Ron’s New System

[b_online]

Ron, I guess it's working well.
have you tried the GAC-2?

I am thinking of trying GAC 4/1 or 2. Not sure which one.

I go between 5m Nordost Tyr and Mogami 2549.

Congratulations for the system Ron !


Hello XV-1,

The GAC-2 cable (1040X) is a very special cable. It has an innate lifelike sense of rhythm that is quite addictive.

Tonally, I miss some of the body and tone that some other cables can provide in the upper bass/lower midrange, but as soon as the Gotham GAC-2 (1040X) cable is temporarily replaced at home with a different cable, it always feels as if that life quality in music is gone.

If I could find a cable that would provide me with a denser sound in the upper bass/lower midrange and a more lifelike tone while retaining the GAC-2’s (1040x) lifelike dynamic nuance and resolution, it would probably be my go to cable for life.

For completeness, I haven’t experienced that lifelike dynamic expressiveness with the more expensive Gac-2 UltraPro (10561) , or in any other cable for that matter, and I yet have to try the GAC-4/1 (11001) .

B

 

[morricab]

Hi Ron,
When are we going to get impressions about the sound of Incito S in your system?

 

[orfeo_monteverdi]

give us an update on the installation and initial sound quality results of the Incito S. You have your masses to entertain!

While waiting for the masses to be entertained by the Aries Cerat Incito S unpacking, as an intermezzo I have a few questions over Ron's system (I am relatively new in this 399 pages thread, sorry). First, regarding the length of the interconnects used and the electronics location.

RCA interconnects and their length
Ron's system is single-ended => RCA interconnects.
I guess they are those on the picture hereafter, than run from the preamp (presumably on the left side) to the monoblocks.
Ron, you wrote that you are happy with the extremely low impedance of the Aries Cerat Incito S as you have long RCA interconnects:
1. do you confirm that these are indeed RCA interconnects ? (it may have been said previously, sorry). What are their length?
2. will the electronics stay on the side, and monoblocks near the panels ? (=> long interconnects / shorter speaker cables; better stereo image?), or do you plan to move the Incito S (and the sources too) in the middle? (=> shorter interconnects / less good stereo image?)

In general (especially if the electronics are on the side: source and preamp, maybe also power amp) with a a single ended system and with a SET power amplifier, is it advised to rather have
1) shorter interconnects and longer speaker cables if the power amp is on the side (probably 5m/16.4 ft of speaker cables);
but it is said that tube power amplifiers do not like long speaker cables (Atmasphere even mentioned earlier in this thread that a damping factor can drop to 1, given a certain total cable impedance (length++); I can't find his post back)
OR
2) longer interconnects (with electronics on the side). And therefore shorter speaker cables (with power amp near the speakers, as in the picture above)
?

As for longer interconnects, in Ron's system, the Incito S has a very low output impedance, so it seems OK. But to what extend/length? The interconnects seem very long on this picture.

Apologies if there is already a thread on this specific topic (SET on the side, single ended system).

Thanks.

 

[Folsom]

Shorter = 50ft or less.

 

[orfeo_monteverdi]

Shorter = 50ft or less.

You mean 50ft max ( = "shorter"), but what for ? For speaker cables, or...RCA interconnects ?!
(50ft = 15.2 m !)

 

[Lagonda]

You mean 50ft (shorter) for what ? For speaker cables, or...RCA interconnects ?!
(50ft = 15.2 m !)

Speaker cables of course, his speakers are 30 m apart !

 

[Holmz]

While waiting for the masses to be entertained by the Aries Cerat Incito S unpacking, as an intermezzo I have a few questions over Ron's system (I am relatively new in this 399 pages thread, sorry). First, regarding the length of the interconnects used and the electronics location.

RCA interconnects and their length
Ron's system is single-ended => RCA interconnects.
I guess they are those on the picture hereafter, than run from the preamp (presumably on the left side) to the monoblocks.
Ron, you wrote that you are happy with the extremely low impedance of the Aries Cerat Incito S as you have long RCA interconnects:
1. do you confirm that these are indeed RCA interconnects ? (it may have been said previously, sorry). What are their length?
2. will the electronics stay on the side, and monoblocks near the panels ? (=> long interconnects / shorter speaker cables; better stereo image?), or do you plan to move the Incito S (and the sources too) in the middle? (=> shorter interconnects / less good stereo image?)

In general (especially if the electronics are on the side: source and preamp, maybe also power amp) with a a single ended system and with a SET power amplifier, is it advised to rather have
1)- shorter interconnects and longer speaker cables if the power amp is on the side (probably 5m/16.4 ft of speaker cables);
but it is said that tube power amplifiers do not like long speaker cables (Atmasphere even mentioned earlier in this thread a damping factor drop to 1 given a certain total cable impedance (length++); can't find his post back)
OR
2) - longer interconnects (with electronics on the side). And therefore shorter speaker cables (with power amp near the speakers, as in the picture above)
?

As for longer interconnects, in Ron's system, the Incito S has a very low output impedance, so it seems OK. But to what extend/length? The interconnects seem very long on this picture.

Apologies if there is already a thread on this specific topic (SET on the side, single ended system).

Thanks.

Some amps can go into oscillation when there is to much of a reactive load, which it can become when the speaker cables get unwieldy long.

I put in a 1 and 2 into the quote of your words.

I would vote for #2.
As the 50’ was mentioned… At that point many would be running XLRs. However there is a perception, among the golden eared, that unbalanced RCA have a sweater sound... which they must as XLR mostly all sound the same, and are more immune to noise etc.
Whereas the RCA seem they’re like are being used as “tuning devices”.

 

[Ron Resnick]

While waiting for the masses to be entertained by the Aries Cerat Incito S unpacking, as an intermezzo I have a few questions over Ron's system (I am relatively new in this 399 pages thread, sorry). First, regarding the length of the interconnects used and the electronics location.

RCA interconnects and their length
Ron's system is single-ended => RCA interconnects.
I guess they are those on the picture hereafter, than run from the preamp (presumably on the left side) to the monoblocks.
Ron, you wrote that you are happy with the extremely low impedance of the Aries Cerat Incito S as you have long RCA interconnects:
1. do you confirm that these are indeed RCA interconnects ? (it may have been said previously, sorry). What are their length?
2. will the electronics stay on the side, and monoblocks near the panels ? (=> long interconnects / shorter speaker cables; better stereo image?), or do you plan to move the Incito S (and the sources too) in the middle? (=> shorter interconnects / less good stereo image?)

In general (especially if the electronics are on the side: source and preamp, maybe also power amp) with a a single ended system and with a SET power amplifier, is it advised to rather have
- shorter interconnects and longer speaker cables if the power amp is on the side (probably 5m/16.4 ft of speaker cables);
but it is said that tube power amplifiers do not like long speaker cables (Atmasphere even mentioned earlier in this thread a damping factor drop to 1 given a certain total cable impedance (length++); can't find his post back)
OR
- longer interconnects (with electronics on the side). And therefore shorter speaker cables (with power amp near the speakers, as in the picture above)
?

As for longer interconnects, in Ron's system, the Incito S has a very low output impedance, so it seems OK. But to what extend/length? The interconnects seem very long on this picture.

Apologies if there is already a thread on this specific topic (SET on the side, single ended system).

Thanks.

Hello Orfeo,

All source components and preamps are in an adjacent equipment room. I find it convenient and classy and anti-acoustic feedback and anti-vibration friendly to have all source components and preamps located physically outside of the listening room. This obviates all sorts of audiophilia nervosa about isolation platforms and footers and woo-woo tweaks.

I have both RCAs and XLRs that run from the equipment room through the conduit in the wall and then into the listening room. The interconnect lengths are about 45 feet. Bi-amping and tri-amping adds to that length. Loudspeaker cable lengths are 2 meters.

My philosophy is that absent an actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI problem I see no reason to pseudo-balance natively single-ended amplifiers. (Absent an actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI problem I see no reason to get involved with grounding boxes or power conditioners or regenerators or isolation transformers or balanced power devices, most of which I have auditioned and all of which change the sound.)

Both the PF100s and the JA100s are natively single-ended circuits. Presently I'm using RCA interconnects everywhere.

This is the adjacent equipment room:

 

[Ron Resnick]

Hi Ron,
When are we going to get impressions about the sound of Incito S in your system?

After I move it from the garage into the listening room and set it up and get some experience with it. But I have no reason to think it's going to be any different than the demo Incito S I had for several months, except with significantly more gain and, consequently, slightly greater dynamics and drive.

 

[morricab]

After I move it from the garage into the listening room and set it up and get some experience with it. But I have no reason to think it's going to be any different than the demo Incito S I had for several months, except with significantly more gain and, consequently, slightly greater dynamics and drive.

Oh, you haven’t set it out yet? What are you waiting for?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Oh, you haven’t set it out yet? What are you waiting for?

I've been taking a break from audio at home, and enjoying a tertiary hobby. I've also been focusing on spending a lot of IRL time with my real friends.

I did listen to a lot of music on my long-term Qobuz playlist on the overhead for many hours last weekend. That was fun. It was nice to hear a lot of my favorite 1980s songs I have not heard in a long time.

 

[bonzo75]

I did listen to a lot of music on my long-term Qobuz playlist on the overhead for many hours last weekend. That was fun. It was nice to hear a lot of my favorite 1980s songs I have not heard in a long time.

I remember Ron's speaker system on his swimming pool was much better than many hifi systems, that time he did not have his stereo, but I won't be surprised if it is way more emotional than his stereo.

That’s the overhead I was referring to

 

[microstrip]

Hello Orfeo,

All source components and preamps are in an adjacent equipment room. I find it convenient and classy and anti-acoustic feedback and anti-vibration friendly to have all source components and preamps located physically outside of the listening room. This obviates all sorts of audiophilia nervosa about isolation platforms and footers and woo-woo tweaks.

Only if you choose to ignore how platforms and footers work. Their action is not mostly suppressing feedback. Skepticism is the best way to suppress audiophilia nervosa, unfortunately I am open minded.

I have both RCAs and XLRs that run from the equipment room through the conduit in the wall and then into the listening room. The interconnect lengths are about 45 feet. Bi-amping and tri-amping adds to that length. Loudspeaker cable lengths are 2 meters.

My philosophy is that absent an actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI problem I see no reason to pseudo-balance natively single-ended amplifiers. (Absent an actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI problem I see no reason to get involved with grounding boxes or power conditioners or regenerators or isolation transformers or balanced power devices, most of which I have auditioned and all of which change the sound.)

Both the PF100s and the JA100s are natively single-ended circuits. Presently I'm using RCA interconnects everywhere.

How can you be sure that you do not have " actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI " issues on your system in such conditions? These things do not present at our door with an identifications card. Most of the time we only notice they existed from the sound benefits of suppressing them or with measurements. When using the Lamm's or CJ's (all SE) although I can not hear hum , optimizing the cable layout with a spectrameter looking at the mains and harmonics results in a better sound.

What are you calling "native pseudo balancing"? IMO such thing does not exist - it is a marketing term for using improper connectors or wiring.

This is the adjacent equipment room:


View attachment 155919

Nice to see such a tidy room!

 

[Ron Resnick]

How can you be sure that you do not have " actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI " issues on your system in such conditions? These things do not present at our door with an identifications card.

If I don't hear it, then I don't got it. At the very least, if I don't hear it, then I don't care about it.

If I don't hear it, then I don't allow audiophilia nervosa to make me worry about it.

I heard my listening room Lutron Maestro RF dimmers causing a buzz through the speakers. I removed the fancy dimmers, took them off the remote control system of the house, and replaced them with dumb rocker switches. Noise problem solved.

What are you calling "native pseudo balancing"? IMO such thing does not exist - it is a marketing term for using improper connectors or wiring.

I didn't put those two together. Pseudo-balancing is using a balancing or unbalancing transformer in a natively single-ended circuit.

Nice to see such a tidy room!

Thank you!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Only if you choose to ignore how platforms and footers work. Their action is not mostly suppressing feedback. Skepticism is the best way to suppress audiophilia nervosa, unfortunately I am open minded.

How can you be sure that you do not have " actual noise or actual grounding or actual EMI/RFI " issues on your system in such conditions? These things do not present at our door with an identifications card. Most of the time we only notice they existed from the sound benefits of suppressing them or with measurements. When using the Lamm's or CJ's (all SE) although I can not hear hum , optimizing the cable layout with a spectrameter looking at the mains and harmonics results in a better sound.

If I don't hear it, then I don't got it. At the very least, if I don't hear it, then I don't care about it.

If I don't hear it, then I don't allow audiophilia nervosa to make me worry about it.

my viewpoint is that we don't know what we don't know. so the only way to understand cause and effect of noise is to test it by applying some sort of decoupling or isolation or EMF/RFI solution and........drum roll please.......LISTEN. you never recognize noise until it is gone or reduced. then it jumps out. you then realize it was never part of the music but something masking the music.

the separate room for sources approach might pass the 'eye' test and the intuition test, but the listening test is the only one that tells you what you don't know. but there are plenty of separate room for sources benefits which might trump the caveats. it's personal and no wrong way. and gear interaction on the shelf can be real. and should be considered.

one easy way to try it in any room is with headphones. if you can hear the results of isolation processes with headphones, those results resemble a separate room approach so that tells you you still benefit from that isolation process even with a separate room. but with big music depending on the whole structure of the home even a separate room does not completely eliminate the feedback problem. but feedback is only one aspect of noise.

 

[Synaxis]

my viewpoint is that we don't know what we don't know. so the only way to understand cause and effect of noise is to test it by applying some sort of decoupling or isolation or EMF/RFI solution and........drum roll please.......LISTEN.

I agree with this. Well said.

 

[LL21]

my viewpoint is that we don't know what we don't know. so the only way to understand cause and effect of noise is to test it by applying some sort of decoupling or isolation or EMF/RFI solution and........drum roll please.......LISTEN.

the separate room for sources approach might pass the 'eye' test and the intuition test, but the listening test is the only one that tells you what you don't know. but there are plenty of separate room for sources benefits which might trump the caveats. it's personal and no wrong way. and gear interaction on the shelf can be real. and should be considered.

one easy way to try it in any room is with headphones. if you can hear the results of isolation processes with headphones, those results resemble a separate room approach. but with big music depending on the whole structure of the home even a separate room does not completely eliminate the problem.

You beat me to it, Mike. There is hearing actual noise...and then in most any good system, if you dont ostensibly hear noise, there might very well still be noise that you dont realize is there...until it's gone. That has absolutely been my experience. Time and again.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

and sometimes when you uncover and conquer a noise/distortion problem, it can open your eyes and ears to solving other mysteries about your system. since you now have a more truthful tool to use. like peeling an onion there is mostly more layers to uncover over time.

what more musical secrets can our systems reveal?

 

[LL21]

and sometimes when you uncover and conquer a noise/distortion problem, it can open your eyes and ears to solving other mysteries about your system. since you now have a more truthful tool to use. like peeling an onion there is mostly more layers to uncover over time.

what more musical secrets can our systems reveal?

entirely agree...

 

[Elliot G.]

my viewpoint is that we don't know what we don't know. so the only way to understand cause and effect of noise is to test it by applying some sort of decoupling or isolation or EMF/RFI solution and........drum roll please.......LISTEN. you never recognize noise until it is gone or reduced. then it jumps out. you then realize it was never part of the music but something masking the music.

BOOM!
I have spent the better part of the last year learning about noise, particularly what I did not know I needed to know about and what it actually does to harm the resulting output of your system.
With the help of Grant & Richard from Shunyata I have learned much about what I wasn't aware off.
There are many who have written and Mr. Gabriel's work and I am not going to try to explain it.
I can say this you really don't know what you don't know till you know it.
I was not a fan of power conditioners as I thought that all the ones I have used altered the sound and therefore what they might have done that could be considered good was tinged by what they screwed up. I had not done any grounding experimentation and then tried a few different products until I found what really worked exceptionally well. There are major differences in what power cords can do and probably last but from from least is noise from the network and the components themselves when they are playing music. Then of course thier are mechanical isolation devices that prevent different types of noise. All are important and IMO something that separates the huge discussions of the day analog versus digital and tubes versus transistors all can have the abyss's shortened with the proper noise attention.

I am sure that there are many products that address these types of noise/distortion and finding them and using them correctly is IMO magical.
I have written lately about my personal experience in my room with my system else where.
I would advise Ron to have someone show him in his room with his system which I personally would gladly do if he was not in California