Best Rig [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Best Rig



Buzz Roll
09-19-2004, 03:33 PM
I'm kind of curious about some of your listening experiences and what the best system you ever heard happened to be.

RGA
09-19-2004, 05:19 PM
There have been a lot of excellent ones that do some things incredibly well from a set of Avante Guards horns, ML Prodigys, The B&W Model Nautilus with all Classe amps, JM labs Mezza Utopias, and the list goes on.

I don't think i can say there is a BEST in absolute terms because the set-up I would choose has certain aspects that can and have been beaten by other systems.

But in terms of balance for being able to do every form of music well and sound like lifelike music and get the intruments seemingly more right without adding fatigue would be, and no one will be surprised:

The all Audio Note system - above the level three system recently reviewed on Audio Asylum.

Audio Note AN-E/Sec Silver ($25,000.00)US been replaced by a $30k version
Audio Note DAC 2.1 Balanced ($4975.00)US
Audio Note Transport (~$2000.00)US
Audio Note Preamp (Don't recall the number but between $2500 - $8,000)
Audio Note monoblock power amps (~$5k)
Audio Note Turntable 3 (~$20k)

You get the idea. given the cost of some gear I've heard over the years from the likes of Legacy, Cabasse, Hales, Wilson/Krell, etc The above is dirt cheap. Especially since you can get the speakers in lower versions and retain much of the quality.

I would very much like toi hear the bigger Utopia speakers from JM Labs - the Mezza's were on a very nice track - the treble was a little dull - but it could have been the upstream gear no up to the mark.

So you started the thread why not post your favorite system?

Buzz Roll
09-20-2004, 07:55 AM
I guess there are 3 systems that stuck out the most in my mind.

One was a Meadowlark Kestrel/Rogue Audio Tube combo and Myriad CD player. That was the first system that I heard that made me realize why people get so into hi-fi "oh this is what it's all about!"

The 2nd "great" rig that I heard was pair of Joseph Audio Pearls driven by a pair of McIntosh 1200 Monoblocks (Mac pre and CD player). I actually really didn't like the sound that much, others in the room did, but it was interesting to see that a really expensive system can't please everyone.

I think the rig that impressed me the most was a RedRose set-up at Mark Levinson's store in New York. The whole thing was a fraction of the cost of many stereos that I've heard and really sounded great (Affirmation Integrated, Classic speakers, Rega 3 turntable). Not cheap, but simple and better than most systems out there.

If I was to put together an ultimate system, I'm not sure what it would be yet. I'm still discovering new products and learning as I listen more and more. I guess I just wanted to see was what people's personal references were when they choose the equipment that they have.

RGA
09-20-2004, 11:06 AM
I think the best way is to find the best system regardless of cost. And then try and attain it. I mentioned the best system I found and now I am on the path to get something that closely resmbles the essence of the system with my meager finances by getting a good price here or there or buying a componant used etc.

I think it's fatal to mix and match products. For example I really loved the Audio Note AN-K/Spe and in the sytem I heard it in and my own system I can recommend it. But I also heard it recently with an award winning Rotel integrated amp(which IS a good amp) and a good teac CD player and the sound was not that good - switching out those two pieces and it was startling better. GOing to the non silver wired basic AN E/L with those budget componants was much better because it suited the gear.

I realize for those in the peanut gallery who will hear alarm bells going off that amps and cd players and cables don't matter and to a degree I'm one of those who believes they have much less to do with sound than the speaker/room. BUT....though subtle - it's the difference between listeneable long term or not - and that subtle difference over tome can be the whole ball-game.

There are lots of very pricey stuff that is very hi-fi soudning but not pleasant - the point of a stereo system is to be all day enjoyable and emotionally moving - to augment the musicians by bring out the emotion. The word euphoic means pleasing - and of course we can't have that with our stereos now can we? The industry as a whole is rather irritating ebcause most of it IMO is dreadful - even the expensive stuff - so on that I agree with UHF Magazine - lots of stuff is about selling boxes - and they can be expensive too from famous names.

Just because you were not impressed you shouldn't think twice about it. Lots of people going in with certain expectations will get what they expect on an audition.

I came to Audio Note expecting the worst to be honest for a variety of reasons I've mentioned already in other threads. The fact they do what they should not do made me realize that most of the industry is more about marketing than sound.

Jimmy C
09-20-2004, 11:56 AM
I'm kind of curious about some of your listening experiences and what the best system you ever heard happened to be.

...One can certainly spend a small (or large!) fortune on audio gear, but very often it fails to impress - well, my experiences anyway.

I heard the B&W N800 Signatures driven by monster Classe amps. This system was no doubt nice, but once you hear the final cost... well, it didn't do THAT much for me. Sort of like a quickie with Shakira (insert fave here) and then realizing there was a hole in the rubber.

Big Martin-Logans and some swell Audio Research tubed electronics? Again, really nice but there is that disjointed bass thing going on. They just don't coalesce for me.

I suppose my favorite demo was the BIG Snell XA Reference driven by Y.B.A. gear. This was my first understanding of the audiophile term "effortless" - no substitute for cubic inches. I could only imagine what these could do in a larger soundroom.

2nd place goes to the Revel F50s and Musical Fidelity... a somewhat "budget" (ahem...) system. Well, compared to the Snell/Y.B.A., anyway. This got me interested in my M20s... a smaller piece of pie.

Another post here at AR was talking about the DeVore Gibbons - hhmmm - very interesting.

If there is no traffic, I can get there in under an hour...

Wireworm5
09-20-2004, 04:32 PM
The best system I've heard is mine. I have not had the privelage of hearing other audiophiles gear nor have I gone out to demo speakers for fear of spending even more money.
I started my quest for the best sound about 3 years ago. With many hours of critical listening I would analyze what I could do to improve my system. After many upgrades I have acheived the best sound for my budget. I can still improve my system but this would require thousands of dollars more. If I could start over again I could do things cheaper and better.
Its comforting when a guests say its the best stereo they've heard. Unfortunately I haven't had many guests.:)

Woochifer
09-20-2004, 05:36 PM
I think it's fatal to mix and match products. For example I really loved the Audio Note AN-K/Spe and in the sytem I heard it in and my own system I can recommend it. But I also heard it recently with an award winning Rotel integrated amp(which IS a good amp) and a good teac CD player and the sound was not that good - switching out those two pieces and it was startling better. GOing to the non silver wired basic AN E/L with those budget componants was much better because it suited the gear.

I realize for those in the peanut gallery who will hear alarm bells going off that amps and cd players and cables don't matter and to a degree I'm one of those who believes they have much less to do with sound than the speaker/room. BUT....though subtle - it's the difference between listeneable long term or not - and that subtle difference over tome can be the whole ball-game.

"Fatal" to mix and match products? It's one thing to enjoy an all-AN setup, but it's quite another to stretch that point to conclude that somehow mixing and matching components is a "fatal" approach. Did you do that listening in a different demo room with different acoustical controls and placement alignments? Or are AN speakers somehow exempt from the effects of room acoustics when you move things between different rooms?

If I'm to accept your logic, then by buying the Yamaha receiver before my other components, I would have therefore needed to also add a Yamaha DVD player, Yamaha speakers, Yamaha cabling, and a Yamaha subwoofer. Or if I had bought my Paradigm speakers first, then I would have had to match it only to an Anthem amp. Sorry, but this kind of AN lovefest makes no logical sense. It's one thing to be smitten about AN, but quite another to suggest that going with a matched approach for all components top to bottom is a universal truth.


There are lots of very pricey stuff that is very hi-fi soudning but not pleasant - the point of a stereo system is to be all day enjoyable and emotionally moving - to augment the musicians by bring out the emotion. The word euphoic means pleasing - and of course we can't have that with our stereos now can we? The industry as a whole is rather irritating ebcause most of it IMO is dreadful - even the expensive stuff - so on that I agree with UHF Magazine - lots of stuff is about selling boxes - and they can be expensive too from famous names.

Enjoy your euphonic presentation all you want, but how does something that's "very hi'-fi sounding" equate to NOT sounding pleasant or enjoyable or emotionally moving? This soapbox rant against the whole industry infers that the BUYER decisions that drive the industry at all price points are somehow motivated by something other than THEIR own enjoyment of music, movies, etc. You accuse the industry of being all about "selling boxes" and by extension that means that all the people are buying are boxes.

Last time I checked, I bought my system for the ENJOYMENT OF IT, not because some industry marketing conspiracy pushed me into buying something that will give me buyer's remorse down the road. I'm now three years in, and I'm very much enjoying things.


I came to Audio Note expecting the worst to be honest for a variety of reasons I've mentioned already in other threads. The fact they do what they should not do made me realize that most of the industry is more about marketing than sound.

This is where your Audio Note rants veer off into the ridiculous. You've pretty much bought into the notion that they are right, and everybody else is wrong. AN does things the way that they do because they are about the sound; the rest of the industry does things the way that they do because they are all about marketing. Can you just accept that other approaches are just as valid for other consumers' preferences? Or is that giving too much acknowledgement that other people might choose the kind of gear that they do because they know what they are doing?

Woochifer
09-20-2004, 05:55 PM
I'm kind of curious about some of your listening experiences and what the best system you ever heard happened to be.

Most recently, my best listening experience was with a pair of Dynaudio Evidence Masters hooked up to a set of Krell monoblocks and a Musical Fidelity CD player. Those Danes are about as flawless and balanced top to bottom a set of speakers as I've ever heard. They provided reference quality presentations for every type of music that I tried on them (i.e. it let me hear parts of the music that I had never heard before), and that's something that I rarely get from any speaker at any price. The imaging was spot on, and the dynamics all the way through were rendered about as well as anything I've heard in at least the last 10 years.

Going further into the past, a friend of mine had a Klipschorn/Hafler setup at his place, and for its price, that combination bested most of the far more expensive "high end" systems of that era that I'd heard. Probably the setup that I regarded as a reference level playback in the 80s was the Infinity IRS reference system. The thing used multiple panel flanks of drivers that took up a whole room and was hooked up to a veritable army of Audio Research amplifiers. But, it remains probably the only demo that I've ever heard that came close to reproducing the scale and weight of a full orchestra. In addition, that system also added a new dimension to classic rock and jazz recordings as well.

RGA
09-20-2004, 07:05 PM
Sorry Woochifer the meaning of the sentence should read to mix and match complimentary componants not that mix and matching outright is a bad idea. Based off of my auditions for example the Rotel was a lesser match with the Spe speaker while it was more suited to the L version. Just as I enjoyed My Sugden quite a lot more with the Paradigm Studio 100V2 than I did with the MF A300 which had some strengths but seemed to sound gritty and unengaging. Though some have said that that was not the MF to listen to so to as to be fair to MF.

No I spent the day(and other days) in the same room with the AN speakers and cycled through several amplifier cd players with the same cables(though we tried out others). I have listened to the AN's in all three of their rooms and three of my own.

"Sorry, but this kind of AN lovefest makes no logical sense." No again I am looking at it from a different stance of complimentary equipment. Yamaha is not creating a serious two channel chain like Linn, Rega, Quad, and Audio Note. I'm sure you will argue that receivers are perfectly fine - we've been down that road so there is no point going down it again. I have heard the best receivers by the usual Japanese makes side by side a/b over long sessions with a variety of speakers - it's fine if you don't notice or don't care to spend the money but respect the fact that many do appreciate said differences. I very much like the SET amps the AN's have as compared to the sound emitted by Bryston, MF etc let alone from Receivers. Obviously with Audio Note matching their amp with the appropriate gear is far more critical than a 100Watt+ SS amp.

"You accuse the industry of being all about "selling boxes" and by extension that means that all the people are buying are boxes."

Not all people but many people. WHich is no problem since most know what they're buying. I bought an all-in-one printer knowing full well it isn't the BEST photo printer or Scanner on the market(or even particularly good), but it does the job and takes up less space and I don't really care about making the BEST photo prints - if I did I would have bought something else.

"Enjoy your euphonic presentation all you want" I didn't say the set-up was Euphonic - What I said was "the word euphoic means pleasing - and of course we can't have that with our stereos now can we?"

It's as though the word Euphonic has been subverted to mean innacurate and thus if a system is PLEASING then it must be Euphonic which now means innacurate. HUH?

"Last time I checked, I bought my system for the ENJOYMENT OF IT, not because some industry marketing conspiracy pushed me into buying something that will give me buyer's remorse down the road"

That is fine - what you find enjoyable and what I find enjoyable may not be the same. There will be alot of people - most people in all likelyhood - who would be more than happy with Yamaha and Paradigm etc. I'm sorry that not everyone on the planet agrees. I want more from a system - and you can think that a dime over what you spent is a waste and diminishing returns arguments are abound etc - but it doesn't do it for me.

"AN does things the way that they do because they are about the sound;"

Yes I believe the former is correct because both owners are making far less money by deliberately running the companies they run than they could have made had they kept doing what they were doing before. If you have an unyielding passion for something and decide that a certain sound is fantastic and then all of a sudden those products are no longer made and what replaced them you PERCEIVE, and I'm using perceive not stating a fact, is worse, then you might do certain things take risks to build it yourself and keep them alive. They are not solely about the bottom line and increasing market share etc.

"the rest of the industry does things the way that they do because they are all about marketing."
Not the rest of the industry. Sony corporation gives a rat's ass about making good gear. They are about marketing and selling boxes entirely. That does not mean they don't make good gear - but it is not the first and foremost thought that enters their mind IMO.

"Can you just accept that other approaches are just as valid for other consumers' preferences?"
I don't care what other people choose to do. I care what I choose to do and state it. Certain people will write my comments off and never bother to try anything I suggest. Fine. Other people who are just as dissatisfied with what they hear as I am might say gee let's try what Richard suggests - nothing really to lose and maybe if they hear it the way I hear it they will have everything, I talk about, to gain.

Obviously if you have a set plan for H/T and a certain look price range etc in mind AN is totally not for that person - which is why I VERY rarely go to the Home theater forum. People who go there are looking for something I'm not interested in.

"Or is that giving too much acknowledgement that other people might choose the kind of gear that they do because they know what they are doing?"

What people know is based of personal experiences much of the time. The reason there are magazines is to widdle down selection for people in a very busy world. The reason anyone would BOTHER to come to these forums is to get opinions. Why? I mean they could go to chapters and pick up 15 magazines that will gladly tell them the best way to spend their money. And just because I do that does not mean that I "know what I'm doing." It means they did some magazine research funded by the very folks selling the equipment. Not EVERY product is equally good - and IMO much of it isn't even remotely good at very expensive price points.

When I started out I thought I knew what I was doing as well. And bought some of the best gear in the reviews at the time. Made sense to me - Stereophile listens to a lot of stuff as do the folks at What-Hi-Fi etc etc. I mean unit A was the cheapest piece ever to get a class B recommendation and it won best Product in Britain and on and on. Meanwhile unit B which had next to zero, if any at all to my knowledge, coverage sounded way better but I went with unit A because hey all those reviews MUST be right. Now Unit A was good - no real complaints but unit B was the coulda shoulda wishda and now regretta product that still being made while unit A is just another long gone product changed for a more stylish unit which sounds worse.

I base my view off my own experiences. When I bought receivers that was the only thing you could buy in most audio stores. It is still largely true at FutureShop and A&B sound. I doubt most people have the time nor inclination to actually sit down and spend 7-8 hours in an audio store on multiple occasions trying out and A/B-ing several amplifiers and listening to this stuff for hours.

I make no pretense that I'm oin the die hard two channel audio camp - the fact that some people want multichannel etc is fine - which is why I don't frequent multi-channel forums or really get into mutlichannel speaker questions much unless it's about something I can offer up as hearing.

Marketing is a very very powerful thing - which isn't to say that there is NEVER value behind it - I mean the Pet Rock is valuable I suppose to some people and I know I wouldn't know what to do about buying a clock Radio if Bose wasn't around to sell me their clock radio that sounds as good as a 10 foot high high end speaker or whatever their claim is this week, and i'm sure I'd forget about Coke if I didn't see a commercial and billboard every hour. Audio Note has plenty of representation in most parts of the world with little to no advertising and zero product literature. Their dealer Triode and Company put out a couple of ads to tell people where the hell they can go and listen. How very over-top of them. The best education to make the right choice is to listen, for yourself, side by side against the others guy's stuff - and i'm not surprised that Soundhounds sell more Audio Note than anything else in the store despite having relatively few to no reviews and little to no marketing and no product literature - Selling Sound quality I'm happy to say still manages to work despite busy folks and despite Home theater invasion - but in order for it to work it can't just be marginally better than the next guy's it has to be substantially better.

Woochifer
09-20-2004, 08:44 PM
Sorry Woochifer the meaning of the sentence should read to mix and match complimentary componants not that mix and matching outright is a bad idea. Based off of my auditions for example the Rotel was a lesser match with the Spe speaker while it was more suited to the L version. Just as I enjoyed My Sugden quite a lot more with the Paradigm Studio 100V2 than I did with the MF A300 which had some strengths but seemed to sound gritty and unengaging. Though some have said that that was not the MF to listen to so to as to be fair to MF.

Thanks for clarifying. Yes and no. The importance of the amp relative to the speaker depends more on the speaker than anything. If it's a demanding panel or low impedance speaker, then a better amp is in order. But, as far as complementary goes, the variation on the component match is far less than with the speaker and the room acoustics.


"Sorry, but this kind of AN lovefest makes no logical sense." No again I am looking at it from a different stance of complimentary equipment. Yamaha is not creating a serious two channel chain like Linn, Rega, Quad, and Audio Note. I'm sure you will argue that receivers are perfectly fine - we've been down that road so there is no point going down it again. I have heard the best receivers by the usual Japanese makes side by side a/b over long sessions with a variety of speakers - it's fine if you don't notice or don't care to spend the money but respect the fact that many do appreciate said differences. I very much like the SET amps the AN's have as compared to the sound emitted by Bryston, MF etc let alone from Receivers. Obviously with Audio Note matching their amp with the appropriate gear is far more critical than a 100Watt+ SS amp.

A serious two channel chain? I dunno about that. If you're looking to optimize a two-channel setup, I've always found that manufacturers rarely make all of their components at a comparably high levels of quality, and typically differ in terms of how well they stack up against the competition in different market segments. For example, Linn made great turntables, but I never thought their source components or speakers were anything special. If you want to believe that they are making a "chain" by offering all the components in a system, fine. I don't see it any differently than any other company, big or small, that makes all the components that make up an audio system. Personally, I would rather optimize a system around the strengths for different manufacturers. If they happened to all come from the same company, so be it.

SET amps though have much more variation in the tonal characteristics than SS amps will. If you buy into the advantages of SET amps (which I view more as a series of tradeoffs), then obviously you're entering into an area with a lot more variability.


"Enjoy your euphonic presentation all you want" I didn't say the set-up was Euphonic - What I said was "the word euphoic means pleasing - and of course we can't have that with our stereos now can we?"

It's as though the word Euphonic has been subverted to mean innacurate and thus if a system is PLEASING then it must be Euphonic which now means innacurate. HUH?

Because you're using your definition of enjoyment or pleasing as an inference that everything else is therefore unenjoyable or irritating. When you say that most of the industry is "dreadful" how else is anyone supposed to interpret otherwise? I never brought up anything with regard to accurate or inaccurate. Euphonic does not mean inaccurate. INACCURATE means inaccurate.


Marketing is a very very powerful thing - which isn't to say that there is NEVER value behind it - I mean the Pet Rock is valuable I suppose to some people and I know I wouldn't know what to do about buying a clock Radio if Bose wasn't around to sell me their clock radio that sounds as good as a 10 foot high high end speaker or whatever their claim is this week, and i'm sure I'd forget about Coke if I didn't see a commercial and billboard every hour. Audio Note has plenty of representation in most parts of the world with little to no advertising and zero product literature. Their dealer Triode and Company put out a couple of ads to tell people where the hell they can go and listen. How very over-top of them. The best education to make the right choice is to listen, for yourself, side by side against the others guy's stuff - and i'm not surprised that Soundhounds sell more Audio Note than anything else in the store despite having relatively few to no reviews and little to no marketing and no product literature - Selling Sound quality I'm happy to say still manages to work despite busy folks and despite Home theater invasion - but in order for it to work it can't just be marginally better than the next guy's it has to be substantially better.

The whole point though is that what Audio Note does with all of the philosophical stuff that they tout on their website, with the "zero advertising" schtick, the unavailability of specs, etc. -- IT'S ALL MARKETING! With their approach they are doing the exact kind of brand positioning that gets taught in business school. You don't have to engage in direct advertising to market like a mutha, in fact, some businesses purposely don't advertise as part of their branding strategy. For years, Coors created a whole mystique around their brand by not advertising, and by purposely limiting their distribution. It was only when they made some strategic errors and began losing market share that they started advertising and distributing nationally.

The simple fact that Soundhounds and netizens like you are touting these "they're just good guys who love music/their approach is different therefore they must be right and everybody else is wrong" traits like they're badges of honor is a sign that it's just a part of their marketing strategy. IMO, it's no different than the mass marketing of individuality that goes on in the entertainment and fashion industries. It's not necessarily through mass advertising, but in creating an aura of exclusivity or mystique that they prop up their brand identity. Granted, they very well might make a fine product, but you can't tell me that they don't market because they do.

RGA
09-20-2004, 10:00 PM
"But, as far as complementary goes, the variation on the component match is far less than with the speaker and the room acoustics."

Based off of my auditions the amp cd player is extremely critical. Yes speakers and room acoustics make the biggest CHANGES. But in the same room with the exact same positioning you will have ZERO doubt that the change from the Rotel/Teac combo to the AN Combo is such a major improvement as to make me consider dumping my RRSP's and buying - and it isn't euphonic distortion as SET zero feedback has no second order harminic distortion - it is more detailed in that extention into the treble is more there and resolution far greater and bass oh baby. And AN is dead easy to drive with any ss amp - but until you do this you will not believe me which is fine.

"I've always found that manufacturers rarely make all of their components at a comparably high levels of quality, and typically differ in terms of how well they stack up against the competition in different market segments. For example, Linn made great turntables, but I never thought their source components or speakers were anything special."

Well in a way I agree with you - and that is precisely why I did not buy from those companies because as you say they have weaker areas. Audio Note does not. Though they have made certain products that I don't much care for. But no one is perfect.

"I would rather optimize a system around the strengths for different manufacturers. If they happened to all come from the same company, so be it."

This is the conventional way of thinking yes. I do the same thing due to finances. For instance I would rather the power amps from Bryston or Rotel than their preamps in a mix and match set-up. In a way this is also a LEVEL approach. You get say a level A+ power amp but if their preamp is only a B in that range well you'd like the A+ so you get it from another brand maybe a YBA or Classe or whatever. Other people howver very much love the Bryston Pre and think the two are suited. The manufactuer if they are truly about sound are at least attempting to have a signature sound the designer likes (or preferably no sound added) with their amplification and Cd player if they make one. The Sugden a21a and matching Cd player for a start - though many liked other cd players over the Sugden.

And Linn annoys me becuase of the functionality of their cd player - it's frustrating to use.

SET amps I have to tell you I have very little experience with. And maybe people have good reason for attacking the SET's they have heard. I can only go by the SET's that I have heard and in the context i have heard them. Audio Note designs some of if not the best SET amps in the world apparently - I say apparently because I have not been next to the Ongaku - but the industry YACK for whatever it's worth from the reviewers (Yeah I know) supposedly seem in agreement. And based off what I heard with the Oto(their cheapest unit) with their made for SET amp speakers was that I cannot accept this notion of lack of bass power volume treble extention or even noise in the form of hiss. There is zero noise and a getting into the attack and decay that the SS Rotel cannot attain nor the Brystons I have heard which seem to pinch the bass off as if they are frequency limited or overly punchy - can't be described needs to be directly compared. There are many theoretical weaknesses to SET - I have read them - but it did not play out that way when I actually listened to the thing. Now maybe the Cary SET or the ASL SET will have gross problems that would make them unlistenable I don't know.

About Euphonic. I was not attacking you Woochifer. But often times and you must agree that you have read statements about tubes that the only reason people LIKE tube amps is that they are Euphonic because they are distorted - often said to be euphonic distortion. The clear implication these people are making is that people like tube amps because they have pleasant distortion but are innacurate as compared to SS. Innacurate to what is the question. And with regards to SET this second harmonic distortion does not apply anyway - the AN Amps are zero feedback, no high order harmonic distortions can be produced under any condition." So what is being produced has nothing to do with euphonic distortion at all. And there is no audible noise or hums - so what the hell are people talking about with SET was my first question. Other reviews when in the context of their speakers also make numerous references about AN amps blowing the myths about SET to the weeds - bith Stereophile and What-hi-fi and Hi-Fi Choice agree and all three publication raved about the OTO basically Audio Note's worst amplifier.


Well I agree and have thought about the no marketing market strategy - believe you me that was the FIRST thing I though about. In fact Audio Reminds me a bit of the way Rolls Royce did things - There is an aura - even UHF made a comment after finally reviewing the basic transport/dac combo after twenty years selling magazines this was the first set they had ever even seen let alone got to hear. They made a coment that the company was a mythic or legendary status in the industry because you heard OF them but never heard them. Of course this Aura is out there.

The question though is who creates the aura? Peter Qvortrup can't do that by himself - plenty of makers make way more expensive tube gear than he does. You can't create an aura. That is doen through word of mouth. If i had not posted anything here I doubt anyone would have heard of them or would have been something in vague memory as oh yeah that company into tubes and kept going.

I don't think it is fair to make assumptions about their marketing - because it has way more of an adverse effect than it would if they went straight ahead. Their web-site and his views have a lot of negative talk - but his views are REAL views whether one agrees with them it is not a publicity stunt - these guys have been around over 20 years and fads and stunts are fine but you had better have something to back it up especially when you consider how stiff the market gets when you're going to drop $20 -$500K on a sound system. The Soundhounds approach was not check these out they're the best thing in the store by a mile and Paradigm and B&W that we carry suck.

What would Paradigm and B&W do if that was what was said - Lots of other places to sell their gear in a city of $400,000. The simply let the customer decide what they like best. Terry the owner there is not typical -he says very few people ever ask the dealer what they think is good or best - he says they're usually treated like a used car dealers and ignored. But given the other dealers in Vancouver and I presume most places it's no wonder people have that view. "So can I wrap tha up for you" "B&W is the Mercedes of the ndustry" "Arcam is an award winner here look at this magazine review" "This speaker is great look at this award it has gotten every year for X years" "This speaker maker is the best oin the world - everyone has heard of Bose for good reason."

The sales pitch at Soundhounds when you ask about them is to fgo to their site. But you would only bother to go to their site if you were really impressed by what you heard. If I hated X speaker I would not rush home excited to read about their design - I heard their design and it sucked so why would I bother? And hell AN's Web-site is horrible which is hardly a further selling point - even the no advertising Sugden has put together a very nice easy to use elegant home page. Audio Note you can;t even access the freakiing dealer locator. The stuff on their is so bloody old and out of date - the spec sheets have misprints even when they are there - nothing about that is good marketing. And then their tone is so harsh and overbearing and insults the competition that that no doubt will immediately turn people off as some crank.

But all that aside when you compare the J or E's to the stores other speakers and they are frankly handedly embarrassed. And then the crank seems awefully damn right all of a sudden and then you say well now I understand how he lasted for 20 years and why there is quite a large following. I sound like one voice raving - but if you look over the net a bit I am not alone. And they have a lot of the insiders on board too unlike the nOhrs of the world.

lattybuck
09-24-2004, 12:19 PM
We used to roadie some when I was a kid, late teens early twenty's. We also installed a few sound systems in club's for people we used to know and drink with. I helped install a system with a friend in the late 70's that had 6 top of line maggies hangin at angles about 10' or so high on the on wall's and we sunk 12-12" woofers in the walls for subs, 3 per corner. We also added square acoustic panels around and behind the maggies and balanced/sealed the sub enclosures in the walls. We used some mics placed around the room to balance the sound and get the parametric EQ settings to make the sound as flat as we could under a few conditions; empty, a full house or a partly full house. Granted it was a club and mainly had night club style performers. Sort of a wanna be Vegas style scene to it, Wayn Newton etc. But once we had the main panels and EQ's set right you wouldn't believe the sound that just seemed to majically appear in that room. I can't remember who made the mixing panels and Parametrics EQ's we used to "message the sound" as we used to call it but we had a stack of class "A" tube amps on the back wall to drive it all I remember.
The club owner was a monster music fan as well as we were. I still think when that room was empty late at night and we would stay to drink and listen to our latest german recorded classical or direct disc record's it was increadible. Even some vintage 1930's direct jazz and classical stuff was impressive. I have been a flat speaker fan every since. Just never had the oppurtunity to play/listen to that kind of a rediculously expensive system again. That club sold out to disco within a few years and that was the end to it all anyway.