Prof, what you wrote really doesn't matter much. It's like somebody indicating that are an instant race car driver just because they bought a sports car.
What Matters and What is Nonsense
I’ve been an audiophile for approximately 50 years. In my college days, I used to hang around the factory of a very well regarded speaker manufacturer where I learned a lot from the owners. When I started with audio it was a technical hobby. You were expected to know something about electronics and acoustics. Listening was important, but understanding why something sounded good or not so good was just as important. No one in 1968 would have known what you were talking about if you said you had tweaked your system and it sounded so much better. But if you talked about constant power output with frequency, or pleasing second-order harmonic distortion versus jarring odd-order harmonics in amplification, you were part of the tribe.
Starting in the 1980s, a lot of pseudo scientific nonsense started appearing. Power cords were important. One meter interconnects made a big difference. Using a green magic marker on the edge of a CD was amazing. Putting isolation dampers under a CD transport lifted the veil on the music. Ugh. This stuff still make my eyes roll, even after all these years.
So I have decided to impart years and years of hard won knowledge to today’s hobbists who might be interested in reality. This is my list of the steps in the audio reproduction chain, and the relative importance of each step. My ranking of relative importance includes a big dose of cost/benefit ratio. At this point in the evolution of audio, I am assuming digital recording and reproduction.
Item / Importance to the sound on a scale of 1-10 / Cost benefit ratio
Starting in the 1980s, a lot of pseudo scientific nonsense started appearing. Power cords were important. One meter interconnects made a big difference. Using a green magic marker on the edge of a CD was amazing. Putting isolation dampers under a CD transport lifted the veil on the music. Ugh. This stuff still make my eyes roll, even after all these years.
So I have decided to impart years and years of hard won knowledge to today’s hobbists who might be interested in reality. This is my list of the steps in the audio reproduction chain, and the relative importance of each step. My ranking of relative importance includes a big dose of cost/benefit ratio. At this point in the evolution of audio, I am assuming digital recording and reproduction.
Item / Importance to the sound on a scale of 1-10 / Cost benefit ratio
- The room the recording was made in / 8 / Nothing you can do about it
- The microphones and setup used in the recording / 8 / nothing you can do about it.
- The equalization and mixing of the recording / 10 / Nothing you can do about it
- The technology used for the recording (analog, digital, sample rate, etc.) / 5 / nothing you can do about it.
- The format of the consumer recording (vinyl, CD, DSD, etc.) 44.1 - 16 really is good enough / 3 / moderate CB ratio
- The playback device i.e. cartridge or DAC / 5 / can be a horribe CB ratio - do this almost last
- The electronics - preamp and amp / 4 / the amount of money wasted on $5,000 preamps and amps is amazing.
- Low leve interconnects / 2 / save your money, folks
- Speaker cables / 3 / another place to save your money
- Speakers / 10 / very very high cost to benefit ratio. Spend your money here.
- Listening room / 9 / an excellent place to put your money. DSPs have revolutionized audio reproduction
259 responses Add your response
Over many years and many permutations of my setup, relative cost percentages have changed and sometimes quite radically. I agree the listening room is critical, cost benefit ratio high here. Some tweaks work, others not. Tweaks with a long track record are more likely to have some value, although effective new ones come along occasionally. Some still consider cabling to be a tweak. Has it not surpassed that characterization, could so many people over so many years be fooled into false belief?In the end I've concluded everything matters, the only difference is the degree it matters to you. |
Interesting tweak or what I prefer to term, "tuning" last evening. I have been auditioning a new phono stage. It is a FET design and as such has a warmer tubier sound sans tubes in much the same way that conrad johnson's SS preamps did years ago. Very resolving, revealing details that my 25+ year old phono pre never did. The tuning involved footers. I started with two Herbie's soft tenderfeet and two hard tenderfeet. Next I went to four hard tenderfeet. My objective is to eek out as much top end air and detail as possible. The four hard feet were more revealing but what really got me where I wanted to go sonically was removing the Herbie feet and using three #4 Black Diamond racing cones. Voila!! More pluck, cymbal decay and hall sound, with super tight bass and jumping dynamics. Just beautiful. The OP is "What matters and what is nonsense". That experience matters. I checked the results today and the results were confirmed. Keeping the new gear. Lovely vinyl sound.🎼 |
geoffkait, Are you ever going to get a fallacy correct? Your record is thus far perfect! (Hint: no claim to authority was made, no argument via appeal to authority either). rbstehno, My reply was largely tongue in cheek, but also with a point. First, you came in with a strawman "if you can’t hear a difference between a Home Depot cable and a synergistic research cable." Nowhere did I of course say such a thing, nor did I imply it. In fact I was explicit, when I wrote: "None of that is to proclaim that none of the expensive accessories can make a sonic difference; it’s only to say where I find my own money is best spent." So I did not claim cables make no sonic difference; only that I have reasons for how I spend the balance off my money and time on speakers/room acoustics. The point would be that, you combined a strawman with a dig at my hearing acuity (the most common, tired refrain from cable-lovers...along with "or your system sucks.") And you did so without knowing a thing about my hearing acuity or experience in audio, which is just fine for detecting subtle differences, thank you very much. But that’s ok, I’m sure you have a faaaaar better system than anything I’ve ever encountered and nothing I’ve done in audio could prepare me to hear the obvious differences you speak of, so I will just have to defer to your wisdom. If only I could trade these cloth ears in somewhere for golden ones. Where did you get yours? ;-) |
Prof wrote, being in to high end audio since my teens having obsessively listened to high end systems of all price brackets for decades having many friends in the reviewing side and thus constant acquaintance with extremely expensive well regarded gear having reviewed speakers myself having had many great speaker systems through my room (from MBL to flagship Thiels to Von Schweikert, Audio Physic and many others...) having access to high end cables and tweaks, attending all the audio shows many other audiophiles attend, having a career in post production sound almost daily hearing the difference between live vs recorded/reproduction of those sounds, using my own recordings of my instruments and familiar voices to evaluate speakers and compare to their live sources... having designed a major reno of my room for great sound in consultation with acousticians and on and on... >>>>>Right. And on and on with more Appeals to Authority. Hel-loo! |
Geoff. For someone who so often mentions fallacies, you'd at least have a running start at being coherent if you actually looked them up and understood them. (There are valid appeals to authority, and fallacious appeals to authority - neither of which I indulged in). Go ahead: look up the formal structure of the fallacious version of appeal to authority. Now make yourself a nice bowl of popcorn, and entertain yourself for hours trying to find that form presented in what I wrote. I'm rooting for ya! |
prof Geoff. For someone who so often mentions fallacies, you’d at least have a running start at being coherent if you actually looked them up and understood them. (There are valid appeals to authority, and fallacious appeals to authority - neither of which I indulged in). Go ahead: look up the formal structure of the fallacious version of appeal to authority. Now make yourself a nice bowl of popcorn, and entertain yourself for hours trying to find that form presented in what I wrote. I’m rooting for ya! >>>>How do I know when you’re using an illogical argument? Whenever your mouth moves. Your statements I quoted are ALL appeals to Authority. There’s no such thing as a valid appeal to authority, silly. That’s kind of the whole point. If there was a valid appeal to Authority any yahoo on the internet could claim he wins the debate by simply declaring he was a PhD in Theoretical Physics or he has the support of a PhD or whatever. But that’s not true. It’s not logical. He cannot automatically win the debate by submitting his credentials or those of someone else. That’s why it’s an Appeal to Authority. Capish? Or by declaring he has 40 years of experience in high end systems. It sounds good but it’s an appeal to Authority. Hel-loo! In order to join in the debate, any debate, you must actually construct a technical argument. The appeal to authority relies on an argument of the form: A is an authority on a particular topic. An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam is a form of defeasible argument in which a claimed authority’s support is used as evidence for an argument’s conclusion. I hate to judge before all the facts are in but you should probably march yourself right down to your local library and spend some time researching the subject. 😀 A good place to start is, http://www.skepticalaboutskeptics.org/examining-skeptics/daniel-drasin-zen-and-the-art-of-debunkery/ By your own words you dabble in philosophy and debate. I do it professionally. 😬 Have a nice day! |
I do it professionally. LOL. Geoff, that you are so thoroughly confused about fallacies and the nature of reasoning helps explain your web site and products. Which is why you did not, and could not, produce what I asked: Show the logically fallacious form of argument from authority, and show where I made such an argument. (Hint: aside from your messing up the premises, what do you even imagine to be the *conclusion* of an argument I made? Where is that fallacious *conclusion* found in my response to rbstehno?) Do you want to put the bullseye shirt on, sit on the dunking chair, and try again? ;-) If not, I’ll hand hold you through the process of pointing out why you can not do this. |
I don’t mind repeating myself, prof - everything in your post to rbtstehno was fallacious. You are, for whatever set of reasons, not exactly clued in to the whole illogical argument thing. You obviously think you are. But hey, it makes for interesting discussion. I dunno why you would attack me or my web site. For one thing that’s another fallacious argument, argumentum ad hominem. “God gave you two ears and one mouth for a reason.” - Judge Judy |
*dunk! Splash!* . (Here’s a towel...) geoff, Simply repeating "yes you ARE being fallacious!"....is not an argument establishing that conclusion. Your objections could be interesting if you at least showed a grasp of the distinction between repeating assertions (as you keep doing) and actually making an argument. That’s why I tried to get you to actually produce an argument - even as a starting point what you think to be MY argument - if you are actually going to call it fallacious. If you are attacking a purported argument as fallacious, the first order of business is to actually point to the author’s premises and his CONCLUSION < --you know, the part you are supposed to show to be fallacious! Yet you’ve been asked twice to do so, and to point directly to the CONCLUSION you claim I argued for, and why it is fallacious. That’s why I’ve said, please scour what I answered and try to find that CONCLUSION you are objecting to. Kinda basic stuff that seems to escape your notice. You don’t even seem to recognize the relevance of pointing to an arguments conclusion, when arguing it is fallacious. Let alone being able to show it is in fact the conclusion argued for! So, I’ll leave you spinning your wheels I guess. But if you want to try again: What do you take to be the argument I made, including it’s CONCLUSION? (Hints: Did I argue there was no sonic difference in the Home depot/synergistic research cable comparison raised by rbstehno? Of course not. I never compared those items. Did I argue for the conclusion no sonic differences exist between cables? Nope: I explicitly said I was not making any such claim. So what in the world do you think I was arguing for? What conclusion is haunting your imagination that you could show I *actually* made?) (And, again, you mistakenly point to yet another form of argument I did not in fact make - argumentum ad hominem, but it seems we have to deal with one fallacy at a time here). |
prof geoff, Simply repeating "yes you ARE being fallacious!"....is not an argument establishing that conclusion. >>>>I know you are but what am I? If you can’t figure it out by now this conversation can serve no purpose any more, professor. This is a study in the lecturee - that would be you - believing or trying to pretend he’s the lecturer. 🤡 Wake up and smell the coffee! ☕️ I’m beginning to see why you took Michael Green’s post so personally. 😀 |
Hi I am kinda new to this but here is my $.02. I have always loved music and have had a stereo system since a teen Pioneer receiver, Mission Freedom speakers, techniques turntable Sanyo cassette. Nothing great. Then about 15 years ago I upgraded to Onkyo Receiver 626 Mordantshort speakers, then added Sonos connect. All my friends thought that I had a great sounding system and I was also happy. I then purchased a HSU sub which further enhanced the sound. 6 years ago I heard Monitor Audio silver 6's and loved them and purchased. My friends still enjoyed my system. I have a client who has 3 high end systems and I asked what I could do to enhance my current system. He told me what to buy and here my experience begins. He said that my Monitor Audio speakers were good but too small for the size of my room. I should also buy a NAD51 DAC and a Parasound A23 or used A21. If I could find a REL sub Stadium 3 or better add that. I should buy an oppo, a power conditioner and upgrade cables. I struggled to pay $15k in cables like he has for each system. The first thing I purchased was the NAD Dac and Parasound A23. Once that was hooked up with regular BB cables that I had my Monitor Audio speakers never sounded so good it was a huge improvement. So that got me going. I bought a Bryston Pii and although it isn't as friendly to use as the Sonos is I think I hear a more clear sound. I purchased average cables MacKenzie XLR and Coffee USB AB. I can't honestly say I hear a difference over BB RCA's. I found a REL Stadium 3 and it sounds way better than the HSU The HSU was too boomy and the REL just extended the bass nicely. I struggled to come to grips with a power conditioner however whomever I spoke with said it would make a difference. My client said Running Springs Jacco was a good one. I had the opportunity to borrow a RS Haley and it did make a slight difference to the sound slightly clearer and separation in voice and instruments were better. Where the big difference in the power conditioner came to be was when I disconnected it My music sounded really harsh which I had never heard before and the separation wasn't the same between instruments and voice. I couldn't find a Jacco to buy but I broke the bank when a Dimitri came up for sale. I also had the fortune to buy at a great price I think BW 803s and they sound even better than the Monitor Audio. I have heard the 800D3's and would love a pair one day. As far as cables go I bought a signal cable power cord and I have to say it made my music sound more laid back. Not sure if I like that or not and the more upbeat music seems to be missing something not as punchy with just a regular power cord. I am running cheap speaker wire that was put through my walls when I built my house so I don't know what expensive speaker cables will do to my sound. Anyway that is my story I am not an expert just a guy who loves music but I have to say that the changes that I have made have made a noticeable improvement in my system. As far as interconnects go I have tried a few different ones all lower cost and I can't say that I hear a difference so the jury is still out on those.Still struggle with $1,000 cables. |
Although I have one high end system for all music, my living room second system cost me $5K for used gear (Legacy Signature IIIs, highly modified voltage tap not ultralinear tap Dynaco ST70, custom built sub-mini tube pre-amp, a modified Pioneer DV-05 (certainly not stock), Stillpoints, GroverHuffman cabling). My wife rocks out on that system with it’s 6 10" woofers. It appeals to guests for pop, jazz and classical as well. Most comment, "wow, that’s some great music system!" "I wish I could afford that (they can, they just don’t know how to assemble a high end audio system), until they hear the audio/music room system. Yes, I installed an SR black duplex and one SR blue fuse (all there is). No room treatment, no SR HFTs-not needed in a good acoustic space. However, my audio/music room needs a lot of treatment, severe slap echo, windows, ample flat walls/cathedral ceiling). So the latter room has 2 pair of Hallographs and 32 HFTs of various types assembled throughout. I got rid of all of the wall hangings and acoustic panels (diffusion and absorption types). The sound is more spacious now with greater clarity and difficult to hear any slap echo while music is playing. Again, the room is about 50% of the sound. The speakers are important but so is everything else. The speakers and amps have to pair correctly. The pre-amp is to be as neutral as possible. The tweaks are for vibration/resonance control and for acoustic room control. Simple in concept, often difficult to achieve. Used gear can be part or all of an audio room/system providing ample musical listening satisfaction. |
Good discussion except for the occasional silly snark. The OP opinion/style seems fine to me. Personally I (also) have a strong background in EE as well as being a musician This informs my opinions but doesn't make me The Oracle obviously. . Reasonable but limited funds for audio. For me the most fun is had getting the most sound for my dollar and "sweat equity" as well as learning along the way. So I recap and adjust bias on old equipment and consider tweaks as they come along based on my interest, the cost and the fun factor. I am predisposed to being skeptical to things that seem to violate laws of physics. I understand and do not denigrate the human nature of expected outcomes. To me certain claims seem more like belief systems akin to religion or the Paranormal etc, which is also a big part of the human condition. Nothing wrong with that as long as not hurting other people. I think it is valid for "skeptics" to warn other interested parties, which is part of what this forum is about, that, based on science and/or experience, certain claims SEEM improbable to them, preferably without insulting others beliefs and experiences. The reader can decide if such arguments are convincing to them, or not, as they can do for the comments by those with other perspectives. I tend to work toward a sound that makes my classical and acoustic heroes and folk-rock, sound most realistic, usually involves a mandolin violin and/or a female vocal. The process is a big part of the fun, obvious I know to most of you. Choosing and placing/adjusting speakers and modding the room when possible is productive and fun.(Walked into a showroom expecting to buy KEF's, walked out with Rega RS3 speakers because the seller correctly though they might do better for what I told him I was after) Re-doing the guts of older electronics is fun and sometimes musically productive, always educational. I like to solder. I have tried hard to hear differences in speaker cables and can't. A quality SVS sub helped refine the sound in a big way. Not miraculous, or jaw dropping, just better. I never notice "phase" or "crossover" issues affecting musical enjoyment. And the individual parts are easier to move around for this old back. (Compared to ginormous main speakers) Ultimately the best way to get the best acoustic sound is to play it yourself with pals, and/or see it live in a "sound friendly" environment. I got as much "emotional support" and almost as much aesthetic pleasure from recorded music when I was younger and broker as I do now. Enjoy the ride because soon, you know, we will all be dead. (and maybe someone else will a get our stuff in a killer deal at auction and carry it on!) |
As an addendum, I read the Daniel Drasin referenced by Geof. I appreciate the link and the perspective. It seems to try a little too hard to debunk the debunkers. Most of us and especially those of us in science and medicine know that last years impossibility is this years fact and sometimes vice versa. BUT the bar is, and should be pretty high to support unlikely or unique claims. So issues of reproduciblity especially by those who have no financial or profound personal stake in the results is important as is a potential theoretical framework, or at the very least lack of a violation of well established fundamental laws of physics. Sure you can propose those violations also but it helps to be a genius. A good skeptic DOES listen to and consider unusual or unlikely proposals and experiences but is fair for them to be...rational and...skeptical. |
+1 playmore To me, the central issue coming out of this thread is the process of improving your system versus getting ripped off. All has become more difficult as audio transactions become "over the Internet" as opposed to selecting/auditing from a local dealer who stocks a large number of products (no longer the norm). So, product threads and reviews are essential to increasing the chances of making a good decision and I reiterate the necessity for being able to identify owners who provide honest assessments of the item. This worked for me for the Tekton Double Impacts AND did not work for the Nord Stereo UP amplifier. You pays your money and takes your chances... |
There has never been an audiophile tweak that was found to be a hoax or a fraud. Obviously there have been some preposterous ones, I won’t hot dog you about that. We already know blinding testing is not going to reveal the hoaxes. Nor is science or medicine or mathematics. Why? Because many audiophile tweaks are out of reach as it were of textbook explanations. Thus it’s becoming more and more difficult to figure out just what the heck laws of science have been broken here OR how to measure it. Here are some examples of what I’m talking about. Silver Rainbow Foil, the Tice Clock, Ultra Tweeters, fuse directionality, The Teleportation Tweak, Mpingo disc, Marigo Dots, demagetizing CDs, demagnetizing LPs, isolating solid state amps, the Red X Pen, Morphic Message Foils, the Original Intelligent Chip. |
Thanks Craig159. I might try those Herbie Feet as my wood floor is quite uneven and the spikes on small wood slabs method is a pain to keep in place and level. And if improves my detail or imaging, great! And I am leaning to switching from AIMP to JRiver as Media Player. I play ripped discs from PC to Schiit Bitfrost in one set up. Seemed like a pretty good way to get "pretty darned good" sound for rational money. But I am not sure if I am getting the best version of output bits from the PC. Will be interesting if I can "hear" any difference from playback software assuming "flat" settings. |
phomchick: Haven't used the REW/JRiver combo since I upgraded to the 64 bit version. Do you mean that REW will do an automatic dump of the EQ value (after you make the corrections) directly into JRiver? In the past have had to insert these by hand into Apqualizr and it has been dreary. Am now using JRiver in connection with RME ADI-2 DAC to upsample CDs to 768khz; the result is astounding, even better than the 192khz I was using earlier. Give this a try if your DAC will support it -- even if it sound illogical. Don't forget to select the SoX upsample option in the audio menu. |
| Post removed |
@craigl59 You can export your filters from REW and import them into JRiver. After creating the correction filters in REW, export them as a WAV file File -> Export -> Export filters impulse response as WAV Choose "stereo" the right and left filter you want to use, a bit level and sample rate (I use 24-bit and 48000) Then, in JRiver, import the filters...Player -> DSP Studio click Convolution, browse to the WAV file you saved from REW, and that is it. |
"When I was growing up, I heard that half of your budget should go to speakers and the rest would be divided between whatever sources you chose. It was to be some golden rule." I believe, after as many years as 'OP', that the loudspeakers and front-end are the most important elements of a system. So, when I was able to afford great stuff, I never hesitated to spend on those components. These days, my wallet is thin, and that great equipment is, sadly, gone forever! My current (awaiting delivery of 'Sys' & 'Mani') is a Schiit stack with a 'Modi' multibit and a second-hand Adcom GFA 545 amp. Oh, and a salvaged AR XB with Shure's only current offering - I wish I had an M91ED! As far as wires go, I have tried huge speaker cables (and tiny solid ones too) and thick, cumbersome interconnects as well. But now I know better, and seek merely good quality gold-plated (for resistance to oxidation) RCA connectors and speaker cables of adequate guage for the shortest possible convenient length. In the end, whatever pleases ones needs, both technical and psychological, is a personal choice. OCD notwithstanding. ;-) |
I agree as regards to the first couple things on the list, that we have no influence on. I agree that 16/44.1 is format good enough and realization is the more important. But I do not fully agree that speakers are the most important factor and the rest is far less important. What I have learned in my 20+ years being audiophile and setting up 100+ systems, is that the system sounds as good as its weakest component. What is the system that makes the sound? The system is: 1. The room and its acoustics, which produces about 85% of the sound coming to your ears, 2. Set of components of the electronics. I have seen systems consisting of fantastic electronics worth 250k US$ that played like crap because of bad room or bad room acoustics. But if your room is almost perfect and it has good acoustics, then everything matters. Yes - the speakers matter very much as well as anything else in the system, but I have heard speakers for 5k (retail) playing with electronics for 200k (retail) in the room treated properly, producing amazing sound, one of the best I have heard. Does it mean that speakers are less important than the rest – no, it does not. What I wanted to say, is that everything matters, each system is different, and the only way to improve the system is to experiment and try to find the weakest component and improve it – than the whole system will improve. And this (experimenting) is what audiophiles love the most, I think. |
+1 Jareko The implication is that some speakers can sound way above price point (for certain qualities especially) when the room and electronics are ideal. My Alon Trio set up in a good room went from good to great when I replaced amp BK202 with mid period sold state McIntosh fully recapped. Pre was cj PV8 mod.. Rotel to Cambridge CD quite audible improvement. Modded Thorens TT good. Revamped Sota Saphire with Alphason tonearm, 40 bucks at an auction sale, priceless. I did have to adapt a PS and build a new suction device for the Sota and buy a $400 cartridge. But hey thats why it's a hobby. CZ, it is true about post 90's nonsense, but also some very real tech advancements. I suspect in a few years SOME brand new $500 amp will sound better than a modded recapped 80 lb classic monster made by...anybody. Well, you know, in a double blind test... : ) |
Right on. I have a $100,000 system with only Legacy Focus (original) speakers which sell for $2,500 used. It sounds great, better than 90% of audio show rooms (well maybe higher than that). However, it required use of Synergistic Research HFT room treatment system and two pairs of Hallographs which together cost more than $5,000 to tame the room's slap echo and focus the soundstage (while opening the seating area to five people across). The only audio show room that completely blew away my system and any other I've heard was the Kronos/VAC/Von Schwiekert/Mastersounds $1.4 million room, touted by every reviewer as the ultimate in music reproduction fidelity (and fun). Here's a secret-The Pioneer DV-05 DVD player with dual laser pick-up. Modding it with six big capacitors and a high end A/C cable transforms it into a fantastic CD player. All for under $200 and equal to my EAR Acute which is $6K. I own both, with the Pioneer in the living room system (see Oregonpapa's Pioneer player which replaced his Audio Research $10k player when the latter failed). What I am saying is that one can build a superb system on the cheap and that the room acoustics are at least 50% (I wouldn't say 85% as above) of the sound quality. |
I posted this on another forum but it's relevant here too. There is a problem with HEA. That is summarized in today's article from Enjoy the Music: Come Admire My Hi-Fi Jewelry Roger Skoff writes about what things cost, and why. This essay delivers an important message about many HEA manufacturers (and their clients). The equipment must appeal to the eye/visually or else it won't sell, regardless of audio quality according to many HEA manufacturers. http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0618/HiFi_Jewelry.htm This is probably why there were so many new (and differently conceived) turntables at the recent Munich audio show. Just check out Michael Fremer's AnalogPlanet.com site for several hours of exploration of the new LP spinners. For some, looks mean almost nothing. For others (and generally very expensive) the visuals are striking. |
I’m all for audiophile jewelry! That is I do like manufacturers to pay attention to the design and finish of their components. At the expense of sound quality? Of course not. But these items are not going in to a closet - especially speakers which become part of one’s furniture. So I’d like to be able to think "that looks nice" when looking at these items. It matters to me. I bought a very nice looking turntable and took much care to place it on a beautiful roasted maple wood isolation base. I truly get great satisfaction every time I look at or interact with the set up because it's so pleasing to the eye. (There are reasons people buy beautiful analog watches when they could buy cheap, crappy looking digital watches that tell time even better. It's not irrational considerations that drive these preferences.). I have certainly seen quite a number of audiophile systems from the "looks mean nothing" camp and...yeesh!...no thanks! I prefer good sound and good looks. |
fleschler"There is a problem with HEA. That is summarized in today's article from Enjoy the Music: Come Admire My Hi-Fi Jewelry Roger Skoff writes about what things cost," That article is FAKE NEWS he does not name his source any one can write an article like that when they quote an unamed highly placed source or highly regarded designer or some other person who's name they do not give it is nonsense don't believe everything you read! |
Fleschler Thanks for that post. Just so happens I was looking for a transport to the Bitfrost for CD's not yet ripped or friend brings over. Replacing a very creaky Marantz 63 (original owner). I have good experience with Pioneer transports but was not sure about DVD versions. Found a DV 05 with no remote for 50 + 20. and the current set up does not allow for remote use easily anyway. Eventually suspect I will stumble on remote. It will be interesting to compare the ouput from Pioneer analog with Bitfrost from the digital out, real easy to A B with no latency from pre amp.Sound IS better from Bitfrost compared to ancient Marantz. Speaking of tweaking the current pre is an older Denon IC based unit recapped and all Op Amps changed to modern high level versions. The pv8 currently lives elsewhere. The re do went well meaning I did not induce oscillation with high speed opamps or otherwise bugger it up and seems to not be the limitting factor in the system. By comparing to no pre amp. Helps to have an EE buddy with pro de-soldering equipment to get all the ICs out. The process taught me a lot about op amp design and state of the art of those little dead bug looking things... Back to the original post, there are a lot of op amps in the production chain of most of what we listen to. I guess we have to be playing pre 1965 or so vinyl to get away from them? So the IC nay sayers have a BIT of explaining to do. Not inviting rants, although thoughtfull informed commentary always welcome. I do like my cj PV8 more, but then, tubes is tubes. Thanks again again fleschler, I'll report on the Pioneer. (You weren't by chance selling a DV 05 just now for 50 + 20 ?) : ) |
If your speaker wire and interconnects are affecting the sound there’s something wrong with them. They certainly CAN function as non linear devices if they’re made to be but I wouldn’t want that. Make sure they are of sufficient gauge and properly shielded and move on. If you’re into vinyl I would and did spend a lot on the cartridge. Like speakers they are electromechanical and hard to do right. The turntable should not add noise and maintain a constant speed. The arm should track smoothly and not add noise. All that exclusive of the cartridge can be gotten for under a thousand. Amps and preamps should be linear as well but not everyone likes that so go with what you like. Subwoofers are not evil particularly for movies. Great speakers exist for less than 3k but dollars there make the greatest difference to a point. That is, I think over 10k is pretty diminishing returns. |
@AMG56 - Sorry for the late reply. I don't visit these forums every day. I get everything you wrote. Like you, I appreciate live music and that is the sound I'm trying to achieve at home, essentially to enhance my emotional connection to the music. That has always been my goal, and that is how I got into this hobby. The high-end gear, the cables and the tweaks are all a means to that end. I wouldn't spend my money or time on any of this if it didn't result in the hairs on the back of my neck standing up. I'm not wealthy and my system is relatively modest... by 'audiophile standards' (but IMHO it sounds more natural and more exciting than most of the fancier rigs I've heard). I rarely change components, but I have made significant improvements by upgrading cables and a few other select tweaks. (I say 'select' because many do nothing or even degrade the sound.) My only qualms are with people who shout "Nonsense!" or "Scam!" when they really mean to say, "I didn't hear any difference." or maybe even, "I'm skeptical, but I've never heard it." |
Clearthink - Where do you get off calling Roger Skoff a liar? Do you know him? I DO, and he's honest as the day is long. If Roger said he had that conversation, he did. Fleschler - On the "audio jewelry" subject, I know from other dealers & distributors that there is a segment of HEA with tons of money and no interest in anything that does not look attractive (and expensive). Good for them. Most of those systems are poorly set up and sound mediocre anyway. For the rest of us, there are 'bargain' components which provide similar performance at lower prices... in less exotic boxes. Instead of complaining, just go find them. Some folks on forums like this one can give you suggestions (but always listen yourself). In fact, isn't that what these forums are for? (Not to accuse people you don't know of lying. "Fake News" - Where did you get that from?) |
Playmore. Thanks for the support (and others). As to the Pioneer, it's only an adequate player without the mods (six capacitors, of which some are power supply related, my engineer friend is the one who does the mods) and the A/C cable. I bought six hoping for him to upgrade them all but he only did three (his business is GroverHuffman cabling), of which one is now owned by Oregonpapa. Oregonpapa then installed SR blue fuses to further upgrade the sound. Too bad I can't post an interior shot of the caps. |
aalenik"Where do you get off calling Roger Skoff a liar? Do you know him I don't have to know him to know that what he published in the link provided is what the American president calls fake news with it's unamed source of a "famous designer" if it were true he would name his source which is the honest thing to do but if you want to "believe" him of course you are free to believe in mysterious unamed sources that the writer somehow feels a need to "protect" you may also believe in the tooth fairy if you like that is fine with me but I can spot fake news when I smell it! |
fleschler Thanks for input. I have enough experience to re do some PS caps and a few others as well a cord without messing up too bad. (Some switching supplies can be a bit touchy) Fortunately schematic is on HiFi Engine. Will be using mostly as transport but keeping noise down and plenty of juice to the laser makes sense. Likely will do some chasis damping and maybe the drawer. I found an interesting CHOICE of "wasapi" outputs in AIMP software, one labled "Schiit gen 2 USB".(!) It did seem to improve things into the Bitfrost but am a "bit" confused because I thought bit perfect wasapi was one thing. Need to read more and invite knowledgeable commentary. Out of respect to OP, moving my speakers a little and hanging some modestly priced absorbers, including behind speakers, makes the most difference. The rest is mostly fun. BTW intellectually I have a hard time really believing power cords make a difference but emotionally, a nice robust mechanically stable short as practical cable is quite satisfying. For 20 bucks, a nibbler and solder. The Mapleshade modded Cambridge CD in the other set up came with what looks like Saran Wrap outer cover on power cord. It is a fun conversation piece if nothing else and the whole thing does sound good. I choose not to engage with folks who state opinions unpleasantly but dont mind firm opinions, it being a given that all such are combination of knowledge base, experience and internal synthesis. Most of y'all are great fun and I appreciate it. A lot of the fun for me is that the stakes are low. It is a good escape from many of our jobs, or civic, political and personal engagements where stakes can be much higher. This is not really the place for that, me thinks. It is intriguing that on line forums interaction is an evolving communication thing with its own linguistics, sociology, and signal to noise ratio. |
