Canuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio ForumCanuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio Forum
It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:19 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 326 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 8:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 am
Posts: 273
Location: Brampton, ON, CA
Make sure you go back and remove the Yaqin after spending some time with it to make sure the improvements are really there.

For me, I lost detail and dynamics and a few bucks trying different tubes. But great for all those that noticed an improvement. For myself, I found I lost something when I added another component in the signal path.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 8:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 4:19 pm
Posts: 6
Location: Chino Hills, CA, US
RandyB wrote:
Make sure you go back and remove the Yaqin after spending some time with it to make sure the improvements are really there.

For me, I lost detail and dynamics and a few bucks trying different tubes. But great for all those that noticed an improvement. For myself, I found I lost something when I added another component in the signal path.

I have and to my ears before the Yaqin, the sonics sounds fine. With it, there's more air in the highs, the treble has a bit more clarity and the low end is rounder. There is more overall weight IMHO. The PT-7030 has a very good analog section so it does not add or detract from it. I really did not detect a loss of detail or dynamics at all.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 8:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:28 am
Posts: 3438
Location: Kamloops, BC, CA
gcchifi wrote:
RandyB wrote:
Make sure you go back and remove the Yaqin after spending some time with it to make sure the improvements are really there.

For me, I lost detail and dynamics and a few bucks trying different tubes. But great for all those that noticed an improvement. For myself, I found I lost something when I added another component in the signal path.

I have and to my ears before the Yaqin, the sonics sounds fine. With it, there's more air in the highs, the treble has a bit more clarity and the low end is rounder. There is more overall weight IMHO. The PT-7030 has a very good analog section so it does not add or detract from it. I really did not detect a loss of detail or dynamics at all.


Excellent! That seems to be the thing with these Yaqin tube-buffers, the effect on the sound is immediately pronounced, be it either pro or con. Enjoy & keep us posted...
8)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 4:19 pm
Posts: 6
Location: Chino Hills, CA, US
^Thank you OR... The CD playlist this weekend has been:

Aerosmith - Orpheum Theater, Boston 2/14/84 [WBCN FM broadcast]
Led-Zeppelin - Tarrant County Convention Center, For Worth 5/22/77 [soundboard]
The Beatles - John Barrett's Cassette Dubs Volume 1 [studio outtakes]

The above are unofficial releases which really tests how the Yaqin handles very good but not professionally mixed audio. It did not accentuate any part of the recordings but gave it more definition. Sans the Yaqin, again they were very presentable but as is. The CD3 in place made the experience "bigger" for the lack of a better word. It seemed like I was inside the bubble. Comparing it to the CD2, it was as if I moved in further. There's still "bite" yet stay analog sounding. On previous listening sessions of similar material, the CD2 kicked it up a notch by smoothing out the digital glare. The CD3 is at least moved it to another bar above at most. On the 'smith's show, it showcased a good separation of Crespo and Dufay's guitars but not shunting Tyler along with the rhythm section of Hamilton and Kramer in the background. I could easily sense how the broadcast mix improved as it went along. The '77 Zeppelin soundboard, the recording is on the "dry" side but I could discern the sustain on Page's fret-board work more. It tended to sound somewhat wooly but not as much on the CD3. The Beatles material were digital transfers off actual cassettes...through the CD3 it sounded like my Nakamichi CR-7A on steroids.

I've read some bits where tube buffers were said to be similar to a "loudness" feature on integrated units. Not so because in those instances, I felt that the sonic spectrum was just bumped up without any subtle changes here and there. There was even one poster somewhere who said it was like inserting an equalizer in the chain. I'm not sure about that or how he arrived on that concept.

Anyway, with the CD3, I took out the tube cage so that I can properly install the EH's and decided not to put it back. It looks so much simple yet attractive without it. Plus I can see the soothing top and bottom glow of the tubes which is an added kick. It is also deeper with added heft. My Parasound DAC is no slouch when it comes to details but the CD3 assists in making the sound even more listenable without it being fatiguing to the ears. I do respect the purist's stance on hearing the recordings as is but if I were to dine on a prime rib steak I wouldn't mind well applied seasoning on it. That would be the best analogy I can come up with...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 4:19 pm
Posts: 6
Location: Chino Hills, CA, US
Acquired a second SD-CD3 for really cheap... Now running the pair from my pre-amp to one of the amps. My reservation prior to doing it in this sequence was the possibility of a popping sound when the pre-amp triggers the amp. None at all. Have one buffer for the electrostat panels and the other for the low end being the woofers as each speaker is bi-ampable. So far the sonics has been really clean and lively without sounding artificial.

The Atlantic Technology A-2000 has separate transformers for the three and four channels respectively. Very neutral sounding to begin with so the match has been good. I use Outlaw PCA interconnects which adds no signature of their own which helps transparency. However the CD or LP has been re-mastered for any faults cannot be hidden.

Purchased other brands of tubes for some rolling fun...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 4:19 pm
Posts: 6
Location: Chino Hills, CA, US
Decided to take both SD-CD3s out of the pre-amp to amp loop. Fine with the DAC, Turntable, Tape and Tuner in Bypass modes but just did not like how it sounded with Blu Rays and HD TV audio. Re-installed one with the DAC and pre-amp while the other with the Vincent PHO-8 phono pre-amp. Sounds really good...

Subbed out the RCA 6SN7s with 6F8Gs from the same brand with adapters. Cleaned the pins beforehand with some Pure Tronics cleaner [99.9% Isopropyl Alcohol]. It is safe for plastics plus does not leave residue. Just assurance that the contact points aren't dirty to start. Although I read that technically each type is similar...I prefer the sound of the 6F8G's. 1940's vintage that have been tested by seller who is thorough and selective about his equipment.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:17 pm
Posts: 1963
Location: New Westminster, BC, CA
This seems to be the most active thread on the subject of tube buffers. I'm tempted to try one, but also wondering if DAC is necessary first. I run analogue and digital into a Music Hall A15.3. The digital is streamed via Airport Express - directly into the amp. The overall sound is pretty damn good. My music is all ripped lossless and when I stream radio I try to use the highest bitrate streams.

Would a tube buffer between the Airport Express and the amp be useful, or should I go with an outboard DAC instead? I don't want to add too many extra devices to the system for space and aesthetic reasons, that's why a tube DAC might be the way to go. Music Hall makes one of these, but would cost a heck of a lot more than a Yaqin.

Might be worth picking one up off CAM just to try out?

_________________
Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination. - Oscar Wilde


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:17 pm
Posts: 1963
Location: New Westminster, BC, CA
bump.
sorry...don't want this to get buried.

_________________
Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination. - Oscar Wilde


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 4:17 pm
Posts: 2307
Location: Winnipeg, MB, CA
stickers11 wrote:
This seems to be the most active thread on the subject of tube buffers. I'm tempted to try one, but also wondering if DAC is necessary first. I run analogue and digital into a Music Hall A15.3. The digital is streamed via Airport Express - directly into the amp. The overall sound is pretty damn good. My music is all ripped lossless and when I stream radio I try to use the highest bitrate streams.

Would a tube buffer between the Airport Express and the amp be useful, or should I go with an outboard DAC instead? I don't want to add too many extra devices to the system for space and aesthetic reasons, that's why a tube DAC might be the way to go. Music Hall makes one of these, but would cost a heck of a lot more than a Yaqin.

Might be worth picking one up off CAM just to try out?

a tube dac could be the answer to both. I too use an Airport express and find I was impressed with the analogue output but realized improvement with a digital connection to my Peachtree over the analogue.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:17 pm
Posts: 1963
Location: New Westminster, BC, CA
I will be on the lookout for a unit then. If anyone on this thread has a lead or is ready to move on from theirs, send me a DM.

_________________
Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination. - Oscar Wilde


Last edited by stickers11 on Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:00 am
Posts: 5
Location: Windsor, ON, CA
Hello all

I've been reading this post with relish for the past while. Great to see so much experience gathered in one place.

I recently purchased a Yaqin MS-30L (and absolutely loving it!). I'm currently feeding it mainly with a Cambridge Audio StreamMagic 6.

I was wondering if installing a CD2/CD3 between the two would be an improvement or even necessary.

I listen to a lot of high-bitrate digital audio and I thought the buffer would smooth the sound somewhat before it was fed to the amp.

Thanks!

_________________
Retro-grade technology ROCKS!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 326 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group