Nice AR amp...and is that an ATI amp I see on the bottom. I scored a used 1502 in a local DJ audio store for $100. He took it out of a clients club and didn't research the value of the amp.

BTW--nice custom pre amp as well. I admire people who can circuit their own components.

AK

That is an ATI 1504 four channel amp which drives the four surround speakers. The Audio Research amp drives the center in active bi-amp mode. The whole amp is heavily modified, and the channel which drives the HF compression driver is modified to work in triode mode.

The left and right mains also run in active bi-amplified mode with the LF being driven by the Dynaco MK IIIs (modified) and the HF compression drivers driven by the Cary stereo single ended triode amp (modified, with an outboard linear power supply for the output tube heaters). The active crossover I also designed and built with a crossover frequency of 500Hz

The four subwoofers (two for each stereo channel) are driven by a modified Soundcraft SA-1000 1000 watt amp.

Hi Altec,

I see you are an Audiophile too. I feel the trend these days is for surround only and not for music. This is why I am using my old modified Tube preamp so I can play CD's and hear music again. I use the 1070 for the sub and the SQ is great. I am not able to play SACDs and use the sub. The tube preamp puts out way to much voltage for my amp sI I orders 12db In Line Attenuators. I am hoping that help the bass. I may want a 2nd HSU sub and run a 2nd set of outputs from the tune preamp into the subs and use their crossovers.

Altec, whichg tubes do you use, type and who makes them? I do not like the current Russian tubes, I think they sound like crap.

I use a combination of NOS and European manufacturers. I use the Russian Electro-Harmonix 300B tube for the SET amp. I have no complaints either aurally of of it's measured distortion spectra, which drops off like a rock after the 4th harmonic. The input 6SN7 for the SET is a NOS GE tube.

I usually don't get too wrapped up in tube brands. If I don't like the way something in my system is sounding, I can design it, or redesign it till I do.

I have a few SACDs, but honestly like the sound of vinyl stereo LPs better than any digital commercial release I've heard, in any format.

I have a recording preamp/mixer I made for making live recordings, and this, in combination with a modified digital audio workstation (ProTools), yields digital recordings which can hold their own with a vinyl release (and are better in terms of low end response and noise).

Liz...

Music quality may have always been there, just on the higher end of the spectrum. As far as the fascination/focus with surround sound...I wonder if it might simply be the case of the newness of the technology, and the availability of digital format. Mass marketing (box stores) focuses on HT. Which ultimately feeds into the idea of the "latest and greatest" syndrome. I keep reading new posts of audio people wanting to know when the next gen 990/Outlaw is coming out. With many vague statements of "I can't wait any more" I'm going to buy Onkyo or NAD (for immediate example) to get HDMI 1.3.

What I appreciate regarding some of the threads in the Audiogon and several other forums...the respect for past/vintage products and the understanding of sonic value in a component. Audiophiles seeking out vintage gear because of its sonic quality. There is no vintage gear in the surround realm, Unfortunately, it's always changing.

The internet has opened up my perceptions to all of the different audio potentials. I tried reading my dad's Stereophile magazines years ago, but the prices turned me off. I could never afford what the magazine was reviewing. However, in my sparse economic and nomadic state, I was able to put together some semblance of sonic sanity.

Now that I am able to extend my budget a bit, my research has expanded beyond the box stores. Please correct me if I wrong Altec, tubes seem to be prevalent in two channel audio. Even though there was a shift with the advancement of solid state in the 80's, it seems now the focus is swinging back to tubes because of economics of manufacturing. Simply tube components are becoming more affordable to the budget conscious buyer. Also, the hi-fi stores slowly disappeared in the 90's. OR...maybe the advent of the compact disc through a major wrench into the whole analog world.

The general public/consumer is not able to maintain the knowledge of oh, say "Altec" or "Gonk". Some of us have to play catchup when our perceptions open up to a wider view of the audio world. Thank dog for the internet.

Pardon my digression from the original cable thread (a few barley pops with visiting family) . I live in a small, low economic community...so I don't often get to talk about my audiophile obsession.

One further note...which is important. For quite a few years, I had wanted to purchase separates (which I was raised on). I waited ten years. I watched the growth of Outlaw for almost six years. My two channel sonic obsession didn't reignite until I purchased the 990/7125 a few months ago. I have bought more cd's in the last few months, then combined over the last three or four years. I wanted to wait for the next gen 990, but the "Double Down" promo got me. Purchasing the 990 has motivated me to move forward in refining my system...on a non-profit budget.

So Liz...I got lost in the surround format...but the 990 brought my focus back to the importance of two channel fidelity.

Now I am looking forward to the tweakings.

AK

That is certainly the trend. I used to have tube amps for all my speakers, surround and all, but it simply got unmanageable, not to mention HOT!

Generally, people who invest in tube gear are more concerned with quality music reproduction, and that is still stereo. Surround music didn't catch on (at least with SACD and DVD-A), but it is still up in the air if the new video formats will be used to popularize surround music.

From my own experience, I am tremendously unimpressed with surround mixes from a artistic taste point of view. There are some good ones like Dark Side of the Moon, but there are also some really unmusical ones.

I've done several surround mixes myself, and always am thinking it's a rather pointless exercise, because it doesn't really add anything beyond stereo from a musical point of view, i.e. serving the music rather than the technology.

The problem with surround is that we are used to music being presented historically in a front-centric manner (the Berlioz Requiem notwithstanding). Instruments coming from all directions behind the listener is generally unnatural. If the surrounds are used for ambience only, there is the feeling that those channels are not contributing "enough" to justify the extra channels.

As an aside, in my own system, for the playback of selected CDs, I've taken two studio reverb units and assigned one to the side surrounds and one to the back surrounds. I load slightly different programs into each, with the rear surrounds having a more "deep" ambience program than the sides, with more delay. This combination is able to simulate the reverb field as well as that on most classical SACDs, and affords a lot of flexibility in tailoring the relative size of the "room".

Of course this reverb processing can be switched out, and I never use it with vinyl playback, since a record tick reverberating into the surrounds is very unnatural!

Actually, in a many multi-channel releases, the reverb field in the surrounds is created in just this manner.

I do not like the surround sound for music either. I feel stereo sounds more natural and truer to the source.

Surround is good for movies and broadcats.

I have 12 SACDS and I do not listen in multi-channel mode.

Music is what makes me use my tube preamp.