Hi Cincy_Bob,
Did you do the bottom too? I'm glad it helped. Forgot, which one did you get? Looks like I am not getting notifications so I am just now catching up on this thread. Sorry for the late reply.
Ray
Hi again,
Did you put any BHP under each trafo? a 2.5x1 will work nicely. What that seems to do is to add a bit of delicacy to offset that politeness. A bit more inner detail. I'm not sure I agree with the dynamics part of that. I am currently evaluateing some cables, and like the snap of a snare drum is definitely there. Now, if you put the piece under the transformers and make it 3x1, that will defintiely night and day change the character of the TVC. Don't know why. It adds some "tube bloom" which at first sounds really neat. But you also loose detail.
Ray
Ray -
I bought the Reference Dual-Box TVC with brass top and bottom plates and copper wiring. I was brave enough to tackle the bottom of the transformer, so I went through with the full modification that you had recommended (i.e., four pieces of BHP per transformer). Since I have the dual-box unit, I did not use any separate pieces of BHP on the inside of the brass top plate or bottom plate (except that the BHP adhered to the bottom of each transformer does come into contact with the bottom plate and, therefore, serves a dual purpose of dampening both the transformer and the bottom plate).
On the bottom of each transformer, I mounted a piece of BHP that was very close to - if not exactly the same - size that you had recommended. You had recommended a 2.5 inch x 1 inch piece. I know my length was exactly 2.5 inches, and the width was between 1 inch and 1.25 inches. So it is possible my pieces were just a bit wider.
It is good to know that the unit is very sensitive to the size of the BHP on the bottom of the transformer. At some point, I will probably take the TVCs apart again and measure the exact dimensions of the bottom BHP pieces.
Regarding my comment on dynamics, I did not mean to say that the dynamics of the component were compromised by the BHP mod in a way that was detrimental to the sound. I think that the sound of the unit after the BHP mod is more balanced and refined. Before the mods, there was a bit of a raw, unrefined character to the sound coupled with a tendency toward treble brightness. While these were certainly traits that are not desirable, I think there was also a sense of extra punch and vitality to the music that came along as a by-product of the nasties. When the BHP mod tempered the runaway treble frequencies and brought a sense of refinement to the sound, I noticed that the "punch and vitality" were tamed a bit as well. I should note that I am running a very high resolution system, which lays bare any subtle changes in the sound.
Overall, I think the BHP mod is definitely the way to go, and the dynamics - after the mod and after the unit is fully burned in - are excellent (i.e., on par with my reference active line stage preamp). So my comment on dynamics was really just an attempt to describe the sound before and after mods. I get the feeling that the undampened resonance in the stock version of the TVC causes a bit of an exaggerated sense of punch and dynamics that comes along with a bit of an unrefined character and an exaggeration of treble brightness in recordings that tend in that direction. I also get the impression that there is probably no way to retain the extra sense of "punch" while at the same time resolving the undesirable characteristics. That's just a guess based on what I experienced with the mod and based the way the TVC sounds in my system at this point after about 500 hours of run-in.
I might, at some point, experiment with tweaking the size of the BHP mounted to the bottom of each transformer to see what sort of effect that has on the sound and whether that changes my perspective.
Thanks again for all your assistance, Ray!
- Bob
