Audiophile Priorities and Recent Topics
Mahgister is (was?) our #1 user of tweaks....and I admire his approach to his enjoyment of them. I don't have to duplicate same to enjoy mine, nor 'you' anyone else's... That is the beauty of it all, when the frissons stop...or better...begin. https://www.sciencealert.com/why-some-people-get-skin-orgasms-chills-from-listening-to-music-science (...this has popped up before, but bears repetition....) ...and, for the better part of it....nice thread, 3EZ.... ;) |
Tweak Mini Review; VPI Magic Brick. The science of why they sometimes work… Essentially on a conventional transformer they add core material. Undersized transformers on quasi budget equipment benefit the most. Sorry Torridals don’t work that way. There is also the potential mass loading effect reducing vibration effects. i normally use them in conjunction w Stillpoints. Rollerblocks, HRS Nimbus couplers…pick your favorite… Sonic effects are are a bit like tube rolling, depends on the component but better clarity from midbass up thru midrange can be expected. Can be found used $20 to ? DIY also possible, the sheet core from a DOA transformer potted in epoxy would be excellent. |
Good point @tomic601 Mahgister has stated that he doesn't even own vinyl. How off-putting certain commentators must be to him with their polarizing positions on digital vs analog. I value my digital and analog front ends equally. All this thread was about was reflecting on audiophile priorities recognizing that everything matters and there is role for everything - but there may be a hierarchy that folks can reflect on. I provided mine and I welcome all perspectives - not just those that mirror mine. |
I have a good VPI Magic Brick story. I bought a set of three from the Stereo Exchange a thousand years ago. And schlepped them around for hours as we did some other shopping. At one point, we were in the rug department at a department store (Macys?) where they were having a demonstration of rug weaving by these mystical looking dudes wearing what I would call Hari Krishna outfits with shaved heads and pig tails. I put down my load of bricks with a sigh of exertion. One of the rug dudes (who spoke perfect American English) asked "what's in the package?" I said "Magic Bricks." Rug dude nodded, knowingly. As they say in NY, "go figure." |
Mahgister - what an interesting guy, his methods inspired me to make efforts with power supply (Puritan PSM-156), room acoustics (effective absorption on the front wall between speakers) and his ideas were to get the most out of your gear before spending loads of money on more gear, or better gear. I organised more isolation, and finally used my AMG toppers. PP products. It’s really a more balanced approach, to make what you already have work better, integrate a synergistic approach where everything matters. Equally. Others have said it (you know who you are), Mahgister just kept at it, until hopefully some listened to the logic. Budget dependent choices of implementation of his criteria, based upon good reasoning. Let’s face it, the greatest components plonked down in a room isn’t going to sound anywhere near it’s best. Hopefully anyone coming in here isn’t going to read the top three posts and build his system based solely on those?? Correctly implemented "tweeks" as I read them called, really do save money and can develop a better experience. I’m not saying having a solid foundation isn’t important in the system recipe, but you can double the budget and leave out doing something that despite being less expensive, gains more sound quality than simply throwing money at the issues. Most of us have already invested in speakers, amplifiers, front end signal sources and these are obviously the big ticket items. I can see why much less expensive items as the OP has suggested are things to talk about, because they are next step items to get better performance with what we’ve already chosen. I haven’t changed out a fuse yet, it is part of the power supply, as far as I’m concerned. Logic dictates that if cables of any form can make any difference, fuses probably can too (again, I haven’t gotten to it yet). @mahgister - hope this finds you in good health. |
Something's unraveling around here.*L* And that's news? Slinkys in a squirrel cage that always changes speed and/or direction...at it's worst, TTTTruth... At best, involving and insightful. 4:33 of Difficult Listening, digital of course. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qfnNJbtRjw |
"lol How many ID’s did you create in late July all with less than 50 posts? And only posting on topics like Quantum Science, Tekton, and Fuses....something seems so familiar here." @three_easy_payments, one. One account. I only post on threads I either know something about, or want to know something about. *shrugs* Not sure where the disconnect is, or what the problem is. |
@coralkong Look, this is only the 2nd thread I’ve created in the last 12 months. Others have created many multiples of this in just a few months so the tenor of the forum likely comes from subjects posted by others - much more than me. Believe it or not we even have one member who has created 62 threads and nearly 11,000 posts in under 3 years so perhaps that's the source of the vibe you're picking up. In any event, it’s very odd that you randomly stumble on my thread to broadly share the following: I own Tekton speakers. I had a good experience. *shrugs* YMMV. Why post this is on a thread that had nothing to do with Tekton speakers and is simply serving as an outreach to members to post their experiences with audio priorities? Maybe you meant to post this on another thread? In any event, we are a welcoming bunch so please share anything else you’d like about the gear that gives you joy, including your Tektons and any other components. |
I wish someone or something would define exactly what tweaks are. Is there an objective list of particular devices or group of devices? Therefore, room treatments, cables, AC, footers/isolation, internal parts such as capacitors, resistors, etc. ? Assuming there is such a list, who decides which groups or particular devices belong on that list? Perhaps someone hears an effect from any particular device or group of devices. Is there some objective criteria that proves this person couldn't have heard what they stated they heard? Is there some objective criteria pertaining to any particular person's estimation of value of any particular device or group of devices? I agree a certain amount of skepticism should be practiced with particular tweaks. My criteria for possible purchase or believability for a group of devices or particular device is it has to observed to be effective to a relatively large number of people for a number of years. I can't be exactly precise on numbers or years. We've all seen some tweaks come and go, I assume the ones that are spoken of year after year are effective to at least to some degree, to some people. And so, I see these threads as providing a service, at least to me. Someone is either providing introduction to new device or commenting on a particularly well known device. The new device will fail or succeed in marketplace and feedback on well known device is appreciated. Based on one's criteria for what is a tweak, I either use a lot or very little. Again, I'd like to know exactly what is a tweak? |
@sns At least for purposes of this thread I wasn't trying to define a tweak. I just wanted to get input on where audiophiles were assigning priorities in the build out of their systems. Not sure it matters if we call component isolation a tweak, or cabling a tweak etc...I just wondered how focused folks were on these items relative to other priorities. |
| Post removed |
That's what I thought you meant. I might even agree that newbies could be mislead on tweaks, depending on my assumption of what newbies might think. My issue is some posters entirely negating certain items and/or particular groups of what they perceive to be tweaks. This could be just as harmful to newbies in that they may mislead in another direction. I've long observed systems getting more complex over time, more and more links in systems, assume this would be called tweaking. And then we have the optimization of each link, tweak upon tweak. Isn't this the natural evolution of audiophilia disease? I'd only suggest keeping the horse in front of the cart. |
Tweaks are about a deeper understanding of how sound is being produced from the recording process all the way to the end result. Tweaks also seem really counter intuitive and voodoo magic at times. How can six feet of wire dramatically change the sound when electricity has traveled 1000s of miles to get to your stereo. Honestly I have no idea. My latest theory with NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE is that it’s not filtering the electricity from the source but it’s effecting the electricity changes produced from inside the device... but I digress. Cable lifters ungodly expensive. 8 little plastic foglifter devices $150 and do they even work??? Before spending your hard earned cash try an experiment. Buy a case of beer (everything sounds better with beer) Buy lots more broccoli (don’t just steal the rubber bands) Go to the drawer that has all those rubber bands that came on the broccoli I have two sizes thick and thin put the thick rubber band near the bottom and the thinner rubber band around the top wedge a piece of cardboard between the bottles so they don’t vibrate. (I cut mine from a pizza box... had to use the leftover beer) repeat until you have enough to get the cables off the floor. now just listen. Is it better? If it is, buy Danager a beer. If it isn’t just drink the beer and eat the broccoli. this sounds like a win win to me |
OK, here’s playing the devil’s advocate. Sometimes the most obvious answers that are right in front of you do not come to light. I do not consider interconnects, or speaker and power cables tweaks. First, lets be real, many of the lengths that some of you go to to tweak your systems would be considered fairly symptomatic of a neurotic condition by non audiophiles. I think you will find it is also considered the same by a lot of audiophiles. A possible explanation for the tweak o maniac is that they have blown so much money and ended up with a such a lousy sounding system that they will try anything, no matter how weird, to make it sound better and not have to admit they really blew it. This is only relevant if you have never had your system sound so good that you could just sit back and enjoy it. Remember I am just playing the devil's advocate. |
It seems to me that there are basically two types of tweak: the substitute tweak and the add-on tweak. Substitute category: you're replacing something that your system needs in order for it to work with a something else that performs the same basic function, though supposedly better: fuses, power cords, capacitors, whatever. Add-on category: without these, your system will continue to produce sound: dynamat, footers, microdots on the walls, whatever. |
@jetter I do not consider interconnects, or speaker and power cables tweaks. I’d agree but would you claim to be deriving more than 50% of your system’s listening pleasure from your cabling alone? I ask this as I’m genuinely curious because I’ve read the claim being made and it simply doesn’t cinch up with my own personal experiences or even guidance you read in say Harley’s book. I wouldn’t assign more than 10% or so to cables which means I acknowledge it can certainly make a difference and is worth addressing but it’s not close to being one of my highest priorities. So the thread was created to foster a discussion of what are your highest priorities and what role (and relative importance) do areas like cables, footers, and fuses have in your system? I just know my experience and I’d like to hear others. Our collective accounts could be really helpful to others. |
So the thread was created to foster a discussion of what are your highest priorities and what role (and relative importance) do areas like cables, footers, and fuses have in your system? Coulda fooled me. The actual OP: these topics vastly overwhelm thread topics that clearly would have more influence to hifi audio sound such as discussions of the sonic characteristics of various amplifier topologies, the importance of simplifying the signal path, and identifying fantastic speaker/amplifier synergies, etc... Whatever. I just know my experience and I’d like to hear others. Our collective accounts could be really helpful to others. They are. Tons of people talking about how great their stuff sounds on Nobsound springs, or on Pods, or Podiums. QSA fuses, Stones, all kinds of things. You should try reading them. Oh, but wait- aren’t those are the ones you started out complaining about, the ones that "overwhelm" the site? Whatever. |
Tons of people talking about how great their stuff sounds on Nobsound springs, or on Pods, or Podiums. QSA fuses, Stones, all kinds of things. You should try reading them. I’ve definitely read them. And now I’d like to hear how people feel those areas (among ALL others) fit into an audiophile’s overall prioritization. Yes, my own viewpoints have been expressed as I do feel the role of springs, fuses, and stones are overstated in terms of impact (simply from my experience). This is an open forum to share ALL of our collective experiences - not just yours MC. Stop complaining about people sharing their experiences just because they don’t match yours. You hate the thread....we get it...so move on. And I love it - I got ’whatevered". ;-) |
Relevant internet definitions I found for “tweak” are mostly along the lines of, “improve (a mechanism or system) by making fine adjustments to it” and “to adjust slightly; to fine-tune” In the audio world, these definitions align with my belief that tweaks are the final efforts one makes to optimize the sound of a system. They may be system dependent (i.e., some tweaks may work best with specific gear) or they may be universal in that certain tweaks may improve the sound of most or all systems. For example, many here have amp stands or isolation platforms that have survived multiple changes of the equipment supported on them, and they continue to improve the sound of the owner's system. To the OP’s question, IMO, for a given room, the selected components and speakers determine the basic sound of a system while tweaks can be implemented to remove minor deficiencies and/or to enhance the sonic qualities already being delivered by the existing system components. I believe cables may have a bit more influence than most other tweaks, but I certainly do not believe the impact of a cable on system sonics is anywhere near that of a component or speaker. IME, tweaks and cables are to a system what the sweeper is to the curler…..the sweeper can help but the stone still needs to be travelling in the right general direction at the right speed.
I believe the polarization seen in these threads mostly results from the vast chasm between the magnitude of changes/improvements being reported by some as a result of adding a tweak compared to the insistence by others that a certain tweak (or cable) can’t possibly affect the sound of a system. It isn’t that people don’t hear changes between components, speakers, cables, or tweaks because most here report that they do. It’s the magnitude of the difference between the two sides of the argument coupled with the increasingly higher prices being charged for this stuff that apparently neither side can live with. Although I have an opinion, I try to listen and judge for myself, vote with my own wallet, and let others do the same. |
@three_easy_payments And now I’d like to hear how people feel those areas (among ALL others) fit into an audiophile’s overall prioritization.I am happy to share my view as someone who just acquired decent components for the first time. I don't see the items identified as tweaks as a priority at all. I find the ideas interesting (and entertaining), but outside of buying better cables (earlier post) I won't pursue the rest. For me these other items listed (isolation (except TTs), fuses, cable goop, stones, etc.) seem unnecessary. Interesting, but unnecessary. To me the main components (speakers, source, preamp/amp, cables/interconnects) are the priority. Everything else seems a pursuit in diminishing returns. Maybe if I thought my system components were perfect (to me an unrealistic and unattainable goal) then I might chase some tweaks. However, I prefer discovering and buying new music instead of researching the latest quantum discovery. I am in this for the music, not the gear. Cheers! |
Cables, tweaks, goop, fuses, tar paper, water beds, trampolines, self sealing stem bolts (no idea what they are, I heard it on ST DS9) minor stuff, 5-10%. Vibration control, 5-10%. Gear 30-35% maybe a little higher 40% Electrical 5-10%. Room and room acoustics, 40-50% Real world cost and contribution to actual complete sound systems. Like Master M, I don’t think Vibration / harmonic, Electrical or room acoustics, as tweaks. You’re better off in the back yard with your gear backed up to a wall than in an untreated room.. There are fundamentals to make a system, and it has nothing to do with tweaks. It seems like it cost me a 100% on every part I learned, especially gear. The ROOM.... THE ROOM!!!!! I’ve seen a few weird ones too.. BUT attention to the room, wonderful sound...Down to the wispy plants, here and there. I like really good horns too, So many toys so little time. :-) Tweaks.. 5-10% including cables.. |
@cleeds +1 I too believe cables make a difference - and you need to be a "non-idiot" to produce a good one. I just don't think they are contributing to more than 5-10% of my system's overall performance - and appreciate other's thoughts on the relative impact that cables and other items make on their rigs. |
mike_in_nc4:58pmFinally, it’s easier to sneak a new pair of wires or set of fuses into the house than a new pair of speakers. That can be important to those who hope to be spared questions -- of cost and sanity -- from life partners.Mike. NOW you tell me? The trucking company tells me my speakers are on the way for delivery today. Dead man walking... |
Three_easy_payments: I started out in this hobby when I bought Dyna70 and DynaPAS kits and built the stuff myself at the age of 14, back in the 1960s. David Halfer’s Dynaco was built on the premise of simple (simple!) high quality design that was affordable. That ethos had largely vanished in the audio world of today. The system that I have today is built on the foundation that I started out with 53 years ago. The premise is the same: don’t spend much, carefully shop to get the most for the dollar out of each compatible component. The biggest recent improvement was a consequence of moving into a new home that needed a gut restoration. I have a room that is semi-anechoic, and the sound quality went up by a whopping 25% to 30%. All for the amount of money I was to spend anyway for thermal performance, about $2000. Which would you choose? $2000 on a room treatment for 25% improvement $2000 on cables for at best 5% improvement see https://www.theaudioatticvinylsundays.com I have tried expensive cable in the past. You will see that I found cable performance to be so negligible that I don’t bother to include them in my system component listing. I thought until a few days ago that all of my cables were generic, except for some bottom of the barrel Monster. It turns out I still have Analysis Plus in there, connecting the table/SUT/preamp/amps from the last time I tried experimenting with cables, about 10 years ago, and completely forgot about them. cheers - unreceivedogma apologies to those who by now have heard my mantra over and over, beaten into them with a baseball bat. |
| Post removed |
@unreceiveddogma Which would you choose? Agreed on this example. It strikes me that your focus would only shift to tweaks when you feel that you've done all you could in every other area of priority first. What really got me motivated to start the thread was the premise posited by a few members who seemed to give a disproportionately large level of priority to areas that I thought would be the absolute last areas to focus on. Seems many others agree. Much appreciated...and cool website! |
Three_easy_payments : thx for the website shout out. As inferred before, I built around a low cost, tube analog approach. As to speaker/amp synergy: I started with the Dyna and a pair of Lafayette speakers. Moved up to a pair of Dyna MK IIIs, then Hafler mono blocs which were crap, back to the MK IIIs. Moved to a pair of Warfdales, then Altec 604Cs (1978), then the Futterman (1985), then Duntechs. The Duntechs and the Futtermans destroyed each other. Repaired the Futtermans, ditched the Duntechs, back to the 604Cs. I recently had the Futtermans rebuilt by Jon Specter as triodes. He put in all new Jensen audio grade foil oil caps. I rebuild the 604s every 10 years. I asked Specter if I should change the impedance from 16 to 8, he said leave ‘em at 16, the Futtermans love efficiency. The Futtermans have been stable for 8 years now. I started with building around the Dynas, got the 604Cs, loved ‘em, got the Futtermans and the Duntechs disaster led me to realize that the Altec/Futterman combo was a match made in heaven. I know that Futterman/Quad is the classic combo, but I never liked the Quads. I experimented with about a dozen cables in the 1990s/early 00s. To the extent that I heard a difference, I wondered if I was trying to hard to hear it. I should not have to make an effort to hear anything at $200 to $2000 per pair. Sorry! A waste of $s imho. The only tweaks that I have done that made a difference is bolting the cabinet to a brick wall that the table sits on, and putting the Velodyne sub on springy rubber feet. That second one strikes me as counterintuitive but I guess that decoupling the sub from the building trumps resistance to movement: until then, the sub was turning the entire 3.5 story building into a subwoofer. |
Out of curiosity I took a quick look at Robert Harley's well-known book "The Complete Guide to High-End Audio" to see what his guidance was on tweaks. He discusses them in Chapter 15 (out of 16). He indicates that these items can be used to address an "audiophiles' need to squeeze out those last bits of musical performance out of their systems." He also says that you should not even think about these items before making sure you have optimized speaker positioning and room acoustics first and having first built a solid foundation. A few quotes I found interesting, while he did acknowledge that some accessories can certainly make improvements: Other accessories can not only fail to improve the sound, but can actually degrade it. To make matters even more complicated, many accessories are completely worthless - nothing more than snake oil sold by less-than-honest promoters that have no effect on sound. Listen before you buy It seems that Harley's priorities align well with mine and many others that have posted in this thread. It's interesting that the Editor-in-Chief of The Absolute Sound used the term "snake oil". I honestly didn't expect that. |
@unreceiveddogma does he offer examples? Not too many, rather he states "I don't endorse every accessory described here - I simply report on what's available." However he did include this about examples of indisputably worthless products: Examples include an alligator clip , to be attached to a speaker cable to prevent the speaker's "gravitational influence" from affecting the audio signal. Another claims to "energize" the electrons in an audio system with a combination of lithium salts and cobra venom. |
