Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Melquiades Amplifier
In the Thread: “Melquiades” amplifier: a year later.
Post Subject: Some anti-Melquiades propagandaPosted by Romy the Cat on: 12/4/2006
 darkmoebius wrote: |
| That's because "off the shelf" amps can be easily resold for little or no loss of money if they are not to the buyer's liking. The Melquiades, on the other hand, leaves the builder with $3,000 worth of parts not easily resold if it doesn't fit well with the builder's musical goals. So, there is a far greater financial risk involved in chosing Melq over a commercial amp. |
|
It is difficult to argue. I never seen any person with Audiogon URL instead of ears or brain who was ever was able to accomplish any interesting Sound.
| darkmoebius wrote: |
| Your attitude (and writing style) certainly doesn't help the amp get serious consideration amongst those most capable to build the amp. |
|
I am well familiar with it and I am in a way quite comfortable with it. I have little if any interest in the “serious consideration” of DIY-type people. Quite opposite, to understand “how” and “why” the Milq sounds a person should be well beyond the typical DIY mindset.
| darkmoebius wrote: |
| Also, I think most profficient builders are more comfortable in discussing how things work or are designed rather than the listening experience because the latter is extremely subjective and filled with unknown variables whereas the "nuts & bolts" of building is filled with known reference points. It seems to me that you (Romy) are more focused on the listening experience itself. |
|
Yes, it is correct. I still hardly understand why the Milq’s driver stage sound in the way it is. BTW, some greatest minds of audio engineering, way more inelegant then your typical DIY Morons, also have no idea what responsible for the Milq’s driver stage Sound.
| darkmoebius wrote: |
| And that's the most accurate reason why no one else has really tried your amp - the Melquiades serves you well, in your system, in your room, for your tastes/goals. Not many people have any idea what your system and room actually sounds like. And since your repeatedly say that 95%+ of other people's systems and components are junk or horrible and they lack the mind to understand music, there is no common reference point to encourage people to risk $3,000 on your design. |
|
Yes, I would agree. Also in the Milq release note I insisted that the person who would like to pursue the Melquiades should have “mature and refined expectations in sound reproduction”. I did not say that “95%+ of other people's systems and components are junk. However I do always said and I do insist that 95%+ of other people's expectations in sound reproduction are junk. Think about the difference.
| darkmoebius wrote: |
| Speaking for myself, I am seriously considering the Melq, but that is a LOT of money for me. A huge risk financially because there really isn't much third party validiation of the amp's true performance. A "Catch-22" really. Not enough people have had success with it to encourage a large amount of others, yet that can't happen without someone stepping up to the plate. |
|
The reality is that Melquiades is insultingly cheap and even from its $3,000 it could be substantially made less expansive. I described how I made it but I did not care about economics. In reality the Melquiades could be made for no more money than a typical mass-market 300B amp. The "Catch-22" with Melquiades is not the Melquiades price but the fact that I SPEND NO EFFORTS TO CONVINCE ANYBODY to build it. It would be easy to bring witnesses of the Milq’s sound or to let the guy who bought the first Milq’s to publish his feedback. The problem is that it would be TOO EASY AND TOO PRIMITIVE, at least for me. Why do you think I should case why amp you use? I made the Milq available and frankly speaking for myself, I feel more gratified that I revealed the Milq’s circuit then the fact that I was able to get out of Milq the necessary sound. The Milq is out and my job is done. It is up to others to embrace or to reject it. Trust me; it will hardly affect me, or even my ego, if the Milq’s progress would goes one way or another.
| darkmoebius wrote: |
| Since I am overhauling my system for a new set of priorities, the idea of Melq has me once again looking it over. I had an Almarro A318B integrated, 18wpc SET - 6C33CB, in my house for 4 months this year and certain aspects of it's sonic presentation were unique and superior to the 300B, EL34, and PX-25 SET amps that I have. With all other things being the same in my system except the different amps, I found the the Almarro had signs of being the least colored and neutral tonally. It was by no means a perfect amp, but it did give me an inkling of what might be possible with that output tube with a no-holds-barred design. So, I am defninitely intrigued by the Melq's potential. |
|
“the no-holds-barred DESIGN”? Hm… I do not think I ever had these objectives. I think that orientation to “no-holds-barred design” is a fundamentally faulty when one think about Sound. Frankly, I would not suggest the people with ““the no-holds-barred design” objectives DO NOT try Milq. I hardly believe the “no-holds-barred BS” correlates in anyway with what Melquiades is. The Milq does what is necessary to do and the “the no-holds-barred design” is the stupid metaphors that the BS audio-writers implanted into the minds of audio public. The “no-holds-barred design” but it does not exist in the realty of Real Audio. It might be possible “a no-holds-barred implementation” of a selected design but it is also very controversial subject….
| darkmoebius wrote: |
| Hopefully, a few more people will build your amp because it might nicely fit into the new direction I'm taking my system with a set of cornerhorns designed by RCA's Dr. Harry Olson using his legendary 15" LC-1C coaxial drivers - (picture 1 & 2). The cornerhorns were never commercially produced. The owner of The Ah! Horn Company has provided public access to a sketch, given to him in the 70's by Dr. Olson, of what Dr. Olson considered the ultimate cornerhorn for his ultimate driver. A rough mockup of the driver and cabinet had terrific free-air frequency response. Even though, they have moderate high(er) efficiency, I wuld like an amp capable of exemplary current drive to control the large drivers, plus great LF response. |
|
“exemplary current drive to control the large drivers”… Hm…. I kind of feel a pain in my teeth… Where you people dig all that BS? Anyhow. if you are for “great LF response” (that would be hardly possible in context of RCA drivers) then be advised that I believe in DSET and I do not feel that a full range SET should driver LF section. You see, there are some very intricate nuances of LF dumping with SET. It is highly possible that you would need differently load your output stages for LF and MF sections it order to have the correct Sound. Unless you are of course incredibly lucky….
Rgs,
Romy the CatRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site