-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadmaa
If anyone had been able to reliably tell the difference between the sound of amps on blind testing it would be all over these forums with the winner bragging his a-s-s off.
That's r-e-a-l-l-y old news
http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_data.htm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadmaa
If you wish further edification you can email Mr. Clark at a2000rich@aol.com for complete details.
At last look, there were still lots of catches and restrictions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadmaa
And yes, if there were that much of a difference between the sound of amps you should be able to tell 100% of the time double blind or otherwise.
No doubt, the debate will continue. Here's a link to a recent debate between John Atkinson of Stereophile and Arnie Krueger of the pcabx.com website.
http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/
rw
-
Arny Kreueger the king opf the DBT support group ADMITTED differences do exist between just 5 power amps they selected off the shelf...and he's the guy who invented the freaking ABX comparator. It just does not hold to scrutiny in the fieldof psychology -- the top engineers agree differences do exist -- it is the people on forums not getting it and making assumptive conclusions that because people didn;t hear ti in a test it doesn;t exist in the real world -- that jump is wrong.
-
If all amps sound the same why is Pioneer not advertising that their receiver sounds as good as a $50k amp...reason they cannot prove this with a DBT, reason two the scientific community and Pioneer knows the limitations and they would get sued and LOSE.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by corwin99
The Gershman's did not beat the Audio Note's in the soundstaging and off-axis performance department, but for overall enjoyment they came out ahead.. seemed less brittle... my personal opinon on the AN K/Spe's so far is that they definately have some sibilance (I noticed this with the speakers at Sound Hounds too which were driven by 2 very expensive looking silver Audio Note components... integrated and a CD player).. but I also thought the narrow room might have had something to do with it... or perhaps the recording. At any rate, they still sound superb. I am driving them with a pair of Radii KT-88 Monoblocks that are very smooth sounding, so i really don't think it was them.. I even let them warm up for a good hour too.
Actually the Klipsch RB-5 MKII is really nice and non-fatiguing speaker. It reproduces a bit of a hump in the midrange from what I can tell.. perhaps horn coloration or something from the tractix horn.. reminds me a bit of listening to Tannoy's with the dual concentric tweeter/woofer... great for Jazz. If you make it out to our shindig i'll display :) Email me at ddood at dood.ca so I can add you to the mailing list of the people that are coming to decide on a date and which components everyone is bringing. You can tell me if you think the K's are sibilant or not then too ;)
I didn't even bother with the B&K's... they did get a HUGE pair of those new 700 series B&K's with the diamond tweeter... something like $15,000 a pair... less than what i thought they might be, but they were out front with the Maggies... looked nice.. sounded nice but i didn't really sit down and listen. The only B&K's i remember liking were an older pair of those Robot looking ones.. the matrix series i think... don't remember which one or generation.
I suppose it's a matter of taste my reason for not buying the X1 was because I found it subdued and restrained in the treble - Though I still say it's one of the best $1500.00cdn speakers around because I would prefer a speaker to err this side than err on the bright side.
Just goes to show you that not everyone hears it the same way. The Maggies are great speakers for the money -- I may consider them as a second system for home theater that does justice to music -- but I'd want to listen longer because I wasn;t convinced by the ribbons totally -- never have really been thrilled with ribbons...but Maggie's 1.6 was better than I heard from others over the years including the SMG which to be frank stunk IMO.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
...but I'd want to listen longer because I wasn;t convinced by the ribbons totally -- never have really been thrilled with ribbons...but Maggie's 1.6 was better than I heard from others over the years including the SMG which to be frank stunk IMO.
FYI, the 1.6s do not have the ribbon tweeters as found on the 3.6s and the 20.1s.
rw
-
In my humble opinion, if you cant tell the difference between amps than your speakers are not good enough to show the difference. I can change an interconnet and the Scintila will tell you. Also if you switch AMPs you hear a huge difference.
-
The Professionals Can't Tell The Difference
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
In my humble opinion, if you cant tell the difference between amps than your speakers are not good enough to show the difference. I can change an interconnet and the Scintila will tell you. Also if you switch AMPs you hear a huge difference.
My speakers are excellent, thank you. Extensive listening tests were done by both Julian Hirsh of Hirsh/Houck Labs and also Ian G. Masters regarding the sound of amps. Neither of these professionals or the people doing the listening tests could detect any difference between the sound of numerous amps tested. I seriously doubt that your listening conditions could have been anywhere near as controlled nor do you have the expertise that these people had. After listening to numerous amps it was concluded, as I had stated, that no differences could be discerned. If you know more than these people more power to you.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadmaa
My speakers are excellent, thank you. Extensive listening tests were done by both Julian Hirsh of Hirsh/Houck Labs and also Ian G. Masters regarding the sound of amps. Neither of these professionals or the people doing the listening tests could detect any difference between the sound of numerous amps tested. I seriously doubt that your listening conditions could have been anywhere near as controlled nor do you have the expertise that these people had. After listening to numerous amps it was concluded, as I had stated, that no differences could be discerned. If you know more than these people more power to you.
Well if you are so convinced why bother to get beaten on in a thread? Seems like you need other people to tell you whats right and what not. I have "big" friends in the industry too that will eat your friends....but thats like kindergarden. Have fun listening to what others tell you, i listen to the truth. AMPS do sound different, and if you would own a Scintilla or a speaker is similar performance you would hear it too.
To put more fuel in the fire...
" Hitachi 65S700 Yamaha RX-V1400 Speakerlab SL7's M&K 12" Sub Infinity Center Cambridge In Wall Surrounds JVC DV-SA75 DVD" <----with that system you wont hear the difference between Norah Jones and Joe Cocker.
-
Your Diatribe Is Not Appreciated
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Well if you are so convinced why bother to get beaten on in a thread? Seems like you need other people to tell you whats right and what not. I have "big" friends in the industry too that will eat your friends....but thats like kindergarden. Have fun listening to what others tell you, i listen to the truth. AMPS do sound different, and if you would own a Scintilla or a speaker is similar performance you would hear it too.
To put more fuel in the fire...
" Hitachi 65S700 Yamaha RX-V1400 Speakerlab SL7's M&K 12" Sub Infinity Center Cambridge In Wall Surrounds JVC DV-SA75 DVD" <----with that system you wont hear the difference between Norah Jones and Joe Cocker.
Incidentally, I seriously doubt that you have ever heard a Speakerlab SL7 speaker. Interesting that you could cut down a speaker that you have never even listened to.
-
I 100% agree
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadmaa
Incidentally, I seriously doubt that you have ever heard a Speakerlab SL7 speaker. Interesting that you could cut down a speaker that you have never even listened to.
One should not pass judgment on or against a component they haven't listened to. Furthermore, one should not make claims of sonic differences or lack thereof unless they've listened to all the components within the scope of their claim.
-
By looking at the design of that speaker (drivers, weight of drivers, box colorations etc...) and by knowing what the world thinks of the Apogee Scintilla and what i have heard i can guarantee you that when it comes to the level of perfection in sound reproduction your speaker is not even to be mentioned in the same phrase as the Scintilla. Furthermore i have not cut down your speaker but you have done so yourself by saying that you cant hear the difference in amplifiers. If you cant hear the sonic differences in amps, than your speaker is simply not good enough. If you think Scintilla, think along the lines of Infinity IRS BETA...just better.
-Flo
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicoverall
One should not pass judgment on or against a component they haven't listened to. Furthermore, one should not make claims of sonic differences or lack thereof unless they've listened to all the components within the scope of their claim.
It is very simple. We did a AMP test 3 days ago.
The contestents:
1 pair of Vacuumstate 300B Monos
1 pair of Ampzilla 2000 Monos
1 Son of Ampzilla
1 Pathos Acoustics Classic One
1 Krell KSA-150
and several preamps. Listening was done on a pair of modest VMPS RM30's.
You can clearly pick out the different amplifiers by their sound characteristics. If you disagree, than your speakers are simply not good enough.
http://www.maggiefanclub.de/fun2.jpg
-
So after all this bragging as thats just what it sounds like,you guys havent answered the question in thread 1. You guys make these threads boring,thanks.
-
Well i dont think its bragging, i dont own all of these. Mine are only the ones in my sig.
This thread is pointless because the question why receivers are not as good as amps is so simply it does not need an answere. Receivers are a compromise in construction and aimed towards the HIFI market with some exeptions like a 989 or a 5808 or a Lexicon.
Seperate pre and power amps generally are better designed, have more space and bring the ability to be exchanged (pre and power).
Of course the 5805 amp section will sound better than the 500$ CA seperates but comparing price to price the seperate combinations are better,
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
I suppose it's a matter of taste my reason for not buying the X1 was because I found it subdued and restrained in the treble - Though I still say it's one of the best $1500.00cdn speakers around because I would prefer a speaker to err this side than err on the bright side.
Just goes to show you that not everyone hears it the same way. The Maggies are great speakers for the money -- I may consider them as a second system for home theater that does justice to music -- but I'd want to listen longer because I wasn;t convinced by the ribbons totally -- never have really been thrilled with ribbons...but Maggie's 1.6 was better than I heard from others over the years including the SMG which to be frank stunk IMO.
I agree that the X-1 does feel a bit restrained in the treble... it tends to lack a bit of the air that the Audio Note have... but I think that is also the reason I like it so much, especially over the long haul.. it is such an easy speaker to listen to in that it causes no listener fatigue. I also think Gershman raised their Canadian Prices recently as Canadian dealers seem to be asking $2000CAD for the X-1 now.
I've been listening to those AN/K Spe's a bit more the last couple nights and they are starting to tame down a bit.. now I'm not hearing that sibilance anymore. I was hearing it with a lot of female vocals. Amazing sense of air and transparency. Good call on these speakers... whole time i was reading all your posts about these things i was skeptical, but decided to buy a pair anyway.. they are good.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
So after all this bragging as thats just what it sounds like,you guys havent answered the question in thread 1. You guys make these threads boring,thanks.
If you're not a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem. How about instead of whining that people make these threads boring, you contribute something to them? with over 600 posts under your belt i'm sure you can think of something. I should also add that there was no question in the original post.
-
My post was directed at ruadmaa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
It is very simple. We did a AMP test 3 days ago.
The contestents:
1 pair of Vacuumstate 300B Monos
1 pair of Ampzilla 2000 Monos
1 Son of Ampzilla
1 Pathos Acoustics Classic One
1 Krell KSA-150
and several preamps. Listening was done on a pair of modest VMPS RM30's.
You can clearly pick out the different amplifiers by their sound characteristics. If you disagree, than your speakers are simply not good enough.
]
My point was that no one can know if there are or are not sonic differences between any two pieces of gear until they listen - and the conclusion is valid only in their own system. Ruadmaa was taking you to task for commenting on a component you hadn't listened to and he turned around and did the same thing with regard to separates vs receivers i.e they all sound the same. His comment seemed a bit odd as a result.
Looks like you had quite a time with your test! Did you trip over any components? :)
Yes, I've had no problem picking out sonic differences between amps I've auditioned in my own system so I agree with you.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicoverall
My point was that no one can know if there are or are not sonic differences between any two pieces of gear until they listen - and the conclusion is valid only in their own system. Ruadmaa was taking you to task for commenting on a component you hadn't listened to and he turned around and did the same thing with regard to separates vs receivers i.e they all sound the same. His comment seemed a bit odd as a result.
Looks like you had quite a time with your test! Did you trip over any components? :)
Yes, I've had no problem picking out sonic differences between amps I've auditioned in my own system so I agree with you.
Sounds good to me :-) Yes i tripped over the Krell because one of my pant legs got cought by the sharp fins! But the coolest part of the evening was with the Krell too. Once we plugged it in and turned the power on the whole room went dark so we had to go to the other room to get the power.
-Flo
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Sounds good to me :-) Yes i tripped over the Krell because one of my pant legs got cought by the sharp fins! But the coolest part of the evening was with the Krell too. Once we plugged it in and turned the power on the whole room went dark so we had to go to the other room to get the power.
-Flo
LOL! So it was a blind test after all? :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
So after all this bragging as thats just what it sounds like,you guys havent answered the question in thread 1.
While the thread has strayed, I think it was answered pretty fully on the first page.
rw
-
Maybe the pros can't ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruadmaa
My speakers are excellent, thank you. Extensive listening tests were done by both Julian Hirsh of Hirsh/Houck Labs and also Ian G. Masters regarding the sound of amps. Neither of these professionals or the people doing the listening tests could detect any difference between the sound of numerous amps tested.....
But I am convinced that I can hear differences. That was certainly the case when I compared my NAD C270 against Monarchy SP70 and Bel Canto eVo2i; (I bought the latter). And I didn't need Scintillas to do it either, just humble Magneplanar MMGs.
More recently I compared the Bel Canto against my Panasonic SA-XR25 receiver. The latter was highly tauted around here by some people but was distinctly inferior to the Bel.
And for the latter comparison case I used only my Paradigm MiniMonitors. ruadmaa, you Speakerlabs are up to the job if you will take the time to listen.
As for Julian Hirsch and Ian Masters, nobody doubts their credentials as engineers but a lot of people dismiss them as audiophiles. It's said of Hirsch that "he never heard a component he didn't like". Because a test is legitimately DBT doesn't mean that its definitive: in any case, while a DBT can prove the differences do exist, but it cannot prove that they don't exist.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
But I am convinced that I can hear differences.
So do I.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
It's said of Hirsch that "he never heard a component he didn't like".
My favorite Julian story came from a JBL engineer who was giving a demonstration on JBL speakers. He was asked if Julian was on the take since he never said anything bad about anything. The engineer said "No, he's not on the take, he just can't hear."
rw
-
I can tell easily
Both my Musical Fidelity and PS Audio amps are highly rated amps, but with my system you can clearly hear a difference between them. To me, the maggies sound better with the PS Audio amp, while the Musical Fidelity sounded as good, if not better, on the Gallo Reference 3.
-
I don't know which engineers or scientist suggest that all amps sound the same with all types of speakers. There are well documented research papers that suggest for some speaker designs at least (in particular speakers that have drivers wired in series, are higher order crossovers with more parallel elements) that different amplifiers will produce different results. Amps that are more tolerant of either inductive or capacitive loads should be the most compatible with most speakers.
Truth is though, that many amps aren't equally tolerant, either deliberately by design or without consideration. Some amps are less tolerant of, for example, speakers networks that yield inductive loads. Speaker designers, engineers, physicist have known this for years, and because of this there are different "golden rule" moltipliers for L and C multiples (inductors and capacitors) in crossover networks that designers use to match the electro-acoustic properties of speaker systems to the amps they'll be used with.
There isn't a truth that one type of amp or crossover is better than another, but rather that the system synergies could be better under certain conditions.
In this situation I think that the engineers AND the audiophiles are right. The engineers are right to say that the sonic differences aren't attributable to the amplifiers themselves, and the audiophiles aren't crazy or selling snake-oil when they say that some amplifiers sound better to them than others through their speakers or certain combinations yield more pleasing results.
Want to make things even more complicated? It's very likely that the same high-end speaker model and amplifiers could sound different from one pairing to the next as even the slightest tolerance deviations (+/- 1% is very good, but adds up as the number elements increases) can cause slightly different results. What's this mean - nobody is right if they say speaker X sounds better with amplifier Y or speaker X sounds better than speaker Z, etc...
Since I don't see the inductive or capacitive characteristics of equipment readily disclosed in the specs, safe to say you should use your ears to determine what sounds best to you.
Depending on your gear, it is entirely possible that a $200 receiver could sound as good with your speakers at volumes you listen at as a $20,000 amplifier. If this is the case, I envy you.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by corwin99
I agree that the X-1 does feel a bit restrained in the treble... it tends to lack a bit of the air that the Audio Note have... but I think that is also the reason I like it so much, especially over the long haul.. it is such an easy speaker to listen to in that it causes no listener fatigue. I also think Gershman raised their Canadian Prices recently as Canadian dealers seem to be asking $2000CAD for the X-1 now.
I've been listening to those AN/K Spe's a bit more the last couple nights and they are starting to tame down a bit.. now I'm not hearing that sibilance anymore. I was hearing it with a lot of female vocals. Amazing sense of air and transparency. Good call on these speakers... whole time i was reading all your posts about these things i was skeptical, but decided to buy a pair anyway.. they are good.
Well mate all I can say is you have some good taste because very few people would take a gamble on speakers like Gershman or for that matter Audio Note. I heard Gershman before Audio Note and have been recommending them for years. The AN K needs a lot of experimenting to get bang on...toe in, or not, dead straight ahed works in some rooms better, distance apart, how close to the wall. With the J in the corner it is not just a matter of bass but also on the control of the midrange and treble.
I am not a huge break in believer because I think it's largely a matter of getting used to somethig that is presenting the material differently. My first criteria of any loudspeaker is can I listen to it fairly loud which is loud ALL-DAY. If one cannot then return it. I recommend highly those speakers that fall into this camp...I can forgive weaknesses because all speakers have them -- all day listening is an attribute of speakers like AN Gershman, Reference 3a MM De Capo (original version), among a few others.
The AN's will settle down -- they don;t like inexpensive SS gear at all. In fact if you have several hours at Soundhounds -- get them to hiook up the VEYR GOOD Rotel RA-1 or 2 to the AN K/SPe and the AN E/L -- You'll find the Rotel does better with the E/L and makes the K a bit strident. But when you switch out the Rotel with the Meishu the K is still just as extended but without any hint of grain...the E/L for whatever reason (copper as opposed to silver) is easier going on lesser gear.
I personally think Soundhounds should carry the cheaper K/LX because it is less likely people are going to have truly great amps running the K's. If the K/LX is like the E/LX then it would be far friendlier to inexpensive or SS amplifiers in general.
I have done the time listening to the J/L vs J/Spe and several E models after each other and the treble response is improved dramatically IF the amplifier is SE. So LX is better with SS and Spe and above needs SE to be IMO well matched.
Though I enjoyed the Sugden I had with both -- but few SS sound like Sugden.
I'd kinda like to see Soundhounds pick up Gershman -- what the hell they seem to have tried everything else.
-
E-stat
Wow what are the tweeters in the 1.6 then? I was merely looking through the black cloth and it appeared to be a ribbon? Is it some sort of hybrid?
I'll have to try the 3.6. Soundhounds said that if Maggie sells then they will bring in the 3.6 and the 20.1 or whatever the flagship is. I would like that because I would like to hear what a NEWER full range large panel can do -- the big ML's were nice but not quite up to my tastes. But the 1.6 is half the price of the ML Aerius and The maggie I think is superior in every regard.
I would seriously look at these for my second system for home theater. Though I'd have to buy a blinking subwoofer or two.
-
The 1.6 has a quasi ribbon, it is not a full ribbon. The same driver can be found (only larger) in the midrange section of the 20 and 20.1
The 3.6R is the second flagship and the 20.1 is the biggest.
-T
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Well mate all I can say is you have some good taste because very few people would take a gamble on speakers like Gershman or for that matter Audio Note. I heard Gershman before Audio Note and have been recommending them for years. The AN K needs a lot of experimenting to get bang on...toe in, or not, dead straight ahed works in some rooms better, distance apart, how close to the wall. With the J in the corner it is not just a matter of bass but also on the control of the midrange and treble.
I am not a huge break in believer because I think it's largely a matter of getting used to somethig that is presenting the material differently. My first criteria of any loudspeaker is can I listen to it fairly loud which is loud ALL-DAY. If one cannot then return it. I recommend highly those speakers that fall into this camp...I can forgive weaknesses because all speakers have them -- all day listening is an attribute of speakers like AN Gershman, Reference 3a MM De Capo (original version), among a few others.
I agree.. I need speakers that I can listen to loud for extended periods. You will be sad to hear that the All-day listening attribute of the Ref 3a MM De Capo's seems to be slightly diminished... but still sound very good in other respects.
You know what's funny, when I bought the AN/K Spe's, i almost bought them to prove to myself that they couldn't be as good as they are, especially with their ugly cabinets and what not. I've actually grown to like the cabinet. In my recollection.. my favourite speaker i've ever heard is still likely the Gershman Avant Garde. The Carbon Fiber Audax midrange in that unit sounds so good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
The AN's will settle down -- they don;t like inexpensive SS gear at all. In fact if you have several hours at Soundhounds -- get them to hiook up the VEYR GOOD Rotel RA-1 or 2 to the AN K/SPe and the AN E/L -- You'll find the Rotel does better with the E/L and makes the K a bit strident. But when you switch out the Rotel with the Meishu the K is still just as extended but without any hint of grain...the E/L for whatever reason (copper as opposed to silver) is easier going on lesser gear.
I personally think Soundhounds should carry the cheaper K/LX because it is less likely people are going to have truly great amps running the K's. If the K/LX is like the E/LX then it would be far friendlier to inexpensive or SS amplifiers in general.
I have done the time listening to the J/L vs J/Spe and several E models after each other and the treble response is improved dramatically IF the amplifier is SE. So LX is better with SS and Spe and above needs SE to be IMO well matched.
Though I enjoyed the Sugden I had with both -- but few SS sound like Sugden.
I'd kinda like to see Soundhounds pick up Gershman -- what the hell they seem to have tried everything else.
When i return from China (i'm leaving tomorrow) I will hook my K/Spe's to the Odyssey's to see how well they work together.. since i have two complete systems side by side it will be easy.. and good for my shootout. You really should come... We're going to have a Blue Note Piccolo Turntable, Ellis 1801 Speakers, Jolida 100B CD player, SimAudio 4070se, Musical Fidelity Amp of some sort, all my gear, hopefully a Roksan Radius 5 TT, and maybe more... all this along with my own gear of course... some of which isn't listed in my sig.
I was actually thinking about buying a pair of the J/L instead, with the Vinyl Veneer and all copper... since it was the first one i listened to.. not sure if they were using the Meishu, but it was a very large silver integrated and Cd player.. both audio note. The K/Spe actually sounded BETTER than the J/L to my ears in that room. Considering they were both the same price and the J/L was like twice the size i was a bit tempted to get the J/L anyway.. but can't fit that next to my gershmans. So far the K/Spe's are liking my Radii KT-88's... they're nice little 15W monoblocks. I should actually stick my Sonic Impact modded amp in there too.
You really should consider coming down to our shindig.. likely will be a saturday.. mid-late June... all day.. BBQ/Beer and all that.
-
Is that IT, then?!?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
I don't know which engineers or scientist suggest that all amps sound the same with all types of speakers. There are well documented research papers that suggest for some speaker designs at least (in particular speakers that have drivers wired in series, are higher order crossovers with more parallel elements) that different amplifiers will produce different results. Amps that are more tolerant of either inductive or capacitive loads should be the most compatible with most speakers.....
I'm skeptically that the differences in amp sound are entirely explained in terms of inductive/capacitive differences between speakers. For example the NAD and Bel Canto I mentioned above each had consistent characteristics whether they were driving the aforementioned Paradigm MiniMonitors or Magneplanars. I.e. ...
- NAD: warm, less well defined bass, less definition in general, slightly grainy highs.
- BEL CANTO: lean, well defined bass; smooth, extended highs, outstanding definition across the spectrum.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
You guys make these threads boring,thanks.
I wouldn't say boring. Reading these pages just reinforced the fact that upgrading my amplifier really isn't going to give me that "missing" sound that the ad agencies are want me to believe.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by corwin99
I agree.. I need speakers that I can listen to loud for extended periods. You will be sad to hear that the All-day listening attribute of the Ref 3a MM De Capo's seems to be slightly diminished... but still sound very good in other respects.
You know what's funny, when I bought the AN/K Spe's, i almost bought them to prove to myself that they couldn't be as good as they are, especially with their ugly cabinets and what not. I've actually grown to like the cabinet. In my recollection.. my favourite speaker i've ever heard is still likely the Gershman Avant Garde. The Carbon Fiber Audax midrange in that unit sounds so good.
When i return from China (i'm leaving tomorrow) I will hook my K/Spe's to the Odyssey's to see how well they work together.. since i have two complete systems side by side it will be easy.. and good for my shootout. You really should come... We're going to have a Blue Note Piccolo Turntable, Ellis 1801 Speakers, Jolida 100B CD player, SimAudio 4070se, Musical Fidelity Amp of some sort, all my gear, hopefully a Roksan Radius 5 TT, and maybe more... all this along with my own gear of course... some of which isn't listed in my sig.
I was actually thinking about buying a pair of the J/L instead, with the Vinyl Veneer and all copper... since it was the first one i listened to.. not sure if they were using the Meishu, but it was a very large silver integrated and Cd player.. both audio note. The K/Spe actually sounded BETTER than the J/L to my ears in that room. Considering they were both the same price and the J/L was like twice the size i was a bit tempted to get the J/L anyway.. but can't fit that next to my gershmans. So far the K/Spe's are liking my Radii KT-88's... they're nice little 15W monoblocks. I should actually stick my Sonic Impact modded amp in there too.
You really should consider coming down to our shindig.. likely will be a saturday.. mid-late June... all day.. BBQ/Beer and all that.
I don't mind coming but I can't bring my speakers -- I am also car-less.
The K/spe could be argued as being better than the J/L -- I know Bob Neil who reviews for Positive Feedback likes the K for certain things. The J/L is in a chipboard box copper wiring and is about 5-10 years old...it depends what you're going to match up with the stuff...the J has 25hz on the K and a much larger sounding front to back presence -- but the K/Spe is more refined than any L model for the range that it covers. The J will also play considerably louder with less power. They don;t sound the same after all because we'retalking a port versus a sealed cabinet.
I had the K for six months but the added bass extends the envelope of the overall presence and image so much that I would probably due without some resolution and get the J/L over the K/Spe if they were around the same money if it were a main speaker. The J/Spe did take time oddly for the bass to seem right and the whole sound to really feel at ease.
I spent the most time with the X1 and the GAP(which is a fine speaker as well).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
I don't mind coming but I can't bring my speakers -- I am also car-less.
The K/spe could be argued as being better than the J/L -- I know Bob Neil who reviews for Positive Feedback likes the K for certain things. The J/L is in a chipboard box copper wiring and is about 5-10 years old...it depends what you're going to match up with the stuff...the J has 25hz on the K and a much larger sounding front to back presence -- but the K/Spe is more refined than any L model for the range that it covers. The J will also play considerably louder with less power. They don;t sound the same after all because we'retalking a port versus a sealed cabinet.
I had the K for six months but the added bass extends the envelope of the overall presence and image so much that I would probably due without some resolution and get the J/L over the K/Spe if they were around the same money if it were a main speaker. The J/Spe did take time oddly for the bass to seem right and the whole sound to really feel at ease.
I spent the most time with the X1 and the GAP(which is a fine speaker as well).
Was just joking about the speakers ;) I wouldn't be able to corner place them to do them justice anyway.. both my component racks are in the corners of my listening room. But yeah.. will be lots of fun with the guys over for the day... i'll let you know when it is.
The K/Spe and the J/L that i heard at soundhounds definately sounded different, and i think it did have to do with the port on the J/L... it didn't seem placed properly, definately less coherent than the K/Spe. I think that's what struck me about the K/Spe.. it's just so damn coherent.. everything seems "together". Just wish the low end was a bit more. I'm considering hooking the cable from the SW-1's onto the K/spe's to see if that sounds good.. heh.. i dont think so tho since there is a difference in sensitivity. The SW-1's would cross them over at 90hz... 3rd order.
I hope i can snag some gear or accessories out in Shanghai.
BTW- I can pick you up for the get-together... its no problem. Where abouts in Nanamo do you live?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
I'm skeptically that the differences in amp sound are entirely explained in terms of inductive/capacitive differences between speakers. For example the NAD and Bel Canto I mentioned above each had consistent characteristics whether they were driving the aforementioned Paradigm MiniMonitors or Magneplanars. I.e. ...
- NAD: warm, less well defined bass, less definition in general, slightly grainy highs.
- BEL CANTO: lean, well defined bass; smooth, extended highs, outstanding definition across the spectrum.
Oh, I didn't imply all differences were fully explained only by the inductive or capacitive properties of speaker networks. Naturally I would think there'd have to be inductive/capacitive difference in the amplifier as well that would cause the difficulties I mentioned earlier. I just wanted to say they do exist and engineers know this. Because of this evidence, it baffles me that some nay-sayers who claim to be engineers can make claims that all amps sound the same with every speaker etc. It's clear they don't, and that system synergy is important.
Though it's also very likely that some speakers might be indifferent to amplifiers and vice-versa.
I also think some designers build in "response curves" if you will into the amps, though I'll admit to never really researching if this is true or not.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
Oh, I didn't imply all differences were fully explained only by the inductive or capacitive properties of speaker networks. Naturally I would think there'd have to be inductive/capacitive difference in the amplifier as well that would cause the difficulties I mentioned earlier. I just wanted to say they do exist and engineers know this. Because of this evidence, it baffles me that some nay-sayers who claim to be engineers can make claims that all amps sound the same with every speaker etc. It's clear they don't, and that system synergy is important.
Though it's also very likely that some speakers might be indifferent to amplifiers and vice-versa.
I also think some designers build in "response curves" if you will into the amps, though I'll admit to never really researching if this is true or not.
Kex -
As usual, you're a bedrock of rationality in a sea of extremism -- on this thread at least, it looks like the subjectivist kool-aid is on the menu.
Your point about "response curves" is very true with a lot of vintage equipment, particularly with the "zero states" on receivers and preamps. It was pretty well known that vintage Yamaha receivers with all of the tone controls and settings at zero or flat still had a slight rise in the treble. I believe that with Marantz receivers, it tended to reside more in the midrange. With the huge number of switches and controls that you saw with a lot of vintage receivers and preamps, it shouldn't be surprising that the analog signal would get altered along the way, even with everything at a zero/flat state.
I think manufacturers moved away from this type of thinking in the 80s when preamps and receivers started incorporating fewer switches and controls, and started going more towards the minimalist edict that took hold in the two-channel community. With newer AV receivers, it's completely different because most of the signal processing now occurs in the digital domain, where audible differences are not nearly as pronounced as before when the signal had to pass through a bevy of analog switches and controls before it went to the amp section.
-
Wooch, that confirms my suspicions then.
I've had the priviledge a few years back of spending a few weeks with my uncle's Bryston gear hooked up to my system. Even on my modest old Wharfedale Emeralds I could notice a different, dare I say better sound than my old Marantz pro-logic receiver or NAD 3020 integrated.
While I do praise the benefits of quality amplification and can appreciate tonal differences, I don't think recievers all suck donkey balls and are incapable of delivering good sound.
-
Corwin
I'm near the ferry.
Audio Note speakers are time and phase aligned as well as timed to a master curver - no one in the industry does this...you will see some that stagger their drivers in a sloped fashion where the tweeter is further back etc. Somewhere on AA they went more in depth as to the design
On time and phase alignment
"We go one better than simple time/phase alignment, we individually adjust and match the woofer's behaviour to the tweeter at the points where they both reproduce the same frequency, this is far far more important and sophisticated than the primitive practice of sloping the baffle a bit to "compensate" for the tweeters earlier and shorter response time."
"I don't understand why you would measure a speaker at 180 degrees and I have not measured or seen measurements on the NHT you mention, but I can tell you that I would have no real problem putting the 90 degree off axis response of any of our speakers up against any other forward radiating speaker, we would come out well there."
A thread from peter Qvortrup is at ://www.audioasylum.com/audio/speakers/messages/192627.html
|