My pleasure

Glad you are enjoying

Thanks

Great!

Thank you

My pleasure

Great!

Many thanks!

Regarding question number 1. From various sources on the Internet: Power tubes like EL34's and KT88's are good for about 2500 hours or more. Small signal tubes like a 12AX7 or 6922 will work well on average for about 10,000 hours. Prices vary wildly depending on the brand, and you can search on the Internet for that. One problem is that a lot good tubes are produced in Russia and because of the war in Ukraine they may be hard to find. A lot of tubes are called "new old stock" which means they may be decades old but "supposedly" never used. There is often a noticeable difference in the quality and sound characteristics of one brand versus another, and in most cases you have to buy matched pairs if purchasing two of the same tubes for stereo (or even 2 monoblocs) because there can be a difference in output between one tube and another, even if the tube is the same brand and model and age. Some companies that make tube equipment will also sell replacement tubes. McIntosh tubes supplied with their new equipment have the McIntosh brand on them (made by someone else), but I believe that McIntosh was sourcing them from Russia, so not sure what the availability of replacement tubes is right now directly from McIntosh (Adrian would probably know).

I personally like to hear Lewis and the other guy also.

Audiophile dream but not necessarily a music lover’s choice

Thanks!

Thanks

they are ugly looking

Adrian has said in the past that he doesn't like to "review" products he doesn't carry (new or used), otherwise people would say he is biased if he says he doesn't like them.

I like B&W especially the 800 series, though some may find the highs a bit prominent. I do find the bass a bit weak relative to the cost and competition, but that's strictly my opinion. Haven't heard ATC recently, the ones I had years ago needed a lot of power to get them singing

ahhh, the cable thing - - it's never a question with those that have partaken - - my buddies and I figured out back in the very early 80's that cables matter, there was nothing controversial about it, basically, if one went from zip cord to monster cable (the big player back then) and could hear no difference then that would imply that the system was maxed out with the zip cord (as far as speaker cables), but we never, not even one time (with various systems) found that MC wasn't worth employing - there was no You Tube - no forums - no playground for those that love to argue about something that they haven't truly experimented with themselves - and I'm only ranting here because I tire of this subject being kicked around, so yes - I have played the game and messed with everything from that skinny crap Radio Shack used to sell as "speaker wire" to the reference stuff I'm running now, and, I'll inject here that I do think and have found myself that the "full loom" idea is worth striving toward - everything can and usually does affect a high end system, cables are of course part of that equation, good, bad or otherwise as of course they have an audible affect. The reason I felt compelled to reply to your comment Nirodha, is that, and perhaps oddly, my personal experience with two of the brands that Adrian mentioned are among my favorites because I've actually employed them myself (not Shunyata) - So Dubious? I'll call you out - What are you taking about? Both reference lines of the other two brands are excellent and are anything and everything except tone controls, which is what you're implying - you don't own a true refence system do you, you don't "really" know from experience do you - all that is to say that it's clear that your comment is you spouting off about something you have no personal experience with.

Excellent!!!

Can't be more honest than this since Adrian does not sell room treatments and therefore, makes no money with this recommendation. But it is a SIGNIFICANT improvement for any system

I doubt that very many people think a CD that is streamed sounds better than a CD played on a CD player attached to home audio system. If one uses a separate DAC (or DAC integrated into the pre-amp/integrated amp) for both the local CD player or streaming CD bit rate music, then the cost of the CD player is not much of a factor (within limits) as to whether it sounds better than a streaming service playing the same CD bit rate music using the same DAC. Obviously, some very old CD players may have some very old built-in DACs, but one can feed the digital signal into a newer DAC via digital optical or digital coax output in most cases. Several streaming companies have some of their music that is higher quality than CD bit rates (sort of like SACD is higher than CD). Usually the streaming companies charge more per month to access their higher than CD bit rate music. More and more newly recorded music is available at higher than CD quality on streaming services, but it depends on the recording. Some labels have gone back and re-released (but not remixed) their old CD recordings to be able to stream them at higher bit rates, since in most cases professional recording equipment originally recorded them at higher than CD bit rate/quality.

me too

Really? A Bryston that was harsh? Which model was it? How long ago was this? The ones I've heard more recently are very warm.

The 4B cubed and it was horrible.

@@barrypatterson1154 Compared to what other solid-state amps? Just curious, as I have no experience listening to Bryston.

McCormick, PS Audio BHK, Parasound, Pass Labs, Gryphon and even Rotel sound better than Bryson. The best sounding solid state, in my opinion is McIntosh.

@@barrypatterson1154 BHK models have a tube input stage, so they are sort of a hybrid design.

If it has no issues, and the price is right, why not? Listen and see for yourself.

Not everyone agrees that CD's played from a local disc player sound better than streamed CD's. Not to mention that there is a lot of recordings that are now streamed at higher than CD quality bit rates (but usually costs more pre month to access them). As far as volume, that doesn't necessarily mean that one source is better than another just because it is louder. Volume matching must be done before making any other quality comparisons.

I meant CDs vs Tidal/Qobuz.

Thank you for the clarification. And I agree FWIW. In fact, I might suggest that a great CD transport could deliver even better SQ than streaming from one's local network, depending of course on the quality of the components. And in my experience, there is considerable improvement in SQ when using an I2S connection if available and supported by transport/DAC. @@adrianlow2114

I'm with you and agree with Adrian. I have a Innuos Zenith where I can play both the ripped CD and the Tidal or Qobuz version of the same record from the same unit, DAC, cable, etc. I found that the CD version usually plays better than streaming. However, that was particularly true with TIDAL but I recently switched to Qobuz because it sounds better in my system (Tidal vs Qobuz). Ironically, fiber to the home also improves sound compared to cable.... As far as Hi Res files are concerned, even with classical music, it's not always necessarily better. I believe that the quality of the mastering and recording are probably more important than the bitrate/Mhz

@@alpro3714 Yes, the quality of the recording/mixing/mastering is extremely important. But if the same recording is released in CD and SACD, then one would expect the SACD to sound better (obviously if played on a SACD player). Same applies for Hi-Res (now called MAX on Tidal) vs CD. of the same recording. I am not sure that I could tell the difference on a blind test, but I am pretty sure that on my system, the CD doesn't sound better. I have tried this test, because before I got Tidal, I already had about 400 CD's, and I compared some of them after getting Tidal. But not all Tidal recordings are available in MAX (Hi-Res) and it costs $20 USD a month to get access to the MAX versions (only $10 per month to get the CD quality versions). I use the iFi Zen Stream, and I have fiber optical Internet access. Tidal previously used MQA format on at least some hi-res streams, but I think MQA went bankrupt or something, and Tidal no longer talks about MQA anymore.

I know this is silly, but I don't think they should have chosen Legacy Audio as their brand name. Doesn't exactly sound like state-of-art. Also, the aesthetics tend to have a low WAF (generally big and boxy).

@@Mark-rw3kw Looks like you are saying Legacy Audio looks cheap and doesn’t sound good. Have you ever tried them in your system?

@@kennethlui2268 I have never heard them. I meant the name Legacy does not make one think of a modern design. They seem to get good reviews.

@@Mark-rw3kw well, I don’t use the name to judge their products. They could be old school designs but old school can sound great. It all depends how they execute it.

@@kennethlui2268 I was just trying to explain why maybe they aren't particularly popular, not how they sound. They are generally large clunky designs and might not fit into everyone's living room, but might be perfect for a home theater or man-cave audio listening room. I have been aware of them for many years (from audio magazine advertising). They initially only sold their speakers on a direct-to-consumer basis going back to 1983, even before the Internet, but now have retail dealers. If you live near Springfield IL, you can visit their showroom and demo all of them, or find a dealer.

Expensive.

@@Mark-rw3kw 👍

I was about to say that! lol. Or to paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart when trying to define porn ... I know it when I hear it! haha

Adrian didn't disagree with you. What he said is that he can't carry every brand because some brands don't allow more than one dealer in the same city, and for each new brand that AE carries they would need more listening rooms, and have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars buying demo equipment and having a bare minimum of stock on hand to sell. AE recently started selling Martin Logan speakers because one of dealers in the Toronto area had gone out of business (or stopped selling Martin Logan, not sure which), so AE could start selling them.

Really, the question is CD (or streaming CD) or vinyl. But the answer depends to some degree on how the music was originally recorded. Back when recordings were done using analog tape recorders, tape hiss always existed to some degree, even if it was mostly surprised by professional noise reduction systems. So I don't think anyone wants to go back to analog tape recordings of the performance. Some prefer vinyl playback, but then there are those occasional ticks and scratches, and every time you play a vinyl record with a diamond stylus, some of the vinyl is removed or changed for the worse. The problem with some digital recordings is that they are mixed to be played back on iPhones with earbuds, and when played back on high-end audio equipment they are too harsh and obviously people don't like that. But for a well recorded and properly mixed digital recording, it has the capability (if done right) to more faithfully (compared to vinyl) be able to sound like a live performance in your living room, if you have the right equipment to play it back.

I agree that a high-end audio dealer can only carry a limited number of brands, but that is different than a auto dealer. The answer is not "they don't." The answer is that some dealers don't allow more than one dealer per city, and even if they did, the retailer cannot afford to buy demos and inventory and listening rooms for a large number of products. If it was less expensive gear, that would be more economically feasible, but I don't think some people understand that the retailer has to purchase up front all that stuff on display and in their inventory (it's not given to the retailer on consignment). As far as serving Mexican Food and Italian Food in the same restaurant, I have seen that once, but I didn't have the courage to try it.

Yes lol. Guess I did lose you