Rx Reviews

Name: Steve Hoffman, Music Restoration Specialist, West Hills, California
Review: Those little tube dampers with the wheels on them really work GREAT!! They work like a charm and really make the Marantz 8B even more legendary sounding. Tighter, more even, less cluttered tone wise. If you don't want to go whole hog, just try them on the input tubes first. Or just try them on the 6CA7's. You'll hear it. An inexpensive tweak for those of you who use your beautiful 8B as a full-time playback amp.
Name: Michael Girardi, The Stereo Times
Review: The eight Ultrasonic Rx-50 tube dampers on my KT-88 tubes (Ayon Audio Triton) add another level of improvements and match better with the smaller preamp Rx-9 tube dampers. All of your products in my system really made a big improvement. Highly recommended. Some of the best $ ever spent.
Name: Christopher Russo, Home Theater Systems & Consulting
Review: After using your products for a few months now, I wanted to give you some feedback. Back in May, I upgraded my SF Line-3 SE preamp from your original Teflon Halo's to your Ultrasonic-9 tube dampers. At the same time I installed another set of Ultrasonic-9 dampers in my EAR 834P phono preamp. I left the standard tube dampers that come with the Audio Research CD7 in place. The improvements included major improvements in transparency, soundstaging, and imaging. I did notice an edginess in the upper mids that had existed prior to the installation of your Ultrasonics, but still existed after the dampers were installed.

A couple of weeks ago, I purchased the new Ultrasonic Rx's, which I installed in my SF Line-3, and then installed the Ultrasonic-9's in my ARC CD7, and added an Ultrasonic-35 for the 5881 tube in the CD7. The improvements in the highs were amazing, as well as a further improvement in soundstaging, and the ability to separate instruments within that stage, but something wasn't quite right with the mids, and the bottom end. The mids seemed to be a little unfocused, and I seemed to lose a little bottom end extension.

So at that point I decided to change the location of the dampers on the tubes. I originally placed them on the top third of the tube, and now I moved them to the middle of each tube in all my components. Wow!! What a difference!! Everything just snapped into focus. The highs, mids and bottom end all were tonally organic sounding. There was a total separation of instruments on the stage, and the overall focus was amazing. This is the best my system has ever sounded, and is the equivalent of a major component upgrade.

Being in the business allows me to listen to a lot of music everyday, and I can unequivocally say that there isn't any upgrade that comes close to yours from a price/performance standpoint.
Name: Anthony Landry, Houston, Texas
Review: I bought three RX 9 damping instruments for my EAR Pre. I first place them in the default position 1/3 down from the top and something was wrong with the midrange as being slightly out of focus and also the base was slightly less. The highs were still there kicking nicely. So I changed the positions to the middle. The improvements were not subtle. Not only more base but tighter base. The midrange was 4-D and highs were even cleaner with better delineation. Man, I would not have believed it if I had not heard it myself. Best tweek for $75.00 I have ever heard. I wish I had tried them sooner. Get them, you will not only hear your music in 3-D, but 4-D well. Now, you have to have the right system and the right music to get to this level. It pays to discover.
Name: Greg H., Bay Area, CA
Review: Whatever golden ears I may have had, I fear I lost to too much live loud music, convertible driving, and other causes. But the impact of the Rx on my system doesn't require golden ears. I recently re-entered tube life with a Decware Taboo. It is fed by a Mac mini running Fidelia and uncompressed files, many at 96/24 and 192/24. My DAC is a Cullen-modded PS Audio DLIII. No speakers, just the Audez'e LCD-2 cans. Vibration, in theory, should be a modest issue. When I set up my new Taboo, just about 11 days ago, I put it through a burn-in cycle for the stock and the other tubes I had bought. Each tube had an Ultrasonic Rx on it during this cycle; sometimes I was listening, and sometimes not. When I did, I was blown away by the improvement of replacing my 3x priced RSA Apache headphone amp with the funkly Taboo. That of course was partly the experience of just getting back into tube life. But once my Taboo was broken in, I started seriously listening. Lovely. Now to some tube rolling. Swap tubes, but ugh, what happened? Something missing in the female vocals, a flatness, not quite a smear. And I realized I had swapped tubes but had not put the Rx rings on the tubes in circuit. Restoring the rings revealed Carol Kidd's larynx once again. This was not a case of setting out to test the effect of the rings; I am not set up for a true blind A/B test, and frankly I suspect the psychoacoustic suggestibility of a test in which I would be swapping the rings in and out and looking for differences would be difficult to overcome. This was an accidental test, and the Rx made all the difference. For me, the difference is more noticeable than the presence or absence of Tenderfeet. Worth every penny. Great product Steve. I have more Decware equipment on the way. Every tube gets a ring.
Name: Philippe, from France
Review: have been very busy lately and didn't really had the time to make thorough a b comparison with and without your gears! what is sure is when I am home I listen to more and more music..... with more and more pleasure what ever music it can be from deep purple and led zep to don giovanni and charles aznavour..... CD or LP (am in the process of upgrading the vinyl part of the system) it is more and more thrilling: lively, rythmic, real,..... and more musical! independantly of my listening room conditions (big room but nasty and nothing much to be done except move which I will do in a few week). Is it possible that the tube dampers "settle in" and improve with time? I then await to be settled anew to go on in the improvement which should be more tube dampers!
Name: John M, Newmarket, Ontario
Review: I recently purchased the UltraSonic Rx dampners and finally installed them on a pair of new 6H30DR. These are for an Audio Research LS16 MKII. I read mixed reviews of the performance of the dampners and decided to try them myself.

The short version is that the dampners had a significant positive effect. However I did have to work with them a little. I first installed them on new tubes as recommended on the instructions. I should have tried the tubes without the dampners first - I new better but...

There was an effect but it was not positive. So I repositioned the dampners higher on the tube. The position on the tubes was similar to the original dampners supplied by ARC on the original tubes, 6H30EL. The effect of this minor adjustment was a dramatic improvement.

Next I removed the dampners. The 6H30DR tubes without the Herbies dampners were slightly better than the original 6H30EL with the original dampners.

Then I re installed the UltraSonic Rx dampners on the new 6H30DR this time a little higher than ARC recommends on the original installation. This yeilded the best improvment and the improvement was huge in every respect.

I am giving you this rather long summary because of the mixed reviews that I have read regarding your dampners and dampners in general. I realize that the result will be case specific but I can't help wondering if the individuals are really spending the time necessary to find the right position for the dampners on the tubes for their application.

If I did not motivate myself to spend the time to get the best position for the dampners on the tubes I would have short changed myself.

Great product - Great result!

Thank you,
John
Name: Winston Follador, Sao Carlos, Brazil
Review: "I received today the dampers, and already installed it. I noticed a small but real improvement over the last generation of your dampers (Ultrasonic Standard). Seems that the mids and highs sound more natural, with almost none of the harshness of the previous dampers. The voices are more liquid. A little more "air" around the instruments. Let's listen a little more! Thank you Steve!
Name: Clint Wilson
Review: Well I've given the new r/x version of your tube damper a good workout. I've tried them with quite a few different tubes in my cd player and they definitely have a different effect on the sound from the ultrasonic version. I transferred back and forth from each version over the last few weeks (letting them settle in for a day before close listening) and have found that the r/x version has a positive effect on most of the tubes I have. (I guess this can be expected as tubes do vary in degree to their inherent microphonic nature.)

The r/x version definitely reduces a condition of "electronic" glare that has been persistent in my system. It does this while also creating both a more rythmic (bouncy?) feeling to the music AND seems to open up the sense of ambience or air around each instrument (I guess this also speaks to a reduction in congestion or compression). A good test for me as to a tube's resolving power is the prominence of sibilance in female vocals -- r/x dampers place this sibilance in perfect relationship to the voice behind it (i.e. taming it without masking it or reducing its part in creating the liveliness of the music). I have had a few early version of the Philips E88CC with the odd "pinched waist" construction for a few years now, but have never found them to sound quite right. They are raved about in audio circles but my experience never match the glowing opinion others had of this tube. I am happy to say though, that the r/x dampers bring this tube closer to what others are saying abut it. Of all of the brands of tubes I tried, this tube was improved the most.

With regards to positioning, the rings still seem most effective towards the bottom mica of the tube, with the effects lessening as it was moved up towards the top. The bottom line is that the r/x pads do help out the system (at least with most of the tubes I have) and don't seem to create any negative artifacts.
Name: Clint Wilson, Alberta, Canada
Review: I've received the Rx dampers and had a chance to listen to them last night. I think they are definitely going in the right direction. My initial impressions are that they are smoother (compared to standard UltraSonics) and do seem to remove some of that high end glare and grain -- it seems to give the music more "bounce". It is quite surprising that the two different versions could sound different when they look so similar! Anyways, I'll listen to them more intensively over the next few days and get back to you with more detailed impressions as they settle in. Thanks so much for this opportunity to try them out!!
Name: Rob Simon, Chicago, Illinois
Review: As per your suggestion, I purchased UltraSonic Rx for the phono and line stages and input tubes. Regular UltraSonics for the 6550's. Wowzezz! This isn't even what I dreamed of; it's a learning experience -- revealing just how beautiful some of my records and CD recordings are. I was hoping for an improvement, but I couldn't have imagined beforehand that it would be like a total transformation. Nothing in particular is different except that everything just sounds right!
Name: Dennis Vandeputte, Aurora, Illinois
Review: I just received Rx-50's for the 6550's in my ARC VS55 and I am astonished by the improvement. Now I want to add them to the 6N1P's. My compliments on your achievement with these damping rings.

1 | 2 | 3 | next> | last>>