Levir, I've never owned a DNA-225 amp. However, for 3 years I owned a DNA-2 Revision A amp and was my favorite amp of any I've owned or heard.
I sold the DNA-2 Rev. A after I auditioned the Nuforce Ref 9 amps. As good as the custom-built DNA-2 Rev. A amp was, the Nuforce amps were simply better and more refined in every sonic category.
The fact that the Nuforce amps are 85 lbs. lighter, significantly smaller, and far less expensive than the DNA-2 Rev. A were also contributing factors.
Just added the incredible Nuforce Ref 9 SE amps and three just as incredible Foundation Research LC-100 line conditioners, one for each mono amp and one for the APL.
At $3000 msrp each, these LCs are not cheap and at a theoretical 100 amp current capacity, one may consider these overkill but their performance makes it worth every penny. The smaller 10 amp and 30 amp models will be out later this year.
I'm convinced more than ever that line conditioning is an absolute foundational fundamental for any adequate or better system.
I recently became a dealer and took on both Nuforce and Foundation Research product lines as well as a few other mfg'ers, but that doesn't mean the wow! factor is any less significant.
Hi, Ray. The design has been finished for some time now but since CES 2006 has come and gone, I've not yet pushed the button to have the design prototyped.
I made the statement in my previous post that I would not be surprised if the Nuforce room received best sound at CES. I hate to eat my own words but this simply was not the case.
The sonics were surprising good and I think all the ingredients to potentially sound far better were there. But considering all of the amps, preamp, cabling, line-conditioners, and speakers were brand new right out of the box(not burned in), along with a few other self-induced limitations, it simply was not meant to be. Furthermore, the APL 3910 really comes into its own when it is plugged directly into the amps. But since this was somewhat of a debut for the Nuforce preamp, they preferred it remain in the main system.
I visited only a handful of rooms during my few days there. Out of that handful, I thought the best sound was at the APL Hi-Fi room over at THE Show where Alex Paychev had his own custom speakers, cables, amp, and his brand new APL modified Esoteric UX-01.
Nrchy, if you didn't have your Harley with you, that may explain my not recognizing you. Bon told me some time ago that you and I conversed at THE Show. Sorry if I didn't put 2 and 2 together.
I've not actively sold my racks yet, though I've sold several prototypes. Of course I'm always willing to take a custom order but as for actively selling my racking systems, I'm just not sure the demand is there for performance-oriented racking systems.
To be frank, I think that proper line conditioning and proper vibration control are the two final frontiers in high-end audio for the majority in high-end audio. Until people can actually witness the A/B type differences in a familiar system I just don't think the demand for proper vibration control and proper line conditioning will be there for some time to come.
Actively selling my racks also takes a certain amount of investment dollars to do things right. This is a struggle for me as I want to do things the right way, but with 2-channel dying and vibration control at the bottom of most people's list of priorities, the stakes seem just a bit high. So I'm just taking a back seat for the time being. But if somebody wanted a custom built racking system, I'm certainly geared to design and produce.
Dave, yes things can get a little viscious around here. I'll admit that I've been guilty of it a bit myself in my past but I also attempted to limit my attacks to 2 or 3 individuals.
The APL 3910 is an awesome unit that has its own hybrid digital/analog attenuator, output transformers, 6 AKM dacs, etc., etc.. It should still do video although I haven't tried. Multi-channel I'm not sure about.
The sonics are far superior without the APL connected to a pre-amp.
And boy it is ugly. This ugliness is a very tough pill for me to swallow as I despise ugly gear. Especially black ugly gear.
I've only had it for a week now (though it's been pretty well burned in). The APL connected to my Nuforce amps has produced the most dynamic and life-like presentation I've yet heard. Of course proper line conditioning and vibration control helps immensely. :)
APL is now mod'ing the Esoteric UX-01 which is actually pretty nice looking even in black. This unit sports Esoteric's NEO transport which is supposedly the greatest transport made. Rumor has it that the APL mod'ed UX-01 is far superior to the APL mod'ed 3910 strictly because of the phenomenal transport build quality.
I believe APL is selling the APL UX-01 for about $16000 and he is now taking orders. The $16k actually isn't so bad when one considers that the UX-01 off-the-shelf is $14k. APL still puts about $6k labor and parts into the UX-01 only he is able to acquire the Esoteric at much better prices.
This could be the end-all ucdp. Have you been to www. aplhifi.com? APL will be at CES this year as will Nuforce. In fact, Nuforce will be using my APL 3910 and several of my racks.
In the Nuforce exhibit will be Foundation Research new line conditioners, the LC-100s. I've not listened to the LC-100s yet but from what I hear they are something else!
If I could be prophetic for a moment, I would not be surprised in the least if Nuforce is awarded best sound at CES. And no it won't be because of my racks especially since they take a minimum of 8 days for the settling in process to occur.
Yes John, I can understand your position on my thread. After posting I did some more research and found really ugly threads on similar topics. I am just intrigued and that made me a bit naive I guess. Too bad I can't delete the thread altogether.
Let us know what you think of the APL 3910. Everyone seems to rave about it. Does your machine still do video and multichannel music? Alexs price has gone up quite a bit since he first started doing the 3910s. At that price, I couldn't buy it blind or even on reputation alone. Id have to hear it for myself before committing to it, but Id still like to hear what you have to say about it.
I also agree it is real ugly. Cant he whip up some sort of replacement faceplate?
John, sorry for not responding earlier. We spoke at CES 2005 a couple of times. I only realized who your were (stehno) until the last day which was the second time we talked.
I still think your stands have to be seen to be believed! Now I want to SEE how they sound! Are your still building and selling those beauties?
Thanks, Ray, you too. I will not be displaying my new rack design at CES as my vendors could not provide the finished materials in time.
David, I am aware that air-borne vibrations are 3-D. But it doesn't matter how or where vibrations are captured by the component chassis. The bottom line is they will gain entry and they need a way out.
I saw your new thread and I wouldn't touch it with a 10-ft. pole. Life's too short. :)
For somebody like Star Sound or even myself to flat out suggest to the masses that coupling is superior to de-coupling would in essence potentially offend every single enthusiast and mfg'er using kitty litter, innertubes, tennis balls, cork, rubber, sand, mdf, Plexiglas, etc.. That covers about 93% of the entire industry.
Like you, I too think performance should be the number one priority (after all, this is supposedly a 'high-end' audio hobby and forum) and right behind that (for me also) is aesthetics. In fact, my co. slogan says "Aesthetics surpassed only by performance". I thought it was kinda' catchy and hopefully accurate. The aesthetics draw people in but hopefully it's the performance after an 8 to 10 day settling in period that really bowls 'em over.
Nothing worse than spending a lot on something so ugly. I recently received my highly acclaimed APL 3910 ucdp which is a heavily modified Denon 3910. But she ain't pretty.
Thank you John,I consider that a compliment, Ive met some realy good folks on a,gon,please thank your wife too!Good luck at CES!Im planning on attending RAF this coming year,will you be displaying there?Looking forward to seeing your new designs!!Have a great New Year!Ray
John, thanks for the response. You have great analogies too.
I do not mean to push anything, nor do I intend to be confrontational. I sincerely consider myself an eager student of these thoughts/theories. I do not claim to understand all about vibrations and resonances as well as damping for that matter. Personally, I have not experimented enough to make any sure-footed comments either way. In the end though, the sound is all that really matters. Often I find a logical argument leading to poor sound. I think this is usually because some variable has not been accounted for.
The one element many seem to overlook is the horizontal/lateral portion of vibration of any sort. Are cones effective for this dimension of resonance? I would expect air-born vibrations to be 3-D so it would have horizontal/lateral elements to it no?
Your product(s) are clearly artful (which is a high priority to me, second only to performance). If they actually do perform well too, then you have hit a home run in my book! - Congratulations. I have always said you have to look good which has lead me to building rather nice little do-dads that no one ever sees. Nevertheless, I take my own pride in the workmanship. Besides, no one else in my household even listens the way I do. A boom-box is more than adequate for them. :-)
I think I will begin a thread to see if others would like to participate in a general discussion like this without forcing you to participate. Lets not forget, this is your system thread after all.
Cute, Mdhoover :) Ray, I hope you don't take this the wrong way when I say, I like you a lot! I think my wife does too. Thank you very much for those kind words.
I have a few new designs ready to prototype but one that I hope will be ready for the NuForce exhibit at CES in 10 days. That is if I can get it done in time as it has to ship by next Friday and it hasn't even begun yet).
If it comes together, it just may be my overall most practical, unobtrusive, and aesthestically pleasing rack to date with uncompromising performance. At the very least it should hopefully compliment and contrast nicely with the smaller yet huge sounding NuForce amps.
If not, then NuForce will be using my stainless steel What Rack?.
Hello John,I enjoyed your analogy and thoughts in response to Daves question.I cant afford your rack at this point in time,,but that doesnt stop me from admiring them! They are a work of art and a joy to look at,,its refreshing to see a rack so different from anything currently on the market.Best wishes to you and your company!!Ray
So, do you think your ideas will "resonate" within the audiophile community, or do you think that you'll remain "isolated?" It would seem that there are a "couple" of possible outcomes.
I don't think I've ever publicly stated that my racking systems handle vibrations better than others? I have my own thoughts about my designs verses the competition but I don't think I've ever specifically compared mine to theirs in this forum or elsewhere.
But if you're going to force the issue, I'll do my best to somewhat briefly explanation why I think my racks are potentially sonically superior to many others when it comes to handling vibration:
1. One must choose the superior vibration controlling methodology. My designs strictly adhere to the resonance energy transfer methodology (aka coupling) rather than the isolation / dampening methodology (aka de-coupling). To the best of my knowledge, it is phyically impossible to completely isolate anything from vibrations. If that is true, then many who claim 'complete isolation from vibration' have already indicated that they've fallen short of the mark.
I do recognize that one can affect sonics for better or worse from a dampening perspective but that's little more than a crapshoot in my opinion.
2. One must recognize and properly address the source of the most harmful types of vibrations. There are 3 primary sources of vibrations / resonance. Air-borne, floor-borne, and internal-borne (power supplies, motors, etc.). My limited research concludes that air-borne vibrations induce far more sonic harm than either floor-borne or internally generated vibrations. The vast majority of other mfg'ers have concluded that floor-borne vibrations are the biggest culprit for inducing unwanted vibrations and have designed their products as such. If this is true, then by that fact alone, my designs should stand a better chance at controlling vibrations since my racks were designed (hopefully successfully) at addressing the most harmful vibrations.
3. Assuming 1 and 2 above are accurate assessments, then one must execute their design in accordance. That includes using the right materials and tremendous rigidity. Kitty litter, Plexiglas, tennis balls, sand, bicycle inner-tubes, sorbethane, hockey pucks, all have their place in life. But not in audio.
If it is true that there are 3 primary sources of vibration and that air-borne vibrations are by far are the biggest culprit, then one simply needs to consider a few issues to determine whether a racking system design has potential to be executed successfully.
o Air-borne and internally-generated vibrations will enter the component. The question is, do they have an exit path?
o Floor-borne vibrations can for the most part be prevented from entering a component by use of kitty litter, sorbethane, cork, inner-tubes, etc..
o Regardless of the source, vibrations are always captured by an object in a moment-in-time. However, captured vibrations can only dissipate over a period of time. Like a reverberation.
So if I assumed, like the majority, that the biggest culprit is floor-borne vibrations, then I cannot properly address the air-borne and internally-generated vibrations. At least not with the same strategy because preventing one type of vibration from entering the chassis most certainly will squash the other two sources of vibration from exiting the chassis.
On the other hand, if I assumed (and I do) that air-borne vibrations are by far the biggest culprit, then I can automatically address the internerally-generated vibrations at the same time. And through the use of a proper mechanical conduit, in this case Star Sound's Audio Points, I may also be able to somewhat minimalize any floor-borne vibrations from entering the component.
I'm rambling but ultimately my goal is to treat resonace energy much like electricity. It's always seeking ground and I want to design my racks to help expedite that process of transfering resonance energy to ground. That is to transfer those captured vibrations away from the component, into the racking system, into the sub-flooring system, and back to ground. And to do so as quickly as possible so as not to allow the vibrations captured in a moment-in-time to remain and exponentiate within. With my designs and with Star Sound's highly acclaimed Audio Points, I hope to accomplish that.
I'll close with this little analogy.
Think of sitting in your car at a traffic light and you're hoping to isolate / dampen yourself from the horrific subwoofer vibrations generated 2 cars behind you that's annoying the heck out of you, you're rearview mirror, and every other part of your car. Your's and the offending car's air-filled tires have obviously done little or nothing to isolate you from feeling the affects of these vibrations. Neither have your cushioned seats or rolled up windows or the 5000 lbs. of metal surrounding you.
In affect, your car is just like a component chassis and your air-filled tires are like rubber, sorbethane, cork, kitty-litter, et al footers.
To demonstrate how far off the mark some mfg'ers are, they erroneously believe that these vibrations are floor-borne (street-borne) induced and have told me so in this forum. Yet the vibrations from a a jackhammer pulverizing the sidewalk or street right outside your car cannot even compare to the vibrations generated from the subwoofers two cars back. But there's just no convincing some.
I'm no scientist, nor do I pretend to be. But if you care to read some white papers on the subject I recommend checking out StarSound.biz's web-site. Star Sound is the front-runner for the not-so-popular resonance energy transfer methodology and I am more than happy to ride on their coat tails. In fact, my racking systems are essentially designed around their Audio Points because resonance energy transfer is an all or nothing methodology.
Other areas of importance with properly designing a performance-oriented racking system include:
o Adequate ventilation. o Minimize surface areas capturing air-borne vibrations. o Component sizes. o Shelf height adjustability. o Rigidity. o Shelf capacity. o Scalability. o Price. o Aesthetics.
I can't say that I've adequately addressed every one of these criteria, but I've done my best.
I will say this much. When one purchases any racking system in the 'performance-oriented' category, the level of sonic performance gains one should expect should be no less than the sonic gains of 1 or 2 major component upgrades.
Hope this helps, and thanks again for your compliment.
System edited: Added the APL 3910 universal cd player and a pair of NuForce Ref 9 Premium amps. This custom APL 3910 will be used in the NuForce room at CES next month.
Thanks, Ray. I really appreciate your compliments.
Of course the designs are for naught if they do not substantially improve the sonics by properly dealing with air-borne vibrations captured by the components and the rack.
Thanks for the kind words, John(Girod) and you too Beemer.
Considering Girod has one of one of the better sounding systems I've heard (he owns the very highly acclaimed Denon 2900 APL SACD/CD player and Wilson Watt/Puppy speakers), his comments mean a lot.
BTW, about 10 days ago I installed 8 Isoclean gold-plated electrical fuses in each of my line conditioners and then 5 more in my amplifier (2 on each rail and 1 external). The improvements were quite pleasing.
Having owned Aerial 10t's I'm not surprised you are happy. The 10t will report all that's good or bad in front of it, and obviously you have done well.
