[David Ellis]

Gents,

I did an a/b test this morning with Scott Endler's stepped attenuator's. I have some good news and bad news to report.

First, the good news: Scott's Attenuators really do sound better than my Creek OBH-12 remote volume pot.

Next, the bad news: It's now clearly obvious the majority of backround instruments on my Andrea Bocelli Sogono CD are completely synthesized.

My wife hasn't confirmed my findings yet, and unfortunately will not tolerate the lack of a remote control & switching in our upstais (main) system. Hence, while Scott's attenuators do sound better, they will be again relegated to the basment attached to my VanAlstine Ultimate 70.  My basement systems will remain very respectable.

Scott's site is:

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4c5pt/

[brj]

Any idea if they could be mounted in a simple chassis and then coupled with the Bent remote control unit that was originally designed for the DACT stepped attenuator?

[Jon L]

Gawd, this reminds me I have a pair of Endler attenuators sitting in my closet, not even hooked up once to my system.  I picked them up on Agon for fun to compare w/ my EVS ultimate attenuators, which sound better than even Placette Passive.  

I know, I know, I am so laaaazzzyyy...

[David Ellis]

Any idea if they could be mounted in a simple chassis and then coupled with the Bent remote control unit that was originally designed for the DACT stepped attenuator?

I... really don't think so.  The ground for the resistors in, it's current humble configuration, is attached directly to the casing of the RCA plugs.

Scott's attenuators are a budget item with regard to cost.  They sound great, but aren't adorened with "bells and whistles".

Scott might be able to come up with another version to accomodate chassis mounting.  I encourage you to contact him directly concerning this.

I should be very clear in 1 regard.  I have not compared Scott's attenuator to other stepped attenuators or the Bent TX-102.  It seems there are a few folks who have accomplished some formal testing.  My results simply confirm their results.  Scott's attenuator is a great sounding product IMO at a killer-cheap price.

Dave

[GHM]

FWIW Scott does a have chassis mountable version. I have a 24 step 4K stereo unit mounted in a custom made battery powered integrated chassis.

[David Ellis]

FWIW Scott does a have chassis mountable version.

Very cool.

[David Ellis]

Also,

I noticed in your remarks this comment:

Home brewed 16 awg solid core silver speaker wire

Where did you purchase the silver?  Is it 7/9 or better?  Also, was it insulated when you purchased it?

[GHM]

Hello David I purchased the wire from Hoover and Strong.
I purchased the teflon from McMaster -Carr.
This is the process I used in making my speaker cables Make your own cables.

As far as purity ..mine are 99.9% silver wire.

[MemphisJim]

Hi Dave-

Did you listen to a specific one? He offers two different models - an 11 step or a 24 step. The 11 step seems to be half the cost. I'm curious to know whether or not there is a difference in performance?

Thanks,
Jim

[David Ellis]

I listened to and have the less expensive 11 step flavor.

I must also add that I have no desire for more steps in the attenuator and that the spacing was very decent.  

One of my systems favored settings higher on the volume knob.  The other favored settings in lower on the volume knob.  In either case, the spacing between each step was easily tolerable.  I have no desire/need for more steps in a volume control attenuator.  

I think Scott's 11 step unit is an easy winner

Dave