment list. Keep up the great websites. Thanking you in anticipation.
Nick Williams
I did not test the Minerva with a fancy FireWire cable,
just a model I bought at Best Buy. I’m not sure how many specialist makers have
FireWire cables in their lineup, but I’d imagine there are some. There certainly have
been a number of USB cables that have cropped up from various audiophile-approved
companies. One example is the Synergistic Research Tesla Tricon that Colin Smith wrote about on SoundStage!
The real question is whether there is a need for a specialist FireWire cable. That I
can’t answer. . . . Jeff Fritz
The search for TWBAS
July 13, 2009
To Albert Bellg,
You comment ["Concerto for Writer and
The World’s Best Audio System 2009"]: "That differs greatly from how
nearly all of us put together our own systems -- and, indeed, from how Jeff put together
his own system. Virtually all systems are created by a more evolutionary process of
auditioning individual components, then adding those that improve the system’s
performance in ways we like. In the context of TWBAS, that might sound like a dangerous
idea, since it’s more than likely that engaging in a similar process of starting with
the best components we can find and then auditioning other very-high-end components might
have resulted in a TWBAS 2009 that sounded even better than the one we heard."
Search algorithms over this kind of solution space are a
dicey business. The evolutionary procedure you describe is a hill-climbing process; its
outcome is radically dependent on where it starts. It's also somewhat dependent on the
order in which comparisons are made. That is, imagine hilly terrain, with the height of
the hills representing the overall quality of the system. (I'm glossing over the points
you made about the difficulty of defining such a measure, valid though they are, to make
the analogy simpler.) If your search starts on the lower part of a hill, it will climb
toward the top of that hill, even though there may be a higher hill somewhere else.
Nonetheless, such algorithms are widely used in statistics,
computer science, etc., because they are computationally feasible. In a non-linear
situation there is no feasible way to compute a global maximum. In the computer situation,
the normal procedure is to repeat the search from a variety of starting points.
Unfortunately, doing this with an audio system is a little too time-consuming for numerous
repetitions to be a reasonable alternative.
Starting from scratch also does not provide a guarantee of
finding a "best" system. In the absence of a better way of checking component
synergy than trying combinations of gear, it's a shot in the, if not dark, then gloom. I
don't think a clear solution to the question of the best search technique exists. I just
thought you might be interested to hear a little about how non-audio people have thought
about the problem.
Cheers,
Jonathan
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I like the analogy
of using search algorithms in the process of upgrading an audio system once you have a
pretty good idea of the "hill" you want to climb, such as the "SET"
hill, the "minimonitor" hill, the "tube preamp with solid-state amp"
hill, or the "best system under $5000 hill." It seems to me, though, that you
could climb hills for any particular component or combination of components in your audio
system, as well as for the system as a whole.
Furthermore, I think audiophiles are generally pretty
thoughtful about their choice of hill to climb, which I suspect results from reading
reviews and listening to a wide variety of gear wherever we can. Although the personal
factors ("my dad liked Conrad-Johnson, so I like [or dislike] Conrad-Johnson")
and the serendipitous factors ("my favorite uncle just gave me his Cary CD player for
my birthday") certainly come into play.
The "best" system for many of us will be the
synergy of personal preference for the gear itself (do I have gear I respect and like?),
our perceptions of the process we go through (have I spent enough time and tried enough
options?), and what it sounds like (do I like what I hear?). For me, hitting the mark in
those three areas would define being at or close to the top of my "best system"
hill. Best wishes. . . . Albert Bellg
Boulder still recommended?
July 6, 2009
Editor,
I’ve been pouring over your reviews with interest and
am considering the Boulder 1010/1060 [preamp/power amp] combination. Has anything cropped
up in the four or five years since your review
that you would recommend as an alternative? I am also auditioning the Linn Klimax Control
and Solos.
System:
CD player: Wadia 781i
Speakers: Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy 8
Regards,
Nigel
I’m still a big fan of Boulder’s electronics,
although it has been a while since I’ve had the opportunity to hear them in my
system. They surely remain a very competitive alternative. However, there are some other
good options that you should certainly audition before committing to buy anything. First
are the Simaudio Moon electronics from Canada. Their Evolution-series products are
remarkably good across the board. The Classé Omega Omicron Mono amplifiers and a
top-of-the-line Delta-series preamplifier would also make a fantastic pairing. And then
there is Behold of Germany, though the price of these might put them out of consideration.
So to sum up, yes, Boulder is still a top consideration, but there are other competing
brands that you should hear before you decide on anything. . . . Jeff Fritz
|
