Realistic sound = tubes and analogue

[RGA]

Sir T

I didn't even know the PS3 was a SACD machine. I just checked the box and it says "playback of Super Audio CD is not supported. Apparently they pulled it from the newer slim machines :-(

Apparently only the 60 and 80 gig versions will play SACD and these were the machines that would also play PS2 games - the new PS3 machines will not play PS2 games (which I think is monumentally stupid) But no one ever said that large companies cared about quality or logic just the bottom line. Here is a list of which PS3 machines play it http://www.ps3sacd.com/faq.html#_Toc180147566


There is some rumbling from some Sony Reps that they may be pulling out of SACD. Both from making the hardware and software as they've been losing a lot of money on it. I fear that if Sony pulls out it will end SACD. As this author notes that it was near dead back in 2007 and it has not improved since. SACD sales was propped up because they included it on many budget DVD players and those 400 disc do everything mega changers. So every one of those that sold could be said was a SACD hardware sales but in reality probably less than .01% of the buyers were buying those machines because it had SACD support. Sony seems to have pulled out of including the technology largely I suspect due the horrid sales of the music. And even the sales of SACD music - some of that was propped up here because it includes the regular Redbook version to play in redbook machines. So it would be tough to determine if even SACD sales were truly about the consumer buying it for SACD or buying it because it happened to be the artiest they wanted and the only version the store had. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9680711-1.html

FWIW my dealer seems to prefer the sound of DVD-A over SACD by a significant margin from his level of enthusiasm in our discussion. At least with the machines he has and the software he has. I have not heard DVD-A enough because the stores that carried it seem to drop it so fast. The music selection at all the stores up here - Future Shop, Best-Buy and HMV have pathetic music selections. I have to buy used or online to get any quality music. Classical is almost completely gone from the box chains, Jazz has one rack and only mainstream big well known Jazz artists like krall, Miles Davis, Coltrane, Brubeck and even then only the latest couple of albums or compilations. Best Buy here did not have a classical CD outside of the 5 CD cheapo sets of Mozart and Beethoven.

Strangely HMV was selling a vinyl of Radiohead. But they have both moved into the video game and movie sales.

[GMichael]

Sir T

I didn't even know the PS3 was a SACD machine. I just checked the box and it says "playback of Super Audio CD is not supported. Apparently they pulled it from the newer slim machines :-(

Apparently only the 60 and 80 gig versions will play SACD and these were the machines that would also play PS2 games - the new PS3 machines will not play PS2 games (which I think is monumentally stupid) But no one ever said that large companies cared about quality or logic just the bottom line. Here is a list of which PS3 machines play it http://www.ps3sacd.com/faq.html#_Toc180147566


There is some rumbling from some Sony Reps that they may be pulling out of SACD. Both from making the hardware and software as they've been losing a lot of money on it. I fear that if Sony pulls out it will end SACD. As this author notes that it was near dead back in 2007 and it has not improved since. SACD sales was propped up because they included it on many budget DVD players and those 400 disc do everything mega changers. So every one of those that sold could be said was a SACD hardware sales but in reality probably less than .01% of the buyers were buying those machines because it had SACD support. Sony seems to have pulled out of including the technology largely I suspect due the horrid sales of the music. And even the sales of SACD music - some of that was propped up here because it includes the regular Redbook version to play in redbook machines. So it would be tough to determine if even SACD sales were truly about the consumer buying it for SACD or buying it because it happened to be the artiest they wanted and the only version the store had. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9680711-1.html

FWIW my dealer seems to prefer the sound of DVD-A over SACD by a significant margin from his level of enthusiasm in our discussion. At least with the machines he has and the software he has. I have not heard DVD-A enough because the stores that carried it seem to drop it so fast. The music selection at all the stores up here - Future Shop, Best-Buy and HMV have pathetic music selections. I have to buy used or online to get any quality music. Classical is almost completely gone from the box chains, Jazz has one rack and only mainstream big well known Jazz artists like krall, Miles Davis, Coltrane, Brubeck and even then only the latest couple of albums or compilations. Best Buy here did not have a classical CD outside of the 5 CD cheapo sets of Mozart and Beethoven.

Strangely HMV was selling a vinyl of Radiohead. But they have both moved into the video game and movie sales.

I think you are right about the newer PS/3’s not having SACD, but I’ve heard that the BR music format is very good. Have you tried any of those?

[tube fan]

The digital you heard at that show was 16bit digital, that is all they had there. And what SACD's they had were played through players that transcoded the DSD stream to PCM, which is the worst way to handle SACD. There were ZERO demonstrations of high resolution audio done right - and the only one that had any high resolution recordings done right was me. When you have nothing legitimate to compare too, it is easy to make the argument that vinyl sounded better. Another thing is there were far more tube based amps at this show than SS, and most of them were in the larger rooms where the sound could stretch its legs sort of speak. This show was more tailored to vinyl and tubes than any show I have ever been to. I think CES is better at having more of a variety of both high end digital and analog, and high end tubes and SS.



He was referring to 16bit digital, and we are now at 24 and 32 bit digital. It looks to me like the older guys are slow to move on.




1993 was seventeen years ago... Do you really think that digital technology has stood still for that long?





They played plain old 16bit digital or DSD transcoded to PCM on that rig, hardly a way to present SACD. And finally, I know that reel to reel tape sounds better than most digital, we actually agree on this.

Tube Fan, you really need to get out and hear DXD based recordings. You probably won't give up either tubes or vinyl after listening to it(you are much too emotionally tied to both), but at least it will reset your notions of the current state of the art in digital, instead of you hanging on to a thirty year old memory.

I am beginning to get a clearer picture of why some wax nostalgic over tubes and vinyl, they are very emotionally attached to it. When you are this emotionally attached to something, you psychologically block out everything else(including what sounds better) to maintain that psychological connection. (now putting on my RE coat) Those of us that do not have that connection, don't really "marry" ourselves that closely to any format unless it has a sonic superiority over a previous format. When the next better sounding format comes along, we move on to that. We progress, and are not inclined to wax nostalgic over something when something better comes along. I am also beginning to think there is an age component to this as well.

You 100% incorrect that I have ANY emotional ties to either analogue or digital. Both are a huge pain. Tubes age and go bad. TTs and cartridges have numerous problems. However, until I hear digital that sounds realistic, I am forced to stick to analogue. I check out the shows and our top audio stores every 6 months, and I've never been impressed with the ss or digital sound.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think you are right about the newer PS/3’s not having SACD, but I’ve heard that the BR music format is very good. Have you tried any of those?

Agreed. I have reviewed just about every title released, so if you need some pointers, I can help you out.

I forgot about SACD and the new players.

It would not surprise me one bit if Sony drops SACD. Now with the Blu ray disc, they have a chance to revive high resolution music without supporting tools that are not normally found in studios(all DSD workflow in a all PCM world).

[tube fan]

Are there ANY stores where I can hear this wonderful new digital sound in the SF bay area? Is there much software?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You 100% incorrect that I have ANY emotional ties to either analogue or digital. Both are a huge pain. Tubes age and go bad. TTs and cartridges have numerous problems. However, until I hear digital that sounds realistic, I am forced to stick to analogue. I check out the shows and our top audio stores every 6 months, and I've never been impressed with the ss or digital sound.

I am not convinced by this statement. First, if you read the review of the Bryston 28BSST here:

http://www.stereophile.com/solidpowe...ry/index1.html

Notice this quote

The 28B-SST's midrange was just as sweet, clear, and open as its treble, and full of new musical information—all reminiscent of the triode mode of the VTL S-400 tube amplifier, which I used to review VTL's TL-6.5 preamplifier (Vol.30 No.6).

So Larry Greenhill is comparing the excellent qualities of the 28BSST a SS design, to the same excellent qualities of the VTL S-400 tube amp, an amp of which I have heard before. If this reviewer finds qualities they both share, why can't you?. As much as I like SS designs, I recognized there are certain qualities of tube designs I can appreaciate. I am not so biased in favor of SS designs that I cannot recognize some great qualities of a tube design. If you have not heard a single SS amp that sounds as good as a tube amp, you are A) not looking.B) do not want to recognize any good qualities of a SS design or,C) you purposely don't into rooms at shows that feature SS designs. The same goes for digital sound. Puget sound was at the California Audio Show, did you bother to listen to the DXD based recordings they had?

I fully understand your prejudice against 16bit digital, I don't care for it either. But it is difficult for me to believe that you go to all of these shows, and have never heard a high resolution digital source that offered the same realism as analog. 24/96 DVD-A has been out for years, almost a decade now, 24/192khz has been around for at least that long as well(but not widely used until the last five years), and you have never heard it at a show?

This seems very curious to me because at CES a couple of years ago, 24/96khz, 24/192khz, SACD, and DXD recordings were all over the place. Based on your claimed exposure(of which I don't doubt), you should have heard an excellent presentation of high resolution digital by now. Personally, I think when you hear or see the words digital, you shut off any objectivity before you even hear it. The slant and tone of your postings sure bare that out.

[tube fan]

The only digital based system I have ever heard that came close to my system (remember I have Audio Research tube units, more ss in tonal balance than 98% of other tube units) was in the Audio Note room at the recent show. I have never gotten three-dimensional sound out of any ss unit. Note that others prefer tubes because they have qualities that elude all ss units. I would VASTLY prefer a ss unit to my AR gear, if it could match my Audio Research units (say at $15,000 or less). Note that ss amps and pre-amps should be much less expensive to maintain than tube units, a huge plus for ss. What ss units should I try to hear in my system (Fulton J or Dunlavy SC-IV speakers, VPI Scoutmaster with Benz Ruby 3 cartridge)?

I have the same objection to mm cartridges compared to mc ones. The only non-mc cartridge I have liked was the London Decca, which is probably more trouble than mc cartridges.

[E-Stat]

What ss units should I try to hear in my system (Fulton J or Dunlavy SC-IV speakers, VPI Scoutmaster with Benz Ruby 3 cartridge)?

In addition to the latest Bryston 28B Sir T mentioned (not earlier amps), have you tried anything from Pass Labs? ASR? Spectral? I confess that I would really like to hear what a clean kilowatt would sound like on my stats.

rw

[tube fan]

I have heard, and hated ss from Spectral and Pass. Many of the top reviewers in the Absolute Sound, Stereophile, and Drago prefer tubes to ss. Ditto for analogue over digital. I'm sure they have heard most of the top ss units, and they still favor tubes and analogue. The Audio research VSi60 integrated amp which got such a rave review in Stereophile only costs $4,000. I'll check out the Bryston, but I doubt that it will impress me as I was unmoved by the Spectral and Pass ss units I heard.

[E-Stat]

I'll check out the Bryston, but I doubt that it will impress me as I was unmoved by the Spectral and Pass ss units I heard.

HP says it sounds pretty darn good on the Scaenas and the Sanders.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I have heard, and hated ss from Spectral and Pass. Many of the top reviewers in the Absolute Sound, Stereophile, and Drago prefer tubes to ss. Ditto for analogue over digital. I'm sure they have heard most of the top ss units, and they still favor tubes and analogue. The Audio research VSi60 integrated amp which got such a rave review in Stereophile only costs $4,000. I'll check out the Bryston, but I doubt that it will impress me as I was unmoved by the Spectral and Pass ss units I heard.

Keep an open mind, if you go in to a listening session with this attitude, there is no way an objective evaluation is possible. If you walk in with the attitude that you will not be impressed, then you probably won't be.

I would bet this is the attitude you take anytime your hear the words "digital" and "solid state".

[RGA]

In addition to the latest Bryston 28B Sir T mentioned (not earlier amps), have you tried anything from Pass Labs? ASR? Spectral? I confess that I would really like to hear what a clean kilowatt would sound like on my stats.

rw

My issue with SS has long been that they sound too much alike and that "alike" sound isn't all that good. If you can't differentiate them in a blind level matched session then the differences just are not that noticable to be worth an extra $20,000 so unless it's about power in a big room then the difference in an average listening room on 87-90db easyish speakers then throwing money at SS isn't really getting you anywhere. In other words a Classe set-up sounds a lot more like a Sim Audio and a Rotel front end than does an Audio Note versus Jolida versu Cary.

I find that tube fans get attacked for not keeping an open mind but a lot of SS guys take one look and see a tube and automatically project "euphony" and have their own set of predispositions and will hear into things that are not there. They have every bit the bias a tube guy has. I have read moronic statements that you can add a resister to the cable to get "tube" sound - which implies that tube amps all sound the same. Tube amps sound a lot more different than SS amps so SS supporters often over generalize the so called "tube sound." A Jolida 302b sounds all warm and mushy and some like it. The ASL AQ 1003DT same price range same tubes sounds lean and mean like some SS amps They are entirely different sounding amps.

The Tube Fan is not mishearing things. SS has a certain flatness and throwing money at it doesn't necessarily help. I liked the Technical Brain amps - these are a bit different in design from the usual and judging byt the people who liked the Lotus set-up probably were responding to the TB amps. But sure it gets good at $80,000+ and TB has a track record that every unit that has been sold in North America breaks down. See Valin's review of them. The Bryston 28b at CES didn't convince me - the room they were in was arguably bottom two or three I heard there.

I had a guy selling panels and his own 1000 watt amps telling me how you need 1000 watts to get the dynamics and scale of music - 10 rooms down the hall I heard the Jinro (20 watts) on twa ways blow his panels and his 1000 watt system into next week and sound a lot better cleaner and less chaulky sounding in the treble. The words organic and real pop up a lot with tube gear because there is more "meat" and body to instruments and vocals.

My dealer has sold virtually every big audiophile brand noted - with great tube gear you hear the "room" on the recordings - with SS even his best SS you simply never do. You hear a washed out 2 dimensional presentation that is very clear and crisp and "tight" and those are commendable things but to my ear and obviously to Tube Fan's ears something got hacked off to get that crispy clean front. Some SS keeps it intact better than others. Class A single ended amps like the Sugden - but even then factoring in the price I ask can a tube do the same or better for less and while I absolutely love the circa 1992- versions of the A21a - I still prefer other tube amps for less money. I did enjoy an inexpensive Heed Audio SS amp at CES which was surprisingly good for the money and has an interesting design approach.

The problem for a lot of tube guys keeping an open mind is that once you've heard say 5-10 of what are considered the best SS amps and you see $70,000 price tags and you say - gee my $3000 tube amp sounds a lot better then it's hard to blame folks for giving up. I mean I have heard Krell, Levinson, Classe, McIntosh, Bryston, Rotel, Creek Audio, Naim, Arcam, Rega, NAD, Sugden, Linn, YBA, Meridian, Sim Audio, Musical Fidelity, at considerable length. Then there are all the brands at shows and fellow audiophile houses and various short auditions like Edge, Boulder, Pass, Technical Brain, etc.

At some point you make a decision that wehn a $4000 tube integrated sounds better than a $80,000 Krell Levinson then you stick with the pain of buying tubes every couple of years. And if it is that your ear/brain is being seduced by beautiful second harmonic distortion and euphony then so be it. Better sound is better sound no matter the reasons for why it sounds better. And since better is somewhat subjective - what are you gonna do? I think I get why people like the sound of Krell and Bryston. But I grow weary when they imply they have better ears because it is "more accurate" and star doling out graphs to convince others. If you need a graph to convince people something sounds "good" then you have just admitted you don't have the ears to determine that for yourself. And if you don't have the ears for this then stop spending money and go to Best Buy and get one of those receivers and a nice little Klipsch home theater in a box set-ups and spend the money on some other hobby.

[Feanor]

My issue with SS has long been that they sound too much alike and that "alike" sound isn't all that good. If you can't differentiate them in a blind level matched session then the differences just are not that noticable to be worth an extra $20,000 so unless it's about power in a big room then the difference in an average listening room on 87-90db easyish speakers then throwing money at SS isn't really getting you anywhere. In other words a Classe set-up sounds a lot more like a Sim Audio and a Rotel front end than does an Audio Note versus Jolida versu Cary.

...

Oh! All of a sudden blind tests are important to you, RGA. I never cease to marvel at your self-contradiction and hypocracy.

The fact of the "alikeness" of solid state would tell an open-minded person something, i.e. maybe, (just maybe), s/s does something right that the myriad variations of tube sound cannot.

I was surprised at the significant differences between my s/s, yet fine-sound, Monarchy amps, and my recently DIY'd Class D Audio SDS-258, (see the AA review and further comments HERE). And price difference is far, far from $20,000 let me assure you. The transparency and dimensionality of the latter (even more than the former), is astounding. What's more, it's ability to convey the authentic harmonics of instruments is outstanding and the best I've heard in my system.

Are the "dimensionality" and "authentic harmonics" that I refer above the same as the "depth" and "tonal richness" (or whatever the phrase) attributed tube equipment? I've heard the latter on occassion and I would say they're probably not the same thing. As for which is are accurate, I'd say the former. Which is more pleasant is a harder call; perhaps that depends whether you can handle the truth.

[RGA]

Feanor

i don't tend to trust reviews from DIYers because there is a known bias to such pride of ownership accomplishments.

As for DBT's I am not a supporter of them for many valid reasons but in general people who wax poetic on Solid State like to go to the "science" as to why they're superior to tubes so if you go to the well you should not be a hypocrite and you should also go to the science that clearly illustrates that you won't tell one SS amp from another one level matched assuming both don't go into clipping at the given level. Tube amps won't all be differentiated in a DBT against SS either - depends on the amp.

"The fact of the "alikeness" of solid state would tell an open-minded person something, i.e. maybe, (just maybe), s/s does something right that the myriad variations of tube sound cannot.

So you're saying they're "alike" and that is a good thing and try to slam tubes but then proceed to say that SS sounds a lot different (a lot means very noticable and even though I am not for DBT's they will show up hugely noticable differences - so they're not hugely noticable). And a LOT of SS makers tend to to state things like "valve-like" and our amps sound more analog etc. Such makers I applaud for knowing which sounds better but then I wonder why they just didn't make a tube amp since that is clearly their reference standard goal. I read Heed Audios page and even they were talking about getting the superior dynamics blah blah of valve designs. Fascinatingly I like their amps before I read the website and now I get an idea of why it sounds good.

I am not against class D - I have heard a few pretty good ones and PS Audio has some interesting amps at $999 which are appealing from a price size perspective.

The fact that tube amps have a lot of variation can be viewed to be varying degrees of inaccuracy since if they sound different then they can't all be accurate. But then I don't believe anything out there is truly accurate so my view is to have it sound "good" and generally the tube amps tend to sound better out of what I have heard. SS may sound better out of what you have heard but we both have not heard everything. It comes down to experiential listening and most people have not heard the systems I have heard so there is no point in having the discussion.

[Geoffcin]

What a priggish thing to say!

Feanor

i don't tend to trust reviews from DIYers because there is a known bias to such pride of ownership accomplishments.

You've just proven my view that your speakers are nothing more than overpriced poorly designed boxes with middling drivers in a simplistic array that only a person who was foolish enough to purchase at an outrageous price would defend as "state-of-the-art". That "would be pride of ownership" talking on your part, and it would discount your views on these speakers entirely!

[tube fan]

I just read the Stereophile review of the Bryston 28b, and they caution to use it with 6 or 8 ohm speakers. That lets me out! Trust me, I have a completely open mind. Remember, my favorite system at the CAS was the Evolution Acoustics when playing copies of master tapes and driven by ss units. The Audio Note system was in my top 3 rooms, and they only used CDs. Looking back on the show, I am still shocked how realistic the Audio Note system sounded. How much was due to the Jinro integrated amp, and how much to the Audio Note speakers, could not be determined. I am going to
audition the Audio note speakers with analogue front end on Friday. It might get expensive!

[RGA]

What a priggish thing to say!



You've just proven my view that your speakers are nothing more than overpriced poorly designed boxes with middling drivers in a simplistic array that only a person who was foolish enough to purchase at an outrageous price would defend as "state-of-the-art". That "would be pride of ownership" talking on your part, and it would discount your views on these speakers entirely!

This is not a priggish thing to say - you can do the research on this yourself if you were the slightest bit interested - that the do it yourself creations tend to bias the people who build the unit to like it more than if they had not built it. This has been studied and you can check it out.

I have never said that the Audio Note line of speakers were "state-of-the-art" in fact I have said that many other speakers have certain attributes that I think are considerably better - thus in those area those other speakers would or could be called "state-of-the-art."

And before you start doing your wonderful moderating job of not starting flames - I would consider the cost of your own speakers before you start deriding what others own. I am fortunate to have a dealer who knows the mark-up of Magnepan and now I also know them. As well as the parts cost since they are a Magnepan repair facility. With that knowledge I certainly would not be poking fun at "any" other speaker brand.

[RGA]

I just read the Stereophile review of the Bryston 28b, and they caution to use it with 6 or 8 ohm speakers. That lets me out! Trust me, I have a completely open mind. Remember, my favorite system at the CAS was the Evolution Acoustics when playing copies of master tapes and driven by ss units. The Audio Note system was in my top 3 rooms, and they only used CDs. Looking back on the show, I am still shocked how realistic the Audio Note system sounded. How much was due to the Jinro integrated amp, and how much to the Audio Note speakers, could not be determined. I am going to
audition the Audio note speakers with analogue front end on Friday. It might get expensive!

Do your best to audition an All AN system. Not that other gear can't sound good with it but in general the speakers tend to like their own amps. The amp/speaker are designed together (voiced together). The turntable so long as it is good should be fine if it's from someone else. AN CD replay is really good - but even Peter says good vinyl beats his best digital at half the price. He along with everyone else making CD players is still ultimately limited to the CD format - there is only so much that can be done.

I'm quite surprised they didn't bring the entry level turntable. Mario ran the room and he's the guy who builds them. I think you would be impressed at what an MM cart can do when it's designed properly!

[Geoffcin]

This is not a priggish thing to say - you can do the research on this yourself if you were the slightest bit interested - that the do it yourself creations tend to bias the people who build the unit to like it more than if they had not built it. This has been studied and you can check it out.
.

Oh really, it's been studied eh? Please show me one of these "studies" that you are quoting from.

I for one trust Feanors appraisal of his amp better than any you would give me, even if you are a self proclaimed "reviewer".

[Feanor]

Feanor

i don't tend to trust reviews from DIYers because there is a known bias to such pride of ownership accomplishments.

....

Ha! You are right about that in general. Of course in my case I can't take any credit for the amp design or construction -- I just put it in a box.

As for skepticism, I'm by no means convinced by those who say they know about amps and any sort of equipment at consumers shows or even in retail show rooms. There might be a partial exception in case of speakers, though as you know well, we constantly here how the speakers couldn't be set up properly in some hotel room or wherever. The fact is even a (self-proclaimed) "expert" such as yourself can only fairly judge components in a familiar room and equipment setting.

[RGA]

Oh really, it's been studied eh? Please show me one of these "studies" that you are quoting from.

I for one trust Feanors appraisal of his amp better than any you would give me, even if you are a self proclaimed "reviewer".

yeah I didn't think you'd want to know how much the parts are in a Magnepan. I did not insult his gear - read it again. I said that someone who builds it himself has a bias - I am not hunting down the quotes and articles to satisfy you. If you can't see the basic psychological logic of it then I can't help you.

[GMichael]

I said that someone who builds it himself has a bias -.

Are you saying that the sub I built isn't really as good as I thought? You take that back Mister.

[Geoffcin]

Are you saying that the sub I built isn't really as good as I thought? You take that back Mister.

That's exactly what he's saying, and even more; He's saying that you as a builder are in some way unable to grade your own work because it's so dear to you.

What a load of crap!

If anything people who build their own gear are MORE astute about what is, or is not good about the build. I would say that this goes across the board from audio, to just about anything else that is hand made.

[RGA]

Ha! You are right about that in general. Of course in my case I can't take any credit for the amp design or construction -- I just put it in a box.

As for skepticism, I'm by no means convinced by those who say they know about amps and any sort of equipment at consumers shows or even in retail show rooms. There might be a partial exception in case of speakers, though as you know well, we constantly here how the speakers couldn't be set up properly in some hotel room or wherever. The fact is even a (self-proclaimed) "expert" such as yourself can only fairly judge components in a familiar room and equipment setting.

Yes and that's the same excuse many IMO lesser product makers always give. I'll give you that listening to something once in an unfamiliar room that may not be set up properly can be unfair to the maker. At a show like CES pretty much every room on a given floor is the same. All makers have very similar room conditions with which to work. And every maker has to deal with things they don't like. I can forgive some of them but in the end stereos are designed to work in rooms. Manufacturers are given the room dimensions ahead of time. The makers who have done this for years have no excuse - first time guys fine they're still learning the layouts.

Some companies can't afford the big rooms or signed up late and the room they got was all they had left. Some stuff I have heard in half a dozen rooms before I went to the show and which have been set up by professionals so I can tell the difference of how the showroom treats certain speakers. Most nearfield listening speakers can be auditioned with little room effect which is kind of the point with nearfield speakers.

The AN speakers at CAS were too big for that room, not positioned in corners and it probably had about 60% of what they're about. But I think people could still get a general idea at least in the mids and treble. I have long said they're room friendly because even when they're not at their best they still sound "good" maybe not great but good.

No I was not there but I have heard those speakers in similar compromised set-ups. And they still were generally very well liked. They were compromised - and still some reviewers found them to be the best they heard at the show and that without proper bass and a frequency that was likely out of whack. They showed enough to have people want to try and listen again in a better set-up. But they have to at least do that in a show environment because they are still "rooms" and a speaker needs to work in them. Ideal or not.

And ultimately an audition, even if not perfectly ideal, is still better than judging stuff without any audition of any kind! Plenty of people here seem to have lots of opinions on something they have never auditioned - even the "audio forum" moderator for heaven sake whos is supposed to have some level of objectivity to be given the position in the first place.

By the way I was not saying your DIY amp was poor - just that people who build things themselves have a bias to liking it more than if they had not built it themselves. There is a good article and a famous DIY quote on this phenomenon but I can't remember the title or the author. And since it also applies to AN kit builders I figured it would not be taken the way it was.

[Geoffcin]

yeah I didn't think you'd want to know how much the parts are in a Magnepan. I did not insult his gear - read it again. I said that someone who builds it himself has a bias - I am not hunting down the quotes and articles to satisfy you. If you can't see the basic psychological logic of it then I can't help you.

No I really DO want to know what it all costs, since it's been about 10 years since I bought my first repair kit from Magnepan. ($46.50)

While you at it please give me the markup costs that your dealer told you. I hope you know that divulging proprietary info like that can cost your dealer more than his Magnepan dealership. I'm sure a lot of other manufacturers will want to know that he's giving out their confidential info to punters like yourself.