OFCCM,

If you're definitely going to get the mods done, perhaps you'd be interested in performing an experiment?

What I suggest is only get one 200 modded initially, and then arrange to do a level-matched double-blind test between one of the unmodded ones and one of the modded ones. If you can tell the difference between the two in a level-matched, double-blind test, and you prefer the modified version, then you've proven that the modification is worth it.

Jeff

Jeff,

In the first place I made it clear I would never mod ANYTHING without first having an extended period of time with the stock units in my listening room. Secondly it is not very high on my list of priorities. So any test I did would be so far down the line as to render it worthless. That said I would be interested in finding out how they sound.

However a double blind test would not prove a thing. How are we going to hold a legitimate double blind test in the internet environment. In theory it sounds good, but how do we set it up. If I am setting up the double blind test in my area, Are you going to believe me if I said there is a significant difference and published all the opinions of my friends in this area under a double blind setting. You would question my methods, my findings and then when all else failed just say I was biased in this debate. And in all honesty you would be right to do this. If you are in Maine and I am in Alabama there is just not a legitimate, inexpensive way to set this up. However we could all put up a little green and get a pair of these modded and pass them around letting those with stock units compare against the modded units. Surely there are enough 200 owners out there willing to put up a little money and hold the cost down. I think you would need to do this in stereo not multi channel. My interest in a mod for a center was based on how I felt they would sound with my current system. For the purpose of a serious listening test it would have to be 2 channels at a time or in a mono set up. I trust my ears, but not while listening in an HT format. So we use Music and either 2 channel or mono. We could have everyone set up one speaker and listen in mono using one unit at a time which is the perfect way to do it and save cost, but I don't think enough people would be willing to go to the trouble to change their home set up. Also if you think we can really hear a difference listening and watching "Rambo 3" then we are wasting everyone's time and money. So those involved would have to own at least 2 stock units to start with. I am willing to do that. We might even catch the interest of the retailer and if he is confident in his product he might cut us some slack on the price, say at his cost. Those involved in the test would have to be responsible for the frieght to the next guy or gal. At the end eveyone could post views. If after the test someone wanted the units they could buy out the others minus the fright. If the units were an absolute stinko we could auction them off and donate the money to an appropiate charity and write it off on taxs. That is a better way to handle it.

Now in all honesty this sounds good but after everyone has had a chance to listen to the units against his or her stock units in their listening rooms, we still won't prove anything except that we all have opinions. We will certainly have fun listening and enjoy a lot of debate. If enough people were involved we only spend a little money doing it. I would be interested in that and give my time and money (if we got enough people involved).

So now we have high interst level, low cost, and a chance for eveyone to get involved. Sounds good to me, but someone else needs to be the ringleader. I just can't do it right now. I can invest and participate but not set it up.

Also if you are just throwing this "double blind test" post out there as a kind of put your money where your mouth is gesture then I am not interested. I have been in this hobby to many years to be baited into something. During this debate I have gone out of my way to try not to influence anyone, pointing out that this is not for everyone. My post have at least had a little thought to them along with some opinions and experience. The true test is in the ears of the listener and only they can decide what is worth it and what is not.

[This message has been edited by OFCCM (edited June 10, 2003).]

[This message has been edited by OFCCM (edited June 10, 2003).]

When I am typing a book I need spellcheck. Retirement has made me lazy, sorry for any mistakes but I am not editing the above post again.

Darn, did it again

[This message has been edited by OFCCM (edited June 10, 2003).]

OFCCM,

I agree with you about the upgrade to electrostatic speakers. I did similar upgrades to resistors, caps, connectors and even changed the circuit topology a bit on my Acoustat speakers. I am VERY please with the improvement to the sound.

"AN exra $10 in parts that I add to the unit at home taken to the manufacturing side would probably increase the sales price by a $100 or more."

I do not understand why this has to be so. If a mfr. decides to use a $10.50 audiophile grade input coupling cap. instead of a $0.50, and there are no other changes to the production line other than installing the $10 more expensive part on the circuit board, then I do not see why the cost would go up by $100, except of course, if the mfr. gets greedy. Plus, for a part you or I would pay $10.50 for, a mfr. would buy in quantities so that the price per unit would be vastly less.

"Our model xyz amp, now with audiophile bombast model $$$ capacitors" may increase the panache of the product by $100. Don't sell the steak, sell the sizzle.

Paul


------------------
the 1derful1

Okay, notice the "Deputy" under my name, so this may be a stupid question but...

There was a review of the M200 linked in a previous post that said "The frequency response is the only area I see room for improvement. It starts rolling off about 3 kHz, although it is down only 0.3 db at 20 kHz. The low end though suffers a bit, dropping 1 dB at 20 Hz. Perhaps this is an overzealous use of an input capacitor (these are commonly used to prevent DC from getting into the power amplifier from the preamplifier). I would suggest using a higher value to keep it reasonably flat to 20 Hz. It is not so much that you can't boost the low end with a tone control somewhere, but there is phase shift where you have frequency response rolloff."

Is this something that could be safely modified by an end user? Do you know if any of the parts connexion's mods address this issue?

That input capacitor might be a bit difficult to find for someone who is not trained in electronics. In any event, if you use bass management and roll off the bass going to one of the 200's channels, what does it matter if it's down 1db at 20Hz?

True enough. Especially since one can barely hear 20hz!

Jeff

Well this is hardly scientific but the M200's do not sound to me any more rolled off than my previous Adcom 565 amps which are supposedly not significantly rolled off (0 db) at 20 KHz. They sound significantly less rolled off than the Marantz M500 to me. YMMV.

Yeah, if those rolloffs exist, they are so small that you probably wouldn't be able to hear them except under very critical conditions while listening to pink noise.

But, depending upon the shade of pink your pink noise is (or if you are using white noise whose white kelvin value is on the low-is side) you might be able to just barely hear a difference if the 1dB attenuation at 20Hz is switched in and out as in a A-B comparison.

Assuming this attenuation at 20Hz is caused by the input coupling cap, adding another one in parallel (leaving the original one in place) will move the -1DB point below 20Hz. Plus, you can select your audiophile capacitor of choice. The additional cap can be easily removed in case you want to return the amp to it's stock condidtion.

Noting the comment about the high frequencies starting a rolloff at 3KHz and being 0.3 dB down at 20KHz, if this rolloff is caused by a bessel type low pass filer, then the designer is after superior (less) phase shift in the passband at the (slight) expense of a somewhat lower in frequency start of the amplitude rollof, a design approach that I like.

Paul

------------------
the 1derful1

[This message has been edited by Paul J. Stiles (edited June 22, 2003).]