[Middy]

One strange effect I have noticed is that after 10 mins of warm up I get a small jump in sound volume and a bit more detail.reducing the volume still has the extra clarity.? ??

Maybe the grease becoming less viscose?
Reduced resistance or better conductor??

 

[BIG POPPA]

It's called getting into focus. A rig gets there in about an hour or so.

 

[Middy]

Ah Cheers BP... Me being the nervous type..After applying the Mapleshade Cilclear and getting the volume jump I thought I'd broken something.....

Wasn't straight away though...

Have a good one

Dave 8^)

 

[johnjen]

In my normal course of tweaking, it usually takes an hour or so before there is a noticeable change, which hangs on for the next several hours of use.
But usually the first 10 hrs starting at ≈2hrs of continuous use, the SQ will peak, which gives me a clue in terms of if the tweak is a step up or not.
Then the SQ morphs and gets less focused, then more, then less, etc. for 2-300 hrs. of use (and sometimes more).
 
This pattern has been consistent for just about every tweak and change and experiment I have made.
I wish I knew why and what is really going on, but these SQ shifts and changes are probably not something that is measurable, at least by any 'standard' test I am aware of.
 
This trait of shifting and changing over several hundred hours really slows down my rate of experimentation, since I need to wait until the SQ stabilizes before I determine if the latest tweak is a keeper or not, before trying the next tweak.
 
JJ

 

[landroni]

  In my normal course of tweaking, it usually takes an hour or so before there is a noticeable change, which hangs on for the next several hours of use.
But usually the first 10 hrs starting at ≈2hrs of continuous use, the SQ will peak, which gives me a clue in terms of if the tweak is a step up or not.
Then the SQ morphs and gets less focused, then more, then less, etc. for 2-300 hrs. of use (and sometimes more).

 
This pattern has been consistent for just about every tweak and change and experiment I have made.
I wish I knew why and what is really going on, but these SQ shifts and changes are probably not something that is measurable, at least by any 'standard' test I am aware of.

 
This trait of shifting and changing over several hundred hours really slows down my rate of experimentation, since I need to wait until the SQ stabilizes before I determine if the latest tweak is a keeper or not, before trying the next tweak.

 
JJ

Ouch! 300 hrs --- that hurts. So much for instantaneous DBT'ing cables, tweaks, etc.
 
But 300 is really a lot -- that's two weeks. Is it possible this is related to reaching some kind of thermal equilibrium, as the Schiit DACs are famous for?

 

[BIG POPPA]

With 300 hours , you are convincing yourself. With true blue tweaks, it should be very transparent . Don't try something because it might do something, try something because it will do something. Bold thoughts, bold tweaks..... Great insight, some work, some do not. Just the way it goes. My 2 cents

 

[johnjen]

 
Ouch! 300 hrs --- that hurts. So much for instantaneous DBT'ing cables, tweaks, etc.
 
But 300 is really a lot -- that's two weeks. Is it possible this is related to reaching some kind of thermal equilibrium, as the Schiit DACs are famous for?

The "thermal" explanation is insufficient in my book.
That is to say yes it is involved, but is only one aspect of several others, all of which contribute to what is going on.
In my experience there is aging and 'acclimating' of all active and passive parts that is of much greater impact and importance.
 
Think of it this way…
Each component in a piece of new electronics has gone thru 100 hr's of being on and functional.
This is the factory burn in testing, mostly to catch infant mortality issues, before they are more expensive to fix (return to the factory for repair).
But what I hear is a gradual coming into focus which can take, again, several hundred hours before full stabilization and peak performance is achieved, at least in my system anyway.
That isn't to say the SQ is bad, but it is to say when it reaches 'optimal' operating condition it (the SQ) IS Way better.
 
 
I pay close attention to the SQ and keep track as it changes in a daily log.
 
I have been seeing this pattern for quite a while.
You may not notice this in your system.
 
However with mine it can be rather 'pronounced' at times, like when it heads into the ceramic throne.
Only to emerge on the 'other side' performing way better than it was before the swirling, gurrgling, event.
 
The thing is, as the overall system SQ improves, everything, all the time gets better.
Which means even when the system isn't performing at it's peak it is still WAY better than it was.
IOW even at its off peak times it has all of the aspects I have documented previously.
 
But when it peaks, um, like ahh, that's when new words come up to describe the new capabilities.
Like right now, I'm on the cusp of establishing a new SQ peak.
All the indicators are showing, go for throttle up…
 
Yeeeehaaaaaawwwwww…
 
JJ

 

 

[johnjen]

Recently "trending" in RCA connectors is a reduction of contact patch size, going away from a full "collar" to a single small contact point. See Nordost, Eichmann, and others.

Go figure.

I've been thinking about why they would do this and the reason that I can see for it is to maximize via clamping force and 'tight' metal to metal contact patch, a more robust connection, instead of using that same amount of force spread over a larger area.
 
This would insure a more 'positive' and controlled contact patch with very little chance of any contaminants 'getting in the way', so to speak.
 
So over the long haul, where folks don't maintain their connections ( ie. cleaning and 'resetting' the metal to metal contact patches) 

this 'new' approach may work 'better' for them in the long run.
 
Still it does work best only when the male rca connector stays fully inserted, with no droop.
 
And speaking of cleaning and maintaining the contact patches for xlr connectors…

 
I think I may have found a 'proper' set of cleaning brushes for 3 and 4 pin xlr female connectors.
The male pins are easy to deal with but their female counterpart, not so much.
I should be getting these small brushes in the next few days to see how well they will work.
 
JJ

 

[Middy]

I got some mid size interdental wire brushes. They became a little crushed so maybe too big. Not sure if the go deep enough.
Let us know what you are using.. and overall results.


Good luck
Dave

 

[johnjen]

So this is the brush set I just received.
 
The smallest is 1/16" and the largest is 3/16"
 
The smallest (1/16") works very well on 4 pin XLR and the next 2 sizes larger work on 3 pin XLR's
 

 
Also the 2 smaller brushes down from the biggest, work on the female rca center pin connection.
 
JJ

 

[Middy]

Are they fibre/plastic or metal brushes JJ?

 

[johnjen]

The shafts are stainless steel with nylon bristles
 
JJ

 

[johnjen]

For those who have experienced the situation where the focus of the SQ 'snaps' into place, you will be able to relate with what I am posting.
 
I HEARD the Beattles White album, for the first time, ever.
Yes I was around when it was first released and have listened to it countless numbers of time prior to today.
 
When my system 'stabilizes' while reaching a 'peak' in the SQ, what I usually experience is hearing my music, as if anew.
 
And after a time, the rate of improvement in reaching new 'peaks' of SQ, begins to slow down, but doesn't stop.
It continues to increase and in new ways, as more and more of the system gets out of it's own way.
 
And I ALWAYS get enchanted when hearing My MUSIC as if for the first time, again.
 
JJ

 

[johnjen]

My latest SQ observations…
Star Trek had its holodeck, where ‘solid’ objects were manifested into physicality.
Right now my Holo has an added ‘edge’ or a sharp boundary to each ‘voice’.
This manifests as a more refined outline or definition of each acoustical object within the soundstage.
 
I attribute this to the coming into focus of the last 2+ tweaks that are now stabilizing.
The Akiko sticks/canisters have added greater levels of inner and micro-details.
I call this change Tuubz where the SQ has the added harmonic ‘richness’ that tube circuits are famous for.
 
And the 2nd Wyrd has further refined the dimensionality of the soundstage.
This is related to C3 (cohesive, coherent, coupled) where each ‘voice’ is more focused and its relationship to the music is more ‘integrated’ into the whole experience. 
Somewhat related to PRaT (Pace Rhythm, and Timing) where the music is more involving and sucks you into it with SuperGlue like consequences as a result.
 
In addition I further modified the Wyrds and added a bypass cap to the Wyrds 2 main power supply filter caps.
Yes this does effectively void the warranty, so if one (or both) should die due to component failure I can’t/won’t claim it’s a warranty issue, especially now that I have announced to the headphone world that I did in fact mod the Wyrd (with pictures etc.).
However the net effect of performing this tweak is hard to attribute to specific auditory changes, but in every other case adding a bypass cap has always improved the SQ.
And granted this is the first time I have used this trick to a digital component, as all of my previous uses of this tweak were on analog gear (amps, preamps, speakers, etc.).
But I know it can’t hurt either, and since the results of this mod improve the ability of the big electrolytic caps to ‘respond’ more quickly, I can see where digital circuits would also benefit from a power supply that can ‘respond’ more quickly as well.
 
 

 
 
But this new and improved Holo is providing a much more ‘solid’ and precise auditory image of the entire sound-stage, as well as for each ‘voice’, and also as they interact with each other and the acoustic space they occupy.
I’d say that these 2+ tweaks are mutually compatible and reinforce each other quite nicely.
And perhaps this is but an itty bitty baby step towards that Star Trek holodeck solidity. 

 
 
JJ

 

[johnjen]

So my latest fussings deal with my near-field speakers, the $40/pr. Daytons which I have tweaked and tweaked some more.
And now tweaked again.
This time I went hardcore and hardwired some ANTICables directly into the boxes, bypassing the wimpy speaker terminals (choke points) on the back.
 
These ANTICables cost 2-3 times the price of the speakers ($125) for a 4' length of bi-wired solid 12-AWG (effectively 9-AWG) straight from the amp into the boxes.
This is MASSIVE overkill, sort like The Rok is for these speakers.
 

 
And thus far we both have heard changes already.
Pam (who listens WAY off axis) notices greater clarity of instruments and can understand the lyrics mo-bettah.
And I am hearing new nuances to all the 'voices', and greater coupling, as in the sound carries better throughout the whole house at lower volume.
But they (ANTICables) recommends ≈100hrs of break-in, which held true for my previous experience with their cables as well, so I need to wait for a more complete evaluation.
 
For those not familiar with ANTICables, for their speaker cables they use a single strand high quality copper with a very thin dielectric coating (no plastic or rubber jackets), and in my case (bi-wired) there are 2 strands for each polarity.
These strands are fairly stiff, as you might imagine since they are 12-AWG each and so they tend to 'stay put' where they are placed.
 
I was using 14-AWG Coleman Cable zip type speaker cable, which I found at my local hardware store, which was WAY better than the 22-AWG cable supplied with the speakers.
But this cable had started to corrode inside the jacket, so it was time to replace it.
 

 
 
ANTICables are fairly inexpensive (by comparison) and deliver very nice SQ, especially for the price.
 
JJ