Manny,

Not wanting to sidetrack this thread, with more about my experiments except for the ideas I was trying to look at in relation to adding things (like the Super Rectifiers or Steve's pre stages, or parts and cables), and the relativity of "purest" design and effects. And I have been hoping to make some threads with in depth info on modifications I have done, but it has just always seemed like a lot to take on, having been working on the Torii MKIV, CSP3, ZRock2, and HR-1s, and lots of parts testing. But people seem to want to see and talk about it, so I will try to get it moving over the next month or two if I can. Relative to your appreciation of the beauty of Steve's designs, I agree, and guessing you have seen tbe Sarah development thread and pics since you have one on order. But also there are more you may want to check out for some more recent design versions incorporating some of Steve's recent refinements, the SE84UFO25, and I think there was one on the CSP325... also the Torii MK5 development thread is a beauty.

Thanks BicycleJoe Lo-Fi. Good to know how those IMGBB thumbnail sizes actually work on this forum... I am used to the thought of thumbnail as quite little#$%^&*()

Will, my comment about the circuit beauty as it relates to the super rectifier topic is that [to me] if I had this beautiful circuit topology as part of my system, that system would be purposefully to showcase that circuit, and adding any additional components to this system would have to compliment the initial circuit, in fidelity, symmetry, and beauty. My point being, throwing the question to the community of how the super rectifier might compliment or detract from each of these things?
I’d love to learn from your experiences with your mods in a separate thread too.
Cheers.

It is interesting to note that very expensive NOS or very expensive new production tubes ($500 - $2000 a pr. for example) aren’t necessary at all in these devices. For example Shuguang or Psvane entry level 211, 805, 845, or 300B (a custom adapter from Space-Tech @ $200 is required for a 300B) will fit the bill. You’d need to spend 5x that much to get about 10-20% improvement from that.

Paul2 wrote on 08/28/22 at 20:53:44:

Yes, the builder does seem to have quite a bit of knowledge about these tube types so he may be right about these price points. I myself have zero knowledge with a lot of the four pin types he mentions. . . but if I had one of these I'd be experimenting. Still. . . I wonder how compatible they are to Steve's components (I sure am tired of blowing fuses in the underside of the chassis) and at present I would need two of these external rectifiers--not the easiest situation to afford right now.

Well, I didn't understand the post at first but I think I do now. No, I don't want to buy an amp from him while waiting for Steve's. I'm perfectly content waiting with my excellent Monoblocks, and I want Steve's take on the 300B, very much.  And I'm theorizing I won't have an additional year or year and a half to wait--just my gut telling me, but I think the new measures Steve has put into place with production and will put into place going forward, and the fact that some will not wait the full length and drop off the list will mean a shorter wait than that. We'll see.

That's possibly an okay plan though my preamp in the main system (ZTPRE) does not have a tube rectifier.

I'm not trying one of these without checking with Steve and if I do it will be after I receive the Sarah. And I may not have the cash then.

My impression is this guy is an idiot and possibly a scammer.  there is nothing magical about 'external" tube rectification.  If he wants to market it as "upgraded" rectification, then he might have to share his design concepts, and WHY it is better, which he doesn't seem to do.  But wait 60 seconds or you can't play in his treehouse.  Huh????  

I'll let Steve Deckert design my power supplies over this idiot all week long.  Steve uses tube rectification in a lot of his designs.

Jerry

I think differently, less harshly. I think there may well be something to his design, and find it intriguing. I've no set plan to purchase one especially without confirming compatibility with Steve's designs, nor am I advising or "telling" anyone to purchase one and what to do with their audio funds.

Steve sells ZSTAGES and ZBITS and other "accessory" devices too. And this outfit seems to have a similarity to Decware in philosophy of design and manufacture, I certainly don't think he's a charlaton or fraud.

Well, I'm sorry but I don't agree with this fully. Steve is not free from hyperbole and salesmanship. Some things that he has been espousing I don't share the enthusiasm for, such as Cryotone tubes, and somethings he says I don't agree with such as there's no need for Anniversary mods if you have an untreated room (if in fact he has said that) --I have untreated rooms and hear clear and strong improvements having added them to several components, knowing the "before" intimately.

The fact that this guy is not filling his website up with "papers" and lots of personal statements doesn't make him a "snake oil" peddler to me, and I can see a design philosophy and knowledge in his designs that can be considered impressive.

Like Decware until the last few years there is no stockpile of independent reviews to read about his work, nor does he have a forum to house owner impressions--I suspect his resources are even slimmer than our favorite builder's and he dedicates his time elsewhere.

I see a similar cohesion and common thread throughout his products to the extent that is true for the Decware line. Personally I see no evidence that he is not an audiophile as we are. I can certainly see the potential advantage of a "super rectifier" using power tubes, and that could be a potent innovation if implemented properly. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, just as I did Steve many years ago.

I'm not doubting its efficacy, I was buying cryotreated tubes and the interconnects I love long before Steve got enthusiastic and before Wathen got into the biz. I just don't get the same improvements and feel as enthusiastic from the two tube types that I did try and don't feel inclined to try more from the Cryotone lineup. I could not describe my impressions the way that Steve has his.

I think both these builders have more in common than not and there's room for me to admire the philosophy and work of both, and also to be very loyal to Steve, having had my audio life vastly improved by his work for 25 years.

You know over the years I've encountered a lot of resistance to Steve's hyperbolic talk and his "ecstatic" writings about the sound of his equipment and seen persons turn away from considering Decware because of it--Space-Tech may be sparing himself some grief and not turning away customers by being less of a "personality" on his pages. But that doesn't mean that he isn't as excited about his own design discoveries and products--reading between lines I seem to sense this.

By the same token look how many versions of the Zen amp Steve has, and how many options you can add to his products that bring them up to high price points as well. I think you may be being too harsh on Space-Tech with little real backing.

The biggest difference I see between his business and Steve's is that Steve spent about 30 years building an online presence including a forum that took a few decades to really flower and it's these customer reviews that have generated a lot of interest and business and also forced him somewhat to interact with customers less ephemerally than by telephone and far more publicly than by telephone or email. And this gives you more trust in his products. Understandably, but in a way Space-Tech is thus damned with little real reason other than a lack of information. Also Steve seems to have more family members and employees as a resource than he does, though it's hard to say with little information. It's like a glass half full, half empty--I think we're looking at it differently that way because his website is not jam-packed with info the way that Steve's has become.

No, I'm not going to try to review his product, that's not my bag and time becomes even more limited for such things as the months go by--my time is being pledged to other things by my wife lately.

BicycleJoe,

Just wondering since you reference your gear as a Rachel, ZP3, and ZLC on order, have you ever listened to Decware personally?And have you ever done listening comparisons of cyro'd tubes compared to the same make of non-cryo'd and relatively close measuring tubes?

CA, that sounds exciting. Your Scottish heritage took a bit of a hit .

Yes, please do give us your impressions. That may be just enough for me to try the STR-1001 Super Rectifier a bit sooner than the plan to shelve it for some time.

Along with an 805a (and 300B with S-Tech custom adapter for 200 slaps in the face) I’m also very intrigued to try the monster mercury vapor 872a due to its exceptional air, however it would need toned down a tad on the bright end with a bit of tuning.

I did email Steve today and asked for some off-the-cuff thoughts in this thread.

Brad

Sounds like you have had intersting experiences with electronics. I can not claim to be an engineer, more an explorer based on minimal tech to help get me where I am trying to go, and very serious listening. In this, I have found many engineer views notably inadequate compared to what I hear, so presume that much of the "science" that causes these engineer's "beliefs" is inadequate also. And when engineers can't hear something many of us can based on their belief system, this implies to me that "technical" bias is overwhelming unbiased observation in many cases. I find it really an amazing presumption that our analysis at this state of development with standard measuring gear can be considered complete compared to what we perceive with our bodies and minds.

So I don't mistrust scientific theory or practice perse, but human desire can turn anything real into modified reality that is believable enough to appear to be real without carefully looking (delusion), and therefore create permeating bias in the thoughts and efforts of humans. It seems to me that just the money part commonly corrupts scientific practice, limited funds defining the need for studies to prioritize this or that, and only go to certain levels of investigation, while whatever ends up not prioritized leaves the picture incomplete.

And this goes for the opinions of others for me, even at times those who I highly respect and trust, like Steve. Though Steve remains profoundly instrumental in enhancing my life, bringing realer musical experiences to my home, and I continue to learn from his explorations and discernment, I have found some of his comments and opinions over many years to appear to me to be based a little more in bias than what I have experienced with some of the same stuff in listening tests. But also we each have our own objectives within our systems and rooms and the development of the system/rooms reflect that...so one system may make some things clearer than other systems and visa versa, and this has influence on our opinions of what is real.

So even with pretty deep agreement, we all have different objectives, experience, perceptions, and time allowed for each area of our investigations. For me this makes it difficult to make any strongish remarks without qualifications and explanations of where the remarks are coming from, especially since there are so many variables in systems, rooms, and each person's perception and consciousness. I guess the end of that, is that some of us with really worked out system/rooms and long practice in discernment, have strong agreement about a lot of the many balances we hear that combined make the music realer. But finally, on the whole, most of us are not "measuring" the qualities of gear equally, even in direct experience, and though a given piece of gear, or tube, or cable does carry relatively repeatable traits, apparently it will not sound the same everywhere and to everyone.

Further, I personally have to qualify even more deeply if I have no personal experience with something, though occasionally I will point to the opinions of trusted musical friends and teachers, folks who I know from agreement over and over that they have extensive experience and hear the broader and more nuanced pictures of music pretty articulately. But as my system and skills evolve, I just can't be absolute on most things even with listening experience, knowing the vast variables from everything influencing everything. I can love a proven part change in the system that is one of hundreds of parts, or not, depending on context. And each adopted part changes that context.

So mostly I am much more comfortable talking about my own experience and interpretation as a basis for what I am trying to convey, trusting what my perception has "proven" to me countess times, "proving" or "disproving" "science," hopes, and theory I have heard, read, or had. And even with things I know from my experience to be real in this system and room, I try to be careful not to be aggressive or absolutist, in part because that is usually polarizing, so not an effective means of communication to me, and as much, there are just too many variables for everyone's knowledge and experience to necessarily match completely with a given exploration.

But hopefully, we can provide pointers for other questers, especially based on our real-life observations and discoveries.


Some ideas that seem relevant to me today anyway...

The JJs I have tried were definitely different.
I would have to say that they enhanced the bass range some, but it was not a refined enhancement.

Some of the instantaneous attack was smoothed over in some way. Just not as precise as even the stock Sovtek versions.

I have not tried the cryo'ed JJs, but I agree the standard ones were not to my taste.

Posted by: GroovySauce on: 08/30/22 at 07:24:46
Quote:

GroovySauce wrote
I don’t follow that it needs to pierce the vacuum. The metal goes from outside the vacuum to inside the vacuum. There is no break in the metal. Long enough exposure should have the entire tube inside and out the same temperature. This might be why certain cryo treatments people report don’t make a difference?

Quote:


Groovy Sauce asked
Why would it make a difference if the insulator is a vacuum?

The Cryo-tone tubes I've put in my system did sound different than the JJ non cryo'd tubes. I did prefer the Cryo-tone vs JJ. I don't care for the JJ sound. Cryo-tone took the JJ sound and refined it. They still don't suit my taste.


Answer the absolute zero coolant @ minus 273 degrees Celsius has to make physical contact with the critical bits and pieces inside the vacuum envelope

Quote:


Groovy Sauce I myself do not use JJ tubes. if you enjoy and hear a subjective difference good enough, enjoy the Wathen tubes but FYI although I've deleted their email JJ who manufacture the rebranded Cryotone tubes for Wathen answered the same. You can ask them yourself by writing info@jj-electronic.com

Doug yes you flat earthers are a stubborn lot and countless authorities opinions doesn't matter much to you.  

Tell me why hasn't Western Electric, Mullard, GE, Siemans, Tung-Sol, Electro-Harmonix, Genalex - Gold Lion, JAN Military, JJ Electronics, Psvane, SED Winged "C", Shuguang, Sovtek, Svetlana, Telefunken, Tung Sol, Groove Tubes or RCA ever adapted the processes of Cryogenic treatment you value so highly. Can you name one tube manufacturer past or present that ever cryogenically treated their tubes?

Crickets.

They must not care to make money and are or were in business for altruistic reasons or maybe no one ever told them or convinced them that cryogenics was a way to improve their products.
Maybe they respect and love their customers too much to upsell them with pseudo science.
Or maybe Cryogenic doesn't work inside a vacuum. I'll go with that last one.


Dougie I don't feel I am stuck in a corner but you do seem to be the one stirring the pot while just saying your not. A bit passive aggressive aren't you

Like my mother taught me "You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

Now I wasn't trying to start a fight, I don't think that way. I was answering Will's question😵‍💫 with my opinion, you are entitled to yours, but next time try and back it up with some objective evidence other than subjective hear say.

It is Will, you need to ask Doug why he reopened that can of worms invoking your name and others, as I noted above I was responding directly to your question then Doug  chimed in with his 2 cents from behind the tall weeds.

My opinion of the Super Rectifier? I believe I answered your question respectfully and completely above.

Not what I said and more correctly not what I wrote. I was responding to direct inquiries about my opinion. It is not ideologies that all the tube manufacturers or purveyors of tube listed above are not in agreement with your subjective arguments. As I stated I have no problem acknowledging cryogenic treatment has an affect on bare metals.

AS far as the Super Rectifier you haven't actually heard one have you?

Get back to me when a tube manufacturing company adapts cryogenicc treatment to their manufacturing process.  Let's put a pin on that instead of being deliberately obtuse.

You keep saying others biases, Will your bias lays in the belief of your own of subjective argument. More power to you and your philosophies for truly as Hamlet suggests that human knowledge is limited: "There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio, / Than are dreamt of in your philosophy" [science].

If your interested in the Sarah and lay out $1500 for a pair of WE 300B tubes by all means send them out to be treated or buy some treated JJ's if that is your pursuit of happiness.

I have listened to Cryo as I mentioned above, I prefer select vintage NOS to most current production tubes cryod or not. I will try some of Western Electric current offerings if they have tubes I need.

Good Night! Sleep Tight! Don't let the bedbugs bite.
If they bite sleep tight, they'll come back another night.

left to right all Mullard late 50's early 60's

EF86, 12AX7, 12AX7, 12AT7, Pair EL84 and an EZ 81 rectifier

Quote:


"Wait a minute" is most likely necessary to avoid an onrush of current created by the additional capacitors added from the targeted amp, therefore avoiding early tube failure in the external rectifier.

I totally agree with keeping this external rectifier out of any of Decwares anniversary offerings. Steve did a very good job with the anniversary mods.

John

Edited:


John wouldn't that apply to current production WE or Mullard? These days anyone who is in the market for tube hi-fi equipment falls under the "Audiophile" demographic and who wouldn't want repeat business.

Western Electric has been marketing to that segment for more than half a century. BTW I didn't say promote I said include in their manufacturing process to improve their product. I am sure you have a dozen other repartees to support your position but none of them can refute that there is no tube manufacturer past or present that believed in the efficacy of cryogenic treatment. Do you know how tubes are actually made? It would be simple to add one more step to the manufacturing process. Quite simple to apply cryogenic treatment to the bits and pieces before the tubes were actually assembled by hand. Thus side stepping the Vacuum Envelope problem, or if there is no such problem treat finished tubes batches before packaging.
If they have no interest why would they go to the bother of retooling and opening factories for such a limited market.

From what I understand from Western Electric promotion is they are a spare no expense, time, or effort organization to deliver the best product they can make.



https://youtu.be/PA8G5zRjriI HD1080p
Batch Process Montage | From the Rossville Works

Groovy, I agree. I am pretty sure I can say that after an earlier version of a Rachel, some of Bob's MG944s, an improved front end, and more transparent and complete cables expanding my musical landscape... then power to the gear, and the power in it, have likely been the most important and influential system areas in seeking the deeper and more complete balances, the deeper beauty. Tubes to me are really important also, a huge playground for me with likely hundreds of NOS tubes. But by refining the power supply parts, the tubes are less critical, while also being more resolving and revealing of their traits. So the good ones are more translucent and complete, and the lesser ones worse, a more resolved environment showing their limitations clearly. And that is using mostly Decware, just helping it to do what is does more completely.

So I agree about the power of the rectifier (and circuit) being foundational. In my mind so much begins with the rectifier and associated chokes and transformers, so that area is always in the forefront for me with refinement work. But it all matters. And as I suggested earlier, all that power supply work was a profound improvement in everything musical with the Decware that I have carefully modified mainly by sound....

But I also agree with others that Steve makes great power supplies, and that this is a big part of his sound... Yet, thank goodness, he is always working to improve his power supplies (and the rest), so an ongoing creative process that yields real results. Related, my experience shows that the power supplies, with careful and balanced efforts are upgradable, A-type mods or not. So my quest is in seeking over time making a world class amp more world class. And Steve has provided an amazing platform for folks like me, having squeezed as much beauty out of the amps as he can, while making his things affordable for the highly considered quality he gets...

The rectifier is clearly a big part of this, and the power empowering the rectifier can definitely help provide more translucent resolution, immediate and balanced speeds, micro-micro to macro-macro dynamics, and critical spectral balances.... So I hear you, finally the rectifier is fundamental to the whole sound, especially once we seek deeper and deeper immersion, the rectifier defining a lot of how complete the inputs and other tubes, and all that supports them can be.

In this context, conceptually, it is impossible for me not to "believe" that something like the Super Rectifiers could potentially be revelatory. And I am guessing the measurements are pretty right being built to replace normal rectifiers we use. And especially with the standby switch, it might just work beautifully??? But I agree that it would be wise to get a feel from Steve about possible cautions and compatibility.

I can see how a vacuum would make a big difference.  That's how a thermos works.  There is a vacuum between the outer layer and the inner liner so the heat / cold doesn't escape.  Also according to a previous post to achieve a -272 C temperature the agent usually liquid nitrogen has to be in direct contact with the medium.  If you just dipped the base maybe thru conduction the metal inside the vacuum would eventually reach close to the absolute zero and because of the vacuum it wouldn't heat up to the ambient temperature but I have no idea how long that would take but metal and glass expand and different rates so I could also see if not done correctly (whatever that process would be?)  the vacuum could easily be compromised.

That said I've never heard one...  maybe decfest