[markl]

[size=small]Firts Impressions Don't Lie-- Or, How Could I Have Ever Doubted You, O RP010; Or, The Mind Is a Terrible Thing To Trust...[/size]

The necessary follow-ups to my initial gushing impressions of the marvelous Rudistor RP010 have gone missing up until now. OK, you didn't necessarily notice this

, and that's fine, but normally, my reviews are far more extensive (alright, verbose) than this one has been so far. So why have my follow-ups not appeared until now?

In short, I panicked.

In the beginning, I had around 3 days (if memory serves) to compare a fully burned in Rudistor RPX-33 to a brand new RP010 before I had to send the former to its new owner. In that time (and at that time), I felt it was obvious which one was superior (RP010), hence the purple praise heaped upon the RP010 you may have read earlier in this very thread.

Then something happened. DOUBT creeped in. Wait a minute-- stop the presses-- I think there's something WRONG here. But what? Impossible to identify on its own, need a reference to verify. The RPX-33? Ugh, I just sold it.

Honeymoon over, I thought I started noticing a couple *things* about my blushing new bride. Issues my old reliable mistress (Rudistor RPX-33), didn't seem to have, or that I overlooked. Despite all of her great new additive and heretofore unheard assests/qualities, I was starting to suspect my new RP010 might be *missing* something. A fatal flaw?

On the one hand, it took me several weeks to first start "hearing" this flaw, so it's not like it was some glaring, obvious thing. It took time to first locate it. But it was at a level where I wasn't sure if my mind was playing tricks on me or not.

Had I succumbed to the syndrome of "I paid more for it, therefore it must be better?" Although I'd proven impervious to this before, prefering many lower-cost headphones/amps/cables/tubes etc., maybe it had happened to me this time?

In a panic, and after several weeks (and some not-so-subtle arm-twisting), I managed to buy back my old RPX-33 from its new owner. I just had to know if the old flame had a little extra va-va-voom my new one didn't, or whether I had gone completely crazy, dizzy with Audiophile's Disease.

As it happens, I had gone crazy.

After around 9 hours of further furious A/B-ing (level-matched with my trusty Rat Shack meter), I can conclude that the RP010 is absolutely superior to the RPX-33 in every way. Yet not in a slam-dunk, obvious, "oh hell ya" way. The difference is appreciable, worth-while, but it isn't the kind of thing that SHOUTS at you, because the ways in which the RP010 are superior aren't necessarily in those glaring, strident, in-your-face areas. It's a musical piece, not a piece of whizz-bang, phony "Hi-Fi".

What did I learn from this expensive experiment?

1. First impressions don't lie. This is a trite cliche, but it's true. I've often said I trust my first impressions most to let me identify a new piece of gear's basic traits and character. I feel like that's when I'm freshest and most receptive to noticing big differences between two components. This experience re-inforces that for me.

2. First impressions are faulty and should be ignored. Wha?

Yes, first impressions tell you where the major differences are, but only long-term exposure to a piece of equipment can tell you whether or not you actually like or dislike those differences more or less than what you previously knew. It's easy to spot when a new component sounds *different* from the current one. It's a simple knee-jerk reaction to decide that because it sounds *different*, it must therefore be *wrong*. Only longer-term listening will reveal whether the current component you know and trust is in fact right or wrong compared to the old one. You have to overcome your own mental conditioning which is fully burned in on (and tacitly accepting of) the old component as a basic presentation of fact. It may not be.

3. Component burn-in is not always a linear process. A particular component may not necessarily go from BAD to GOOD on a continuous upswing with each hour of burn in. I already knew this, as I had experienced it many many times in the past, but my experience here re-inforces that many (not all) new components can sound GREAT straight out of the box, but then develop issues that get slowly ironed out only with further burn-in. I think the RP010's burn-in followed that kind of warped curve. I now have over 250 hours of burn-in on it, and it seems to have settled. I feel no real hesitancy at claiming un-even burn-in effects, as the burn-in nay-sayers will deny a linear burn-in just as strongly as a non-linear one. They're both equally crazy propositions to them. Oh well.

4. Psychological burn-in is real and has to be compensated for. Different components put a different em-PHA-sis and different syl-LAB-les. You need to learn the particular accent of each new component you audition before you can decide if it's speaking the language correctly. "Different" isn't always "wrong", though it can sound that way at first (or second) blush, and it's all too easy to dismiss it, even when you shouldn't have. It's very easy to react positively to the brighter, shinier, flashier piece of gear and find it "better"; after all, it sticks out more, it's more *obvious*, more apparent. But over time, that can become sugary, sweet, grating, annoying, or just plain false and fatiguing. You gotta watch for this.

5. A/B comparisons that are not precisely level-matched are simply invalid. It's an unfortunate psycho-acoustic fact that every component or piece of music that is LOUDER will be rated BETTER by almost all listeners, including YOU (and me), the die-hard audiophile. IMO, you need to carry a Rat Shack level meter with you to every Head-Fi meet and do careful measurements before you decalare any amp superior to another as you are highly liable to be mislead and fall into the trap of LOUDER is better. I did not level match in my early comparisons of the RPX-33 and the RP010. I think this had an effect on my initial conclusions and my subsequent worry.

6. The truth hurts. Just because a certain amp reveals a flaw in your source you hadn't heard before on other amplification does not make that a "bad amp". You can't take it out on your amp when you know darn well your source is at fault. The truth hurts, and you don't want to retreat to a soft-focus, fuzzy-warm and forgiving amp to hide a bad source. IMO that's a very bad strategy, and an unsatisfying band-aid on a real problem. The more transparent some gear is, the more it's liable to reveal the faults of upstream gear. So it is with the RP010. I was already going to do a source upgrade, but now it's a dead certainty.


OK, so where and what are the differences between the two, and why is the RP010 worth the price when it's almost double the RPX-33? Notes to follow.

But really, I'm feeling strongly that it won't be until I get my new source (a couple months away) before I can really fully and fairly evaluate the RP010).

 

[milkpowder]

Dammit Markl, your 6 "lessons" ring so true! I was saying "Amen" and "Hear, "Hear" after every sentence. This is a must read for everyone. I'm glad you're enjoying the RP010.

So the RPX-33 sounds better than the RP010 when the former is played louder? Hell, I'm gonna save myself some dosh, pump up the volume and go cheap

Looking forward to your long-term impressions...

 

[Sovkiller]

Maybe a source upgrade is must now to hear the best out fo the RP010, don't stop there, go, go, go...

 

[slwiser]

Sounds like you have found a point of diminishing return. But I bet you learn that the 10 "kills" the 33 soon with your new source whatever that may be. Have any plans on what source would give the 10 a stretch?

 

[markl]

Oh, yes I do, but it's top secret for now.

Suffice to say, it ain't cheap in stock form, and I may very well have it modified to within an inch of its life. Of course, I'll post about it on head-Fi...

 

[slwiser]

Markl

With your following on several boards, AudioEngr should pony up with his new concoction and let your drive it a while. If it is as good as he suggests this would sell several for him and make a reputation over-night with his new DAC.

 

[Zuerst]

So is your RPX33 avaliable for sale again? If so, I got first dibs.

 

[markl]

[size=small]The "Sound" of the Rudistor RP010[/size]
I put "sound" in quotes because how do you describe the sound of nothing?

It's "dead neutral" without the "dead" part. I always get nervous when I read reviews of gear that are praised for their "neutrality". I usually end up finding them overly dry, thin, laid-back, and lifeless; the word "inoffensive" being a better descriptor. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

But not to worry, the RP010 is "good neutral", not "bad neutral". It's "transparent" in the proper usage of audiophile jargon, in that it's totally open to the source signal; it is not "transparent" in that yucky ghostly, see-through, hazy, foggy way.

So, that said, let me do my best to describe the RP010, with occasional contrasts with the RPX-33 since it's my previous reference point:

1. Post burn-in, the RP010 has no identifiable frequency humps or valleys. Rudi has great ears, this thing is voiced *perfectly* (IMHO). I know he spends a LOT of time listening to his amps-- tweaking and swapping parts to get them to sound the way they do, and I think it shows. Badly-voiced gear has spikes and valleys that constantly call attention to themselves every other second, taking the listener out of the experience of the actual music and reminding him he's listening to mere *audio equipment*. The RP010 doesn't do that; it doesn't over-emphasize any area of the frequency response, or leave anything out. Nothing is spot-lit, jagged or glaring. There was a slight and gentle roll-off at the top when the unit was new; that's the main area that changes with time. Rudi says the amp shouldn't need more than 40 hours burn-in, but IMO, it's closer to 150 to get all the way there. Shhhh, don't tell Rudi I said that.

2. The RP010 is absolutely glare-free. It has none of that mechanical, metallic, artificial, sugary shiny-ness you can sometimes associate with lesser solid state, or even lesser digital gear. It's totally missing any of that steely brittle-ness and sheen that screams "Hi-Fi", instead of "music".

3. I think the RP010 would change the minds of a lot of tube-heads about the necessity of using those glowing valves as tone controls, or as "analog-izers". IMO, the myth that solid state can't get the music's tone right is pure hogwash, and Rudi's amps prove that. One of the biggest appeals of tubes is their ability to even out the flow of the music, filling in the missing digital bits on primitive Redbook CDs, providing a more continuous, natural, "analog" sound, allowing you to see INSIDE the music. The RP010 does the same thing. Even if you can't consciously "see" the gaps in 24-frames-per-second movie film, it does register subconsciously, and when you are suddenly shown something at say, 100 frames per second, the difference is clearer. The image is more stable, less flickery, more solid and natural. That's the kind of effect I think the RP010 provides, just like a tube amp. But without all the tube hassles.

4. The best word to describe the RP010 is "organic", followed by "natural". It has that same holistic, full and complete sound like you get with some tubed designs. It sounds real and not "Hi-Fi". But it's not soggy lush or gooey sweet like you can get with tubes. I can't get over how REAL it sounds, it's just uncanny. Dudes, it's positively EERIE. YOU. ARE. THERE. You're literally in the studio with the band as the tape rolls. By way of a fanciful analogy, I would say it's as if the RP010 constructs the music out of the actual molecules of the original CD or SACD, instead of constructing it out of its own supply of the same molecules of which it's made. Other amps impose their own stamp on the sound, the music is always made up of and constructed from the same stockpile of basic DNA. It always resembles the mother it came from, namely the amp. Not so the RP010, each CD/SACD sounds totally distinct and like itself. This takes some adjusting, and it's not consequence-free. It means that not all of your favorite albums sound like they used to, and it can also reveal some recordings as not being as realistic and natural as others, although I have yet to hear a CD that the RP010 makes sound at all "unpleasant", that's just not its nature. There is something to be said for gear that applies the same stamp onto every piece of music it plays, provided that bias is one you agree with 100% of the time (but for me, I've yet to encounter such a device). OTOH, that means your gear will always have a kind of "same-y-ness" that can get boring over time. It also means you are missing a lot of nuances, character and flavor of your favorite recordings.

5. The soundstage on the RP010 is HUGE, bigger even than the RPX-33. You are in the front row, not in the back of the amphitheater. The sound is dimensional and fully-formed and surrounds the head. The individual instruments are better defined and separated on the RP010 than on the RPX-33. You can easily "see" each and every element of the mix without straining. Also, the singer takes a step-and-a-half forward on the RP010, separating itself from the mix, and putting it front and center where it belongs.

6. The bass on the RP010 is second to none. Tuneful, full, solid, defined, tight. It's punchy, crisp and impactful when it needs to be, and never less than satisfying. The RP010 is also a tiny bit faster and more nimble than the RPX-33. The RP010 is definitely a head-bobber, a toe-tapper. It fills in that last octave of bass more completely, where the RPX-33 has a bit more mid-bass "bloom".

7. The RP010 has even more resolution than the RPX-33. I hate the word "detail" because it suggests overly-exaggerated, compressed, in-your-face sound, and that's not what the RP010 delivers. Bad gear with lots of noise compresses the sound to shove low-level detail up above the noise-floor. Good gear has such a low noise floor, they allow the sound to breathe and let LOUD sounds sound loud, and quiet sounds to sound quiet. But details occur naturally, rather than being overly spot-lit. Such is the RP010. It's more focused and decidedly less grainy than the RPX-33.

8. The Rudi's are emotional, involving amps that pull you in and make you a particpant in the joyful expression that is music. They aren't clinical, beard-scratching products that hold you at a reserved distance. They demand you turn them up and boogie, and what's more, they won't shred your ears to ribbons when you do.

9. I wonder how much this amp would appeal to younger ears. I suspect younger ears with ADD are looking for that ultra Hi-Fi, whizz-bang sound that nails you in half a second flat, with a big "WOW" effect. I know because I went through this myself; inexperienced ears are more quickly drawn to instant gratification, but that kind of sound gets old and fatiguing very soon. If you are into listening to whole albums instead of individual songs, the difference is more crucial. The RP010 emphasizes and plumps up the middle of the note, rather than sharply dilineating the outer edges of it which artifically stimultes the ear by having sharp edges with hollow innards. The sound of the RP010 isn't sharply outlined in big black marker; the highs don't slice, grate and blare. They are at exactly the right volume level to ensure a natural, realistic sound. The Rudi's provide a full, robust, solid, and complete sound. I think more seasoned ears are drawn to more realistic and life-like tone where everything sounds *real* (which is very hard to get right), rather than an over-baked synthetic sound where everything sounds *WOW* (which is really just a cheap gimmick in the end). The RP010 does the former, not the latter.


Final Thoughts
In a little while, I'll be getting a new source which will be considerably more expensive than the one I have now (which isn't cheap to begin with and has been heavily modified by Reference Audio Mods). The point is, I believe that my current source (great as it is) is more likely a bottleneck on the RP010 than the other way around. I expect that only with a new, truly absurdly high-performing source will I get all I can out of the RP010. It's so honest (but not *brutally honest*), that I feel confident it has what it takes to reveal every nuance of whatever shiny new source I buy. I can't wait!

With regard to the difference level between the RPX-33 and the RP010, exactly how much more performance does the RP010 buy you? I can tell you that (and this is no lie or exaggeration), over the last 2 days, I've swapped each amp in and out at least 60 times. Every time, the results were the same; the RP010 came out ahead. But not necessarily by all that much. They share a similar base sound, and that's no small thing. But in the tight curves, at 120mph, where handling is crucial, the RP010 simply holds together better. It's more "present" and solid. It's more resolving. It's more stable and consistent. It's "bigger" and more enveloping. It's more articulate and precise. It holds individual sounds/tracks in the mix together better. It simply has better tone and sounds even more life-like.

How much are all those differences worth? Totally subjective. For me, well-worth the cost, but I've got a pair of headphones more than capable of revealing these relatively small differences. Not everyone has an R10. I also predict (but can't yet verify), these differences will become much more pronounced once I upgrade to an insane-level source.

The bottom line is that the Rudistor RPX-33 is a giant-killer amp that is so incredibly satisfying, it could easily be priced at twice the cost and still not disappoint. The RP010 is meant for and deserves ultra-high-end systems that will allow every last drop of performance to come through.

Rudi deserves a hearty "congratulations" and "thank you" for blessing us headphone geeks with two such extraordinary amps. If for you (like it is for me), music is strictly about *enjoyment*, and you believe that mere *equipment* is just a means to an end (rather than an end in itself), I feel strongly that either of these extraordinary amps will make you grin from ear to ear. Rudi's stuff is for music lovers, not for gear-heads. Forget about tubes, they just aren't necessary once you have properly designed and voiced solid state. Believe it or not, you can get tube sound without tube limitations.

For what it's worth, I can gladly give my most enthusiastic and most heart-felt THUMBS UP to the Rudistor RPX-33 and most especially the amazing RP010.

 

[dizzyorange]

Well you've convinced me

 

[donunus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsaavedra /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your reasoning goes completely against the law of diminishing returns of high-end.

diminishing returns? That statement is for non audiophiles. To paranoid audiophiles, the most subtle things that one gets from uprading from a 5000 to 500000 dollar amp is the most important thing in life

 

[slwiser]

Seems to me to be one to many non-sequiturs for me.

An amp that is truly: glare free, transparent, dead neutral

An amp that is organic, natural, errie, and emotional at the same time

hummm....

But I have no doubt that this is one extremely good amp. I understand it is hard to reach for the stars and touch them. This is what makes Markl such a great reviewer. He can make you feel that he has actually done it.

Another great review, Markl.

 

[Sovkiller]

This is all you need now....

 

[purk]

MarkL & Sov,

How much better is the RP010 to the RP7? I recently auditioned Mulveling's RP7 and it was quite impressive with the HD-650 w/ Zu out of my highly modified SCD-777ES. Is the RPX33 better sounding than the RP7 or just a different flavor?

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purk /img/forum/go_quote.gif MarkL & Sov, How much better is the RP010 to the RP7? I recently auditioned Mulveling's RP7 and it was quite impressive with the HD-650 w/ Zu out of my highly modified SCD-777ES. Is the RPX33 better sounding than the RP7 or just a different flavor?

I like the RPX-33 better using the headphones I have on hand, the soundstage is bigger, instruments separation feel to be better as well, and I feel it like more natural sounding, the RP7 tends to be a little sharp for the CD3K and Edition 9, the RPX-33 is dual-mono, and the match with those low Z headphones is terrific.
OTOH the RP7 is an hybrid amp, and for the HD650 the RP7 is one hell of a good match, a really wonderful amp, among the best I have heard.

Depending on the headphone to be used, I would rather recommend one or the other, but if you let me give you a better suggestion, the best you can do with the HD650 is driving it balanced. Even a humble balanced amp will be an step over (NX-33 will drive it nuts)...In SE mode, I do not think that you can walk too much more, of what you already heard out of the RP7...

 

[purk]

Sov,
Thanks. I felt the same way. The RP7 did a great job with the HD-650 but only so so with the R10 and L3000. My DHA3000 is a better match to the R10 and L3000 than the RP7.