Do you want a Balance control on the kit Linestage?

hagtech · « **on:** 24 Dec 2003, 04:01 am »

I've got the "Clarinet" tubed linestage prototype up and running. Clean right off the bat, measures great, but needs some critical listening.

My question: Do you want it to have a balance control?

I'd like to rip as much stuff out of the signal path as possible. Meanwhile I am working with Bent Audio to closely integrate their IR remote control into it as an option. Yeah, build the linestage with pots, or full remote control (volume & select).

jh

mgalusha · « **Reply #1 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 04:32 am »

Jim,

Yes and no... Not very helpful is it? There are certainly times I would like a balance control but for the most part I agree, the less junk in the signal path the better.

Are you planning of offering the Clarinet as a kit or 1/2 kit? If so, perhaps a balance control could be an option. You can edit your post to act as a poll, might help keep track of the answers.

mike g

Tone Deaf · « **Reply #2 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 09:12 am »

I agree, balance control is very handy for those of us who don't always sit right between the speakers. I'd like the option to build one in.

Regards
Glyn

Rocket · « **Reply #3 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 09:39 am »

Hi,

just my opinion but most audiophiles would rather have a purist approach and not have a balance control.

as an example my n.e.w. preamp has the balance control disconnected from the signal path.

jim, any ideas how much you would consider charging for your kit or half kit?

regards

rocket

ps have a happy xmas everyone.

Tonto Yoder · « **Reply #4 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 12:14 pm »

This is probably a case of "the grass is always greener" but I've upgraded from a B&K Pro 10 (with balance but no tone controls) to a Melos SHA (no controls) to a BAT VK-3i (no controls). I've always believed in the purist approach mentioned, but I kinda miss the balance control of the B&K.

Doc Jr 8156 · « **Reply #5 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 04:28 pm »

Hello,

Alas! A new Hagtech product in the horizon. Can't wait. In my opinion, the balance control offered as an option in building this linestage will be the best choice. For those who want it (me included), it is already included in the design. Some of us have rooms not suited for central listening (between the speakers) and a balance control can sometimes act as an alternative for room correction. Jim, could you design a tube amplifier next. Pleeeeease! Imagine a set-up consisting of a tubed CDP, TT, Cornet, Hagtech linestage and Hagtech amps, SWEEEEET!

RogueAngel · « **Reply #6 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 05:16 pm »

Great idea, say 50 or 60 watts/ch in either monoblocks or a dual mono stereo amp.

Ivan303 · « **Reply #7 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 05:31 pm »

Jim,

Don't know what you have planned, guess it might have been discussed before, but balance control as an option only has merit, also remote control would be nice for those of us that (horrors) listen to a lot of FM

Is there more info on this board that I missed?

Tonto Yoder · « **Reply #8 on:** 24 Dec 2003, 08:47 pm »

Is there some drawback to having dual mono volume controls (and hence balance control)?? You HAVE to have volume control, so this would seem to avoid adding any extra circuitry. I remember the Superphon preamp doing it this way and there must be others I can't think of.

tianguis · « **Reply #9 on:** 25 Dec 2003, 02:21 am »

Jim:
Since applying things I learned at VSAC, my system has progressed in leaps and bounds. The "purist" approach doesn't always yield the best sound. I've found, through using a Behringer DSP, how far from ideal my non-dedicated "listening room" is. I'd been chasing channel imbalance for several years . Measurements showed me how much the room mattered. The DSP allowed me to adjust frequency response and channel volume to obtain balanced sound with flatter frequency response, although channel balance seems more important in my room. I could live with a less-than-flat response but I'll never again live with channel imbalance.
The "optional" dual-volume approach makes sense to me.

Regards,
Larry Welsh

pretzel_logic · « **Reply #10 on:** 26 Dec 2003, 02:12 pm »

I agree with others here about the dual volume pots or making the balance pot an option. I think a balance control would be better than dual pots due to the fact the dual pots, if they are a little different from each other would cause problems, and whenever you change the volume it has to be done equally in series.

I would prefer the option of a balance control myself and if the stereo pot was quite equal on both channels I would have no need for a balance control. I am still using my cheap diy passive pre and the vol pot is definitely off a bit, left channel is a little louder and I can read it on my multi meter.

My vote is for the option of a balance control.

Brian

hagtech · « **Reply #11 on:** 27 Dec 2003, 03:18 am »

Thanks all!. Ok, it's pretty much a concensus - leave balance pot in. Option is to leave it out by jumpering, just don't drill hole in panel. I'll have to find another place to put IR receiver.

And yes, I am working on other new 1/2-kits. I have designed a matching monoblock push-pull power amp. A bit different, maybe only 5W, but no feedback. Designed for sound, not power. Bought parts, need time to build up some protos. Also started concept for a tubed DAC. Not a bandaid or afterthought, but totally integrated tube output stage. Hopefully the synergy will be apparent.

Thanks again for the suggestions!

jh

Tonto Yoder · « **Reply #12 on:** 31 Dec 2003, 10:42 pm »

Quote from: Tonto Yoder

...... I remember the Superphon preamp doing it this way and there must be others I can't think of.

I just realized the Response Audio amp opts for the dual volume controls--
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=7114

michael w · « **Reply #13 on:** 31 Dec 2003, 11:02 pm »

Quote from: Tonto Yoder

Is there some drawback to having dual mono volume controls (and hence balance control)?? You HAVE to have volume control, so this would seem to avoid adding any extra circuitry. I remember the Superphon preamp doing it this way and there must be others I can't think of.

Croft, Audible Illusions persist in using dual volume controls.
I think the old Motif preamp was also dual mono.

I find them a PIA to use.

JoshK · « **Reply #14 on:** 2 Jan 2004, 06:23 pm »

Wow Jim,

That is exciting! I have only built your frykleaner thus far but your product line up sounds truely interesting. I think you'll be hearing more from me in the near future.

© · « **Reply #15 on:** 6 Jan 2004, 04:33 pm »

i think some sort balance control is mandatory -- either dual volume controls or a dedicated balance control or separate input pots on the power amps.

my 2 cents, ©

coffeedj · « **Reply #16 on:** 12 Dec 2004, 07:23 am »

If you sit close enough to the speakers you can't hear the balance control. In fact if you sit there long enough you won't hear at all eventually.