Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 116
  1. #51
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    It's all about the cymbals....

    I have Hank Mobley's Workout on. The Kenwood Basic C1 did not present the full resonation of the ride cymbal. The Eico now allows the cymbal to resonate until it's hit again. It's all in the details baby...

  2. #52
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    Putting aside the whole "live" concept, I will explain my own world of accurate. I don't agree that there are no references to be had.

    "As the band/engineer intended" I suppose is a stretch, as we don't truly know what they intended. One thing I am certain of, and Terrence correct me if I'm wrong, is that the band and engineer intend for the listener to hear every nuance of recorded music. Every instrument, vocal and multi-track there of. They laboured in a dark and boring studio sometimes for months, they want you to hear what has been recorded and edited for your enjoyment.
    I agree with this.

    As far as references go, my system isn't the most resolute. I start by checking the tracks notes as to which instruments appear on the song. Subtle bongo tracks? Quiet mellotron harmonies? This is the first reference point. So if I can hear all of these things in the recording, I know I am deep enough into it, and have the beginnings of accuracy.
    I don't know poppa, tracks notes do not often describe how the bongo is mixed, or its amplitude in relationship to other instruments in the mix. Music is too dynamic for that. Even if you could hear every instrument, are you hearing it in exactly the right amount of balance as the engineer intended, or with the right effect?

    From there, I try to listen for multi tracking and layering. This becomes more difficult for a system to output as they can be subtle and quiet. Vocal layering and harmonies, guitar multi tracking and auxilary instruments to name a few.
    The problem is that you ear/brain mechanism also hears your room along with the mix. How do you separate the two?

    Lastly, I look for realism with all of these sounds. Do they sound like the real thing? Is there proper seperation between them? Are they imaged correctly in terms of size (ie guitar tracks outweighing rhythm section 3 to 1).
    How does the end user determine the proper separation? How do they know what the correct imaging really is? Without a reference this is impossible to determine.

    As I already stated, for me these are the "references" I use to determine how I'm doing. As far as SS v. tubes, some say warm and coloured, I say tonal and detailed. In the "real world", professionals all seek to play their instruments with exceptional tone. Thus when Slash plucks the intro to Sweet Child O Mine, sure its bright but its contained and rich with tone. I think tubes do the best job to convey that same tone, so that with the right speakers and source, you get a fine representation of a natural instrument.
    Bernie Grundman a well known expert vinyl disc cutter and mastering engineer stated in Recording magazine if you are looking strictly for accuracy, stay away from tubes and vinyl. Both of these add colorations of their own.

    Anyhow, great thread. Ajani, lately I have been on a jazz bender but I enjoy most genres to some degree, with the exception of country and classical. Perhaps you'd be interested to know that Roots Manuva, Gangstarr, Aesop Rock and Murs all sound incredible when presented through tubes. In fact, I was shocked at the bass response as no other genre rose to the occasion quite the same. I have also found Stephen Marley, Bounty Killer, Bob Marley, Burning Spear and Jimmy Cliff all to be excellent sounding.

    OK, chat soon...
    This is an example of using ones own equipment to "sweeten" the sound to taste. Tubes add coloration, even if we choose to call it something else.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  3. #53
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    I don't know poppa, tracks notes do not often describe how the bongo is mixed, or its amplitude in relationship to other instruments in the mix. Music is too dynamic for that. Even if you could hear every instrument, are you hearing it in exactly the right amount of balance as the engineer intended, or with the right effect?

    How does the end user determine the proper separation? How do they know what the correct imaging really is? Without a reference this is impossible to determine.
    Well again, this is my own method to try to bring things to where I like them. I have my own ideas regarding the correct imaging of say, a rock band, or a jazz quartet with a featured leader. As an engineer who also masters, I'm sure you do to. Your opinion of these things is why people use your service. Of course, I'm sure you take alot of work done to the specs of someone else, but ultimately you trust your ears based on your experience of what things SHOULD sound like. There is no manual to help you decide this.

    You are most correct regarding amounts of subtle tracks in a mix. My system most certainly plays havoc with this, and it's an area I need to improve. Actually, jazz is a double edged sword for me. I enjoy it's simplicity ie. the old dual track analog recordings, and it's immediacy in my system. BUT, I find that recordings vary greatly and often. Although the leader is clearly out front and seperated, he is 5 times bigger than the rest of the band. A price to be paid I suppose.

    Quote Originally Posted by SirTT
    Bernie Grundman a well known expert vinyl disc cutter and mastering engineer stated in Recording magazine if you are looking strictly for accuracy, stay away from tubes and vinyl. Both of these add colorations of their own.

    This is an example of using ones own equipment to "sweeten" the sound to taste. Tubes add coloration, even if we choose to call it something else.
    Yes, there are many experts and frankly, most of them would have all of us spend $150K for completely boring systems. I am not pursuing complete neutrality as I do enjoy "colouration". I think my points to tonal attributes are fair and poigniant. I have been reading Arthur Salvatore's thoughts, and although he makes so much sense coming from experience, my own system and thoughts couldn't be more different. However, I still have a ways to go and am always learning, and willing to learn.

    As far as my hip/hop and reggae quip. Simply for Ajani's benefit as I know he is romancing the tube idea. Tubes are horribly discriminated against for being bassless. However, the colour in the case of these bass heavy genres has been added in the studio, not on my end. Thus the crazy extension...

  4. #54
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    As far as my hip/hop and reggae quip. Simply for Ajani's benefit as I know he is romancing the tube idea. Tubes are horribly discriminated against for being bassless. However, the colour in the case of these bass heavy genres has been added in the studio, not on my end. Thus the crazy extension...
    I'll add a low powered SET/Class A amp to my 2nd system eventually.... That'll also allow me to compare it with the SS amp in my main one so I can determine if I prefer SS or Tubes.... (though the way I see it is that you don't need to choose one or the other, I'd rather have both - variety is great)...

  5. #55
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    The problem with relying on experts of any stripe is to listen to their "results" not read their job descriptions white papers theories and blind tests.

    Everyone in manufacturing is some sort of expert of varying acclaim. So when Harman International and their billion dollar company floods the market with endless babble - the first thing I want to do is go and listen to their "pinnacle" design which was the Revel Ultima Salon - which at best is a mediocre loudspeaker that I would not want to own if you cut the price in half! It doesn't remotely resemble music reproduction - if you want to hear a woofer in a box and how cool the tweeter sounds be my guest.

    When a recording mastering company like Chesky Records - one of if not the best of the classical music recording studios uses tube amplifiers and the mastering engineer helped demo Audio Note in New York - a SET maker which measures shockingly badly versus regular tube amps which measure shockingly badly versus SS - well that illustrates something.

    Many recordings stink - that vast majority of them are mediocre and most of the better recordings occurred back when tubes were in the recording /mastering studios. With SS and CD - recordings have began to stink - especially in the rock/pop genres. Maybe the Recording engineers are bums - but then maybe it's the solid state stuff with high negative feedback and very poor linearity that start sucking the life out of the sound.

  6. #56
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    The problem with relying on experts of any stripe is to listen to their "results" not read their job descriptions white papers theories and blind tests.

    Everyone in manufacturing is some sort of expert of varying acclaim. So when Harman International and their billion dollar company floods the market with endless babble - the first thing I want to do is go and listen to their "pinnacle" design which was the Revel Ultima Salon - which at best is a mediocre loudspeaker that I would not want to own if you cut the price in half! It doesn't remotely resemble music reproduction - if you want to hear a woofer in a box and how cool the tweeter sounds be my guest.

    When a recording mastering company like Chesky Records - one of if not the best of the classical music recording studios uses tube amplifiers and the mastering engineer helped demo Audio Note in New York - a SET maker which measures shockingly badly versus regular tube amps which measure shockingly badly versus SS - well that illustrates something.

    Many recordings stink - that vast majority of them are mediocre and most of the better recordings occurred back when tubes were in the recording /mastering studios. With SS and CD - recordings have began to stink - especially in the rock/pop genres. Maybe the Recording engineers are bums - but then maybe it's the solid state stuff with high negative feedback and very poor linearity that start sucking the life out of the sound.
    This is what I find so remarkable about our hobby; how opinions can vary completely between one audiophile and another...

    You regard the Ultima Salon as a mediocre speaker, yet so many other reviewers own and use Revel speakers (including the Salon) as their reference speakers... (note that I've ignored how many reviewers rave about the products and focused on the ones who were willing to spend their money to own them).

    I hear many panel guys detail how dreadful box speakers sound and I hear many tube guys talk about how bad solid state is... But then I also hear box fans ripping on panels and SS fans bashing tubes... And I'm talking about persons who have auditioned the products they don't like (not just read spec sheets)...

    Then we come to guys who like both box and panel speakers, tubes and SS... A reviewer at Dagogo (I can't remember his name) reviewed a pair of Audio Note Speakers and prefered them to his Revel Performa F30s, but he didn't suddenly find that he hated the Revels just that he prefered the AN...

    I've seen reviewers describe Monitor Audio Gold series speakers as having an electrostatic like sound, which was something I actually got to test as I auditioned a pair of GS20s along with a pair of Final Sound 400i Stats.... I liked both and found I was in agreement with the reviewer's claim.... However, I prefered the GS20 (the box speaker) over the 400i (Panel); though the panel was a bit more 'airy', i felt the box just sounded more like 'music' to me and the bass had impact as well... But I loved both the box speaker and the panel...

    The more time I spend on this hobby the more I'm convinced that 90% of our issues/debates just come down to personal preferences and have zero to do with being true to live sound or original recordings....

  7. #57
    frenchmon frenchmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    St. Charles Mo
    Posts
    3,271
    Yes, there are many experts and frankly, most of them would have all of us spend $150K for completely boring systems. I am not pursuing complete neutrality as I do enjoy "colouration".
    Well...Peabody and I did hear a system costing close to that number, and while I must say the system was not boring at all it was very exciting and had texture....but it was void of any coloration what so ever. Now for some, they may like that sort of thing, but give me some sweetness and tone....so im with you poppaC.....by the way....the guy also had a second rig upstairs which had Marantz Reference mono blocks paired with Dynaudio c4's...and that system had tones of emotions, like it was made for acoustic Jazz.

    frenchmon
    Music...let it into your soul and be moved....with Canton...Pure Music


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    W10 i5 Quad core processor 8GB RAM/Jriver 20/ Fidelizer Optimizer/ iFI Micro DSD DAC-iUSB 3.0/Vincent SA - T1/Vincent SP-331 MK /MMF-7.1/2M BLACK/MS Phenomena ll+/Canton Vento 830.2

  8. #58
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by frenchmon
    Well...Peabody and I did hear a system costing close to that number, and while I must say the system was not boring at all it was very exciting and had texture....but it was void of any coloration what so ever. Now for some, they may like that sort of thing, but give me some sweetness and tone....so im with you poppaC.....by the way....the guy also had a second rig upstairs which had Marantz Reference mono blocks paired with Dynaudio c4's...and that system had tones of emotions, like it was made for acoustic Jazz.

    frenchmon
    For sure. It can be done to extend the positive virtues of the music, without being repititious.

  9. #59
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Ajani

    I know the reviewer who switched to the E from the F-30. I have not heard the F-30 so I can't say - I liked the Sophia II more than what I heard from the MAXX3 so it's always possible that a lower product in the line-up actually sounds better.

    To me CES 2010 is a pretty clear indicator of what is viewed as the best stuff - in the vast majority of rooms Tube amplification was used whether the speaker was tube amp friendly or not. And in most cases the tube rooms sounded best. Martin Logan and King Sound were panels using tubes - sounded WAY better than Magnepan and SanderSound using SS.

    There were some exceptions - Pass Labs sounded terrific with Sony speakers but the Pass gear didn't sound as good as Octave with Dynaudio. Technical Brain is a SS maker that made good sound and so did Heed audio.

    Nevertheless, you are correct that some like Michael Fremer and several others believe that the better way forward is high powered SS. SET demands a higher price of entry to get good than solid state - you can get quite decent solid state for $500 but a good SET amp probably starts at something like the Audio Note Kit 1 which is pretty much the reference standard at just under $2k. The problem with SETs is they demand very high quality transformers to get away from some of their colourations - and the less expensive SETs that I have heard add a fair bit of flavour which one may like but it also opens them up to attack of being distortion generators.

    Revel has come out with a fix - the Ultima Salon II - perhaps they figured out the mistakes that I heard and fixed them. The Wilson Sophia II sounds a lot better than the first one so maybe Revel fixed it up. My bet is that it will sound better with something like a Rogue Audio or Mystere etc than it will with (enter SS amp here).

  10. #60
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    The problem with relying on experts of any stripe is to listen to their "results" not read their job descriptions white papers theories and blind tests.
    I agree with this, ask Roger Dressler from Dolby Labs about that.

    Everyone in manufacturing is some sort of expert of varying acclaim. So when Harman International and their billion dollar company floods the market with endless babble - the first thing I want to do is go and listen to their "pinnacle" design which was the Revel Ultima Salon - which at best is a mediocre loudspeaker that I would not want to own if you cut the price in half! It doesn't remotely resemble music reproduction - if you want to hear a woofer in a box and how cool the tweeter sounds be my guest.
    I have a someone different opinion of the Revel Ultima Salon than you after listening to it. I liked the sound of it. Maybe because I didn't pay any attention to the babble, and just listened to the speaker. It was not a spectacular sounding speaker, but I did enjoy its sound.

    When a recording mastering company like Chesky Records - one of if not the best of the classical music recording studios uses tube amplifiers and the mastering engineer helped demo Audio Note in New York - a SET maker which measures shockingly badly versus regular tube amps which measure shockingly badly versus SS - well that illustrates something.
    For the most part I agree with you about Chesky Records. However the use of tubes is not a feather in their cap. Once again, it illustrates audio sweetening to taste, as they do add a sonic character to the music.

    Many recordings stink - that vast majority of them are mediocre and most of the better recordings occurred back when tubes were in the recording /mastering studios. With SS and CD - recordings have began to stink - especially in the rock/pop genres. Maybe the Recording engineers are bums - but then maybe it's the solid state stuff with high negative feedback and very poor linearity that start sucking the life out of the sound.
    I agree that many recording stink, especially rock and pop. But the reasons they stink have more to do them being mixed to accommodate so many different playback sources. When you have to mix a recording that sounds good for radio, car, mobile players, AND home stereos, it is likely it will not sound very good on a great system. Too many compromises. I don't think the equipment that is used today is the problem, I think using your release product as demos for all of the different marketing outlets is the problem. In the past I have always encouraged artists to create a radio and mobile friendly mix for marketing purposes, and also create a optimum mix for sale. Most record companies balk at this approach because of costs, but lost sales from poor quality is never on their collective minds. I do not think the recording engineers are bums, but I do think the record companies are.

    In saying that, I think recordings today overall are of equal quality to those produced decades ago, its just different technology. I mainly record film scores, classical, gospel and jazz concerts, and use some of the best capturing devices I can find, and an extremely clean recording chain. The only tube microphones I own and use are from Neuman, but I mostly use extremely high quality condensers for recording. IMO there is no real advantage to recording with tube microphones unless you are trying to create some sort of audio effect. There seems to be less sonic differences between most high quality condenser microphones than there are between high quality tube microphones. Much like tube amps, tube microphones bring a warmth to the voice that a condenser cannot quite do. Unfortunately that warmth is a sonic character that does not work with all applications
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  11. #61
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    This is what I find so remarkable about our hobby; how opinions can vary completely between one audiophile and another...

    You regard the Ultima Salon as a mediocre speaker, yet so many other reviewers own and use Revel speakers (including the Salon) as their reference speakers... (note that I've ignored how many reviewers rave about the products and focused on the ones who were willing to spend their money to own them).

    I hear many panel guys detail how dreadful box speakers sound and I hear many tube guys talk about how bad solid state is... But then I also hear box fans ripping on panels and SS fans bashing tubes... And I'm talking about persons who have auditioned the products they don't like (not just read spec sheets)...

    Then we come to guys who like both box and panel speakers, tubes and SS... A reviewer at Dagogo (I can't remember his name) reviewed a pair of Audio Note Speakers and prefered them to his Revel Performa F30s, but he didn't suddenly find that he hated the Revels just that he prefered the AN...

    I've seen reviewers describe Monitor Audio Gold series speakers as having an electrostatic like sound, which was something I actually got to test as I auditioned a pair of GS20s along with a pair of Final Sound 400i Stats.... I liked both and found I was in agreement with the reviewer's claim.... However, I prefered the GS20 (the box speaker) over the 400i (Panel); though the panel was a bit more 'airy', i felt the box just sounded more like 'music' to me and the bass had impact as well... But I loved both the box speaker and the panel...

    The more time I spend on this hobby the more I'm convinced that 90% of our issues/debates just come down to personal preferences and have zero to do with being true to live sound or original recordings....
    The last paragraph really sums it all up. Audio is a personal taste affair with some liking it just as it is, and other insisting on sweetening it up a bit. Neither is a "correct" way, but a matter of personal taste. This is why I refuse to get into pissing contests regarding components, wires, and speakers. In the end nobody is correct, and everyone is at the same time, at least from a personal perspective.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  12. #62
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    I have a someone different opinion of the Revel Ultima Salon than you after listening to it. I liked the sound of it. Maybe because I didn't pay any attention to the babble, and just listened to the speaker. It was not a spectacular sounding speaker, but I did enjoy its sound.
    I've never heard a Revel speaker that sounded "spectacular", but I thought that was the point of Revel speakers; to be more accurate and neutral than coloured and exciting... If I wanted a bit of added excitement I'd go with my other favourite brand; Monitor Audio....

    As for modern recordings; I wonder what kind equipment was used to record Michael Jackson's albums... I alway find them to be of exceptionally good quality... And I always use some MJ tracks to demo new gear...

  13. #63
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Ajani

    I know the reviewer who switched to the E from the F-30. I have not heard the F-30 so I can't say - I liked the Sophia II more than what I heard from the MAXX3 so it's always possible that a lower product in the line-up actually sounds better.

    To me CES 2010 is a pretty clear indicator of what is viewed as the best stuff - in the vast majority of rooms Tube amplification was used whether the speaker was tube amp friendly or not. And in most cases the tube rooms sounded best. Martin Logan and King Sound were panels using tubes - sounded WAY better than Magnepan and SanderSound using SS.

    There were some exceptions - Pass Labs sounded terrific with Sony speakers but the Pass gear didn't sound as good as Octave with Dynaudio. Technical Brain is a SS maker that made good sound and so did Heed audio.

    Nevertheless, you are correct that some like Michael Fremer and several others believe that the better way forward is high powered SS. SET demands a higher price of entry to get good than solid state - you can get quite decent solid state for $500 but a good SET amp probably starts at something like the Audio Note Kit 1 which is pretty much the reference standard at just under $2k. The problem with SETs is they demand very high quality transformers to get away from some of their colourations - and the less expensive SETs that I have heard add a fair bit of flavour which one may like but it also opens them up to attack of being distortion generators.

    Revel has come out with a fix - the Ultima Salon II - perhaps they figured out the mistakes that I heard and fixed them. The Wilson Sophia II sounds a lot better than the first one so maybe Revel fixed it up. My bet is that it will sound better with something like a Rogue Audio or Mystere etc than it will with (enter SS amp here).
    I'm not sure whether CES 2010 is the best evidence of the 'preference of tubes over SS'.... Let's consider the kind of music generally played at audio shows like CES; generally the standard audiophile approved jazz, simple acoustics and classical. all of which are well served by tubes (and usually vinyl).... If the manufacturers at CES demoed their gear with a wider variety of music; Electronica, Hip Hop, Reggae etc I suspect we'd have seen far more SS in the demo rooms...

  14. #64
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    I've never heard a Revel speaker that sounded "spectacular", but I thought that was the point of Revel speakers; to be more accurate and neutral than coloured and exciting... If I wanted a bit of added excitement I'd go with my other favourite brand; Monitor Audio....
    You summed it up nicely. I didn't find them spectacular sounding, but they indeed sounded just like what was fed to them. I did find them uncolored and neutral, which is why this speaker is finding its way into more and more recording studios all over the world.

    As for modern recordings; I wonder what kind equipment was used to record Michael Jackson's albums... I alway find them to be of exceptionally good quality... And I always use some MJ tracks to demo new gear...
    Every since Quincy started working with Michael he has used the best pro digital gear in the market. Quincy and I share one basic characteristic, we are perfectionist that pay attention to every detail of the recording and mixing process. It takes us longer to get things done, but the end results are always head and shoulders above the rest. I got a chance to work with him on a television gospel special that aired back in the 90's. It was a great experience that has stuck with me over the years.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  15. #65
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    I'm not sure whether CES 2010 is the best evidence of the 'preference of tubes over SS'.... Let's consider the kind of music generally played at audio shows like CES; generally the standard audiophile approved jazz, simple acoustics and classical. all of which are well served by tubes (and usually vinyl).... If the manufacturers at CES demoed their gear with a wider variety of music; Electronica, Hip Hop, Reggae etc I suspect we'd have seen far more SS in the demo rooms...
    It's not the music selection that allows the tube amps to sound nice, it's more the fact that they use reference amplification which costs infinite amounts of cash. At that level, tubes or SS will both sound wonderful. You can't dismiss CES and the choices most manufacturers make when showing their wares, it says alot about great sounding gear. They are not playing to the deaf masses but rather to overwhelmingly picky reviewers and audiophiles, totally unforgiving.

  16. #66
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    It's not the music selection that allows the tube amps to sound nice, it's more the fact that they use reference amplification which costs infinite amounts of cash. At that level, tubes or SS will both sound wonderful. You can't dismiss CES and the choices most manufacturers make when showing their wares, it says alot about great sounding gear. They are not playing to the deaf masses but rather to overwhelmingly picky reviewers and audiophiles, totally unforgiving.
    Picky reviewers and audiophiles who only regard specific genres as being 'music'; that is the reason speakers such as the Magnepan MG1.6/1.7 can be regarded as the greatest bargain in audiophile history.... If you listen to a wide range of music (including modern fare) then such a speaker would probably not even make a top 20 list... So yes musical selection has a great deal to do with it...

    It's why it makes little sense to get excited about the latest product raved about by X reviewer, unless you have similiar musical tastes and preferences...

  17. #67
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Poppa, I have to admit Ajani does have a point. I like an extremely wide variety of music, and because of that, I always choose high quality box speakers(large and small) paired with high quality SS amps. Some people pick a certain speaker technology because it reproduces the kind of music they love best exceptionally well. Electrostatics sound wonderful on minimal miked music, and small scale classical and jazz music. The do not sound good to me (IMO) reproducing FFF passages of large orchestral, organ, and large chorus works which is something most high performance box speakers can do well. That goes the same way for tubes versus SS, and this is from my experience with listening to both. So I do think there is much merit to Ajani opinion of people taste in music being married to the speakers and amps they choose for critical listening. While reviewers and audiophiles can be unforgiving, they can also be quite biased as well.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  18. #68
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Let me ask you this, if you guys were at the CES show, what would your impressions be? I suppose biased AGAINST what you're hearing because it's a manipulated choice of music, chosen for it's simplicity in reproduction?

    All I am saying is you can't write off a $10 000 reference tube amp because it's being used to play a simple style of music. I would also like to add that Rich reported back that Audio Note were using modern rock and heavy, guitar driven tracks.

    I would say for the purpose of this conversation, I might agree that a lower end tube amp could very likely reproduce a coloured sound. But the crazy high end gear they have at CES can't be pigeon holed as such. Have you guys heard high end Manley gear for example?

    I have a feeling that regardless of the music, the amplification would speak for itself. I also want to add that the idea of vendors rigging up the music selection, bothers me to no end.

  19. #69
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    Picky reviewers and audiophiles who only regard specific genres as being 'music'; that is the reason speakers such as the Magnepan MG1.6/1.7 can be regarded as the greatest bargain in audiophile history.... If you listen to a wide range of music (including modern fare) then such a speaker would probably not even make a top 20 list... So yes musical selection has a great deal to do with it...

    It's why it makes little sense to get excited about the latest product raved about by X reviewer, unless you have similiar musical tastes and preferences...
    The interesting thing though was that at CES the rooms that played the loudest and the hardest hitting music Hip Hop Trance metal were ALL tube amp run rooms.

    Audio Note with their 20 watt amp played at ridiculous levels music like Nightwish, The Evil Nine, Slayer, Rammstein, Slipknot with a 20 watt amp. This was played at very high levels with first rate bass impact where you get the sensation of the room going "whoomp whoomp" as if the walls were breathing with the bass lines. That is extremely impressive for 8 inch woofers and to play at very high levels without a hint of distortion anywhere and treble that extended way up to that level where it borders on pain. Dave Cope a distributor had to leave.

    The RA Box from Trenner and Freidl was played considerably louder again with similar music and had huge hit you in the face impact - think top of the line visceral impact with terrific bass and thwack - tube amps - and the Heed SS they had is only 30 watts and unique design for SS.

    Acapella was unparalleled in the treble thwack on cymbals and dynamics - bass was deep and powerful and they could really play at supreme levels - Einstein tube amps driving that room.

    These three rooms had the confidence to play anything you requested at any volume you requested. Not so with many of the SS rooms where the brittleness and lack of bass show up very quickly. Magnepan/Bryston - controlled all the music for example - probably more for the Magnepan shortcummings than the Bryston but Bryston has never had any real bass depth - it just sounds thin and fake. Perhaps they have frequency limiters but even Sugden Integrateds for a fraction of the price have depth and bass weight.

    I heard many years ago a Sophia with Krell and Levinson (an over $50,000 front end) and along comes a Rogue tube amp of a fraction of the power and price playing trance at high level embarrasses the Krell Levinson gear. This is arguably some of the "supposed" pinnacles of SS manufacturers and Rogue is a barely known tube maker and plays at leave the room levels with some truly exceptional treble speed and openness - there is nothing "tubey coloured" about it. Bass was high impact as well. The Wilson on the $50k+ of Krell/Levinson didn't have the treble or the bass and sounded washed out and gave me the "Where's the bass" feeling.

    I dunno but every room I went to it was consistently the tube based rooms that were playing louder more dynamically and had more bass depth and drive. So either the entire industry has fixed up their tube amps or all the speaker makers have dramatically improved efficiency - but when big tougher to drive speaker makers like Dynaudio show up the game with Octave tube amps rather than the likes of Krell - I wonder. In fact I didn't see Krell or Levinson anywhere. I saw a lot of VAC.

    It costs these guys over $10k to show be at these shows - they want to show with the best matches - I would say 75-90% of the rooms used tube front ends.

    All the rooms in my top 5 used tubes.

  20. #70
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    Let me ask you this, if you guys were at the CES show, what would your impressions be? I suppose biased AGAINST what you're hearing because it's a manipulated choice of music, chosen for it's simplicity in reproduction?
    Not biased, just highly skeptical... If the manufacturer was willing to play my own CDs, then I'd be happy.... But I won't assume that a product sounds good with all genres, unless I hear it with a sufficient number of genres to make that determination...

    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    All I am saying is you can't write off a $10 000 reference tube amp because it's being used to play a simple style of music. I would also like to add that Rich reported back that Audio Note were using modern rock and heavy, guitar driven tracks.

    I would say for the purpose of this conversation, I might agree that a lower end tube amp could very likely reproduce a coloured sound. But the crazy high end gear they have at CES can't be pigeon holed as such. Have you guys heard high end Manley gear for example?

    I have a feeling that regardless of the music, the amplification would speak for itself.
    Rich's wide taste in music and the fact that Audio Note has the balls to play music other than the standard audiophile fare is why I'm so interested in AN... If all Rich listened to was Jazz, then AN would not be on my "must audition" list ...

    And there are undoubtedly high quality tubes capable of tackling all genres of music, but how do I determine which of the tubes at CES fall into that category if they only play audiophile approved music?

    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    I also want to add that the idea of vendors rigging up the music selection, bothers me to no end.
    Yep, that's the issue I have with a lot of the CES demos... It's why I question whether CES is really proof of Tube preference in the industry... I'm not saying that Tubes are bad, but I seriously question whether there would be such widespread use of tubes, if demos were done with rap. reggaeton and rock instead of jazz....

  21. #71
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani

    Yep, that's the issue I have with a lot of the CES demos... It's why I question whether CES is really proof of Tube preference in the industry... I'm not saying that Tubes are bad, but I seriously question whether there would be such widespread use of tubes, if demos were done with rap. reggaeton and rock instead of jazz....
    Yes, audiophiles enjoy jazz, but I think you are underestimating the dynamics on a typical hard bop style of album. You yourself were discussing the bright highs of the trumpet. I'm not just talking about the old recordings either, Roy Hargrove is an excellent and modern example.

    A typical quartet or quintet:

    Drums: Cymbals of course being VERY hard to replicate realistically
    Upright acoustic bass: Hard to get resolution to include subtle plucking and fret hand noise. Deep notes that require fidelity to be heard as such, and not as "tones"
    Piano: Melodic and quiet, percussive and ebrasive
    Trumpet: You know this one
    Tenor/Alto Saxophone: The sax is super tough to get just right. It has remarkable tone yet can reach extreme highs and lows. A very breathy instrument. Joe Henderson's Inner Urge is a great example. With correct fidelity, you can hear his fingers pumping the valves.

    Now, a system must be resolute to cover all the dynamics of these instruments. More importantly, seperation is incredibly necessary, and difficult to achieve. Anyhow, it can be every bit as dynamic as rock. Instead of a troubled singer screaming and yelping, you have a troubled trumpeter voicing and blasting.

  22. #72
    Forum Regular O'Shag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    543

    Sorry I mispoke in my last post

    When referring to the advantage of crossoverless designs I cited Planars. I was referring to electrostatics, which do not have crossovers. I heard some Quad 2905s the week before last and they were wonderful. I could hear that extra level of cohesiveness and 'of-one-voice' sound.
    'Lets See what the day brings forth'.... Reginald Iolanthe Perrin

  23. #73
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    ....

    I dunno but every room I went to it was consistently the tube based rooms that were playing louder more dynamically and had more bass depth and drive. So either the entire industry has fixed up their tube amps or all the speaker makers have dramatically improved efficiency - but when big tougher to drive speaker makers like Dynaudio show up the game with Octave tube amps rather than the likes of Krell - I wonder. In fact I didn't see Krell or Levinson anywhere. I saw a lot of VAC.

    It costs these guys over $10k to show be at these shows - they want to show with the best matches - I would say 75-90% of the rooms used tube front ends.

    All the rooms in my top 5 used tubes.
    I don't know either, that's for sure. Certainly quality tube equipment can sound great; I don't dispute that for moment, (I do use an all-tube pre myself). But the CES is after all a "consumer" show.

    Furthermore it caters to "audiophiles". I have to wonder whether the selection of tube equipment is an effort to pander to the biased expectations, as well as tastes, of self-annointed audiophiles. We can see that real pros, like Sir TtT, tend to prefer s/s, (yes, even the maligned Bryston), with the odd exception. The pros critereon is uncolored accuracy, not euphonics.

  24. #74
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    I don't know either, that's for sure. Certainly quality tube equipment can sound great; I don't dispute that for moment, (I do use an all-tube pre myself). But the CES is after all a "consumer" show.

    Furthermore it caters to "audiophiles". I have to wonder whether the selection of tube equipment is an effort to pander to the biased expectations, as well as tastes, of self-annointed audiophiles. We can see that real pros, like Sir TtT, tend to prefer s/s, (yes, even the maligned Bryston), with the odd exception. The pros critereon is uncolored accuracy, not euphonics.
    so many "Audiophiles" expect tubes and vinyl, that I'm not suprised that so many manufacturers would cater to that... So as I've said a few times: the widespread use of tubes at CES is not necessarily an indication of an industry wide preference for tubes...

  25. #75
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    In general audiophiles "listen better" than most people - and I would say that includes recording engineers who are not necessarily "good listeners" because they know how to run mixing boards or have engineering degrees.

    Tubes are not used because they have a much higher degree of downtime and lower warranties - Bryston carries a 20 year warranty, is cheap (relatively) and thus for a business where downtime means dollars they won't be used. The better tube devices are truly linear amplifying devices - no non SE SS amp is regardless of price.

    Recording studios make choices that affect dollars. But it is interesting to note that plenty of artists are using tube amplifiers to record - as an example Jackson Browne interestingly uses Manley Labs to record his stuff and it's funny but Jackson Browne albums happen to be some of the very best recordings I own in that genre. And Manley isn't exactly the be all and end all of tube gear. And I only learned that by fluke as I brought an album to the Manley room that they were playing and I made the comment that I brought the same one and the conversation ensued.

    I am getting quite excited to see how and when Audio Note starts rolling out their new digital conversion, mixing boards, microphones, etc.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •