在這些設計師的發言中,我最近欣賞 Lyra Connoisseur 的工程師 Jonathan Carr。Jonathan Carr 的文章,散見於 Audio Asylum、diyAudio、diyHifi 等討論區,為數不多,內容不勁爆,也不發驚人之語,但態度誠懇,更蘊涵了一番深思熟慮的智性。
過去曾介紹過兩篇 Jonathan Carr 的文章:〈Jonathan Carr 大師班:拆機、改機、調音示範〉 與 〈Jonathan Carr 談電源變壓器〉,這次再看他對改機一事的看法及態度。
他認為,在改機前,會先了解機器原始設計的特點,去揣摩原設計者的想法與企圖,再以此出發進行改機。所以,他會把握兩點原則。第一是,他不會去更動原機的技術架構,管機就是管機、晶體機就是晶體機、OP-Amp 就是 OP-Amp。如果硬把晶體改成管機,那從頭開始組裝一部管機就好了,又何必拿晶體機來改呢?
其次,他會試著去感受原機的設計者所追求的聲音美學,並且欣賞、尊重原設計者的品味與考量,然後在改機時,盡他最大的可能保持相同的調性。當然,如果某些廠機的調性與他個人喜好南轅北轍,或甚至根本就沒有所謂的美學考量,那他一開始就不會買這樣的機器。
when I am modding someone else's design, I have two self-imposed rules as to what I consider kosher practice and what I don't. My first rule is that I won't introduce technology that the stock unit doesn't already have. So if it's opamp, it stays opamp, if it's discrete solid-state, it stays SS, and if it's tubes, it stays that way.全文可見於:http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/1/15869.html
My second self-imposed rule is that if I feel that the original designer put in a credible attempt at voicing the unit in a musically valid way, I will try my best to keep that basic tonal personality. If I feel that the original designer couldn't be bothered with what the unit actually sounded like, I wouldn't have bought that unit in the first place. The same would be true if I disagreed with the basic tonal personality of the stock version.
再附上幾張 Jonathan Carr 的作品照片,非常漂亮的 Lyra Connoisseur 4.2L SE:
在 PCB 上搭棚,各取兩方式之長。 |
電源部 |
照片取自:http://cybwiz.blogspot.tw/2010/07/lyra-connoisseur-42l-se-pictures.html
沒有留言:
張貼留言