Dear friends: Whom is not " biased " for whatever reason(s)?, not only the reviewers, audio dealers, manufacturers/designers but each one of us. Problem is if that reason(s) we are " biased " are " honest " one(s).
Now, think for a moment that audio magazines never existed and do not exist today: where all we been? where the audio industry been? do you think that the high-end niche could exist and grow up?
For the good or bad audio magazynes are a " necessity "/a must to have especially for the new-comers/newbie/rockies and to inform all of us the audio news.
" Wrong/bad with them but worst with out them ".
Are any one of you interested in what were disclosed on the CES in Las Vegas or at the Rocky-mountain or other Audio Shows? could you be interested on audio community meetings and its shedules? could you be interested in what to do and what not to do because the reviews? and I can go on and on about.
The problem for some of us is that many of us already grow up, already learned on almost any audio subject and already know the Audio Trues and the Audio Myths that were and are promoted by magazynes in favor of the industry not in favor of we customers but the rockies do not know nothing and the magazynes makes a " favor " to all of them. Not the best favor but that's it.
If we analize the high end audiophiles that belongs to that market we can fall in count that we all are over 50+ years old. What could be happen when all of us die if there are no more new comers because there are no magazynes to inform about?, it does not matters that that information is away of true.
Maybe I'm wrong but IMHO almost all of us " learned " about high end thank's to audio magazynes, in the past our ignorance level on audio subjects was really high compared with today level.
The best we had in those old times were: Stereo Review, High Fidelity or Audio that were full of measurements but with very low " subjective " opinions and certainly not high end products.
We knew and know about ML, Threshold, Audio Research, Conrad Jhonson, Lamm, Wilson, Thiel and the like thank's to Stereophile/TAS and not because Stereo Review, right?, so we have to give the right merit have those magazynes.
I still read those magazynes and normally I do to be informed of the audio news and to learn what not do: because our each one know-how level we know when any reviewer is wrong ( it does not matters his entusiam for an item ) and through that " is wrong " we will know or confirm what not to do.
There are some reviews that provocate us laugh in their reviews that are a shame for the reviewers but unfortunatelly they are unaware about.
IMHO I think that some of the " top " reviewers have higher know how level on audio subjects that almost any one of us the problem is that they can't share that unvaluable/high value audio information because they are important part, as any of us, of the Audio High End Establishment ( AHEE. ) and have to protect it and have to protect it even if with the information they share with us in reality are given us a disinformation that unfortunatelly is what is happening today.
That not disclosed information and that disinformation is one of the reasons why the high end does not grow up faster.
IMHO all those magazyne reviewers are corrupted and IMHO are corrupted because on purpose are hidden value information for us customers and not only that are not disclosing information but at the same time they are given us disinformation, to these actions I name it: CORRUPTION, maybe with more damage to the customers than if they receive d " money " .
Why many audiophiles are running their systems with tube electronics? because is the best audio technology? certainly not but because was what the magazynes taught us in the past and we believe it in that way and trhough the time our ears are already equalized to that kind of electronics and it does not matters the damage level to the audio signal can do.
Why many of you own only top LOMC cartridges and no single MM/MI one?, because we learned that LOMC are the way to go and no one told us that exist other alternatives.
Why till some years ago almost all own BD TT instead DD ones? why till a few years ago almost all of us used tonearm with fixed headshell instead removable headshell designs? wy till some years ago alomost no one here used subwoofers in their systems? why.....? why.....? and why......?
We still live in the " error " thank's to those magazynes and through internet forums we were learning slowly for we can liberate for ever on those several " errors/myths/mistakes " with we are living in each one audio system.
The forums as this one ( Agon ) is the only today possibility to learn and grow up faster than the audio industry, is the only way to correct our system mistakes. We can't do it through those magazynes and this fact is a shame for those magazynes/reviewers because in theory those audio magazyne main target is to inform to inform true information teaching to us customers.
Don't blame magazynes and today maybe some of us have to blame our selfs to not learned enough to correct our " mistakes ".
The best new is that all of us can improve if we give an opportunity to learn a new opportunity to learn what not to do through magazynes and what to do through internet forums.
I think that no one can stop that AHEE overall corruption that touched almost all those reviewers. It's a way of living.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear friends: Whom is not " biased " for whatever reason(s)?, not only the reviewers, audio dealers, manufacturers/designers but each one of us. Problem is if that reason(s) we are " biased " are " honest " one(s).
Now, think for a moment that audio magazines never existed and do not exist today: where all we been? where the audio industry been? do you think that the high-end niche could exist and grow up?
For the good or bad audio magazynes are a " necessity "/a must to have especially for the new-comers/newbie/rockies and to inform all of us the audio news.
Are any one of you interested in what were disclosed on the CES in Las Vegas or at the Rockyfest or other Audio Shows? could you be interested on audio community meetings and its shedules? could you be interested in what to do and what not to do because the reviews? and I can go on and on about.
The problem for some of us is that many of us already grow up, already learned on almost any audio subject and already know the Audio Trues and the Audio Myths that were and are promoted by magazynes in favor of the industry not in favor of we customers but the rockies do not know nothing and the magazynes makes a " favor " to all of them. Not the best favor but that's it.
If we analize the high end audiophiles that belongs to that market we can fall in count that we all are over 50+ years old. What could be happen when all of us die if there are no more new comers because there are no magazynes to inform about?, it doesw not matters that that information is away of true.
Maybe I'm wrong but IMHO almost all of us " learned " about high end thank's to audio magazynes, in the past our ignorance level on audio subjects was really high compared with today level.
The best we had in those old times were: Stereo Review, High Fidelity or Audio that were full of measurements but with very low " subjective " opinions.
We knew and know about ML, Threshold, Audio Research, Conrad Jhonson, Lamm, Wilson, Thiel and the like thank's to Stereophile/TAS and not because Stereo Review, right?, so we have to give the right merit has those magazynes.
I still read those magazynes and normally I do to be informed of the audio news and to learn what not do: because our each one know-how level we know when any reviewer is wrong ( it does not matters his entusiam for an item ) and trhotugh that " is wrong " we will know or confirm what not to do.
There are some reviews that provocate laugh reviews that are a shame for the reviewers but unfortunatelly they are unaware about.
IMHO I think that some of the " top " reviewers have higher know how level on audio subjects that almost any one of us the problem is that they can't share that unvaluable/high value audio information because they are important part, as any of us, of the Audio High End Establishment ( AHEE. ) and have to protect it and have to protect it even if with the information they share with us in reality are given us a disinformation that unfortunatelly is what is happening today.
That not disclosed information and that disinformation is one of the reasons why the high end does not grow up faster.
IMHO all those magazyne reviewers are corrupted and IMHO are corrupted because on purpose are hidden value information for us customers and not only that are not disclosing information but at the same time they are given us disinformation, to these actions I name it: CORRUPTION, maybe with more damage to the customers than if they receive d " money " .
Why many audiophiles are running their systems with tube electronics? because is the best audio technology? certainly not but because was what the magazynes taught us in the past and we believe it in that way and trhough the time our ears are already equalized to that kind of electronics and it does not matters the damage level to the audio signal can do.
Why many of you own only top LOMC cartridges and no single MM/MI one?, because we learned that LOMC are the way to go and no one told us that exist other alternatives.
Why till some years ago almost all own BD TT instead DD ones? why till a few years ago almost all of us used tonearm with fixed headshell instead removable headshell designs? wy till some years ago alomost no one here used subwoofers in their systems? why.....? why.....? and why......?
We still live in the " error " thak's to those magazynes and through internet forums we were learning slowly to we can liberate for ever on those several " errors/myths/mistakes " with we are living in each one audio system.
The forums as this one ( Agon ) is the only today possibility to learn and grow up faster than the audio industry, is the only way to correct our system mistakes. We can't do it through those magazynes and this fact is a shame for those magazynes/reviewers because in theory those audio magazyne main target is to inform to inform true information teaching to us customers.
Don't blame magazynes and today maybe some of us have to blame our selfs to not learned enough to correct our " mistakes ".
The best new is that all of us can improve if we give an opportunity to learn a new opportunity to learn what not to do through magazynes and what to do through internet forums.
I think that no one can stop that AHEE overall corruption that touched almost all those reviewers.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Lewm: IMHO you are wrong. I used tube electronics for many years and time to time I try it to know if something really improved down there, unfortunatelly that kind of electronic technology can't grow up due to so many limitations of the technology it self.
This is not the place to discuss/argue about, I respect your opinion but that you like to live " in the error " does not menas is the technology to go because it is not.
For the whole audio needs that thechnology is heavy faulty and you can't do nothing for support it.
Forgeret about SS technology, problem is that as you we have to learn about you need to learn about and not only been there because " I like it ". Lewm, I learned.
I only put one simple example of that faulty technology: we need a very low output impedance in amplifiers to handle any speaker. This is to handle the complex speaker impedance curve and phase because this speaker impedance curve is exactly this a " curve " with deeps and tips all over the frequency range. To handle in near perfect condition and to have an accurate frequency response from that speaker first than all we need low very low amplifier output impedance and in this regards there is no single amplifier with tube electronics that can match that low very low output impedance ( lower than 0.1 ohm better if: 0.05 ohms. ). by " nature " that technmol.ogy at amplifier level has a high output impedance so the SPL at different frequencies goes down and up according not what is in the recording but according to that speaker impedance curve given to the sound a coloration/distortions that don't came in the recording.
When we have a very low output impedance amplifier working with the same speaker we achieve flat response we add nothing to that signal because the speaker impedance curve.
That is only one of several real facts on tube electronics and the really subject that we have to worried about is that all those reviewers that are proponents on that technology never told us what is happening they as you only writed: " I like it ".
That's why I posted about reviewers corruption because they don't report nothing about and the problem is not only at reviewers level but even at manufacturer speaker level when they don't specify in the speaker manual information the impedance/phase curve of each one of their speakers designs. Why no one do it? maybe because no one asked.
Dera Lewm and friends, there are speaker manufacturers that recomended their low and complex impedance speakers to been handle by tube electronics with high output impedances in the amplifiers.
Look that I said: " handle ", one thing is " handle " where any amplifier can handle almost any thing and other one serious one thing is that can works in the right way on that speaker impedance regards.
I don't care what you, other or even me like it what I care is how to achieve how to have in an audio system the nearest quality performance level on what is in the recording adding the less and losting the less.
The relationship between speaker impedance curve and amplifier output impedance is not only a critical subject but one that makes a paromount difference when is right/matched against when is not right/matched as with tube technology.
Sorry to take that technology as an example but this example confirm, IMHO , the kind of corruption I'M talking about on reviewers.
I don't want to open any window here about electronics technologies, this is for other thread. Please, we have to stay on topic.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Unfortunatelly the real speaker frequency range impedance is not a flat line and unfortunatelly too we can't do nothing against the Ohm's Law but more unfortunate is that reviewers knew and know it and never mentioned. Only through the J.Atkinson speaker measurements we can attest about.
SS technology is not perfect too but IMHO makes less harm to the recorded audio signal.
This is how the AHEE works.
R. |
Lewm, wrong: I don't sale nothing. Maybe in the future. Btw, my phonolinepreamo design begun as a necessity to fulfil cartridge needs that certainly tube technology can't do it and that's all.
If in the audio market I can't find what fulfil the audio system needs then I try for whatever " road " to get it even if I have to go on the self design item. That's where appeared not only my phonolinepreamp but a tonearm, a TT mat, a headshell and maybe in the near future a cartridge too.
I don't see how is that you don't took in count my self audio trend when you already knew my way of audio item " behavior ": if does not exist then I try to create it. Maybe is because you are unaware of that my audio " attitude ".
I never been satisfied with that: " I like it ".
R. |
Dear Wolf: Why some of us don't like digital? because analog is a better technology?
certainly not, IMHO analog is no better technology that what we hear through 24/176.8 digital source.
Problem is that our system set up was set up to fulfil analog needs not digital needs. So when we put inside that system a digital source with out any re-set system then we don't like it.
In the other side as with tubes analog technology has not the higher accuracy we want and digital is a lot more accurate and neutral with a lot lower distortions and noise and the music recorded on digital is full of emotions too and you can feel it if you re-set your system and ears.
Analog signal is heavy and suffer manipulations through the recording and playback that digital does not. That de-emphasis RIAA during recording/cutting LP and the phono stage inverse RIAA eq. makes a lot of damage to the music signal and other degradations subjects on the whole analog signal.
Digital has its own " subjects " but certainly IMHO the digital signal is truer to the recording than any analog source.
Wolf, we are not talking here of that " I like it " that means nothing on the reality nothing on the true nothing on what is in the recording: digital or analog.
Same things happen when we swtich from LOMC cartridges to MM ones because we don't re-set the system to the MM needs but not because the MM alternative is wrong. Or when we switch from BD to DD TT, there are many examples on the same subject. We have to learn, all of us but is up to each one of us do it.
That " I like it " attitude is the cancer on each one of us and the audio industry is full of different kind of cancer, reviewers is one of that.
The good news is that each one of us can cure that cancer, learning about.
IMHO we have to fight against any kind of audio cancer. Or die with.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Wol_garcia: ++++ " you KNOW tube gear is BAD BAD BAD, ignoring the fact that lots of experienced listeners think (although it's often based on older design ideas) it SOUNDS great, thus obviating its badness and making it your personal issue.... " ++++
certainly that I'm not ignoring the lover's tube technology but that's not the subject.
Almost all of those tube's lovers ignorewhat they really are listening: they really ignore it, the only thing they know is: " I like it ", unfortunatelly and due to that technology deficiencies all those people are not hearing what is in the recording but " something else ". I know that they don't care on that fact and that what only cares is that: " I like it ".
The difference between all these people ( including Lewm. ) is that I learned what is happening with the recordd signal when this signal pass through tube electronics and what I learned and experienced with is something that I don't like it and is something that's far away from my main audio/music targets that is to be: NEAREST TO THE RECORDING, THAT ON PLAYBACK WHAT I'M LISTENING BE NEAR THE RECORDED SIGNAL WITH THE LESS AND LOWER LOSTED OR ADDED RECORDED SIGNAL INFORMATION.
IMHO, it does not matters that you or any one else say: " I like it ", that electronic technology is way faulty to meet that audio/music target, that technolgy was not " designed " for audio and certainly not for today audio/music needs.
It is obvious that the tube people are with different audio/music targets and could be by ignorance, ignorance not to know in deep what tube electronics makes to the recorded signal. That's all.
When they learnend I'm sure that like me they will reject that technology.
Now, if any one of you have facts that could help to say: " tubes are the right technology to reproduce what is in the recorded signal " then post it.
I say facts not " I like it ".
Dear gentlemans, you can go on sticky with that technology this's up to you.
Wh tubes performs different than other technoogies like SS? why when compared in between you prefer the tube one?: very simple, you are prefering a different way different audio/music signal/sound that has and is charged of heavy " make-up " due to that technology deficiencies and that's all but not because is better but because that simple: I like it ".
IMHO, this " I like it " is one of the main reasons why the high end real high end does not grow up faster. Today in many areas is just stopped.
If any one of us wants to start a thread about I will share with all of us all the facts you ignore about that technology and we can discuss and go in deep down there. Obviously with no that " I like it " that does not carry us nowhere.
Btw, Lewm: " you endow yourself with supernatural perception .... """
again, you are wrong and obviously you read my posts but don't understand them. I have not any supernatural perception ( far away from there ) what I have is an in deep training to be aware the system quality performance and discriminate sound from distortions that you can't do it because you have not that kind of training. Lewm, that has a name: knowledge level because an in purpose long training.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R |
Dear Wolf_garcia: That's the problem: " I like it " and this is not the subject of my posts. Please re-read it, think about it at the targets that I say can't be matched for tube technology.
That something like me does not means is right. IMHO we have to learn about other than that " I like it " that IMHO does not carry anywhere susccessfuly.
I want to enjoy music and I enjoy in whatever medium/source ( even trhough a walkman. ) but on recorded music at home I want to hear what is in the recording adding and loosing the less. This is the target.
I need the technology that can match that target for that we need an accurate, neutral, very very low noise, very very low distortions that permit enjoy fully all the music recorded " emotions " with the right rythmum, natural tonal balance, dynamics, the natural agresiveness music has and power that only the live music has.
Tubes can't do it. You can hear sound trough tube but that's not the subject, the subject is that home system target. Well that's my target, for other persons could be different and nothing wrong with that.
Wolf, we have to learn about. Think on this: why wneh we swtiched to a SS amplifier instead our normal tube one we don't like what we heard?
IMHO when we have better accuracy/neutral/lower noise/lower distortions through that SS amplifier then is more dificult to hide problems all over the system chain all over each one system link that through tubes we were unaware because the tube colorations/inaccuracies are hidden those system problems. In the other side a tube based system makes that the owner ears been equalized to those colorations/distortions and when those colorations/distortions gone we have to confront the REALITY and this is what we don't like it.
As with any audio item we have to re-set the whole system chain and obviously our ears and give the time to understand what is happening now with that SS system change against what we had with tubes.
I have nothing against tubes only because are tubes, what I do is to take the " best " technology that can put be near the targets I have and unfortunately tubes can't do it successfuly. Through many years and experiences first hand ones and trhough other systems I learned about with open mind and with out that " I like it " attitude that is almost useless on the whole subject because we are talking of what is right or wrong.
I can tell you why tubes are not right and why SS is better if not perfect: nothing is perfect.
The subject is easy: Which your home audio system targets? how can you fulfil it with overall success?
The differences between opinion's audiophiles belongs to those questions and its answers.
I'm not better than you or any one else, it's only I have different targets than you. Simple as that.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Marqmike: One main characteristic that has the live music is its dynamic power. This dynamic power an efortless power gives the music its endless so vivid impact all around a wide frequency range.
We can't recreate that music characteristic in our home audio system, even that some of us are on the quest/hunt of.
I'm convinced that in a home system music belongs to both frequency extremes that put the music frame for the whole music performance.
Dynamic power/power impact, to be near to this music characteristic we not only need amplifier power and speakers that can reproduce it but deep accurate bass management and " endless " other frequency extreme wide-band and SS meets in a lot better way those needs.
We can ask why powered subwoofers use SS electronics instead tube ones or why active speakers use SS technology. We need to reproduce the music impact the music power.
The real thing is astonishing and that's why as many of you I attend every single week to live events, nothing compare it. The live experience is unique, our home system experience is only that a: " home system experience " away from that unique live music experience.
I know digital is way better music source medium but not for that I give up analog, instead I fight and work day by day to improve to lower the analog distortions to be near to the recording and my first step on that direction was to be aware of those analog distortions and were it comes/came and how detect it because if you are not aware of those distortions we can't improve about thinking that all what we heard is music or comes in the recording. We need on porpose training to do that, with out this training we just can't do it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Peterayer: +++++ " I like listening to the BSO on Friday afternoons, and I also like listening to my stereo in the evenings. And the more one sounds like the other, the more I like it. " +++++
your statement is very precise and self explain it. That kind of " I like it " is the one we have to look for because it is not only subjective one but way objective when you are comparing your system quality performance against the " true " ( live music. ).
Certainly the " I like it " cancer I was refering was a different one, the just " I like it " with no real foundation against the " true ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " The choice of amplifier should be determined by only one thing - the choice of speaker. The better the two elements are matched, the closer the resulting artificially recreated sound will be to reality.... " +++++
right, agree on that. Now. IMHO the main subject there is that ++++ " The better the two elements are matched,.. " +++
what means IMHO that " matched ", simple: electrical matched, that's all. The first electrical parameter to have to be matched is the electrical speaker impedance curve against the amplifier output impedance. After that the speaker current asked against what the amplifier can supply it and go on on other factors in between.
Unfortunatelly no one of us have the capacity " to listen directly to amplifiers and preamplifiers without the need for a speaker " and normally tube technology can't handle can't match the specific electrical speaker needs.
That now/today I use SS electronics is only not because I love SS or because I hate tube technology but because SS is IMHO the only true alternative to match the speaker electrical needs.
Lewm, my speific music targets impede the use of tube technology at amplifier level. Today the best match to any speaker electrical needs is the SS alternative.
That facts has nothing to do with what I like or what I don't like, it is as simple as: 2+2.
Lewm, I'm not stupid and certainly you neither. You are a wise persons and IMHO there are no true real facts where you can argue that tube technology is better than SS to work with real speakers. If I were you maybe I give up on this tube topic because you have no serious scientific foundation to follow trying to support it when there is no way to support it.
This is not whom has the reason and I can tell you that whom has the reason and the winner is: the Physics's Laws.
++++ " will take that into account and not be brainwashed " ++++
the Physics's Laws does not permit to any one ( including you and me. ) to brainwash to any one. So we all are protected against that brainwash.
Now, ++++ " the question was about audio reviewers for the mainstream magazines. What do you think of them? " ++++++
I already posted: almost all of them are and promote corruption because they hide critical audio information or gives us misinformation. That electrical speaker/amplifier match is a clear example about when they don't go in deep on that critical subject.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Syntax: +++++ " But did you never ask yourself, why Reviewers ignore those basics? Or why they are able to write enthusiastically about a tube amp they "reviewed" with a multi-chassis, low efficient speaker design which needs the first 30W for wake up? And the amp has only 10 ... :-) " ++++
certainly they don't ignore " those basics ", what they do is just ignore/undisclosed those audio customers highly valuable information in favor of $$$$$. Tha's why I said almost all of them are part of the AHEE corruption.
The speaker/amp subject is only one example there are others with the same kind of audiophile value and they never touched.
When some one like me touch those " hide " audio subjects many of you just blame me because thinks I'm " crazy ", I'm " ignorant " , I'm " selling " something or I want " ruin " your life. Certainly is not in that way, IMHO is in these kind of forums where we can talk about where we can talk of audio " tabu " subjects.
Dear Manitunc: where if no here?.
In the past I have discussions in this forum and other forums and private with M.Fremer, J.Atkinson, J.Valin and some one else and on all those discussion experiences my conclusion was that those discussions were: USELESS, all of them are living in they very small audio world thinking that only them has the " true " and that we customers are only " lambs " with no brain/common sense and ignorant of everything but what they promote.
In all cases I questio them very specific issues about their reviewes that IMHO were totally wrong gave us false information. In all cases all those reviewers: runaway the discussion, all of them were with no honest capacity to take the " bull by its horns " for the first time in their lives, shame of them an a pity that all those heavy audio know-how are hidden by those reviewers and refuse on porpose to share with us " ignorant lambs ".
Well, as Byfwynne we have to learn by our self.
Please don't blame me about tube/SS or when I talk on digital/analog or LOMC/MM or other audio subjects. I'm only sharing with all of you my findings even if I'm wrong. I repeat: if not here where can we learn what we need to learn?
I'm not against any one of you: I'M WITH YOU, ALWAYS.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Mapman: ++++ " It takes an educated reader to find where that is. " +++++
you put the finger where it really " weights ": educated reader, educated audiophile and this is part of the overall " problem " subject.
How each one of us was educated? from where that audio education came? whom educated us? and perhaps more important could be that at some time as today we have to ask our self:
ALL WHAT I LEARNED THROUGH MY AUDIO LIFE IS TRUE, IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE TODAY AUDIO ADVANCEMENTS, IT STILL FULFIL MY TODAY PRIORITIES OR THE TODAY NEW STANDARDS? or
EXIST A BETTER WAY TO DO IT, A BETTER WAY TO ENJOY MUSIC THROUGH MY AUDIO SYSTEM, A BETTER WAY TO ACHIEVE BETTER QUALITY PERFORMANCE LEVEL THROUGH MY AUDIO SYSTEM.?
IMHO the audio learning is a day by day process and IMHO we can't refuse to do it and stay passive/sticky with my very old audio training. Passive in the AHEE/reviewers/audio dealers " hands ".
Gentlemans: when in you audio life will be the time for you and only you decide that from TODAY you will take your audio system decisions instead that those decisions still be taken by the AHEE/reviewers/sellers or even other fellows with the wrong audio information?, at the end you are the one who pay for those audio system decisions.
Yes, I know that we think we are the ones that are taken our each one audio system decisions but the true is that's not in that way: we are contaminated by the corrupted AHEE.
This is the bad news, the good news is that each one of us can make things change for the better. Is up to each one of us and from no other source.
As our systems time to time needs up dates we that are the most important part of our audio system need to be up dated continuously.
How do you know if your 500K dollars system is the best way to enjoy music at home? are there better options with the same kind of money?. You can be surprised to learn that not only exist a lot better options and not for the same kind of big money but for a lot less money.
How to achieve it?, IMHO the only way is learning: improving our each one ignorance level improving our each one knowledge level and work to achieve that.
Yes, we all have to do our each one work to have the posibility an opportunity to grow up in favor of the MUSIC and music enjoyment.
The hard part in that learning process is to recognise that many audio subjects we learned are wrong, sooner or latter you will discover this fact.
We all are surrounded of myths, myths that were promoted by the AHEE. One of those myths is: " forgeret about measurements. Your ears are the best judgement. " TAS and other notable AHEE members promoted that.
Yes, our ears are the best tool to identify what is right and what is wrong but only if before we learned what is right and what is wrong. So our ears are as good as what we learned beause what we learned is what we are accustom to listen, our ears are already equalize on what we learned. Example: tubes amps or LOMC or whatever.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Swampwalker: +++++ " may be based on differing goals. Raul says (I'm paraphrasing, so feel free to correct me, Raul) that his goal is to reproduce exactly what's on the recording. Nothing more, nothing less. My goal is to have an emotionally enriching experience listening to an artist's work. " +++++
I think we have not different goals but we need some explanation about.
IMHO that " emotionally enriching experience listening... " or it comes in the recording or it not comes.
If does not comes in the recording then we are adding " colorations/distortions " to the recorded signal and if that comes in the recording then we are really enjoying it.
The emotionally charge in any recording is absolutely independent on any audio system: comes in or not.
As truer to the recording is the quality system performance level as better and truer are that " emotionally charge ".
I like music but I like even more music that wake up my emotions and feelings that permit to enjoy at full the music experience.
I don't like analytical audio systems or " accurate "/specs-oriented audio systems that can't shows that music emotional charge when it comes in the recording.
Unfortunatelly many times the recording producers/enginnerings made so signal manipulations that the main music sense ( emotional charges. ) is losted on the recording process. and believe me: we can't recover it.
All of us know when we are listening a good or bad recording beause we " feel " the RYTHMUM or not on each recording.
I'm not different from you about, maybe more discriminating but I'm always looking for that recorded music emotional charges that with out that the music we hear is only sound.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Not all what he writed there is totally true or at least not exactly what he wants we believe, we have to remember that for several ( a lot ) years ( between other same facts. ) HP reference system loudspeakers were the top high price ( 150K ) ISR Infinity Reference ( 4 towers. ) loaned by Infinity.
Till today I can't remember not a single non-biased reviewer and HP certainly IMHO was/is not the first one.
R. |
Dear Frogman: +++++ " FIRST AND FOREMOST trust what your ears tell you ... " +++
agree and I already posted but I added:
++++ " Dear Mapman: ++++ " It takes an educated reader to find where that is. " +++++
you put the finger where it really " weights ": educated reader, educated audiophile and this is part of the overall " problem " subject.
How each one of us was educated? from where that audio education came? whom educated us? and perhaps more important could be that at some time as today we have to ask our self:
ALL WHAT I LEARNED THROUGH MY AUDIO LIFE IS TRUE, IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE TODAY AUDIO ADVANCEMENTS, IT STILL FULFIL MY TODAY PRIORITIES OR THE TODAY NEW STANDARDS? " +++
our ears/brain is educated trhough our music experiences, live ones as the better but what if we never had live music experiences: could my ears be trusty ones to say what is right or wrong against other persons that have different educated ears through live music experiences?
Yes, we have to trust in our ears and time to time ask our self: what learned about? because is what we are hearing.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " I would be the first to admit that modern SS amplifiers are probably not so guilty of these sins, and the gap between tube and SS has narrowed...." ++++++
I agree with the first part of your statement and can add that almost al SS amplifiers are designed using no FB, that high FB SS characterisitc on design is only history as you said. Btw, IMHO the First Wat amp is nothing that can make justice to today great SS amplifier designs: not recomended, the N.Pass other amp designs are way different and recomended.
Your second part where you think the gap between tube and SS has narrowed could be not in that way. IMHO that gap is bigger than ever and goes wider through the time. Lewm, tubes are at its limit there is no more hope about on amps designs and SS is stil improving day by day and I can't see limitations for growing up on this amp technology designs.
Today many of the SS myths as some of the ones you name it and other like: the SS are analythical, cooler sound, no natural music sound, etc, etc... are only myths. Today the SS techology as you posted improved a lot over the myths from the 70's-80's.
+++++ " The first Watt is the most important Watt. " +++++
well that's something that I too learned but that IMHO is not really true. Lewm, the most important watt(s) is/are those that are asked by the speakers and the amplifier can supply with accuracy in real time. Music is not " stady " but with huge dynamic demands over what you and me can imagine.
++++ " Isn't that a sign that Raul and I are after the same thing but by different methods? " ++++
way different methods because your source is lot less accurate and has higher distortions/colorations.
Anyway, I think each one target is to enjoy the music.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Manitunc: +++++ " using a tube amp with most speakers will cause a varying frequency response not at all like the original recording, and therefore, because they didnt make that statement, their opinions are worthless. Now, that could have been said in one post, instead of 30 length posts denigrating anyone that disagrees.... " +++++
all those is your own interpretation or what you want to read but certainly not what I posted:
the tube amp subject was only an example on 3-4 examples I writed that coincide with the Syntax example on his posted thread. So, it is not true that beause the tube subject alone the reviewers work is worthless. This is your interpretation but I never said that. So, don't put words in my " mouth ".
" Denigrating any one that disagrees "??????
Please let me know where I denigrated any one. To have a different opinion is only this: different opinion but this is far away from denigrate any one.
" +++++ but reading Raul's posts make my head hurt. " ++++
come on, please do it a favor and don't punished your self and stop to read my posts. Simple as that.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Lewm: ++++ " more nearly like live, more of the time. " +++++
when we attend to a classical music live event we normally are hearing acoustic instruments, the sound source are acoustic instruments and no amplified ones. This kind of experience is the best we can get as a reference to make comparisons.
The difference at home is that we can't hear through our each one system acoustic instrument "" sound " but always amplified one.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Manitunc: Good stay in that way!
regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Lewm: About that " first watt " comment I think there is a misunderstood by you or a bad explanation by me. I'm not talking there about tube vs SS but only that: that IMHO that very first watt is not the most important issue but what the speaker demands on current that's different to what you posted.
About the Telarc 1812 I think that you don't know what you are talking about and till today you can't understand why I use that LP as an overall analog test through my comparison audio items process.
On the distortions on SS amps all depend on the amp design, any good top SS designs works fine with no trouble with any kind of real world speaker " with reactive rather than simple resistive characteristics ". Maybe you read it that exist a trouble but that as many other SS myths is only one more myth. As on any kind of electronics the name of the game is DESIGN quality and execution of that design: knowledge level and skills of the designer.
+++++ " I believe that the best sounding amplifier, tube or SS will be one that has it's lowest distortion at it's lowest power output, such that distortion (we are talking THD) only increases as power demands increase " +++++
as you I disagree with your statement: THD is only one factor with influence in the quality amp performance but there are several other ones. I know that you are sticky with tube amps and nothing wrong with that but try one and again to support that amp technology has no sense to me or your ignorance level on today SS vs tubes is really high and if it is in this way could be useless to continue this discussion when you ( IMHO ) has no facts or foundation on your statements other that that is what you think and this " what you think " is not enough.
You said more than once: " I do not at all rule out SS amplifiers " but in all the years that I have to know you I can't remember any time you tested in your system a SS amp sharing your experiences even I never see any post from you talking on how good could be the SS technology. Lewm, facts is the name of the game here and you missed this issue.
Anyway, thank's for your posts.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Actusreus: Certainly not, I 'm not on any tube campaign, I just shared facts/information about that normally are unknow by some tube amp owners and that in some ways could works as " open eyes " tool . That's all.
+++++ " who dismiss(ed) analog technology as inferior compared to digital sound reproduction. It apparently also reached its limit and couldn't be improved. " +++++
IMHO only a " closed eyes/mind " or with low knowledge level can still thinking that analog is a superior technology against today digital one ( 24/176.8 ). Certainly it is not and for very good reasons that I hope you already knew.
The analog chain technology is almost at its limit but I'm sticky with because I'm still improving by my self that analog chain with un-imaginable improvements/discoveries that a couple of years I was unaware could exist. I think I can go on on this " improvement road ".
++++ " and a moving magnet cartridge" " +++++
Actusreus, about analog magnetic cartridge technology I know at least two alternatives: MC and MM/MI. I like both with its each one virtues and disadvantages. I own several top rated LOMC cartridges and more than one MM/MI gems.
What's wrong to recognize that exist two cartridge alternatives instead only one?, when we have more than one alternative and when we have the knowledge level and skills along the tools to achieve the best from both alternative: whom can ask for more?, these alternatives is a good way to enjoy MUSIC: don't you think?
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Peterayer: Well, I'm not alone here. My posts were answers to other people posts.
Maybe you can start not a new thread but a new forum in the net with only one subject audio threads, I'm sure that in that way you will not learn to much but you will be happy.
No, I don't start new threads yet because the discusion, very good indeed, is here. Maybe could be better if you add some " fun " here participating on the overall discussion: why not?
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Actusreus: How could you understand " japanese " language if you only " speaks " english one?
The each one ignorance level preclude or not to have a rational argument to have a rational discussion. You are sticky on your tiny audio world because your audio ignorance level. Nothing is perfect and all of us have our each one ignorance audio subjects levels. Which yours? are you aware of that level or your level is just " I like it "?
Please don't go or follow speaking on digital today technology because for what you posted IMHO in that subject your ignorance level is to high and you can't argue almost nothing about or even enrich the discusion.
Always is better to argue or discuss on subjects where we , with facts, have the " hairs in the hands ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Wolf_garcia: Not all, I switched from tubes to SS. Learning trend, as my ignorance level goes down as tubes goes disappearing step by step from my system.
IMHO ignorance level is what makes that we be sticky from some kind of technology or some kind of myths. In the other side as higher our each one ignorance level as more closed mind/attitude we promote.
Information, true information gives " freedom " and increment the joy of listening music.
regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Actusreus: Well, I can't say the same from you because here I learned from you as I learned from any of the other persons posted here.
Certainly I know very well my ignorant level on audio different subjects and through my posts I only share what were my first hand experiences and what I learned from other audiophiles. If you can't understand my " japanese " well: is up to you.
Now, that you can't understand my " japanese " is only saying that you have to learn " japanese " to understand or stay " steady /no answers " till you learned.
Aha! I now understand why you don't understand: you need to learn Japanese, easy!. Please do it and when you learned come back and share your new experiences that will be " colored " by the Japanese you learned.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Peterayer: That IMHO the digital medium is a superior source music a top analog does not means I left analog. I posted that I'm still sticky with analog trying to find out the last " frontier " quality level analog has. In the other side I own several analog recordings that are invaluable if for no other thing because I can't get on any other medium.
Our tonearm design is already finished and we are in the tonearm surrounded customer " presentation ": package, white papers, type of promotion and the like. As soon I can show it I will do it.
We are really proudly on what we achieved, IMHO the design fulfil any cartridge needs and fulfil my audiophile expectations and self needs. We have no doubt that the design is a a clear an precise " border " where at the border side of our design exist only our design.
Analog as digital are alternatives and IMHO we all are lucky to have both.
Regards and enjoy the muisc,
R. |
Dear Syntax: He was and is part of the AHEE and he really was " punished " for his owns rules that belonged to that AHEE " cancer ".
Certainly that is sad that the " company/enterprise " you started and where you worked so hard is the one that gave " thank's " to you that are the owner.
Those HP words said it his huge emotional disapoint with the people that in some ways he " formed/developed ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
