shadorne,
Is it your experience that 3D soundstaging and accurate timbre/musicality/dynamics are mutually exclusive?
Dave |
Great speakers. The only opinion that counts is yours!
Very cool bike by the way.
Best to you crazyeddy,
Dave |
Good explanation shadorne. I have to admit to being addicted to venue recreation (imaging, soundstaging, air, and presence) so I go for the time/phase coherent speakers and cables. Something about having a sonic hologram in the room simply amazes me.
Appreciate and respect those that prioritize other qualities.
In the end, I think we want it all, no?
Best to you shadorne,
Dave
|
bo1972: "I can garantee you 100% that a loudspeaker who creates a stunning 3 dimensional holographic stage will influence your emotion and level of exitement a lot."
I definitely agree with that one.
Best to you,
Dave
|
"Don’t forget that over 99% of all audio systems which are being sold are 2 dimensional."
Yeah, I don't buy that. There are varying degrees of dimensionality. It is not a binary attribute. It is truly a magical experience when one's system can create a sonic hologram, but there's lots of equipment that is capable of it, given the right component matching, placement, room acoustics, AC quality, cabling, and vibration elimination, thus the word "system" vs "componentry".
Dave
|
bo1972 12-25-2016 7:54am:
"Dear Dave,
...This is only a personal opinion, nothing more nothing less. Why for God sake you use the word hate?"
bo1972,
I never used the word "hate" in my two posts (or any other post I ever made) nor said anything negative about Wilson, your opinion, or anything else. I am however sensitive to referring to God in such a callous way as you did above, especially on Christmas Day.
I agreed with one of your statements early in this thread (regarding holographic imaging) and disagreed with one later (regarding your statement that 99% of audio components are incapable of 3D imaging). That's it.
Do you even read and think about what others say or just jump right into repeating the same diatribe ad nauseam as if your opinion or experience is the only one worthy of consideration?
Anyway, Merry Christmas to you bo1972,
Dave
|
|
This was a BS test for you bo, and you failed miserably. "different modified Marantz sources" is not a MODWRIGHT-modified Marantz, Sony, or Oppo.
I am satisfied at this point that you are of the "only my sh!t doesn't stink" ilk and are to be ignored going forward.
Dave |
"I stood up and the sound was almost completely below me."
Hi gpgr4blu,
No snarkiness intended and I have never owned Wilsons, but it never ever occurred to me to judge image height (or anything else) of speakers while standing. Is that what you meant to say?
Dave
|
Hi crazyeddy,
Bet he would be happy with one of your awesome custom bikes instead.
Dave
|
"Fair trade for a new set of WAMMS"
That was my thinking, eddy. ;>)
Best to you,
Dave
|
Nice post, Ivan.
Best to you,
Dave
|
Nice post, blackfly.
"In fact, to me, in audio, finding the "diamonds in the rough" in terms of gear and speakers is the real thrill; the gear that is passed over or older etc that no one gives any time to or no longer has "relevance" that is superlative in sound quality and accessible, financially. That takes talent and skill that no amount of money can buy."
Perhaps the most enlightened audio-related statement of 2016. Only one day to go. Welcome aboard.
Happy New Year blackfly,
Dave |
"Where is the Audiogon knowledge base.."
Lots of good knowledge here. Look deeper, even above on this very page, excepting one.
Dave
|
The strangest and most self-defeating marketing campaign I ever witnessed...
Dave |
Bo,
It's always intriguing to see which of your personalities will post, Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde.
Dave |
|
shadorne,
Does this fantasy somehow relate to Wilson speakers?
Dave |
Depth of soundstage should vary with each recording according to the venue and recording techniques of the recording itself, single mike recordings usually giving the best illusion of accurate spatial imaging of the actual performance.
Depth of individual performers and or instruments should have clearly identifiable spatial locations representing the actual spacing of each in relationship to the other, providing the recording/mastering captures this information.
If a system does so, it is not due to some frequency anomaly, but an indicator of reproduction accuracy and largely dependent on the time coherence of the speakers.
If depth and spatial information is consistent from recording to recording, then the system is creating the illusion of depth through distortions, whether engineered into the equipment intentionally or not.
Accurate reproduction of depth is as important to listener involvement as accurate lateral reproduction (stereo imaging), IMO.
Dave |
Okay cleeds, whatever. It is a single mike placed at a single point in space.
Doesn’t change a thing regarding reproduction of depth. Forest for the trees.
Dave |
"Mike vs mic". Now that is an appropriate correction, Todd. Thank you.
Dave |
Single mike recording is not the same thing as monophonic playback, which blends the lateral information into a single source of sound.
One microphone captures the spatial information (distances from the microphone) most accurately if done correctly, vs multi-mike recording where the mixing/mastering engineer (hopefully) blends multiple microphone tracks to simulate correct placement of the instruments (this is called "mixing"), too often using artificial reverb or other techniques to do so.
Try Cowboy Junkies, "The Trinity Session" to see what I mean. A single-miked live recording (using only a Calrec Ambisonic microphone and mastered but not mixed), yet anything but monaural. If your system does not demonstrate the effects of what I am describing, it is not reproducing depth and spatial information very well. How important or even whether this is important at all to an individual listener is not the subject of my posts.
Another great test is the Opus 3 Test Record 1: Depth of Image (CD 7900) and also available on LP IIRC.
Dave |
One thing that is and always will be an inherent limitation of past and current stereo recording/playback technology is directionality, since a MIC (thanks Todd) can’t discern the difference of direction. As a result, the clapping of the crowd on a live recording will always sound as if the crowd is behind the performers, unless the crowd is recorded with a different mic(s) and mixed/mastered correctly. I have never heard a live recording done this way.
That implies that some of the ambience information (reflections from the walls/objects of the venue) captured from the "front side" of the mic is being incorrectly reproduced as being part of the ambient information of the opposite side. Ultimately, this may be the final limitation of making our two channel systems suspend disbelief. Thus the (largely unfulfilled IMO) promise of multi-channel audio technology.
Dave
|
Bo,
Are you positing that the Monitor Audio speakers are the only speakers capable of reproducing accurate depth, spatial reproduction, and imaging?
Dave |
Okay, you nailed down two brands (Monitor Audio and Rockport) of speakers that you feel do it right. Any others? What about sources, preamps, amps, cabling?
Dave |
Nah, John, just trying a new theory: when a stylus gets hung in a groove and the groove repeats itself, a gently nudge helps break it loose; so maybe that will work here.
Dave |
"For transparency and openness, no loudspeaker using dynamic drivers is going to equal an electrostatic or ribbon, imo."
Try Thiel. Very close.
Dave
|
Now we have strong recommendations from Bo (and many others) of MA Platinum speakers. Also the Lumin S1 modded by Bo.
Clearly, Bo, you feel strongly that you have a secret recipe/method for assembling superior sounding systems that you also feel to be proprietary. Perhaps you do. Audiophiles are a skeptical lot (understatement) and don’t typically trust others to spend their money.
Playing "I’ve got a secret" is not very helpful to the audio world. Are you willing to seek out and participate in some hi-end shows such that your setups and their sound quality can be shared with others in a credible way?
Until you do that, your mini novels are not going to promote more interest than they already have. The harder you try to sell, the less others will perceive your credibility or value your input.
Dave
|
"He has demonstrated to many manufacturers, distributors and designers of components..."
Now we are at the crux of the matter.
Where are the testimonials, writings or documentation of thoughts and impressions from these people? Who are they? So far it has been only the evasive ramblings of one whom is the source of these claims.
Interestingly, the style and prose of your writing, clearthink, is very similar to Bo's.
Dave
|
Awesome detective work Chris.
Looks like a very nice system Bo, comparable to many seen here on the Virtual Systems pages. Don't see much (anything?) in the way room of acoustical treatment.
Dave
|
Bo,
Much earlier I asked a question about what gear you use/recommend? Your response, best that I could discern as it was so convoluted, was that you considered that information exclusive and proprietary. Now we discover, thanks to detective work by ct0517, that your system is comprised of excellent gear, yet gear that is available to mere mortals.
Now that that mystery is unraveled, please answer the last question that I asked:
How does S.A.P. eliminate early reflections (such as those from your uncovered wood flooring) that smear time coherence?
Dave
|
Bo,
Now does S.A.P. eliminate early reflections (such as those from your uncovered wood flooring) that smear time coherence?
Dave |
Consider your opinion elucidated.
The moderators are not here to validate or invalidate the claims in posts by members nor do they do so.
Dave
|
|
"With small 8" woofers obviously you need a subwoofer."
I guess Jim Thiel (RIP) did not get that memo. The CS5 he designed used 8" woofers and measured flat at 30Hz, -3db at 25Hz, and -5db at 20Hz.
Dave |
Geez Bo. Sigh.
Telling everyone else that they are audio neanderthals and that the only systems that create accurate depth and "emotion" are those of your design is a good bit over the edge. Get a grip.
Was not your mental database of what you consider to be superior components formed by trial and error?
When will all of your promises to "unveil" the validation of your magical talents through viable and credible channels actually come to fruition?
Dave
|
