Description

Got fed up with tweeks and expensive improvements and have built a vinyl replay system that should last years without needing any fundamental changes. I expect to move house in 2 or 3 years time which might prompt some changes - but done for now.

I think my system is very competent without being outrageously expensive. Good at reproducing mostly large scale orchestral stuff which I enjoy.
Read more...

Components Toggle details

    • SME Model 20 mkII
    Had the motor redressed by SME which solved pitch stability problem after I bought it from a private seller.
    • Graham Engineering 2.2
    The bearing upgrade from 2.0 made a tremendous difference. Better all round - bass, mid and highs.
    • ZYX UNIverse
    Copper wire/Silver base
    • Graham Engineering Nightingale
    Needs re-tipped, hence the ZYX.
    • Audion Quattro 2 box
    Using Amperex white label 6922 PQs throughout.
    • Canary Audio CA-339
    Using KR300BXL, much better than the TJ Princess 300B's I had. This amp responds well to good 6SN7s. I'm using TungSol roundplates at the moment which are superb.
    • Quad ESL-989
    Very happy with these components. Bought from a private seller when they were 3 years old.
    • Revel Performa B-15
    B15a Sub - The ESLs can't reach the bottom half octave. The crossover is set very low.
    • Purist Venustas
    Phono Interconnect and from Pre to power. Proteous to the sub.
    • Stealth Ultimate Ribbon
    4ft pair - big enough for my setup.
    • Loricroft PRC3 Record Cleaning MC
    Essential equipment.
    • Target 4 shelf
    Had this for 20 years.
    • ASR 100
    the ASR100 power supply is a great piece of kit. It got rid of sibilance that I had been attributing to other issues such as my cartridge or the recordings themselves. It is a great bargain and is top of the list when it comes to the ratio of price to sound improvement.

Comments 9

222222&text=jf
Sorry I didn't respond earlier. I've tried crossover freqs at 80, 100, 40 and now 50Hz. The last one gives me the best results so far. The slope for the sub is at 24dB so it doesn't interfere much with the Quads above the crossover frequency. The difference between 40 and 50 is subtle but useful for some low instruments. If you check my system page, you'll see that the position of the sub is somewhat unusual but works much better in my room; perhaps that's also why 50Hz works well.
Cheers,
Joel

jfd01

222222&text=ch
Owner
I found the Quads start to tail off below 40Hz and dissappear altogether at 30Hz. I modelled the Revel response to cut in between these frequencies. The sub therefore remains silent for a lot of recordings but is essential in others for revealing the lowest registers. Have you achieved better results doing something more sophisticated?

chips

222222&text=jf
Hi Chips,
What's the crossover frequency you're using for the Revel? Do you have a separate high-pass filter for the Quads, or what's the setup to cut off the Quads below the crossover frequency? Have you experimented with various freqs?
Cheers,
Joel

jfd01

128x128
Nice selection of gear. Congrats and enjoy!

Ken

kehut

222222&text=ch
Owner
System edited: Pictures added.

chips

222222&text=ch
Owner
No, not at all. Both highly compatible. The Canary's are rated at 50W, 8 ohms. My usual listening volume is around 50% to 70% which is plenty loud enough. I've never turned volume full up. My set up is a bit cramped (especially considering the 989s) so I've resisted taking pictures. Room sizes in London are pretty ungenerous.

chips

222222&text=jf
Sorry, I should have noticed the revel in your list already! I'm curious about the Canary with your 989s: you don't have any problem driving them with the Canary? I would have thought that would be a mismatch (efficiency and impdedance-wise)? These are the 300B push-pull monoblocks, right?
By the way, will you post some pictures? It would be great to see the setup. Thanks.

jfd01

222222&text=ch
Owner
Yes I have a Revel 15a sub. The 989s are great but they do not reach the last half octave which is particularly noticable on some records. MFSL planets come to mind - really dissapointing without the sub.

chips

222222&text=jf
I also own a pair of 989s and listen to orchestral music. Have you experimented with a sub? I know that the 989s are fine in the bass, but I found out that there's quite a bit more clarity in the mid-register with a sub to take care of the low stuff.
Cheers. Joel

jfd01

Displaying all 9 posts