If you had to choose only one from any of these exact scenarios, which one would you pick and why, assuming you had my current system (as listed in the signature) to start with?

1. Order the Super Zen with UFO Mods and Beeswax Caps plus Volume attenuator. Order a ZBIT and XLR IC's. Upgrade the DAC to a balanced, top-of-the-line Audio Gd NFB 7 (Sabre 9018 chip). Cost: USD 3,500.00

2. Order the Torii MKIV with UFO Mods (when these are offered, Beeswax Caps are std). Cost: USD 3,800.00 (est)

3.  Order the Torii Junior (Ultralinear, UFO Mods and Beeswax Caps Std). Cost: USD 2,350.00 (est)

4. Order a Yggdrasil, ZBIT, XLR IC's and beef up the Mini Torii with UFO Mods and Beeswax Caps, plus two volume attenuators. Cost: USD 3,750.00

Of course, on top of those estimated costs, there's a mark-up of about 33% (or more) for customs / shipping and handling all the way down here.

Thanks for any constructive opinions. I'm way serious about this.

What aspects are you looking to improve upon?  What is it about your current sound that you find lacking?

Hold out for the 6c33c mono blocks to at least find out where they are going to fall price wise within Steve's lineup.  My guess is they are going to fall in somewhere between a well optioned Rachel and a Torii MK IV.  You will have all of the benefits of the Super Zen SET greatness, plus extra muscle if you ever want to play with other speakers.  If they are pure mono blocks without line level inputs then also add the ZSB or a preamp of your choice, or a source of your choice that has a volume control.

The Yggy DAC sounds like it's going to be something special.  But also consider that reports from our forum users are stating that the ZDSD is comparing favorably to PS Audio's DS and the PSA DS is pretty great DAC IMO.  So with the ZDSD we're talking about getting in the area of a $5999 DAC for $1695.

I'm with Lon, Option 4 all the way.  It's a sure-fire upgrade.  Options 2 or 3 are like trying to pick between Gala and Fuji apples; one might be better but in the end who cares.  Option 1 is better than 2 or 3, but in that case I think you're changing too many things.  I assure you your amp is transparent enough to give you all the glory of the Yggy or top of line A-gd.

Owning both a Mini Torii and a Zen, I can promise you that with my Omega single drivers, the two amps sound very different.  If transparency and life and microdynamics are what you are looking for, you'll find it with the Zen which also provides for me more focussed imaging as well.  It's the classic front vs. back of the hall sound comparison.

Compared to the Zen, the M.T. sounds syrupy and slow.  The Mini Torii does provide an upper bass slam or "hit" as Steve likes to say that you may or may not miss with the Zen but oddly enough, in absolute terms, the Zen actually sounds like it goes lower into the deep registers and yes, the M.T. does sound more powerful.

I still rotate both amps in and out of the system and can enjoy them both for what they are.

Unless you really like to listen to your music loud, I'd think about picking up a used Zen.  It'd be the cheapest way for you to make a change based on all your above scenarios.

seikosha,

Thanks for your very valuable thoughts (as usual). Good points and nothing like a first-hand comparison experience to shed some light into my monofocal world of sound. Tradeoffs ... tradeoffs  ...

If you have not yet done it (probably), your statements take on even more weight when the Super Zen is upgraded with the UFO trannies Mod. It should be even better ... So the Mini Torii though, but still less resolving indeed.

I need to really think about this scenario 1 vs scenario 4 (2 & 3 are, like stated by ProggRob, inmaterial in a closed, small listening room, at normal volume levels and with my particular upgrade objectives).

Any other opinions, please? This inquiry has started to converge now ...Thanks!

Lon, I've always wondered why you never pursued a Mini Torii.  It's definitely got a soft sound and also a treble cut circuit.  Two things that you seem to enjoy.  I know in the past, you've stated that you don't like the tube set that the Mini Torii uses.  What specifically was it about the M.T.'s tube characteristics that kept you away from it?

I'd go for #1 myself, but this is based on hearing balanced Zen on ProgRobb's rig.  Also I think your speakers will play well with it.  

I only rule out #4 only because I have never heard the mini-Torii.  Could sound very good with that Schitt.

seikosha,
To be honest it was apples and oranges because all my tube use that I wasn't that crazy about was in guitar amps. so it's not an informed opinion, and I've never heard the amp.

And it's small. I kept moving up to large amps and I have gotten so used to the size of the Toriis. A superficial reason that was a minor inhibitor. I never was attracted to the physical look of the amp.

The real reasons are more practical: I had found the Torii then and it was a big committment and I was in the process of tailoring my system to that. And I had moved my system into my then big living-room/dining-room area and the Torii had the power I needed for this set up. Since then I'm back into a smaller room, but I'm a few monts away from an even bigger room, so the Torii is the best fit for me, and with the tube complements I've found (LOVE KT-66 in these amps, and the particular regulators and rectifiers i'm using are just so right) and the controls (I've found that the bass control is as important and as incredibly useful as the treble cut circuit) I've found the right balance for my source material and listening.

Quote:


I agree with this 100% - especially after hearing my ZMA in Rob's setup. The ZMA has so much going for it, but it's like a sledgehammer compared  to the little Zen's accuracy.

I'm hoping Steve's future monoblocks can bridge that divide between the the ZMA's consistent Godzilla like grunt, and the little Zen's transparency and accuracy.

DBC - I am also glad to see the amp get some attention!  Like you, I have augmented bass but it does not reach up to 150hz.  I cross over around 50hz with a 24/db/octave slope.  I've tried to run higher (80-120hz crossover point) but didn't have success; it sounded a bit muddled to me.  If you can successfully do so with the MBM, never let it go!

Fireblade - ""the Torii models (MKIII or MKIV) are more resolving, the Mini Torii is more musical and forgiving" Another of his quotes: ... the Mini Torii is slightly less revealing due to the more congested topography, relative to the Rachael""

Mini Torii from Steve's writeup: "If you've experienced both good single-ended and good push-pull you know the push-pull typically has more hit and authority in the low end. On the flip side, single ended amps have a transparency and midrange to die for so we're always left wanting both. The Mini Torii SE, thanks in part to the tube regulated input stage has a signature and a hit that makes you think your listening to a much larger amplifier, making classic and hard rock sound good despite being heard on a small single ended amp - rare. "

FB,

From the super-simple design of, and common experience of forum members with Zens, I have little doubt you would realize a shift toward greater transparency with a Zen. Also, you would sacrifice flexibility in tubes, adjustments, and loose some power. Also, I think you have explored tubes a fair bit with your Mini, and have modified Steve's signature this way, as well as tuning with room, speakers, cables, power etc.

Unlike you, I need the Torii's power in my rooms and with my speakers. But if I had accepted the Torii III or IV "out of the box" I would not have nearly the resolution and transparency, or the "just right" definition of body and bass that I have. I have made my amps notably more resolving with room, tubes, power, feet, and cables, and without abandoning sweetness.

And as you suggest in your options, I have also made the Toriis much more resolving with front end...DAC and computer...and treatments on them, power, software, feet, cables, USB power, etc.

I think your coming room treatments (diffusion), once sorted, will help your clarity of presentation and soundstage. In this context, if like my experience, (and it sounds like your perceptions relative to your sub) if you have some excess low end body/weight (even slight muddle) masking detail, and the upper mids/highs in balance, you likely have more resolution than you are hearing. If the low end is "filling in" a bit too much, suppressing the midrange/detail balance...the open spaciousness that can give the players place and saturation in the soundstage could be diminished or lost.

In my room, there is a relative line of frequency balance that does it all best. With a little too much sweet warmth and body, I can lose midrange and high end beauty. But with just enough low end, the mids-up awaken enough clarity to give the soundstage notably more articulation and saturation. Though different in each case depending on too many things, my bass issues here are mainly between 45 and 70 Hz and below 25 or so (at least it helps to dump with a 19-20 Hz low EQ shelf).

Relative to this, I wonder if more bass treatment that really resolves low down could possibly clean your Mini up to a satisfying level of resolution? This was the case here. The addition of the Torii "created" issues in my systems, but along with everything else that effects frequency balance, room treatment (including EQ) notably helped solve it. I wonder if you have explored measuring your space?

Also, in my systems, the Decware interconnects go low and can be unresolved low down, contributing to this issue (if it exists).

I know you have explored tubes, but am not aware of how much since I don't read the Mini Torii area much, so sorry if this is redundant to your process.

Like the MKIII and IV, the topology of your amp is more complex than simpler circuits, and though anything in the signal path effects resolution and transparency (and for better or worse depending how it is done), Steve has proven you can add adjustability really well with the Torii lineage in particular. And these things can be awesome for fine tuning a system.

For your situation, the VRs in particular occur to me. Mainly about clean power, but guessing it is like the bigger Toriis, they also effect the push on the power tubes and inputs. Correct?

It is so hard to guess what different tubes will do just based on the likes or dislikes of others, particularly since the sound of the amp is based so much on everything else, room being a big one. So as I am sure you have found, at times, great tube recommendations for one system could suck in another where the tubes push the system/room balance off too far one way or another. As you have found in your explorations, it is finally all about synergy based in particular system needs.

But there are characteristic qualities of tubes, and the right ones for any of your tube sets could no doubt open your sound and resolution depending on the right tube choices for your particular tonal balance needs.

Have you tried OB3s or OC3s. If like the bigger Toriis, these will definitely lower the push to the power tubes, reducing overall density, and in turn, increasing spaciousness and resolution in the balance. Then of course, like OA3s, each OB3 and OC3 sounds different depending on vintage and make, but they will incrementally lower density (notable lower down), while increasing resolution if density is overwhelming detail and balance, sometimes, even a little. If this works, it may require a little rolling elsewhere to fine tune, but being relatively inexpensive, worth a try.

Like your recent post, I wonder if you may be able pull "enough" transparency and resolution from your Mini, while retaining its great flexibility in tube choices and adjustments for your system. I have been working on this a long time, trying to refine that beautiful balance of amazing resolution with great bass, body, and sweet musicality, but I can take my Torii too far into resolution for sure.

DBC - thanks for the links!  I'm going to check these out.  Here's what I'm running (2 drivers per channel in OB configuration)

http://www.hawthorneaudio.us/catalogs/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&p...

I'm not sure these have any technical issues with break-up, resolution or speed at higher frequencies (within reason, of course, since they aren't full range), but rather a simple overabundance with frequencies 50hz - 150hz coming out of 6 drivers simultaneously.  "Integration" is the word I suppose I'm looking for.  I just sort of ruined things for me.  Of course now, I want to go home and try again!

Quick shout out to Will, who seems to be the tube master of the Decware forum!

Will, this is a quote from Steve's comparison between Rachael and Mini Torii:

"... This amp (meaning the Mini Torii) is also very at home in the listening room, but is more complicated due to the larger number of tubes,

So, yeah, the marketing speech is fine, but relatively speaking, a Jack of all trades, wonderful rolling platform and sensitive gainer is no contest to Super Zen or even the Torii when it comes to pure transparency. Same argument I've been raising about possible tradeoffs involved in the (conceptually at least) coming Ultralinear Torii Junior.

I've already settled on a quite balanced complement of tubes after trying even the OD3 (which to me, the farther you go down that 4 specs line of OA3 ... OD3, the flatter and mono-dimensional the sound becomes). True, OA3 needs a commanding and opening preamp tube like the Brimar 12 AT7 to put things in balance and then you get the best compromise.

Just my opinion. Thanks for your feedback, BTW, as always.

Lon, your last comments make sense to me. Thanks!

DBC, ProggRob and the rest of you guys, thanks so much for the inputs. I'm getting all this together to come up with an optimal upgrading path, which at worst will take a couple of stages over time, but will eventually be done soon.

(apologies for the quick thread hijack)

DBC - I am using a speaker level connection from the Zen to two (2) separate Rythmik A370PEQ plate amplifiers, 375w each into 4 ohms.  The Augies in each channel are wired in series to present a 4 ohm load to the plate amps.  The plate amps can crossover as high as 120hz with (I think) a 12db/octave slope, but no higher.

http://www.rythmikaudio.com/download/PEQ_quickguide.pdf

The mains are running full range, and play down to about 50-55hz before a very steep roll-off.

Will,

I think your coming room treatments (diffusion), once sorted, will help your clarity of presentation and soundstage. In this context, if like my experience, (and it sounds like your perceptions relative to your sub) if you have some excess low end body/weight (even slight muddle) masking detail, and the upper mids/highs in balance, you likely have more resolution than you are hearing. If the low end is "filling in" a bit too much, suppressing the midrange/detail balance...the open spaciousness that can give the players place and saturation in the soundstage could be diminished or lost.

In my case, the crossover with the SUB is 55 Hz, so no risk of invading higher frequencies and mudding the sound that way. Nevertheless, I miss some microdetailing in the zones next up and downd of the center midrange. I also notice lack of bass texture in the above 55 Hz (most important one) segment of the frequency distribution, until about 100 or 125 Hz or so, after which the bass comes neat and tight. The depth of the bass is also limited by my 8" driver SUB and probably the room itself, so I'm still considering a Deep Omega SUB, but it will be adressed after the main mods we are currently discussing.

I believe you are absolutely right in your assessments, I just have a different situation here than yours with different symptoms and (at least to me) all points out at a lack of resolution from either the DAC or the amp or both (probably both is right).

Thanks so much for your valuable feedback.

Hi Fireblade,

The Zen isn't a true balanced design, so yes, you could surmise that the balancing act here is palliative.  However, it does offer a couple of benefits:

1) It takes advantage of the best-sounding DAC output mode, in my case on the Schiit Gungnir.  This DAC is a true balanced design, and it allows me to grab the signal without the hardware summing in the DAC to single-ended output.  Of course, now I've moved the "artificial" balancing act to the amp, but it is handled by very good Jensen transformers selected by Steve, which leads me to No. 2

2) The amp is now receiving a 4v input instead of 2v.  I've compared the two options side by side and prefer the balanced inputs by a fair margin.

Last I checked the balanced inputs were only offered on the CKCS and the ZMA; you'll have to ask Steve if these inputs are available on the Mini Torii.

Rob

Hi Fireblade,

I have 2 points to share.

1.XLR to RCA
In my system, I am currently using a pair of Cardas Clear XLR to RCA adapters.
These are sonically transparent and do a great job for a reasonable cost at around US$250 to US$300 a pair.

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-752-cardas-clear-xlr-input-adapter-pr.aspx

http://www.cardas.com/adaptors.php

I have field tested these Cardas adapters in my system using
the CSP3+ with Beyer T1 headphones and
also in my Zen Torii MK4 with Zu Audio Soul Superfly speakers.

My Oppo 95 player has 2 simultaneous audio outputs, RCA and XLR.
When the XLR output was converted into an RCA signal using the Cardas adapters, there was absolutely no loss of transparency when compared against the native RCA signal.

2.Torii MK4
If you ever decide to get a Zen Torii MK4, the EL34 is more transparent than the KT66 output tubes.

I think our audio preferences are similar whereby there is a preference for audio transparency.

I started out with NOS KT66 grayglass tubes but eventually gravitated towards use of NOS EL34 metalbase tubes.
The Hazen Grid mod just sounds "better", i.e. more transparent to my ears.

FB, I think your continued interest in #4 makes sense. As it has been said, even if eventually you go with a different amp, a better source is always good!

I have been ruminating on the whole thing and here are some more thoughts...

FB quote from Steve Quote:


I agree with you, that a greater number of tubes and other signal parts will reduce transparency, at least all else being equal. But then the level depends on design, part qualities, wires and tubes in the signal path, as well as what powers the parts. The question...within reason, what is the real transparency loss and how much does that effect musical enjoyment?

Also, though caps and transformers are known to help, can the detail and presence you crave from the Mini Torii be improved by identifying and removing bottlenecks that hinder its inherent transparency? If so, resolving them might effect your upgrade choices. It is after all a Decware amp designed to be transparent within Steve's chosen voicing, and it would seem that even if it were the least transparent amp of the family, it would have potential for a very good level of transparency.

Jupiter caps would likely help the Mini's resolution notably, but may not address bass articulation/congestion nearly as much as the mids and highs. Bass articulation and presence issues could be related as you suggest, by masking, but room stuff could be messing with both individually also. And if this is the case, it very likely would effect more resolving gear also.

As you have found, resolution and transparency depends on everything working together....tubes, room, power, source, cables, vibration, etc, each potentially enhancing or reducing resolution. And transparency loss from only one thing (even creating relatively minor EQ issues) can be a notable bottleneck. Within my system/room (no notable transparency bottlenecks once tuned), I can vary the micro detail/resolution either way quite a lot with tubes, and it is not very hard to get to a point of excess. You know all this, but I'm trying to explore the context of your upgrading questions and choices.

In terms of signal path, by adding the Jupitered CSP3 (four more tubes, caps, resistors, wires, connectors and ICs)....though I had to work to bring it up to match my Torii/HR-1 system (set up for very resolving sound), I was finally able to get better sound without notable resolution loss. Some aspects of resolution were perhaps very slightly reduced, but at the same time, the OTL potential of the CSP3, fully realized, also introduces resolution qualities that were improvements...Even with all these wires, resistors, caps, switches, pots, connections, tubes etc. the resolution (and musicality) of this matrix is amazing. But I have been working on all system/room parts to this end for years...very complex detail, resolution and frequency balance...all parts beautifully creating a quite revealing and flexible whole.

This does not deny that the number of parts in a signal chain are important as you suggest. More that it is a matter of degrees and everything effects everything. I have repeatedly found that if the source has it, and each part chosen and adjusted to be resolving and transparent, the whole has loads of potential to this end. This can go a long way toward limiting ultimate transparency issues with longer signal paths.

As an example,: LS knows a lot about really nice tubes, and says...in the MKIV, (really good) EL34s are more transparent than KT66. I too have experienced this, but in my setting now, I might say more “revealing” rather than “transparent,” since the way my system/room is tuned, RFT EL34s sound exaggerated mids up, and a little too loose in the bass. This is not that I am less into micro information and transparency, but because I have been tuning with Genelex KT66!

Some salient messages to me are: everything depends on everything else, usually a unique combination, so how each of us arrive at our sound is rarely the same; and LS has illustrated that particular tubes have been an excellent vehicle to increased transparency.

In my personal exploration, until all in the system/room is notably (and pleasantly) resolving, I can't realize the full potential of the whole. Then, once the whole is tuned to have its "medium" state to be very revealing, and relatively balanced, there is a fair bit of room for "flavor" variations while still having notable micro detail and transparency. And in a number of ways, this is in part made possible by my relatively complex signal path.

All that said, as DBC and ProggRob have found, the pleasure of a Zen system/room can be truly awesome and deeply resolving if all things up that very simple and beautiful amp.

So I don't disagree at all with what Steve said about more tubes making the amp more complex. But I enjoy the complexity of my amp for tuning and still have loads of resolution the way my system/room is configured and tuned. And my signal path is notably longer than the Mini Torii.

Quote:


Quote:


Yes it is all pretty tricky....but if there are unresolved bass and mid areas, and soundstage issues, then it would seem the balance could be improved...in my last post VR tuning was one of several things that I thought might help if it can be balanced with the rest. Switching from OA3s to OB3s for me can be simple, but also can require changing other tubes to adapt the shift. But if you find the result flatter/mono-dimensional, and without other potential, no use going there.

Have you tried other OA3s? None of the OA3s I have sound alike, with differences in openness, body, warmth, texture and extension, some green label Sylvanias from the early 80s my most open, transparent and resolving.

I find that excess anywhere in the bass range can mask mids, disrupting the balance. Even if the detail information is there, if not in balance, it sounds off or diminished. With my speakers, though barely audible, excess below 20-25 Hz has negative effects, muddling resolution of the whole a little.

I find roughly 50-60 down to be about big bass qualities, and up to 150 or so, it transitions into various aspects of lower bass definition. Then maybe 200-600 starts connecting attack to the bigger stuff, defining the bass as real. Seems bass muddle here can be from as far down as the system goes to maybe 130 or so if the balance is off.

When it is not articulate up to 150 or so, there are likely boom frequencies (they can be very narrow Qs) that can blur the overall presentation. Also I find lesser bass issues can be more muddle, not necessarily particularly boomy, and cause it to sound like less bass overall even though the muddle is from accentuation. Also, attenuation anywhere up to 500-600 can “accent” the articulation issues by making adjacent boom frequencies even more dominant in the balance, and by not filling out the tonal range. This seems especially important if the mid bass to lower mids articulation frequencies  are cut by the room. Also I think it is established that below 125 or so is the more difficult to address with traps.

I have a diaphragmatic bass trap that catches some of this but its too small to get it all. So I put narrow EQ cuts @45 and @66 (muddle zones here) with a narrow increase @ the cleaner 53 Hz, compensating in part for the other cuts. This alone has a notable effect on the open presence of the mids up.

Though treatment is the established best cure, I find quality EQ can help treatment to finish resolving room and system issues, bringing up transparency. Really, different wires, tubes, feet, power supplies and so on alter the frequency balance and resolution, in effect, EQ'ing with parts. But good EQ is quite articulate for fine tuning.

This takes me back to the beginning... if Foobar has simple to apply and relatively good EQ tools, this could be a pretty easy way to help identify if there are room/system issues causing transparency problems. By creating a narrow parametric Q like .08 to .1 octave width, and putting it up 12-15 dB or so, by slowly riding incrementally through the frequency range, room induced accentuation areas show up. Or by setting it down 12-15 dB, if you hear little or no change at certain frequencies, the room is likely attenuating that frequency and it would ideally be stronger. I used to do this with several different recordings that are revealing, balanced and extended, the combination revealing issues clearly. If like most, unless the room is treated very specifically for its issues, and to the gills, it could be attenuating important presence areas, or accentuating bass areas that mask the upper parts, or both.

If no frequency areas are limiting resolution, upgrades are pretty clear choices. Or, if there are system/room problems, resolving them would help what is already there, while also clarifying the most efficient next steps.

Yes I do tend to enjoy digging in, but it has been my experience over and over that room is huge, and every single thing matters.

Good Luck,

Will

I understand, and have read great things about the Oppo line in general. I just think using an adapter will not convey the true balanced signal to the recipient component, as it is not just a matter of connector standard differences but also voltage and a true balanced flow all the way to the amp. Just my humble opinion, I may be wrong.

I'm already committed to the flagships at Audio Gd (Master 7 or NFB 7) or the Yggdrasil, plus I don't have a use for dvd, Blue Ray or even cd players anymore. I rather have the differential in cost to go to the DAC chip and output stage, sort of a dedicated, single-purpose device like those I mentioned.

Thanks for the pointers though.

As a conclusion for this thread, I'm going for scenario 4: beefing up my Mini Torii with Beeswax Caps, UFO Mods and two volume step attenuators. Also, picking up a Decware ZBIT. The only thing still on the drawing board is which DAC to pick from the short list above, and choosing the right XRL IC's for the DAC/ZBIT. Also, I'm ordering PI Audio's Difussors (3 pairs).

Thanks to all for the kind and most valuable support!

Thanks, ProggRob. I think I'm going to look for more affordabble choices than those for now. The initial investment at this stage is already high for me. Both cables seem great, though, especially the Spirit Balanced XLR from Triode (and the more affordable of the two!).