I want to have faith in Ray Samuels Audio... but I just don't - Page 8

Read it while its still here, then youll know...

Yes, I think you do. Why? Because there are those who are less interested in the topic being discussed, and more interested in dumping fuel on the fire and reveling in the chaos that ensues.

I'll give you another reason: because the site owner wants this site run the way he wants it run. You are free to disagree with it, but this is not a taxpayer funded, government run site...his house, his rules.

Perhaps you should dust off Lord of the Flies while you're at it...might prove to be instructive. Perhaps a reading of Oliver Twist could help ease your pain by providing perspective.

With regard to the OP, he asserts that he is simply trying to discuss what he thinks must be design issues. He appears to be seeking some basis to justify his decision regarding his amp/issues. Fair enough.

That said, it's also not completely unfair for others to question his motives. He had a bad experience with a RSA amp. He returned the amp and received a refund. To most of us, that's a no harm no foul situation. Not everything works out the way we want it to, and every manufacturer, no matter how careful he is, occasionally produces a unit with issues. I've returned things that just didn't work for me...I'm thinking that most of us have.

What most folks don't then do - assuming there are no ridiculous customer service issues (do a search...there are some nightmarish issues out there) - is actively seek to have others post negative things about that manufacturer - to CREATE an issue - which conveniently supports their decision.

To coin a phrase, I want to have faith in his intentions...but I just don't.

There are some folks who don't like Ray Samuels Audio gear. There are also some who like it very much...I would dare say that there are a lot MORE of the latter. I also feel certain that most manufacturers who are active and/or well represented on this site are in the same boat. I'm not sure I trust anyone's opinion but my own with regard to how an amp sounds - that includes positive AND negative reviews (which, btw, I think carry a weight that is disproportionate to their real value, AND encourage piling on by parties interested only in a flame war). So, I'm ultimately not really sure what community service is performed in starting a thread like this.

As an aside, did I read where the OP paired a Raptor with Sony SA5000's? I'm not so sure that, problems aside, there's not an issue of synergy there. Furthermore, anything I had to say about the Raptor would have little value to the OP, as I simply hate the SA5000's. Just my $0.02...

Finally, with regard to design: so long as it's not a fire hazard, or prone to unreliability, I could care less if the internal circuitry of my amp consists of fish heads, chicken bones and eye of newt...so long as it sounds good to me (and didn't smell bad...though I could live with it if it sounded REALLY good ). I suspect that this is why nobody has stepped forward to "defend" RSA's designs - those who are happy with their RSA products have no need to seek answers in design issues for their dissatisfaction. They are satisfied...end of story.

Well, if you would kindly read the first post the OP asked to provide details on possible good or bad design elements of Ray's circuits in response to some of what he has read and experienced. He specifically asked for no mention of Ray's character and so has the moderators (the moderator also asked no more mention of conspiracy or the book topic). Again, you should probably try to read some more before posting again.

This thread is not for most head-fiers at all including myself. You need technical knowledge beyond most... not conjecture or off topic comments which should be kept to oneself on all threads. My one cent of advice.

EDIT: Lets not even talk about experience with how it sounds unless it can be directly related to technical info as evidence to a problem or even a good design element! I don't have an opinion, but I don't care how much you hate or love it, not the point.

The only problem here is when a moderator steps in like you just did to defend a MOT, it only fuels the 1984 attitude. While it certainly is your right to do so, keep in mind what effect it has. I will now abstain from this debate, sianora.

i don't think this thread in its current form is that useful anymore. if a mod wants to edit some of it and reopen it, that's fine.

You're free to think what you like. I'm here, primarily, to keep the peace. You can believe that, or not. I'm not so much defending an MOT as I am generally questioning the value of a thread like this one.

I'm also expressing my own opinion about the OP's motivations for starting this thread. I express those not as moderator, but as a member who cares about this site. I've seen a LOT of threads like this one, about a lot of different manufacturers. They typically add zero value, as most quickly degenerate into either flame wars or catcalls about censorship. Pick your poison...

I also feel certain that, without moderator involvement in a thread such as this one, the relevant book would be Lord of the Flies, not 1984. Again, pick your poison...

Finally, if anyone wants to see "censorship" in action, then by all means feel free to keep up the 1984 talk. Going forward, any issues that any of you have about moderator actions shall be handled off-line via PM. Such posts in a thread such as this one are the living embodiment of a thread crap.

Mods have every right to post their opinions. I question the motivation of the OP but the thread is open so others can read and make their own judgments. I am not defending Ray by questioning the OP motivation. I don't own any RSA gear and haven't for a while. If elrod-tom or I wanted to help Ray, the thread would have been deleted a long time ago. If being a mod means I can't express my opinion then I would probably resign. What good is it to be a mod on a website, do all that we do so you can hopefully enjoy the site and then not be able to express our opinions so we can also enjoy the site. Everyone knows we are mods, if they choose to believe that we aren't credible on any particular subject because we are mods, they are free to do so.

These debates about whether design A is superior or inferior to design B from a "technical standpoint", or on paper, or in theory, or on Plato's ideal abstract plane always mystify me, frankly.

There's only one measure of how good an audio product is, and that's how it sounds *to you*, in your system with your your ears. Wow, it's the latest, greatest design, but it doesn't move you or involve you in the music, so what is its value?

I couldn't care less how some machine that goes "ping" feels about any one piece of gear. Machines don't listen to or appreciate music. I also ignore what some other egg-head has to say about the schematic for another builder's amp. You can spend all day trying to hook up your ICS to his new and improved schematic, but you can't listen to it.

I couldn't care less if I open up an amp I love and see a plate of jell-o inside. I don't care if the design is from yesterday or 40 years ago. I don't care what the schematic looks like. None of these things matter.

HOW. DOES. IT. SOUND. Does it give you pleasure, make you happy, connect you to the music more than other similarly-priced pieces of audio gear? If so, stop worrying about what's inside, because it's meaningless. All that matters is what comes out of that box and goes to your ears.

The way I read the op, is that he had heard of a certain design implementation and that this particular design had some kind of inherent flaw. He wanted to ascertain if rsa products feature this kind of design as it may have helped him answer the question he was left with with regards his amp experience from this manufacturer.

Seems a fairly reasonable enquiry... if I have read it correctly.

To want to ascribe a particular experience to any kind of explanation or answer is surely a genuine pursuit?

This thread is just hot air, a waste of time, and to me started in bad taste -the way it has spiralled out of control is good for a laugh thou

to OP.
Why do you need faith to a particular amp designer/maker?
Is there any reason you don't want to move on and find something you like ?

I am nearly 100% in the same camp as markl and I'll assume, after my qualification, he and I likely see eye to eye on this.

First and foremost, beyond sound, I want saftey. This is something not talked about often on audio forums unless a design is so seriously flawed units are lighting on fire or failing left right and center. If I can't feel safe operating gear, who cares how it sounds?

Supposing the circuit is fine, the build quality is safe, then sound is all that matters to me too. I may prefer various circuits overall (SET for instance) but I won't turn my nose up at a competing design from a tube circuit or an ss one just because it isn't SET. A good sounding amp is a good sounding amp, nuff said.

IF! a certain piece of equipment has failed or is failing, then it is a benefit to the community if one posts about it. IF! a piece of gear has a flawed design and someone with a keen eye and the requisite background knowledge to identify it properly is able to do so, I would hope 1) they would contact the manufacturer first and let them try to sort it out 2) if the manufacturer is non-responsive, then said poster ought to feel comfortable in posting about it here to discuss with other knowledgable folks. It is the only way people like me, who are clueless about EE and electronics will be able to steer clear of such products and manufacturers who don't take these matterse seriously.

Regarding the OP, does Ray not stand by his products? Are you not able to send back units to him for repair, often times free of charge? If so, then what is the overall problem? If there are ANY serious design problems, post ACTUAL data in the DIY forum, get feedback from others, discuss with Ray or if another company's product, with said designer to have the situation resolved. These types of threads are pointless when someone stands by their products. If they aren't well then, that is cause for posting. But is there any proof that this isn't happening in your hypothetical? If no, then move along, we don't need the drama.

Good point!

I agree. But if we consider how many amps Ray has sold over the years (making him at least one of the 3 best-sellers), how many return customers/upgraders he gets, and yet it took until August 2008 to find him out as the bad designer of defective gear he always was, gimme a break!

It's inevitable that some people will not always love Ray's gear, that's why we have so many amps to choose from. Now, I had an issue some time ago with the Raptor and Stealth being able to fully drive the demanding R10 enough to satisfy me, but that doesn't necessarily mean his design is flawed (or wouldn't have worked wonders with some Sennheisers for example), as I have yet to find a tube amp that does it for me like good solid state. Ray's HR-2 never had any such issue for me and the R10's, but it should have if indeed his basic designs are all "flawed" someohow.

But I wouldn't have known of these successes or issues simply by looking at a schematic of Ray's amps. I had to *listen* to them first.

When I indicate issue, I mean hazard...like starting a fire or exploding Inability to properly drive headphone A...meh, trial and error on that one. Not all units are capable of all things.

Agreed with the volume of his gear, obviously some units will fail, no need to freak. Talk to amp manufacturer personally and privately. IF there is no resolution, I understanding complaining. IF! there is a flaw in the design however, post away if nothing is done about it.

I think this thread would get more hits from the proper people if it was moved to the DIY section. I know it doesnt seem to belong there but it always seems to comeback to finding opinions from DIY people who can comment on circuit design. Maybe alter the Thread name so it is more fitting. "DIY's, how do you feel about circuit design in Ray Samuels amplifiers? So on and so forth.