2. misc-audio
  3. 1188487675

Observations on Audiogon Posts

There has been something that disturbs me about the posts I see on Audiogon. I am specifically talking about the posts that ask members to make suggestion's on equipment.

Here is the problem I have. I rarely (and I mean I can count on one hand the number of times) see people post what kind of sound they are looking for. Instead people ask if such and such a piece will sound good with these other twenty pieces in their systems. What's the problem? Well, how do we know what you are looking for? Is sound-staging the most important thing to you? For some people it is. Do you like a forward aggressive sounding presentation or do you like a more laid back sound? Is musicality the most important thing to you? Do you want a system that produces accurate timbres? Knowing what you're looking for can save you thousands on equipment that doesn't fit you're criteria. It also helps us in making suggestions.

It seems to me that if more of us spent more time on what we are trying to get from our systems then on what brands we should buy we would all be a lot happier.

Just some food for thought.
nrostov

Showing 3 responses by mrtennis

mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
i think most people don't have a clue what they like because the qualities that they allegedly value contract each other.

there is an example on this thread, but i am not trying to nitpick o0r be critical.

if one desires the quality "x" and the quality "y", and x and y are inconsistent with each other, it is not possible to attain both.

here is an example. wanting to achieve warmth and transparency. the idea of warmth involves suboth subtractive and additive colorations, while transparency ,ideally entails no coloration. off course nothing is perfect.

it is best to be consistent with one's goals, so as to avoid disappointments. one should be aware of the meaning of adjectives to ensure they are consistent with each other.

again, i am not trying to be critical. rather just suggesting that one be aware of what one really wants as to presentation and examines the possibilities of attaining them.

i have a reputation of preferring a dark sound. it would be counterproductive if i suddenly wanted resolution with my "darkness'.

if you have the facility to alter the sound of your stereo system, you can have warmth and transparency, but not at the same time.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
perhaps, we can agree on definitions so that when people seek a componet with specific attributes, it is easier to assist them.

i'll start.

warm: slight dip in the upper mid/lower treble region walong with a slight peak in the range 100 to 200 hz.

transparent: a lack of audible coloration in a frequency range. for an example, take a speaker which is so-called flat between 50 hz and 20,000 hz. if one cannot detect any distortion in the aforementioned range, the speaker would be deemed transparent. of course it is not that simple, but at least its a definition.

hopefully others will discuss other attributes and a discussion can ensue.

ultimately these definitons can reside somewhere accessible to all.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
i think what is important is relative differences, not absolute differences. it is more useful to find out what affect a component has on a stereo system. very often a component has a consistent affect on most stereo systems.

sometimes there are relative differences between two or more components, that are consistent accross many stereo systems. such information is very useful.

if someone has had the experience of comparing say, 4 cd players in a variety of stereo systems, the results are most informative.
More to discover