Power first not source!!
Posted by: Claus-Thoegersen on 18 August 2018
My latest unwanted upgrades has been all about power, and I am more and more leaning to a view of that source first is dead unless the source is the first powwer cable and your mains block. After a demo at Ansuz acoustics over a year ago, I changed mains block from Isotek to Mainz8D from Ansuz, and that was an improvement. Last year my dealer had a Ansuz Mainz Ceramic power cable, at a very good price. So the powerline used from the wall socket was changed with the Ceramic cable, proving that the first power cable is the most important one. 2 months back I was at Ansuz again with a group of my Friends, all of them have Naim gear and Audiovector speakers. At that time I heard the new Mainz models, and decided I would try a home demo of the mainz8 c2, even though the idea of spending so much on a power block is hard to justify rationally. When we changed the mainz8 to the c2 model, something strange happened. We had to turn down the volume to listen to the music at the same volume as before. How a passive block can make your system play louder at the same volume setting is really strange. Of course it was not only louder also better, like a box upgrade, and one of the serious upgrades.
Well this should be it I thought, but a few of mhy friends that was at the Ansuz demo, also wanted to see what Darkz could do under speakers and racks, and play around with power cables.
My dealer is sometimes able to get a good deal on the Ansuz products but it is still really expensive! Well I had the power cables I needed so no financial problems with a demo, where you spend other people's money, d listen to music and drink beer. That was until my dealer started to change the standard power cables from the Mainz block to the supercap for the 282 in the system, and afterwards also the Hicap used for the Snaxo used with Audiovector sr6. It was clear that this also was a huge improvement.
Ok so I suddenly needed 2 new power cables for my 2 supercaps since the powerlines now surely sounded terribly broken! Unfortunately it did not stop there! My dealer suggested we should try a Mainz d2 cable from the wall instead of the c2 modelled that was used. Everybody agreed that we could try this but nobody would ever even think about buying this cable, not even at a good price. 30 minutes later my friend decided that it would be impossible to remove the cable and go back to the old c2 instead.
All of us at this demo yesterday agree that had somebody suggested that we would spend more money on power cables and mains blocks than on our pre and source, we would have dismissed it as madness.
The only problem is that all 3 of us are going to do that anyway if we can find the money for it.
I was able to get another c2 cable yesterday, so this afternoonI spend time playing music and then changing the powerline on my 252 with the c2 cable. The improvement was bigger than on my friends 282, I would say much bigger. This is probably because of the Mainz8 c2, compared to one of the smaller Mainz models my friend is using, or it could be because the supercap just makes the 252 even better than the 282?
If you look at the Danish ansuz prices, a c2 power cable and the c2 Mainz8 block cost close to what the nd555 cost, without power supplies!!! However everybody with bigger systems really should try to demo these Ansuz products! it may very well change your upgrade path plans!
Claus
bluedog posted:French Rooster posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:the ansuz block will not transform the dragonfly into chord dave, even if it enables all the possibilities of the dragonfly. So i will tend to say source first and power after.
Of course, without power the source could not exist, but it is not like the hen and the egg logic.
It is very much like the hen and egg logic.
Only we are looking at very small hens and very small eggs. So small in fact that they are both entangled up in a very small hen and egg fight on a very small microscopic level where everything is both hen and egg at the same time. Not after some considerable time and effort spent searching will you find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect.
the power is source and the source is power. A source without power is not a source, or just a potential source. The phenomenon is what the observer has observed as a phenomenon.....but in Reality the phenomenon doesn’t exist, in buddhism. Perhaps we can invent the philosophical hifi?
I'll have a pint of whatever this guy is drinking please.
sorry if you have not understood, i was just commenting Tobyjug comment on”you will find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect “. The buddhist philosophy says that what you see exist only because you see it existing as that. But in Reality, always in buddhism philosophy, things , phenomenons, ...have not individual or inner existence, but are linked to a whole reality.
For your information, i am drinking only water or coffee. But yes, i was digressing a bit, as Tonyjug. Anyway it is not easy to say “ source first” or “power first” because a source without power can’t work and the better the quality of power, the better the source.
French Rooster posted:bluedog posted:French Rooster posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:the ansuz block will not transform the dragonfly into chord dave, even if it enables all the possibilities of the dragonfly. So i will tend to say source first and power after.
Of course, without power the source could not exist, but it is not like the hen and the egg logic.
It is very much like the hen and egg logic.
the power is source and the source is power. A source without power is not a source, or just a potential source. The phenomenon is what the observer has observed as a phenomenon.....but in Reality the phenomenon doesn’t exist, in buddhism. Perhaps we can invent the philosophical hifi?
I'll have a pint of whatever this guy is drinking please.
sorry if you have not understood, i was just commenting Tobyjug comment on”you will find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect “. The buddhist philosophy says that what you see exist only because you see it existing as that. But in Reality, always in buddhism philosophy, things , phenomenons, ...have not individual or inner existence, but are linked to a whole reality.
For your information, i am drinking only water or coffee. But yes, i was digressing a bit, as Tonyjug. Anyway it is not easy to say “ source first” or “power first” because a source without power can’t work and the better the quality of power, the better the source.
My comment was based more around Schrodinger's conundrum of the dead cat in the box. 
Guys, just buy a Hydra and be done with it. They work great.........................
Wugged Woy posted:Guys, just buy a Hydra and be done with it. They work great.........................
Guys, if you could put a great power cable in everything instead of multiple power supplies, you wouldn't need a Hydra....... 
TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:bluedog posted:French Rooster posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:the ansuz block will not transform the dragonfly into chord dave, even if it enables all the possibilities of the dragonfly. So i will tend to say source first and power after.
Of course, without power the source could not exist, but it is not like the hen and the egg logic.
It is very much like the hen and egg logic.
the power is source and the source is power. A source without power is not a source, or just a potential source. The phenomenon is what the observer has observed as a phenomenon.....but in Reality the phenomenon doesn’t exist, in buddhism. Perhaps we can invent the philosophical hifi?
I'll have a pint of whatever this guy is drinking please.
sorry if you have not understood, i was just commenting Tobyjug comment on”you will find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect “. The buddhist philosophy says that what you see exist only because you see it existing as that. But in Reality, always in buddhism philosophy, things , phenomenons, ...have not individual or inner existence, but are linked to a whole reality.
For your information, i am drinking only water or coffee. But yes, i was digressing a bit, as Tonyjug. Anyway it is not easy to say “ source first” or “power first” because a source without power can’t work and the better the quality of power, the better the source.
My comment was based more around Schrodinger's conundrum of the dead cat in the box.
I'd rather like to know if any cats were harmed during the development of this conundrum back in 1935.
And never mind cats in steel boxes, how about cats sleeping on top of warm black aluminium boxes... would they be harmed? Mine has only ever done it once, and now has 8 lives remaining.
rjstaines posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:bluedog posted:French Rooster posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:the ansuz block will not transform the dragonfly into chord dave, even if it enables all the possibilities of the dragonfly. So i will tend to say source first and power after.
Of course, without power the source could not exist, but it is not like the hen and the egg logic.
It is very much like the hen and egg logic.
the power is source and the source is power. A source without power is not a source, or just a potential source. The phenomenon is what the observer has observed as a phenomenon.....but in Reality the phenomenon doesn’t exist, in buddhism. Perhaps we can invent the philosophical hifi?
I'll have a pint of whatever this guy is drinking please.
sorry if you have not understood, i was just commenting Tobyjug comment on”you will find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect “. The buddhist philosophy says that what you see exist only because you see it existing as that. But in Reality, always in buddhism philosophy, things , phenomenons, ...have not individual or inner existence, but are linked to a whole reality.
For your information, i am drinking only water or coffee. But yes, i was digressing a bit, as Tonyjug. Anyway it is not easy to say “ source first” or “power first” because a source without power can’t work and the better the quality of power, the better the source.
My comment was based more around Schrodinger's conundrum of the dead cat in the box.
I'd rather like to know if any cats were harmed during the development of this conundrum back in 1935.
And never mind cats in steel boxes, how about cats sleeping on top of warm black aluminium boxes... would they be harmed? Mine has only ever done it once, and now has 8 lives remaining.
if you remove the power, the cat will go away. So if you love your cat, buy him the best power cables you can afford. Perhaps, if you go to a dealer with your cat, your cat will choose the right power cable between anzus, nordost or kharma.
Someone will write” tell me what this guy has drunken?”
French Rooster posted:rjstaines posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:bluedog posted:French Rooster posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:the ansuz block will not transform the dragonfly into chord dave, even if it enables all the possibilities of the dragonfly. So i will tend to say source first and power after.
Of course, without power the source could not exist, but it is not like the hen and the egg logic.
It is very much like the hen and egg logic.
the power is source and the source is power. A source without power is not a source, or just a potential source. The phenomenon is what the observer has observed as a phenomenon.....but in Reality the phenomenon doesn’t exist, in buddhism. Perhaps we can invent the philosophical hifi?
I'll have a pint of whatever this guy is drinking please.
sorry if you have not understood, i was just commenting Tobyjug comment on”you will find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect “. The buddhist philosophy says that what you see exist only because you see it existing as that. But in Reality, always in buddhism philosophy, things , phenomenons, ...have not individual or inner existence, but are linked to a whole reality.
For your information, i am drinking only water or coffee. But yes, i was digressing a bit, as Tonyjug. Anyway it is not easy to say “ source first” or “power first” because a source without power can’t work and the better the quality of power, the better the source.
My comment was based more around Schrodinger's conundrum of the dead cat in the box.
I'd rather like to know if any cats were harmed during the development of this conundrum back in 1935.
And never mind cats in steel boxes, how about cats sleeping on top of warm black aluminium boxes... would they be harmed? Mine has only ever done it once, and now has 8 lives remaining.
if you remove the power, the cat will go away. So if you love your cat, buy him the best power cables you can afford. Perhaps, if you go to a dealer with your cat, your cat will choose the right power cable between anzus, nordost or kharma.
Someone will write” tell me what this guy has drunken?”
But what if the cat had died sleeping on the warm black box ? Eventually it would have dried up and would have made an effective acoustic diffuser hung up on the wall, further improving the effect of a great power cable.
French Rooster posted:rjstaines posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:bluedog posted:French Rooster posted:TOBYJUG posted:French Rooster posted:the ansuz block will not transform the dragonfly into chord dave, even if it enables all the possibilities of the dragonfly. So i will tend to say source first and power after.
Of course, without power the source could not exist, but it is not like the hen and the egg logic.
It is very much like the hen and egg logic.
the power is source and the source is power. A source without power is not a source, or just a potential source. The phenomenon is what the observer has observed as a phenomenon.....but in Reality the phenomenon doesn’t exist, in buddhism. Perhaps we can invent the philosophical hifi?
I'll have a pint of whatever this guy is drinking please.
sorry if you have not understood, i was just commenting Tobyjug comment on”you will find either one or the other depending on your observational aspect “. The buddhist philosophy says that what you see exist only because you see it existing as that. But in Reality, always in buddhism philosophy, things , phenomenons, ...have not individual or inner existence, but are linked to a whole reality.
For your information, i am drinking only water or coffee. But yes, i was digressing a bit, as Tonyjug. Anyway it is not easy to say “ source first” or “power first” because a source without power can’t work and the better the quality of power, the better the source.
My comment was based more around Schrodinger's conundrum of the dead cat in the box.
I'd rather like to know if any cats were harmed during the development of this conundrum back in 1935.
And never mind cats in steel boxes, how about cats sleeping on top of warm black aluminium boxes... would they be harmed? Mine has only ever done it once, and now has 8 lives remaining.
if you remove the power, the cat will go away. So if you love your cat, buy him the best power cables you can afford. Perhaps, if you go to a dealer with your cat, your cat will choose the right power cable between anzus, nordost or kharma.
Someone will write” tell me what this guy has drunken?”
This is why a home demo is a must. The cat feels more comfortable at home and less likely to die but still choose the best poet cord for himself.