Jay's "Ugly Truth" video


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkveZGS2dSI

Why does this get mentioned so rarely? 

I've experienced the "dark side" and have never had the means to afford gear that's remotely close to the level that Jay focuses on. 

What about you -- can you relate or have you always been able to maintain a healthy balance and avoid being overtaken by obsession? 

stuartk

Showing 6 responses by mahgister

Comparing amplifiers as Jay was doing means little , not only because Synergy matter, but because the impressions of an amplifier are not only gathered through many other components synergy it is listening through a Brain/ears room and with a room acoustically controlled for specific ears or not...

Jays never get it really, he treated acoustic as a secondary component; for me it is the primary one...As Jay most reviewers are not acoustician and not informed really about it out of panels sellers publicity...

Putting panels on a wall is not the same as creating an acoustic room to serve a specific audio system for some specific ears and not another... Small room acoustic is not great Hall acoustic by the way ... Two completely different applications of acoustic laws... Size, geometry and topology and acoustic content matter , then a 13 feet room by15 and by 8 foot for ONE listener spot has nothing to do acoustically with a concert Hall for a crowd ...

Gullible people think that amplifier choice or dac choice or even speakers choice matter most than the room installation choices... Then they are ready to put 100000 bucks on an amplifier choice and 200 hundred bucks on few panels and call this acoustic job done.... After that in this same room they compare with the same components another amplifier and decided they can pick for us all the better amplifier for all ears/room and for all other existent pairing components...

They sell amplifiers, knowing it or not , most reviews are selling publicities; i trust only average users reviews and in great numbers not singular one and only for vintage products because they had been tested by many not few reviews for a very long period not a very short period and sometimes vintage are mythical products not new hyped one which will die way before being mythical good one...

And audio wise people look for the best ratio S.Q. / price not for the higher price tag thinking that higher the price better the sound will be...

My audiophile thesis is that when we had the right synergy between components first and second when we had been able to create the rightful embeddings controls of the mechanical and electrical and acoustical workings dimensions, we passed through a minimal quality threshold which for most well chosen components correspond to their optimal working potential together...

When this optimal working embeddings threshold is reached with many possible minimally qualitative components from the markets , we experience "audiophile" S.Q. at some level, most of the times enough to let us forget sounds qualities as lackings but now experiencing them more as enough to make any acoustic counts being felt as it must be felt...

We listen music forgetting audio defects... Each acoustic factor is felt with the others enough to give a real "musical" experience,... The system is now good...

Upgrading is now always possible really without too much tryings and errors but seems now suddenly way more costly...It is now the system that must be upgraded as a whole ,not a mere component as it was the case before as an often false solution and cure for some defective embeddings controls...

Upgrading really my actual system will cost me too much from 700 bucks to at least 10,000...( a new Dac with BACCH filters) ( read me right here my 2 actual dacs work well and perfectly but i spoke about upgrading the WHOLE system not only changing a dac here thanks to BACCH filters and their corresponding designed dac )

I could optimize it too electrically further for 1000 bucks ( battery+ sine convertor) . I would do it perhaps in the future...But i am happy with what i had and too busy now to listen music to think really about these ugrades which would be real improvement but are no more an obsessive thoughts because the system is very satisfying as it is ... ... I perceive sound as a musical wholeness with it...It is this wholeness i could upgrade not a specific acoustic defective factors as such thanks to Synergetic components and thanks to their embeddings controls in the three dimensions ...

 

I am not proud to own mere plug and play components, i am proud to had been able to learn how to embed them... I am proud more of my own creation than of lucky branded name purchase by themselves.....Creativity cure audio obsession nothing else...

 

Well said and well explained...Thanks ...

In my earlier post I stated, "It is Interesting how the idea of exchanging the Tools to replay recordings become of very little importance over a short period of time."

@mahgister  has stated "Then it is not purchasing an upgrade that will teach you how to distinguish and relate this three different conceptual perspectives , it will be the task to optimize and study the mechanical, electrical and acoustical embeddings of any gear you already own in their rightful optimal synergetical working dimensions..."

As for the words from @mahgister I sense I have them understood and endorse them.

It is no secret on the 'Gon', where I make it known I have worked extensively on interfaces in my Audio System and Listening Environment.

The experiences attained and impressions to be made are not ones that are able to to be acquired over night. It is safer to say there is the Long-Haul element to such an endeavour.

Firstly,  Audio Equipment does not levitate, it requires to be propped up on something to support it.

The methods used for propping up/support has lead me to learn plenty about Supporting Audio Devices from Source to Speakers. The lessons learned are quite substantial and others who I spend time with in relation to Audio interests, when introduced to, or loaned a method I have adopted to use, have followed up with creating their own versions. From my assessment it is without question that when this area of Audio is attended to, devices in use find a new level of attraction for how they perform. (This as a practice does not have to incur an outlay of too much monies)

 Secondly, Audio Devices are not able to Beam a Electronic Signal it is to be transferred from device to device via Wire. There are methods to supply power to a device that are not direct from the Grid, I have mainly worked with Power Cables. 

This for me has been an evolving experience, where 15 Years ago I was influenced by a Brands offerings when it came to Interconnect Cables. Over the approx' past 10 Years, I moved to being more interested in how a Type of material used for a  Signal Wire and the Wire Structure, i.e, Solid, Stranded, would function at an interface.

I have worked with a Source, i.e, Cartridge Tag Wires, Tonearm Internal Wand Wires, Internal Wiring in Audio Devices, Wire Types used to Transfer a Electronic Signal, Connectors on a Chassis, Connectors on a Cable. 

The gauge of Solid Wire or Composition of a Stranded Wire, become the later in the learning process focus of interest. The overall Structure of the Cable was not too important in the earliest investigations, and to date, lessons learned have not revealed too much to suggest the overall structure of a Cable is of great importance in my listening environment.

My own experiences to date have shown Wire Type, Wire Structure - Solid, Stranded and the Wire Gauge and the connectors used on both Cable and Chassis, are the factors that can make a Interface that is produced a Standout (for the better) or to have a Mediocre to Detrimental Impact on the Sonic being produced. (This as a practice will take time, depending on the methods adopted, it can incur cost for third party support. There does not have to be too much of a concern for an outlay when not buying into Brands and selecting a Wire Type Only. Sometimes a used market search can discover a Cable with all the Boxes Ticked for very reasonable monies and will speedily resell if not wanted to be kept).

Thirdly, there is the Space/Environment that the end product of the produced Electronic Signal transferred form Source to Speaker Xover is to be finally transformed into a Sonic with the intention to be Audibly Noticed. Within this Space the Sonic can be one that is not seemingly contaminated by other sonic residuals  being created by the energy being transferred as sound into the room.

Over time I have set up Audio Equipment in a various environments and have become accustomed to how unwanted frequencies can be resent through the produced sound transferring into other local inanimate objects and transforming these into producers of a unwanted audible sonic. 

Not all inanimate objects are removable or able to be simplistically treated, a soft base under a item that has a rattle when in direct contact with a hard surface, is a most basic treatment. A Glass in a Rooms Aperture that resonates is a more involving challenge to substantially reduce the audible intrusion.

My present listening environment is Treated to my Standards but not in a professionally treated sense. I am using my experiences and DIY ancillaries, where the produced ancillaries are using materials that will be incorporated into the ancillaries a professional service will recommend to be incorporated.

My evaluation is that I know exactly where to remove a ancillary and create a sonic that is noticeable for being a intrusive distraction.

For me the above is a Trilogy of Importance.

I do feel the Room undergoing a amount of treatment to reduce the effects of sound that is a residual and intrusive goes a long way to assist with evaluation of adopting the other methods.

How an individual approaches this Trilogy of treating the Audio Interfaces as a 'matter of course' is again each to their own. Where one gets on and off the Bus will be unique for each.

What is a asurity, is that keeping ones ear to the Ground and periodically continuing investigations, will bring new levels of performance and betterment beyond what is already achieved. The impact might just be, that a change of equipment might not seem to carry too much importance, as a result of the benefits already being experienced through working on the Interfaces in the System and Listening Environment.

I will repeat something that is not obvious for most...

The audio engineering vocabulary and concepts are not the acoustic and psycho-acoustic vocabulary and concepts and neither of those are the musical vocabulary and concepts ...We had three musketeers here who are four really because psycho-acoustics is not reducible to physical acoustics...

The word "details" here will mean three different aspect of the potential experience of perceived "details"... It will be the same for the word "musical" with three different meanings and experiences ... And it is the same trichotomy for any other concepts...

Then it is not purchasing an upgrade that will teach you how to distinguish and relate this three different conceptual perspectives , it will be the task to optimize and study the mechanical,electrical and acoustical embeddings of any gear you already own in their rightful optimal synergetical working dimensions...

Audiophile experience means learning how to make converge these three (four) conceptual perspectives in ONE meaningful experience... This had nothing to do with buying 40 amplifiers, 40 dacs, and forty pair of speakers...

Musicians and acousticians upgrade less...😁😊 Why ?

They care less about the brand names and more about their ears experience and how to improve it with no need very often for upgrade... Save the necessary one upgrade when all that is possible have been done  with what we already own... Not before...

I was in heaven with my AKG K340 and my Sansui alpha...

But being an audiophile i decided even if i was completely happy to order an amplifier i dreamed about for years... nevermind his brand name, it is not the subject here...

It takes 20 minutes to decide to return it... One of the most well reviewed tube amplifier for headphone in the world....Versus a 35 years headphone out of a S.S. amplifier...

I was satisfied with my system Sansui anyway because on all acoustic counts all was perfect for me...

I lost 400 US dollars in postal fees, insurance, customs fees... I am let with nothing because i did not listen to my acoustic knowledge but to my curiosity of audiophile ...😊

Upgrading is stupid half the time... Especially when you understand what are the acoustic meanings behind audio experience by learning experiments as i did...

Call this an "error" caused by a slight OCD in audio.... The same obsession that guided me through one year full time acoustic experiments ... But doing this i learned something in acoustic... What did i learn with my "upgrade" ?

I learn that it is acoustic experience and synergy that define what is a good sound first, not marketing or price tag...

I will never upgrade my amp. nor my headphone...

Not even my small optimized active speakers box, because for the price after modifications i hit the jackpot, with my modifications they sound at their optimal level...They did not compare with their sound right out of the box...

Now how it will cost for me for a real upgrade of all my system ?

10,000 bucks minimum ...For a 700 bucks system....

I will listen music and i will forgot upgrading...

😁

And i dont say it because my sound is average... It is not.... It is more than good in the ratio S.Q. /price...

Music is the only cure for sound obsession... Buy music...Or buy books... I never regret the cost of all my books reading and music listenings ...And it is way over my audio cost... it was the cost of a house... 😊

OCD in science, philosophy, meditation, martial arts, books, gardening, art etc can be enlightening and helping in a way ... But buying gear by obsession is preposterous if you dont have the money to begin with... Most people dont... And those who have the money anyway dont even bother to study and experiment with acoustic, they really think that they dont need to... I remember the sound of Jay room few years ago.... It was bad ... With gear of price tag near my first house price...Very bad... Musical has nothing to do with "details"....I had more details with the tube amp. i returned on the spot than with my Sansui by the way ... Lesson learned...

Jay struck me as a very honest person...Once this is said...

He did not know  at first that marketing make people forget that audio is about learning synergy and learning acoustic and mechanical and electrical embeddings controls FIRST not about buying spree...

Anyway he cannot analyse this objectively because he decided to become a reviewer then he decided to sell products...

If you sell something the focus must be the product "perfections" not the embeddings and acoustic controls... The focus is purchasing and selling not thinking...

And audio is about the best ratio S.Q. /price for most people anyway not about the best in the absolute...

Because Jay is honest and very conscious he decided to face this obsession or OCD in audio... Myself i cured it by me experiments with only homemade creative low cost solutions... It worked ... And my S.Q. is the best there is for the price...😊