Yes, that McIntosh looks sweet, if rather decadent.
I too listen to 95% of everything with the tone controls set firmly at flat. But it is that 5% of things that require some adjustment that concern me. What are you going to do when you have a harsh, jagged top end that your $3000 tone control-free "purist" preamp just can't tame? I say this based on hard won experience, as I did once own just such a "purist" preamp (and tossing an outboard equalizer into the chain would degrade the signal far, far more than well-designed bass/treble controls).
Quote:
| It's different strokes for different folks. From my experience there is a reason why your average audiophile, ahem, preamp, does not have twenty buttons per square inch and a huge screen and a zillion connections. It makes things sound worse, period. |
I happen to agree with you 100%. I never said anything about 20 buttons per square inch, flashy LED screens, etc. Odd exceptions like the McIntosh aside, the average decent preamp is and should be rather minimalist. Flashy bells and whistles-laden mass market mediocrity is not what I am talking about, at least not when it comes to talking about obtaining decent sound! Seems the only difference in our preferences is that I insist on having a bass and treble control and you don't. My preamp has volume/balance/selector/bass/treble (and headphone jack!) and that's pretty much it. Which is what I want - and all I want.
(I've never heard the McIntosh amp pictured in this thread, and featurewise, it looks like decadent overkill [with a price tag to match], but I'm willing to bet that it does not sound like your average Yamaha/Sony ES amp. Even so, I think a Van Alstine preamp would give it a good run for its money, and at 1/5 the price too. And, yes, Van Alstine will give you the option of whether you want tone controls or not.)
Quote:
| Pricey "boutique" stereo components are not just to catch peoples upscale $$$ eyes. They SOUND different. Many people can't hear the difference, or care about the difference. Fine, but don't put down the other side of the fence. |
You misinterpret what I had said. Of course they sound diffferent, which is precisely why I am NOT sitting here listening to the likes of Sony ES amps. But I still maintain that if I am spending upwards of $1500 on an amp, I don't think it is too much to ask that said source features high quality tone controls and headphone amp - and many do! Lack of (in my opinion, necessary) features is NOT synonymous with quality.
Quote:
| If you want all the gadgets fine. But I can hear the difference, and afford the difference. |
I don't consider bass and treble controls as "gadgets". Nor do I think a built-in headphone amp is a frivolous ornament. Multi-band equalizers and LED screens, on the other hand, yes, I do believe they are useless distractions (usually distracting from the sub-par quality of the component in question).
I'm glad that you can discern sonic excellence and can afford to buy decent equipment. The only problem I have with your implied line of reasoning is that:
1) Lack of tone controls does not necessarily equal superior quality. Far from it. Whichever the design approach, there are good ones and there are bad ones.
2) There are many top quality components which do feature tone controls and heaphone amps. How do you think your amp would sound next to the McIntosh, for example? (Which I am willing to bet costs more than whatever you are currently using.)
Just how DO you tame the occasional badly mastered CD/LP (usually CD, admittedly) when the need arises? I went through this once in my life - a CD drilling my ears and my $2000 preamp could do nothing about it. That is when I decided that my next purchase would include tone controls. As I said, 95% of the time I do not need them, but it's nice to be able to use them if the need arises.
If you do not want tone controls, fine. But please do not assume that your preference reflects an objective truth about hi-fi design, because it most certainly does not.
