Ramblings about system goals, listening fatigue, diminishing returns

I am ashamed to see the same old gang biting at the same old bait. Same old biases.

Some here should seek to remove the beam from their eye (ears?) before trying to remove the mote from OP's.

It's unbecoming. If someone wants to resort to hyperbole because they're new to the hobby, or have simply found themselves giddy and want to share, WHAT POSSIBLE DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

What I find most embarrassing is how quickly the more fortunate seem to get their asses in a knot. Let it go, guys and girls.

All Audio, NO Attitude. Those who know better to engage new-ish members on the same tired arguments (we know which ones I speak of....cables, $$$$ vs $, etc) need to either respond gently, or not at all.
Probably some good sage advice!
 
Enjoy a late 60s design that virtually every manufacturer across the past four decades has long abandoned for its limited resolution.

Far better exists today for under a buck each.

We'll agree to disagree shall we and leave it at that
 
Enjoy a late 60s design that virtually every manufacturer across the past four decades has long abandoned for its limited resolution.

Far better exists today for under a buck each.

I really thought that manufacturers were profit driven, so how can they set a standard of excellence ????
 
Wouldn’t a standard of excellence be an improvement over OEM ???

Because new or old it’s just a product.....
 
We'll agree to disagree shall we and leave it at that
Trying to help if better sound quality is of any interest. Maybe not.

Ask Quad why they abandoned using that device 35 years ago. In 1975, I built a Dynaco PAT-5 preamp. Like the 405, it used LM301 op amps. Later that year, I sent it to Frank Van Alstine for the FET-5 upgrade which incorporated LF356 JFET op amps along with other passive component upgrades and a stiffer power supply, The result was a significant improvement in sound quality. Two years later, Dynaco responded with the PAT-5 Bi-FET using a similar upgrade.

I can't believe we're having this discussion about LM301s forty plus years later. :)
 
Aye, much new product seems to not really push the bar any higher in terms of sound quality. There is certainly better though the cost seems to be far higher than the relative increase in SQ.

I'd rather take a punt on a reproduction of an old and proven well performing circuit after plenty of research than something higher cost. The only exception to that rule is if the seller is willing to let you demo the piece of gear in your system. This is quite uncommon these days though

Trying to help if better sound quality is of any interest. Maybe not.

Ask Quad why they abandoned using that device 35 years ago. In 1975, I built a Dynaco PAT-5 preamp. Like the 405, it used LM301 op amps. Later that year, I sent it to Frank Van Alstine for the FET-5 upgrade which incorporated LF356 JFET op amps along with other passive component upgrades and a stiffer power supply, The result was a significant improvement in sound quality. Two years later, Dynaco responded with the PAT-5 Bi-FET using a similar upgrade.

I can't believe we're having this discussion about LM301s forty plus years later. :)

As previously stated, pretty sure the repro does not use LM301's. I may be wrong though no one has said it does or doesn't either way.
 
I really thought that manufacturers were profit driven, so how can they set a standard of excellence ????
There are many designers and manufacturers who continue to be both profitable and redefine performance across the space of decades. It all depends upon the audience.

In this case, you can replicate a 1975 design (including all the warts) from a Chinese source for under $200.
 
Seems to use onsemi mj15024, not the original lm301. Still don't see how your argument has relevance. It's an old circuit using modern parts.
 
Actually you can get your gear to sound a lot better and you wouldn't need to spend a dime. However I know it's not how you enjoy the hobby, you want all your trophies in view and plugged in.
I turn the receivers on one at a time and generally the speakers one pair at a time.
 
There are many designers and manufacturers who continue to be both profitable and redefine performance across the space of decades. It all depends upon the audience.

In this case, you can replicate a 1975 design (including all the warts) from a Chinese source for under $200.

Yes and there are people using paper cups and string for communication purposes....

I lived in China for a few years so I understand their business model, use the cheapest of everything to maximize profit which minimizes the effects of design !!!
 
Seems to use onsemi mj15024, not the original lm301.
Those are the outputs in the TO-3 case (large oval silver devices in upper part of pic). The LM301 op amp was used in the input stage (eight legged black chip centered at bottom above marking 473). Recall it was you who told me in post # 89 they were still employed. If you enlarge the image, you'll see they are LM301ANs. The cost to upgrade them to better sounding TL071s or 5532s would be insignificant.

301na.jpg

Still don't see how your argument has relevance.
Only if sound quality is important.
 
Last edited:
I agree but people want to be right and their opinion is absolute. That is the issue. They believe they can't be right while others are right. Most don't see the issue with this hobby being more about taste (which is subjective) than it is about right or wrong. I mean why are there so many different speakers out there? If only one was right, we would have a monopoly. As it is, differing tastes demand different speakers, there is no right or wrong. It is a problem with human Nature, unfortunately.
Well, at least all the different gear and speakers are an opportunity and not a problem.
 
I agree but people want to be right and their opinion is absolute. That is the issue. They believe they can't be right while others are right. Most don't see the issue with this hobby being more about taste (which is subjective) than it is about right or wrong. I mean why are there so many different speakers out there? If only one was right, we would have a monopoly. As it is, differing tastes demand different speakers, there is no right or wrong. It is a problem with human Nature, unfortunately.
I disagree.
From what I've observed, most here on AK are not most interested in being "about right or wrong" and more about enjoying what they have or about to have, perhaps hoping to be right about their choices, imo
Although there are a few concerned about being right, absolutely ;).
 
Still don't see how your argument has relevance.
The argument is always to belittle, as he is the only one with the best sounding gear and the deity anointed him a sound connoisseur.

I turn the receivers on one at a time and generally the speakers one pair at a time.
The setup in the room is what I'm talking about and you might like to try it. A conventional set up with proper speaker placement out from the walls and hight putting the tweeter at head hight while sitting. Less gear in the middle and maybe only 1 to 3 speakers setup at a time.

Ivan-Messer-listening-room.jpg
 
I am ashamed to see the same old gang biting at the same old bait. Same old biases.

Some here should seek to remove the beam from their eye (ears?) before trying to remove the mote from OP's.

It's unbecoming. If someone wants to resort to hyperbole because they're new to the hobby, or have simply found themselves giddy and want to share, WHAT POSSIBLE DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

What I find most embarrassing is how quickly the more fortunate seem to get their asses in a knot. Let it go, guys and girls.

All Audio, NO Attitude. Those who know better to engage new-ish members on the same tired arguments (we know which ones I speak of....cables, $$$$ vs $, etc) need to either respond gently, or not at all.

Thank you, Tim!
 
Back
Top Bottom