Jump to content

auricgoldfinger

Members
  • Content Count

    741
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About auricgoldfinger

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2887 profile views
  1. The only way to get a DR SR7 is to have Paul build one, but he is no longer accepting new orders.. You would have to take over an existing order from someone who no longer wants it. The Farad is an excellent power supply but not on the same level as a DR SR7.
  2. This thread has strayed from its intent of providing useful information on the progress and delivery of SR4 and SR7 orders. We are by now all well aware of the historical delays in the custom build queue. As OP, I would like to see no further discussion of past performance since it is not relevant to this topic. Going forward, I will have such posts removed. Hopefully, people realize that a separate business, Paul Hynes Design (PHD), has been created to fulfill orders for standard SR4, SR5, and SR7 power supplies. We are all interested in understanding the performance of PHD, particularly as it relates to their ability to complete SR7 builds. Please feel free to post your experience with PHD as it is also relevant to this topic.
  3. Search the Novel thread. Rajiv compared the Farad3 and SR4 a few months ago.
  4. Each custom build is unique, and therefore, can't be made into a kit. Paul has transferred some of his intellectual property for the SR4, SR5, and SR7 to Paul Hynes Design. These production versions might be viewed as kits, but they are licensed exclusively to Paul Hynes Design. They are not available for DIY purposes.
  5. I have this exact model and cable. The improvements to my system were exactly as advertised. I am thrilled with the performance. I haven't heard this cable, but SR has a new (and slightly less expensive) version with all their latest technology coming to market soon. It will have their silver wire (air strings) and graphene shielding which work so well in my HD grounding, USB, and power cables. There will be a 30-day money-back guarantee, so I plan to try one. If you can find an SR dealer in Asia, you ought to be able to do the same. https://www.synergisticresearch.com/cables/foundation/foundation-headphone/ This is an intriguing product, but more than I would pay for a headphone cable. What most interests me here is the floating ground station. Given the experience with grounding other cables in my system, I would love to ground a headphone cable to my active ground block.
  6. A graphene DC cable would be most interesting. I have graphene in various components and cables in my audio system, and I believe there is something to it.
  7. Yes, two pieces of equipment can be plugged into a dual rail supply. Paul once wrote me the following in regard to a dual rail supply: "There is a slight sonic penalty with having all the transformer secondaries on one transformer core as nothing is absolutely perfect and there will be some small level of interaction due to transient load current swings. This may be audible in a high-resolution system but it would be rather subtle due to the very high supply line rejection of the voltage regulator circuitry in the DR mode." The SR5 that you are contemplating will not have DR (double regulated) circuitry as it is not part of the standard SR5 offering. You will have single regulated (SR) circuitry instead. Nevertheless, in practical terms, any interaction would probably be so minimal that you would normally not be aware of it.
  8. The primary benefit of dual rails is the lower cost per rail. There are also efficiencies from having two rails located in the same case. For example, only one power cord is needed, and less space is required on your shelf. Theoretically, there could be some interaction between the two rails that could slightly diminish sound quality.
  9. Thanks to you and @paulhynes for taking the time to pull all of this information together.
  10. This is exactly what I hear, too. As the first NUC user to recommend the Apacer memory, I didn't want to risk overstating the change and have others be disappointed. Hence, my description was more conservative. Yours is more accurate.
  11. That's an interesting way of framing the question. For now, I'll defer to @elan120 for his perspective since he has done more tweaking with AL and his NUC than I. I haven't tried one SIMM yet, but it's on my to do list.
×
×
  • Create New...