Lou, please share with us how/why you selected the First Sound pre for your fabulous system. Did you for example have the opportunity to compare it with some of the other super-high-end single ended pre-amps like the CJ Act2? I am considering a new pre, and while I have not heard it yet, First Sound intrigues me to no end.
I may have missed it, but what tubes you running in your First Sound? I have had very interesting expeiences.
Stock: no sluch, but a bit cold to my ear, not as transparent as others.
Siemens 7308 Gold Pins (Emmanuel's favortie - i got from stewart at santuary of sound)): awesome imaging and soundstage - very quiet and refined. Maybe a bit analytical if im listening to female vocals.
Phillips Miniwatt pearl cryo's 6DJ8 (from www.tubeworld.com) 1959 german made: the opposite of the Siemens: warm and smooth as can be. Smaller soundstage, just a bot rplled off and less transparent than the Siemens, but the smoothness and roundness of the notes, it's emotional impact (esp at night with a merlot listening to vocals) is really unbelievable; handily eats the other tubes for dinner on the right matl.... These are what i keep coming back to, though clearly not as "hi-fi sounding" and not as good at rock or complex jazz.
Finally Amperex PQ 6922 white lattereing D getter from early 1960's (got here on AG from Sam): a cross bwetwen the Simens 7308 and the 6DJ8's. These are my all-around favorite, though my heart falls hard for the 6DJ8's warmth.
All in all, its been fun playing with the sound of my First Sound. Your take?
Thanks Mike. I love that picture of you and your son. And that McIntosh system just oozes class! Have you heard any of the newer McIntosh speakers? I'm thinking about popping down to Woodbridge to give a listen; I ran out of time in Vegas.
Thanks again for your thoughts. I am using EMM's ST optical cable for connection. I briefly tried coax (MIT) and AES/EBU (Cardas) and preferred the ST (though, perhaps surprisingly, I much preferred the MIT coax to the more expensive Cardas balanced).
I think my AC is in pretty good shape, I have the whole thing wired up with Shunyata power products from the wall in, but have not gone with an isolation transformer as you have (I rent).
For better or worse, I get my gear straight from EMM Labs (because I work with Gallo speakers, EMM has been kind enough to deal with me directly), so I have no local dealer to whom I can turn. Tomorrow I am going to a local stereo store, the owner of which is a friend of mine, and I will give the EMM stuff a work out on as many systems as I need to to figure out the source of the problem(s).
Sol, one thing I can think of is break-in. In my experience, the DCC2 needs at least 200 hours of break-in to settle down, and the CDSD also requires an extended break-in period. You may also have to examine your cabling for synergy with the EMM front-end components. Also, power issues can substantially impact what you are hearing. Who is your EMM dealer? They should be able to help with these issues.
Of course the 1000 was a mess in terms of reliability. But I also seem to be having problems with the DCC2 , I think. I have a BIG (+10db) boost at 80hz and a very bad roll-off over 10kHz. I know that the boost could be room-related and thus fix-able with room-tuning stuff (40-80Hz being the region of greatest problmes), but I have briefly tried the CDSD/DCC2 in another system and the problem seemed to follow them out of my listening room....
Perhaps of more ocncern is the HF roll-off b/c my speakers (MBLs) should extend out to over 30kHz and this is not a region of room-related problems generally. Have you experienced any similar problmes?
PB: I had an opportunity do compare the CDSD with the 1000 directly in my system. The CDSD is significantly better. In particular, highs are much smoother and the overall tonal balance is much more pleasing to my ear, closer to analogue. Hopefully, the CDSD will prove more reliable than its antecedent, although I have already had to send one back because of a mechanical problem. As for the DCC2's preamp, it certainly can't hurt to look around a bit.
I also replaced my SACD 1000 with the CDSD. The 1000 died (no surprise there!) so I really had no choice in the matter and then it was several months before I could take delivery of my CDSD. As such, I cannot say for certain if the CDSD SOUNDS better (both sounded very good, IMHO)--though it is certainly more expensive! Perhaps you'd care to shed light on the matter? Thanks.
Also, I have been very pleased with the DCC2 as a preamp, but your last note has made me interested in looking around a bit more....
Tahiti, thanks for the compliment. I'm not sure how to respond, because I can't think of a way of truthfully answering your question without sounding like a cheerleader, or somebody going way overboard trying to justify a recent expense. Nevertheless ... The first time I played music through my rig after I connected the FS, my jaw dropped. For real. Then I basically fell down and didn't move for a few minutes, because I was mesmerized by what was coming out of my speakers. I kept muttering to myself "I'm so happy ... I'm so happy ..." My wife (no audiophile, and a bit of a skeptic about the whole thing) was like, what's wrong with you? I told her to sit down, and I put on her favorite Carla Lother disc. After 10 seconds she was in tears, and kept saying "this is amazing ... this is amazing ..."
Basically, the FS has done a few things. First, the bass is dramatically improved. Deeper, tighter, fuller. Second, everything has become palpably three-dimensional. I don't just mean the soundstage (although that has certainly deepened); I mean *everything* -- every note, every sigh, every twang, every clap, everything exists in a well-defined, realistic three-dimensional space. Third, extension and clarity in the high end is much better; strings and bells are more clearly defined (not etched, just more identifiable). Fourth, human voices are much more realistic. For example, the slight harshness I had been hearing in Willie Nelson's rendition of "Georgia" on "Stardust" has been replaced by a richly echoing reverb that obviously is what was really going on during the session.
There really is just no comparison. The FS is vastly superior to the DCC2's built-in preamp (and to anything else I have had in my rig).
Thanks for your response--that's cool of you. The thing is, I am able to buy factory-direct at accommodation prices which is great, but I often do not get a chance to TRY before I BUY, so I am more dependant on advice from people like you than most others.
Actually, I've had some experience w/ Richard Gray and Monster Power and have not been greatly impressed on audio (though the Richard Gray was AWESOME on improving video...). Actually, my other choice was a Sunyata Hydra 8; Ive heard so many good things. Have any experience?
By the way, Ive got a DCC2 on order from EMM Labs' next batch, Im eagerly awaiting (and yes, that I HAVE heard!). Thanks again, Phatboy.
Lou, I am pretty sure I have the only pair ever imported into the U.S. with this finish. These speakers started out life almost 7 years ago as 2.0's, and were one of the first pairs in the U.S. Over the years, working with Kharma's U.S. distributor (GTT Audio, run by Bill Parish), I have had the speakers serially upgraded to current CRS 2.2 spec. Each upgrade has been a marked improvement, although the Enigma x-over stands out in my memory. So I have had these speakers for so long now, I can barely remember the Vandy's they replaced. I'm at the end of the line with upgrades, though, and my next step at some point will be another pair of Kharma's, since I have yet to hear a speaker brand I prefer to them.
When did kharma have a veneer natural color option? I love them, - I have kahrma 2.1's, what did you have prioe to yours and how much better are these.
Actually, Equi=Tech makes a whole line of component-sized audiophile balanced power conditioners. I went for a wall unit because it best suited my application, but many Equi=Tech products are no larger than a power amp, including the highly touted 2Q and 6250, which were very positively reviewed in the June, 2003 issue of Stereophile (fwiw). Other manufacturers are Richard Gray's Power Company, Monster Power and PS Audio. I think Equi=Tech's engineering and technology (and sound) are superior, and that's why I bought mine. If I needed an in-room conditioner, I would probably go with something like the Model 5Q, but one of the smaller (and less costly) units like the 2Q might suit your system.
I have a question though: I rent (and move often) so I just don't think that the Equi=Tech is a reasonable choice for me. I am looking into in-room conditioners... given your experience, have you used any of these that you would highly recomend?
Thanks for the nice comments! I have to say Bill Parish of GTT Audio has been a real pleasure to work with, and has gone out of his way to provide outstanding service and advice, without ever pitching a hard sell.
The Equi=Tech is a balanced power isolation transformer. You can read about balanced power at numerous sites on the web, and of course http://www.equitech.com has a discussion in the FAQ. You can read more about my wall unit at http://www.equitech.com/products/wall/wall.html. Mine has the EMI/RFI filter, oxygen-free copper and "Q" transformer options. Also, I had Equi=Tech ship the unassembled parts to Northwest Cryogenics, and they treated all the pieces before shipping them back to Equi=Tech for final assembly. The effect of the Equi=Tech is just incredible. Backgrounds are absolutely silent. As a result, transients sound more alive, bass sounds more powerful, and the soundstage is more three dimensional, because all these sonic elements are occuring against an absolutely black background.
