Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 26 August 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

I just finished your review of the Bel Canto multi-box DAC system. Nice review -- I thought it described the pieces to a T. I recently bought the Bel Canto system for many of the same reasons stated in your review.

I had a chance to directly compare the Bel Canto and the dCS Debussy, and while the Debussy may have been a hair better, the Bel Canto was more flexible and fit better in my situation. The deciding factor was the ST link between the DAC and the USB converter. I can now have my computer and music storage in another room and link them with a very long optical connection with no apparent loss of signal. By the way, I purchased a 30m length of duplex cable from a computer supplier for less than $50 and the cable appears to be the same.

I don't have enough DSD material to worry about having that capability just yet, so I felt the Bel Canto was the best option for me. Keep up the good work.

Beau

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 18 August 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

I have changed my Boulder 2010/2060 [preamplifier and amplifier] to the Gryphon Pandora/Mephisto. I'm still using the pair of Avalon Times I bought two years ago. The musicality has definitely excelled to another level. However, I am still not satisfied with the richness of the sound. Some say Rockport is a perfect match and some say why not go for the full set of Gryphon components.

I would like to seek your opinion based on my room size in selecting the following speakers that I have shortlisted:

Rockport Altair
Rockport Avior
Gryphon Trident

My room is 12.5' x 22' x 9'. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Eric

Your room is fairly narrow, and this will pose some issues with the larger speakers you've listed, due to the prodigious bass capabilities that the Rockport and Gryphon speakers are capable of. Still, there is no question in my mind that Rockport and Gryphon make speakers that are easily superior to your Avalons. So in that sense, any of the models you have shortlisted will be an improvement over what you have now.

The Gryphon speakers have the advantage of active bass. This would certainly give you some flexibility to dial in the exact amount of bass that your room can handle. There is also some obvious synergy with staying within the same brand for all of your components, especially when the company is Gryphon -- they don’t make anything that is less than excellent, in my experience.

On the other hand, I have always been partial to Rockport speakers. I've owned and loved them in the past and I hope to take delivery of a set of Atrias within the next few weeks that I will be writing about. Any Rockport model will provide a very rich sound, and will be vastly more transparent and neutral than your Avalons.

Ultimately, you are in that envious position that we all know as a "can't lose" situation. Whichever way you go I am sure you'll be thrilled. Oh, and be on the lookout for a Gryphon Mephisto review that is scheduled to be published on September 1. . . . Jeff Fritz

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 15 August 2013

To Howard Kneller,

I just read your excellent review of the EMM Labs DAC2X.

I own one and have really enjoyed it, playing everything from Red Book to native-DSD files. I was interested in the cable upgrade you recommended. I am using the stock Cardas PC.

You mentioned that the Synergistic Research Element Copper-Tungsten-Silver digital cable was a solid upgrade. However, I did not see it making your Buying Guide, while the Infinite power cord did. I wanted to see which power cable would be the best for this DAC. Thank you for your help.

Joe Seminetta

I think that you will be amazed in the improvement that you get with the Synergistic Research Element power cord. It would make a great match for the DAC2X. The Cardas cord is good, but it's not in the same class as the Synergistic. Nor is it meant to be. The Synergistic cord is much more expensive.

The Synergistic cord did not make our Buying Guide only because has not been reviewed here on any of the SoundStage! Network sites.

If you do try the Synergistic cord, please let me know how you like it. . . . Howard Kneller

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 10 August 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

I am a long-time audiophile who enjoys reading your posts on Ultra Audio. The other day, I read your article on speakers over $15k. I spent the last year focusing on the electronics in my system, but may be in the speaker market in that price range over the coming year. I haven't heard some/many of these, but totally agree with your views on several that I have. I heard Rockport Technologies Aviors at RMAF and thought they were the best-sounding speakers at the show last year (eager to hear them again in a more controlled environment along with the Atria.), and although I could never afford the Q7s, they were spectacular when I heard them in a very good room.

But I have one question (maybe a mild complaint) that I wanted to get your take on. In that article you state:

"Regarding one company that touts special wiring within their speakers, I discovered, when replacing a bad driver, that they use the cheapest Monster Cable available. When replacing a bad driver in a speaker from a different company -- a speaker whose drive-units were supposed to be bespoke -- I found Madisound labels under the company’s own labels. (Madisound is a reseller of DIY and OEM drivers.) I’ve also seen drivers that were supposed to be manufactured in-house sitting on display tables at a Consumer Electronics Show, being sold by the OEM that actually makes them. And, perhaps most egregious: I’ve visited several large speaker-making factories that, despite their impressive machine shops and finishing areas, do no acoustical testing of the assembled loudspeaker. None. Nada. Doesn’t happen. Scared yet?"

So, my question is: Why do you (and other audio writers) hold back on naming names here? Being coy about it accomplishes nothing for your main audience -- other audiophiles -- other than to frustrate us. What is lost by naming them? If they are engaging in this, then why not simply state your observations and facts and let them answer or defend their choices. This happens in other consumer-goods industries and I don't understand why audio "journalists" have such a reluctance (other than the obvious explanation of access to gear or ad revenue) to be forthright. Not "naming names" only perpetuates the common perception that all audio writers are on the take, are not really "journalists," and are really just a glorified part of most companies' marketing budget.

I don't mean to be overly critical, but reading "hints" at practices that most discerning audio consumers would find objectionable, but no one being willing to actually be clear to the reader about what is going on is very frustrating. Thanks for your views, your work, and any comments on this.

All the best,
Mike

Yours is a fair letter. There is an explanation. But first, I'll state that we at the SoundStage! Network have been extremely vocal about the products that we think aren’t very good. You can read articles like "Gorgeous Hardware Costing Almost $100,000, but What the Hell Is Inside?," "CES Madness: Sonus Faber and Neodio," "Total Joke: Perfect8's Pricing," "F’ing Up a Legend?," and the list goes on. I don’t think you'll find anywhere near that level of candor anyplace else when it comes to the audio press. And you don't have to hunt around Ultra Audio much to see that I would prefer Ascendo or Magico speakers to Wilsons or Avalons any day of the week. I'm not trying to be defensive here, but simply pointing out that I (and we) have been extremely candid about what we think is good, not so good, and a total rip off. There are many more examples I could give you but I'd be hyperlinking for the next hour.

I know your question was regarding my article, however, so I'll address that specifically. The "What I'd Buy" series was conceived to give you an inside look at what I would buy, and nothing else. The paragraph you quoted simply gives you some of the reasoning that fuels my quest for properly engineered and expertly built and tested products. It wasn't meant to "out" anyone. Doing so would require a thorough bit of documentation in order to fully support "naming names" and that was outside of the scope of my article. But rest assured that we will continue to be honest and candid, but only in the appropriate forums for that type of discussion. . . . Jeff Fritz

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 07 August 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

I'm wondering what's your opinion about the Hegel P30/H30 stack in either stereo or monoblock form. Have you heard that combo before or do you plan to review this coupling? It seems the Hegel amp/preamp duo is a real bargain (at least in Europe). Moreover, do you think the H30 will fit the Vivid Audio Giya G2 well (no lean sound, etc.)? I enjoy your writing!

Kind regards,
Patrick Aguidissou

Although I've never heard either of the specific Hegels or the Vivid speakers you mention in my system, I have heard both at shows. Moreover, I do have some experience with Hegel, having reviewed the HD25 DAC in my system earlier this year. I've heard the Vivid speakers on many occasions and am quite fond of them.

I think the pairing has quite a lot of potential. The ultra-revealing nature of the Vivid speakers should be a good sonic match for the extremely natural sound of the Hegel electronics. Second, the Vivid Giya G2s are capable of extremely tight low bass and they need a rock-solid amplifier to control all that potential. I believe the H30 is more than up to that task. So although there are no guarantees that you'll fall in love with a Vivid/Hegel pairing, I'd certainly give it a try if you have access to both brands. Let me know if you do and how it turns out. . . . Jeff Fritz

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 04 August 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

In the last few days I've read about the Magico Ultimate 3, and that this would be in a class of its own. If we consider its price [approximately $600,000 USD per pair depending on configuration], this must be a special speaker and the sound in a class above the Magico Q7. The drivers look like Western Electrics, or the technologies thereof. Are the drivers all their own design and made in Japan? So what do you think about this speaker?

Kind regards,
Jan

I certainly cannot comment specifically on the Magico Ultimate 3 because it is not a completed speaker at this time. Although I know it is under development -- in the final stages from what I understand -- you won’t find anyone who can tell you exactly how a pair of them will sound. Now, there are folks who have heard the original Ultimates as well as the second version, but from what I know the 3 will be a major upgrade in almost every regard. For instance, I know that the subwoofer driver is now an all-new Magico design that will mate with a 4000W amplifier. The original woofer was an Aura design. As for the rest of the drivers, I am told these are Ale drivers and are quite expensive (over $10,000 each).

How will the Ultimate compare with the Q7 is anyone's guess. The two designs are vastly different, with the Ultimate 3 being a horn-loaded five-way design that is driven through an active DSP-based crossover. The Q7 is obviously a passive affair with conventionally loaded drivers. The claimed sensitivity of the U3 is 116dB -- which makes it vastly more efficient than any dynamic-driver loudspeaker I have ever heard of. In fact, I know of no other loudspeaker that can claim that type of efficiency. How all of this will combine to create sound is conjecture at this point. A direct comparison between the U3 and Q7 would be fascinating to be sure. . . . Jeff Fritz

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 29 July 2013

To Howard Kneller,

Regarding your Essential Sound Products review, it seems absurd to say that: "Rather, they’re based on proven technologies in an industry in which marketing hype and dubious technological claims are all too common." The ridiculous part is that people would be willing to pay that much for power cords, and what looks like a pretty inexpensive power strip. Why must reviews nearly always sidestep the issue of cost? The markup on these items is no less than immense, given the materials and end product.

I would like to see a little less industry gloss (read: meaningless lip service anyone can read in a product brochure) and a little more reality in reviews. Generally speaking (no pun intended), these items are worth a small fraction of what is asked.

I have no doubt these items have sonic merit, but $3000 for that strip or $2200 for the cord . . . come on . . . you and other writers owe it to everyone to speak up.

Glenn

Your e-mail touches on a valid point. Too many high-end audio manufacturers charge prices that are unreasonable. This is true after considering the costs of the materials and parts, overhead costs, and even a generous profit.

Of course, there are plenty of manufacturers who do not charge exorbitant prices. These include speaker manufacturers such as Paradigm and PSB, component manufacturers such as Bryston and Rega Research, and cable companies such as Signal Cable and Pangea Audio.

But my review did not involve products from Bryston or Rega, but rather Essential Sound Products. As indicated in the review, the company uses quality, name-brand parts (e.g., Furutech connectors and Leviton outlets), whose costs are not inconsequential. This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the ESP products sound good. It’s all too common that manufacturers will charge high retail prices, yet use the most inexpensive parts that they can find.

Also, in the case of the ESP power distributor, the unit is extremely well made, heavy, well dampened, and just downright impressive. This is, of course, difficult to appreciate without physically having the unit in front of you.

Still, although the costs of the parts used in the ESP products cost more than those used by some manufacturers, it’s hard to see how they can translate into a $3000 power strip and a $2000 power cord. In all fairness, my review did point out my belief that for the $13,000 asking price, there are a number of competing manufacturers whose products offered greater performance. I therefore disagree with you that my review “sidestepped the issue of cost.”

Nonetheless, this issue of fair pricing should be pointed out more often and perhaps more vociferously. I, for one, will endeavor to do so in the future. It should also be noted that no one is forced to buy any audio product. Reviewers can only do so much and the best way to send a signal to manufacturers who adopt unreasonable pricing models is to simply not buy product from them. Over the long run, companies that do not deliver value to their customers will ultimately not be successful. Although it sometimes appears otherwise, the audio business is not excepted from free-market principles. To the contrary -- it is ruthlessly competitive.

Finally, it should come as no surprise that if you want the very best, state-of the art product in just about any hobby, you will have to pay for it. Just the other day, I was reading about an Italian racing bicycle that costs over $18,000. This is despite that my current bicycle, which costs about $1300, probably gives me about 60% of the performance of the expensive bike. Due to reasons that include low production runs, the use of exotic and expensive high-performance materials, the necessity of employing costly and very labor-intensive manufacturing processes and high research costs, that’s just the way it is. High-end audio is no exception. So, to the extent that your e-mail suggests that it’s “ridiculous [that anyone] would be willing to pay [$2000] for power cords,” I also have to disagree. . . . Howard Kneller

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 27 July 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

In your picks for speakers you would choose at $15k and under, here are three very worthy additions that fully compete with cost-no-object designs:

Legacy Focus HD and SE ($9k-$10k): Dollar-for-dollar, it may be the best value in all of high-end audio.

Legacy Signature SE ($6k): Similar to Focus in that it's an absolute full-range speaker for the audiophile without the sheer space for a larger speaker such as the Focus models.

Legacy Classic HD ($4k-$5k): Incredibly resolving loudspeaker that is on par with speakers such as Wilson Sashas, Aerial 20T, etc.

I think if you listen to any of these three speakers you would agree. I enjoy your writing!

Terry Hetzel

Certainly a strong endorsement! I'd love to review one of these models and will contact the company and show them your letter. . . . Jeff Fritz

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 26 July 2013

To Jeff Fritz

Given your experiences with several Rockport speakers (thanks for all the excellent write-ups), can you share your thoughts on the [Avior and Aquila]?

Looks like I can get them roughly at the same price currently, and I only have some limited experience with Aquila and Altair (amazing!).

Thanks,
Duane

To cut to the chase, I'd go with the newer model. The Avior uses the latest driver technology from Rockport and that would certainly make the choice easy for me. Although I know that big 13" woofer is enticing in the Aquila, I've no doubt that the bass response on the Avior would be comparable, despite the smaller driver. Although a loudspeaker's performance is certainly a result of the entire design -- cabinet, drivers, crossover, wiring, etc. -- the drivers are what ultimately translate the electrical into the acoustical. It is always impressive to me when a loudspeaker company has the engineering expertise to actually design the drive units themselves -- a very good sign. In this case, the Avior's mids and woofers are the first drivers wholly designed by Andy Payor. He's told me that these drivers are super low in distortion and very linear, and what I've heard from the Avior serves only to confirm that. So go with the Avior and don’t look back. . . . Jeff Fritz

Written by: Ultra Reader

Category: Letters

Created: 25 July 2013

To Jeff Fritz,

I’ve read a lot of great reviews of the Magico Q7s and hope to hear them one day. I'm wondering about which amps will fit them best. What do you think about the Boulder 3050, Pass Labs Xs 300, Tenor  Audio 350M, Constellation Audio Hercules -- or maybe other suggestions -- with, of course, preamps to match? Hope to hear from you.

Kind regards,
Derk Jan Aukema

As of right now, the best amplifier I have ever heard on the Magico Q7s is the Gryphon Audio Designs Mephisto. Of course, you’ll be able to read a lot more about my experiences with this heavyweight combo in my upcoming Mephisto review right here on Ultra Audio. But suffice to say that the Gryphon/Magico marriage is quite something; it would shock many audiophiles to hear its sheer realism. As for preamps, I would think the matching Pandora preamp would be ideal.

As for the other brands and models on your list, I’m sure the Pass Labs amps are extremely good, and there are a number of audiophiles I know who have successfully paired Constellation gear with Magico speakers. Those would be obvious choices when developing a short list of electronics to audition. The Boulder 3000-series products are, in all likelihood, stunning, but it is the reboot of their 2000-series amps that I’m most interested in. The 2050/2060 amplifiers have been around for 20-plus years or thereabouts, so it will be interesting to see how the company improves such a successful product series. So right now, my top choices would revolve around Gryphon and Boulder, and finally Ayre Acoustics at a much lower price point. . . . Jeff Fritz