[jtwrace]

Why would it take a year or two to put the already designed modules in a bigger box?

[AmpDesigner333]

Regarding interconnects....
In-line version: ultra short speaker wires, long interconnects
Tabletop version: short interconnects, normal length speaker wires

Regarding "plug right into the speaker"....
Some technical challenges to overcome.  One was mentioned (speakers deviate).  Another is size/weight, and yet another is connector selection.  Still, we are thinking about it, a lot.

Regarding the screws on top....
We intend to use black screws with flat washers in production.  We ordered them in Torx and Philips drive versions so we can see which looks best.  Countersinking didn't pan out (kind of a pun there).  We plan a wood or glass top option as well.  New photos will be posted as soon as they are available.  Actually, we are looking for glass suppliers, so if you know of a company that does this, preferably in the PA/NJ area....

It's a pleasure to get everyone's input on the Maraschino.  Thanks for the compliments, and please keep the comments coming!

[AmpDesigner333]

Why would it take a year or two to put the already designed modules in a bigger box?

It's not that simple, plus there are many other things on the schedule in the meantime.

We're all about superior quality, so no "just throw it in a different box" for us!  A new motherboard design is a major task, plus there are lots of electrical and mechanical issues to work out.

Other companies are interested in Maraschino technology as well, and just supporting them is lots of work.

Thanks for your post.

[jtwrace]

Other companies are interested in Maraschino technology as well, and just supporting them is lots of work.

Cool.  Can you elaborate on this?  Who?  What.....?

BTW-I never said to throw it in a box but it's not that hard.   

[AmpDesigner333]

Cool.  Can you elaborate on this?  Who?  What.....?

BTW-I never said to throw it in a box but it's not that hard.   

Don't wish to elaborate at this time!

More pics on the way soon.....  Maybe I'll tell you what my kids said after we get some AC feedback.  Thanks as always! 

[mamba315]

Glad I ran across this thread.  Two-channel amps with integrated power supply would be great as "amp packs" on 2-way actives.  Earlier in the thread, you said that power can go much higher but eventually at sonic expense.  Do you have a rough idea on where that power level lies with a supply made specifically for the Maraschino?

Mono units with integrated power supply would be great sub amps too.  Maybe goose the power a bit for this application?

I'm looking at this for an upcoming 8-channel "stereo" system.  4-channels for active 2-way main speakers, and 4 channels for sub "swarm."  Every speaker/sub built with amps attached.  Volume/crossovers/EQ will be handled digitally.  All 8 amps fed via balanced XLR.  Maraschino could do well here.

So I bring up power from my perspective, as food for thought.  All the various speakers I may bring into this system can take copious amounts.  Geddes Abbey is definite, and possibly others.  Danley SM60F, Ohm Walsh, and Pioneer EX all appeal to me for various reasons.  I consider 200W/400W/ch into 8/4ohm a good target power level for the main speakers.  This will be adequate with the Geddes and Danleys for home use, although both can handle more power.  It's not clear how much power the Ohms can take but some veterans swear by their 500/1000W amps for best dynamics.  So while a really clean 200W/400W amp wouldn't be theoretically enough to max out these speakers under all circumstances, it should be enough for 99% of real world use.  Most of my listening isn't very loud but I don't like excuses when the volume does rise a bit.

Sub drivers can often take massive amounts of power too, some between 1000-2000 watts.  300/600W seems like a good start, and 500/1000W even better.  I completely "get" that this is likely outside the Maraschino design spec, so I'm not banking on this as much.  Still, class D makes tons of sense for sub amps, and while common wisdom is to use any old thing for the subs, I think they deserve a little love too.  If you make too many compromises, they start adding up!

Anyways, appetizing stuff Tommy.  Looking forward to reading more about them.

[AmpDesigner333]

Any comments?

[AmpDesigner333]

Glad I ran across this thread.  Two-channel amps with integrated power supply would be great as "amp packs" on 2-way actives.  Earlier in the thread, you said that power can go much higher but eventually at sonic expense.  Do you have a rough idea on where that power level lies with a supply made specifically for the Maraschino?

Mono units with integrated power supply would be great sub amps too.  Maybe goose the power a bit for this application?

I'm looking at this for an upcoming 8-channel "stereo" system.  4-channels for active 2-way main speakers, and 4 channels for sub "swarm."  Every speaker/sub built with amps attached.  Volume/crossovers/EQ will be handled digitally.  All 8 amps fed via balanced XLR.  Maraschino could do well here.

So I bring up power from my perspective, as food for thought.  All the various speakers I may bring into this system can take copious amounts.  Geddes Abbey is definite, and possibly others.  Danley SM60F, Ohm Walsh, and Pioneer EX all appeal to me for various reasons.  I consider 200W/400W/ch into 8/4ohm a good target power level for the main speakers.  This will be adequate with the Geddes and Danleys for home use, although both can handle more power.  It's not clear how much power the Ohms can take but some veterans swear by their 500/1000W amps for best dynamics.  So while a really clean 200W/400W amp wouldn't be theoretically enough to max out these speakers under all circumstances, it should be enough for 99% of real world use.  Most of my listening isn't very loud but I don't like excuses when the volume does rise a bit.

Sub drivers can often take massive amounts of power too, some between 1000-2000 watts.  300/600W seems like a good start, and 500/1000W even better.  I completely "get" that this is likely outside the Maraschino design spec, so I'm not banking on this as much.  Still, class D makes tons of sense for sub amps, and while common wisdom is to use any old thing for the subs, I think they deserve a little love too.  If you make too many compromises, they start adding up!

Anyways, appetizing stuff Tommy.  Looking forward to reading more about them.

 

Yes, there is a path to KW power levels, but this is going to take some time.  Maraschino is SUPER clean at any power level.  It's a matter of heat dissipation and the power supply.

By the way, digital crossovers get me very excited!  The ultimate digital system should power each driver individually.  This system sounds (pun) wonderful, and I'd like to hear more about it.  Some photos, perhaps????

[gregfisk]

Tommy,

The black screws on the red top look much better! I guess I'm not a fan of the natural wood look, at least not on something like this. Maybe stain the wood black?

These little amps do look really good how ever you end up making them. I really like the bases and I really like the red!

My 2c, I hope this helps...........

Greg

[jtwrace]

Any comments?

Ugly IMO.

[munosmario]

Ugly IMO.

Ugly??? Your "IMO" qualifier does not make the cut as an element  of the basic courtesy, civility or diplomacy that Tommy's efforts and persona deserve. I wonder what empowers you to declare so categorically that something is ugly...you, for sure may scream to the four winds that, personally, you DO NOT like something.... but an abrupt declaration that it is "UGLY" without any constructive observation? I thought the assumed  role of  an AC "volunteer" as a moderator implied moderation from the "volunteer" as well

[AmpDesigner333]

Ugly??? Your "IMO" qualifier does not make the cut as an element  of the basic courtesy, civility or diplomacy that Tommy's efforts and persona deserve. I wonder what empowers you to declare so categorically that something is ugly...you, for sure may scream to the four winds that, personally, you DO NOT like something.... but an abrupt declaration that it is "UGLY" without any constructive observation? I thought the assumed  role of  an AC "volunteer" as a moderator implied moderation from the "volunteer" as well

Well, technically, I did ask for comments!        My kids agree, pretty much, for what it's worth.  They say the wood looks too "busy".

Thanks for your kind words either way.

[watercourse]

When you said a wood version, I thought you meant the entire top part of the case would be wood, rather than a "cap". A wooden enclosure would look way better than the wooden cap, even in a single "block" or even a single elongated, slim and taller rectangle rather than two cases joined together... but board shape/size limitations might be controlling of what cases can look like. Not sure what you have pictured is an aesthetic improvement over the red and black modules.

I guess this is a more polite and verbose way of saying "ugly", and therefore not an improvement.

[srb]

I think all binding posts should be insulated versions.

Steve

[genjamon]

I know, I know!  Put it in a box the actual shape and color of a cherry!

[mfsoa]

The Maraschino's I've been lucky enough to audition in my system for the past few weeks use countersunk, flush, silver phillips head screws. I don't know if final production will go this way but I like the fit n' finish the flush look gives.

Not crazy about the wood top - looks disjointed from the base.  And if Tommy asks what we think and 100% say "It's UGLY!" then that's the feedback he's looking for (IMO and knowing him). I doubt T has a hint of negativity toward jtwrace's nice and succinct comment 

BTW I posted a little review the other day, copied here:

The past few weeks I have had the good fortune to play with a pr of Tommy's Maraschino amps. As many know he is a friend of mine so the requisite "Audio Buddy" disclosure has now been performed  Thumbs Up

Full technical details, as I know them:
Frequency Response: Low to high
Distortion: Probably not much
Input impedance: Some
Power consumption: Just a little
Weight: Light
Power output: Enough
Cost: Yes

Seriously I don't know squat about specs or measurements, or even if these are final production units.

What I can say is that they are powered by Elpac switching power supplies, 48V, 220 watt output. Because T claims the amps to be very efficient even for class D, lets figure about 200 watt max output. I haven't come close to stressing them out. He is thinking of other power supply options and I suggested maybe battery but I don't know if batts can do 48V. I think T said he can goose lots more power out of them depending on the pwr supply. I'd like to see them mounted in a Cherry case w/ the same big-ass transformer I already have. Drool

The amps are quite small, maybe 3"x4"x5" and light due to the external power supply. I don't know if these are in the commercial chassis or not.

I don't have them hooked up optimally, meaning I use my standard 1M XLRs and my standard ~10 or 15 foot biwire runs of speaker cable (strewn all about the floor!). In an ideal install I'd use long cables from the pre and really short speaker cables. In fact I have seen Tommy hang them from the speaker input jacks w/ just a few inches of cable. I think it'd be bitchin to have a pr of amps for each of my my biwired Von Schweikert VR4JRs but alas I have to slum it with 1 amp per speaker for now.

OK now the hard part - What do they sound like? In comparison to my Stereo Cherry w/ the mondo 1800 VA transformer, the Maraschinos sound more detailed and faster overall. Little subtleties seem more apparent, like the decay of notes, that second melody line that adds to the score, stuff like that. I think T said these amps run at many times the switching frequency of the previous Cherries (which were already fast) and it sounds like it. In my system they have excellent, very detailed bass performance but don't seem to have the sledgehammer bass of the big Cherry. I like sledgehammer bass. I wouldn't call the little guy's bass lightweight, but it doesn't grab you like the Cherry bass does.

But the detail, speed and ease of the Maraschinos is wonderful. Never etched or hyper, just effortless and precise. They are very quiet which makes me think I need to get my Cherry back to Tommy's lab for a checkup.

What else to say, they sound great. The true test will be when I hook the Cherry back up but that'll have to wait until Mr. T can hear his little pups in my system.

Sure do wounder how 4 of these would sound...

-Mike

In the review, I glossed over the fact that I'm auditioning a Convergent Audio Technology SL-1 Ultimate preamp at the moment, and the difference from my VAC Standard MKII is easily heard through the Maraschinos.

-Mike

[AmpDesigner333]

The Maraschino's I've been lucky enough to audition in my system for the past few weeks use countersunk, flush, silver phillips head screws. I don't know if final production will go this way but I like the fit n' finish the flush look gives.

Not crazy about the wood top - looks disjointed from the base.  And if Tommy asks what we think and 100% say "It's UGLY!" then that's the feedback he's looking for (IMO and knowing him). I doubt T has a hint of negativity toward jtwrace's nice and succinct comment 

BTW I posted a little review the other day, copied here:

In the review, I glossed over the fact that I'm auditioning a Convergent Audio Technology SL-1 Ultimate preamp at the moment, and the difference from my VAC Standard MKII is easily heard through the Maraschinos.

-Mike

Thanks, Mike, as always.  You are correct about the feedback on aesthetics.

Can you post a photo sometime?

[Boulevard Theater]

When can I get my hands on it. Everything you build is stunning work. I know these little beast will rock the house. Please let me know when I can get a pair need them for MGM project I think they will fit perfectly.

[mamba315]

Yes, there is a path to KW power levels, but this is going to take some time.  Maraschino is SUPER clean at any power level.  It's a matter of heat dissipation and the power supply.

By the way, digital crossovers get me very excited!  The ultimate digital system should power each driver individually.  This system sounds (pun) wonderful, and I'd like to hear more about it.  Some photos, perhaps????

Very happy to hear that KW power is possible.  This broadens its applications to the PA world as well.  If that sound is that clean it should do very well indeed.

No photos of what I describe yet, as I have only begun collecting parts.  Although the system topology is set in my head, much of the details are still subject to change.  But yes, I think you get the jist of what I'm planning and I also believe this to be the way forward.  "Then why isn't everyone doing it?"  Because it's bloody difficult!  Not difficult to build a system with this topology, but to make it both elegant, user friendly, and sonically amazing is the real trick.  Always better to aim high 

[munosmario]

The Maraschino's I've been lucky enough to audition in my system for the past few weeks use countersunk, flush, silver phillips head screws. I don't know if final production will go this way but I like the fit n' finish the flush look gives.

Not crazy about the wood top - looks disjointed from the base.  And if Tommy asks what we think and 100% say "It's UGLY!" then that's the feedback he's looking for (IMO and knowing him). I doubt T has a hint of negativity toward jtwrace's nice and succinct comment 

-Mike

Sorry, gentlemen, but the fact is that, in Reply #66, Tommy posted TWO pictures. it seemed clear to me that he was asking for "comments" about each one of them (inviting to some constructive comparison, I gather). jtwrace's "nice and succinct comment" was a categorical "ugly" without referring in particular to any of the two pictures posted by Tommy and without offering any constructive comment--unlike everybody else contributing to the thread. So, it appeared to me that jtwrace was condemning both of Tommy's efforts as simply "ugly" with no further comments...my sincere apologies if that wasn't the case and I failed by not giving jtwrace's extremely succinct comment the benefit of the doubt. Ironically, Mike, I though you were part of Tommy's "esthetics committee

In any event, as Mike says, the condition of ugliness is a judgment based on a general consensus of the totality of respondents disliking something because it totally offends their aesthetic sensitivities....but now, a consensus of respondents may dislike something compared to something else, but that does not imply, at all, that the relatively disliked something belongs into the "ugly" category (as previously defined)--the consensus, in this case is one of relative preference, not of offended aesthetic sensitivities...I, for one, do not feel offended by the wood rendition, I prefer the plain red metal with finer screw work and with that massive base...what material is that black looking base? Marble, granite?