Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 165
  1. #51
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528
    But I think the subject got off the beam with the talk of that ridiculous laser record
    player.
    I think the OP is talking about an analog medium based on a laser, a direct reading of
    an analog signal, no translation of the signal to digital.
    PIONEER was talking about a reel to reel high q analog device a few years ago, but it
    disappeared.
    But you think with the way neurotic audiophiles worship at the feet of all things analog,
    paying as much as five k for a SET tube design from 1934, that someone would have seen the market potential for such a thing.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  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 Mr Peabody
    Some "armchair listeners" may not have more knowledge but they know what they prefer. Knowing a professional prefers digital isn't going to make some one else go digital when they prefer vinyl. Presenting the information is all one can do.
    I didn't make the comment out of a preference frame, I made it out of an accuracy claim. As I have said many a time, some people like their food plain so they can taste the food, and some folks like to doctor the food up.
    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
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Not only does the combined body of your posts lead anyone with even the slightest ability to read come to the conclusion that you are most assuredly anti-CD, but your recent post in THIS thread points to your inability to differentiate between a good, and a better CD player. Do your readers a favor and do NOT review things you are obviously not qualified for.
    You make a good point, i don't know how much credit I could put into a review done by some one claiming not much difference between an Alpha 7 and 9. When those players were new to the market my Kenwood 3300 which retailed about $895.00 bit the dust and could not be repaired, couldn't get parts. So I wandered into the store and listened to the 7, the salesman gave no pitch, just helped me demo the gear, I asked to hear the 8 then the
    9. I heard a difference between each model and although I had never spent that type of money on gear before ordered a 9 because I heard that much improvement over the 7 I originally was going to get.
    Last edited by Geoffcin; 08-28-2010 at 10:06 AM.

  4. #54
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    That's open to interpretation I suppose and it's true our hearing is certainly limited but from what I understand the wide frequency response is necessary for harmonics. I don't know how much value you personally place on harmonics but from a training seminar I attended with JBL/Harmon Kardon they presented a convincing case.
    No, look at the meter, it is not open to interpretation. Above 20khz, the meter sat at just the point above baseline of the measuring device, which means it would not be heard, it would be masked (precedence effect) by the louder signals below 20khz.

    If you have actually read my post, I value harmonics, timbre and textures in music very highly. But I also know that most folks couldn't hear the harmonics if they tried. From my experience there is a value in keeping unheard ultra sonic signals intact, even if the listener cannot really hear them.
    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

  5. #55
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    But I think the subject got off the beam with the talk of that ridiculous laser record
    player.
    I think the OP is talking about an analog medium based on a laser, a direct reading of
    an analog signal, no translation of the signal to digital.
    PIONEER was talking about a reel to reel high q analog device a few years ago, but it
    disappeared.
    But you think with the way neurotic audiophiles worship at the feet of all things analog,
    paying as much as five k for a SET tube design from 1934, that someone would have seen the market potential for such a thing.
    The Finial, now ELP TT is totally analog. There is no digital conversion. Excerpt from ELP's site.


    True Analog Playback
    The laser beam travels to the wall of the groove and back. The reflection angle is transferred to the audio signal, meaning that the LT maintains analog sound through the entire process, without any digitization. As a result, the LT cannot differentiate between an audio signal or dirt on the record. To keep your records clean, we recommend a record vacuum cleaner (see our Accessories page).
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  6. #56
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    I heard a difference between each model and although I had never spent that type of money on gear before ordered a 9 because I heard that much improvement over the 7 I originally was going to get.
    Amazing too, when you consider that the Alpha 7 was the go-to easy sale for audio dealers because it really showed how much better a quality CD player sounded compared to consumer grade.

    My epiphany came with the Alpha 9 when the sales rep put in a HDCD sampler and it was like someone cranked up the dynamics by a magnitude. Admittedly the sampler was designed to show off this feature, but it just crushed the dynamics of the 7 and the poor outclassed Cambridge Audio player they had also set up.
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  7. #57
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    I find this difficult to believe. My CD player has been in my signature since I joined the AR forums. To say you've never read my signature after all the responses to my posts you've made over the years means you have some form of optical or memory problem, or possibly both.
    Yes i may have read it but I don't remember the thousands of forum posters on here and what they all own unless they call attention to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Not only does the combined body of your posts lead anyone with even the slightest ability to read come to the conclusion that you are most assuredly anti-CD, but your recent post in THIS thread points to your inability to differentiate between a good, and a better CD player. Do your readers a favor and do NOT review things you are obviously not qualified for.
    If you think any of the Arcam CD players represent any sort of wonderful statement on Redbook reproduction then you clearly need reviewers like me to set you straight. I never said the 9 wasn't better than the 7SE. The lot of them were mid-fi - and yes so is the CD6. This is all medicore stuff.

  8. #58
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Yes i may have read it but I don't remember the thousands of forum posters on here and what they all own unless they call attention to it .
    So you agree, you LIED when you said you never read it. Typical of you to admit to the face on lie and then try to say it really doesn't matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA

    If you think any of the Arcam CD players represent any sort of wonderful statement on Redbook reproduction then you clearly need reviewers like me to set you straight. I never said the 9 wasn't better than the 7SE. The lot of them were mid-fi - and yes so is the CD6. This is all medicore stuff.
    HAA!! When my player was purchased you were still in short pants. Back then it smoked the competition right up to players that we're twice it's price. I know I auditioned many of them in the $2k-$4k range. I really haven't seen much of an advance in redbook playback since, with the possible exception of adjustable oversampling.

    The fact that you THINK you know anything about mid/low/hi-fi after reading some of your pompous statements really doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is that anyone would take anything you say as having ANY meaning at all after reading some of your clearly clueless remarks.

    But please, continue to "set me straight" I always get a kick out of it when you do!
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  9. #59
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    So you agree, you LIED when you said you never read it. Typical of you to admit to the face on lie and then try to say it really doesn't matter.
    I didn't say I read it I say I may have but didn't remember it. What I can say is that when I made the comments about Arcam I did not know that you owned it and it was not directed at you. I owned Arcam for several years and was a familiar with the line which is why I brought them up. It's not my fault you get verly defensive with your gear. If I was still in the mid-fi Arcam realm I might be defensive too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Back then it smoked the competition right up to players that we're twice it's price. I know I auditioned many of them in the $2k-$4k range. I really haven't seen much of an advance in redbook playback since, with the possible exception of adjustable oversampling.
    Yes you're funny. The I bought the best player its class and it beat everything at double the price and there is nothing better since kind of guy. The Alpha 9 was mid-fi is mid-fi and has never been anything other than mid-fi.

    And the reason you can't hear what better CD players are capable of is because of your system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    The fact that you THINK you know anything about mid/low/hi-fi after reading some of your pompous statements really doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is that anyone would take anything you say as having ANY meaning at all after reading some of your clearly clueless remarks.

    But please, continue to "set me straight" I always get a kick out of it when you do!
    One day you'll audition something good. I have heard pieces in your system enough tio know that you need to get off your couch and listen to better gear. Come back to me when you do.
    Last edited by RGA; 08-29-2010 at 11:36 AM.

  10. #60
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    I didn't say I read it I say I may have but didn't remember it. What I can say is that when I made the comments about Arcam I did not know that you owned it and it was not directed at you. I owned Arcam for several years and was a familiar with the line which is why I brought them up. It's not my fault you get verly defensive with your gear. If I was still in the mid-fi Arcam realm I might be defensive too.
    No, what YOU said was that you couldn't tell the difference between an Alpha 7, or an Alpha 9, even after months of auditioning. I find that quite sad for someone who claims to be a "reviewer". I don't mean it surprises me though, as your clearly not interested in accuracy. (or could even recognize it!)


    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    One day you'll audition something good. I have heard pieces in your system enough tio know that you need to get off your couch and listen to better gear. Come back to me when you do.
    Luckily I don't have to go out to listen to good gear. I have my choice of three quality systems right here. (four if you count the PC rig! ) You do have one point though; I had really wanted to get down to Lyric to hear the new Magnepan 1.7's. If they are as good as everyone has been telling me I might have to add them into one of my systems!
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  11. #61
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA

    Yes you're funny. The I bought the best player its class and it beat everything at double the price and there is nothing better since kind of guy. The Alpha 9 was mid-fi is mid-fi and has never been anything other than mid-fi.
    First off; I never said there wasn't better, even back when I bought it nearly a decade ago. I said it was MY choice in the 2-4k range. Did you actually even READ my post? To me the Meridian was the state-of-the-art at that time. Several others that I didn't audition were obviously out of the Alpha 9 league, including the dCS players.

    Just for a refresher, Kalman Rubinson reviewed this player for Stereophile back in '99 when it was new. Of course you were still breast feeding back then, but perhaps you might want to read this before you dismiss the player as "mid-fi"

    Quote;

    "The Alpha 9...is a breakthrough in sub-$2000 CD players. The performance of this 24/96 player with 16/44.1 discs withstood direct comparisons to players/DACs costing several times as much, and made small potatoes of the differences. I was particularly impressed with the bass extension, detail, and power, which will be quite welcome in almost all systems. Beyond that, its broad soundstage was truly thrilling with large and small ensembles, with superb resolution of the music's inner voices. I would be hard-pressed to justify buying a more expensive CD (-only) player. "

    Full review;

    http://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/199arcam/
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  12. #62
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    RGA, you may be meaning to poke a jab at Geoffcin but if any one is paying attention you are off base on the Alpha 9. It sold for $1600.00 to $1700.00 and beat many players costing more than that. It's not mid-fi at all, the 9 would easily give some one a taste of high end digital playback. From what you used in your signature you have never owned a CD playback as good as the Alpha 9.

  13. #63
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    No, what YOU said was that you couldn't tell the difference between an Alpha 7, or an Alpha 9, even after months of auditioning. I find that quite sad for someone who claims to be a "reviewer". I don't mean it surprises me though, as your clearly not interested in accuracy. (or could even recognize it!)
    If I said that then I miss wrote - please link where I did and I shall pay closer attention to what I write next time. If you think there is a vast difference then you would agree that you would pass a Blind level matched session correct? How much would you like to wager on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Luckily I don't have to go out to listen to good gear. I have my choice of three quality systems right here. (four if you count the PC rig! ) You do have one point though; I had really wanted to get down to Lyric to hear the new Magnepan 1.7's. If they are as good as everyone has been telling me I might have to add them into one of my systems!
    Magneapan? yeah okay.

  14. #64
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    First off; I never said there wasn't better, even back when I bought it nearly a decade ago. I said it was MY choice in the 2-4k range. Did you actually even READ my post?
    You said this "Back then it smoked the competition right up to players that we're twice it's price. I know I auditioned many of them in the $2k-$4k range.

    I didn't miss read it. Now you say it is "my choice" hmm. Sounds to me you're just another "mine is the best because that's all I could afford. Remember I may be a fan boy but the stuff I talk most about is not what I actually own. And that's the difference being objective about a piece of gear and saying it's the best CD player because I have it and so you will have to spend what 3 times more to get something better since you say twice as expensive will be "smoked". Puhleeze.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    To me the Meridian was the state-of-the-art at that time. Several others that I didn't audition were obviously out of the Alpha 9 league, including the dCS players.
    I was never convinced by Meridian then or now. My dealer carries current some pretty upper scale Meridian - and it's good - certainly better than Arcam but it's not that great. Lots of people were not in the Meridan camp then or now. I would take the Arcam stuff on a bang for buck for digital over Meridian in a heartbeat. Don't equate money with being better. Some very expensive stuff is not all that good. Big name and design blather hype and sexy looks doesn't make it so. I hear a $30,000 Linn CD player that was bolted to the floor get anhialated by a $3,500 tube cd player. Really wasn't close. That Linn was long gone never to return and they still carry the tube cd players. It is no contest. $26,500 saved to boot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Just for a refresher, Kalman Rubinson reviewed this player for Stereophile back in '99 when it was new. Of course you were still breast feeding back then, but perhaps you might want to read this before you dismiss the player as "mid-fi"
    Yes I had young quality hearing back then unlike the geezers who need endless bright ssshshshshy treble to have any sort of treble.

    And the breasts I was sucking on were models and strippers. Sorry buddy but the Alpha series was the same time frame as the Cambridge 6 series and that was mid to late 1990's. Back in those days I didn't know what good sound truly was all about. That is probably true (I did buy the CD 6) - I also actually thought the likes of B&W, Paradigm, Bryston, Magnepan, Cambridge Audio and Arcam was hi-fi - LOL - yes those were the days of ingnorance. Some people actually go out and listen to real audio reproduction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin

    "The Alpha 9...is a breakthrough in sub-$2000 CD players. The performance of this 24/96 player with 16/44.1 discs withstood direct comparisons to players/DACs costing several times as much, and made small potatoes of the differences. I was particularly impressed with the bass extension, detail, and power, which will be quite welcome in almost all systems. Beyond that, its broad soundstage was truly thrilling with large and small ensembles, with superb resolution of the music's inner voices. I would be hard-pressed to justify buying a more expensive CD (-only) player. "
    That's funny. Yes I bought the Arcam Delta 290 based on Stereophile raves too so I can't blame you for that. But then I went and auditioned some "REAL" products and figured out that I have better ears than most of them. Got rid of the Arcam for something far superior. I suggest you do the same and audition something good.

  15. #65
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    If I said that then I miss wrote - please link where I did and I shall pay closer attention to what I write next time.
    Actually it was a refreshing to glimpse past the normal babel that you post so please, DON'T stop posting what you really hear.
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    If you think there is a vast difference then you would agree that you would pass a Blind level matched session correct? How much would you like to wager on it?
    I would wager with you but it wouldn't be fair for you to loose $$$ with your small salary. Call me when you can actually afford to bet real money and we'll play.
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  16. #66
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    RGA, you may be meaning to poke a jab at Geoffcin but if any one is paying attention you are off base on the Alpha 9. It sold for $1600.00 to $1700.00 and beat many players costing more than that. It's not mid-fi at all, the 9 would easily give some one a taste of high end digital playback. From what you used in your signature you have never owned a CD playback as good as the Alpha 9.
    The fact that something beats something else at a higher price doesn't mean much when the reviewers who say it are being vague. What specifically have they auditioned and what specific model do they claim it beats? Of course the Alpha 9 will sound better than some CD players at more money - big deal - so did the Arcam Delta 290 I owned. The 290 was about half the price of my Pioneer Receiver and the Delta 290 sounded FAR FAR better. So what. The Pioneer was a pile of garbage. Beating a pile of garbage is one thing beating serious audio focussed amps is entirely different. And there were $2k Denon and Sony CD players back then.

    The Arcam Delta 290 that Stereophile reviewed they raved about just like they raved about the alpha cd players - the amp was the only class B amp remotely in that price range back then. The Sugdens (any of them at the time) destroyed the Arcam. Stereophile however would not review any of them because they didn't have enough dealers or they just never heard of them. For YEARS they recommended the Arcam as the best in class. Then John Marks finally reviewed an A21a and they gave it a paragraph blurb and he liked it. Then on a forum he said to me that it was to him the best SS amp in its class on sound. Yes the Sugden needs HE speakers but that's not the issue the issue is pure sound. So you have Stereophile recommending an amp that people might think is best in class and when they finally review the A21a which was selling during the entire Delta 290 production run and they said gee the A21a is actually the better amp. That goes to listening experience and something may be the "best you ever heard" but if you have not heard stuff that is "stiff competition" then it doesn't mean anything.

    It always comes down to experience. When I first began on forums I was a HUGE fan of B&W and Bryston and that's what I was going to buy. And I compared it to lots of other stuff and it always held up quite well - but that's because the lots of other stuff was pretty much exactly the same or similar enough. I think I shifted to Classe and YBA and Sugden and then I shifted partly to Martin Logan (except the mismatch) and to PMC and then Reference 3a. Something is best until something else moves you off the stance and that can only come with experiencial listening.

    The guys who get on my case seem to be the "I've owned my panel for 25 years and I have never heard a better speaker" - to that I say what have you actually heard in the form of boxes. "Nothing - it's a box it can't be good" I swear this was a comment I heard from a guy at Soundhounds. This maggie owner is in a shop selling multi-thousand dollar speakers ANY of which blow his speakers to the weeds and he doesn't even bother to listen- not even for 1 minute because he just "knows" it can't be good.

    No reviewer can hear it all - the fact that a reviewer says - this is better than CD players or amps at double the price that depends on what he heard. And 3 issues later he may hear an amp at half the price that he likes better.

    I reviewed the Grant Fidelity Rita at $4200 at the time which I thought was a very nice sounding amplifier (and it still is) for the money with great build quality. I give it a very nice review. Then GF sends me PM 150 monoblock amps that sell for $1600 (now) which with a decent $1200-$1500 preamp would be easily the way to go(it was with my Rotel).

    So for less money I heard something that is quite a bit better than the Rita. Both of these sound better than amps I have heard at "double the price" too. So what? I would buy a Rita over a $7000.00 McIntosh I heard. And I would buy the PM 150 over the Rita or the McIntosh too(I am being specific). But that doesn't mean that some other amps don't paste the GF and Shengya's either. I would buy the PM 150 and Rotel over more expensive Bryston, Sim Audio, MF, Classe amps as well.

    Regarding CD players:

    What I own and what I have heard are not the same thing. I chose to invest $5,000 into the turntable plus a record cleaning machine. I was reviewing CD players so I felt that before I jump into CD I will simply review a few of them until something comes in that impresses me enough to keep. My dealer has a wide array of turntables and I feel that it is far easier to hear the greater leaps and bounds in vinyl. When you upgrade a $50 cart to a $300 cart you will hear a HUGE difference assuming the table is even remotely competent and a Technics 1200 is that. But if you go from a $600CD player to an $850 CD player that difference is not necessarily even audible and if it is it won't be earth shakingly better. That same $250 yields far more improvement with turntables.

    The Grant Fidelity CD player I reviewed sounds far better than the Alpha 9 and the build quality isn't even comparable - the Alpha 9 is a toy. Sure both are better than the CD 6. But so what? I can still recognize which sounds better whether I own the player or not. I keep it because it is interesting to have a reference of what was considered "entrey level high end" in the mid/late 90s to hear how much better new players truly are. The GF is a tube cd player and the one I am reviewing now is a tube cd player. Both of them easily outperform the likes of the CD 6 and any of the Arcams. The GF's are worth the money for the transports alone. i give that praise to it not because I own it because I don't. It just is that well built. I wish the Audio Note gear was that well built - it isn't up to that level either.

    And if the Shengya CD player is as good as the the PM 150 then the Arcam will be relegated to laughing stock status. The PM 150 embarasses th elikes of the Delta 290. And I would not be surprised if it did the same thing to their digital. $750 http://grantfidelity.com/site/Sheng_ya_CD-17
    Last edited by RGA; 08-29-2010 at 01:43 PM.

  17. #67
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    You said this "[B] Sounds to me you're just another "mine is the best because that's all I could afford. Remember I may be a fan boy but the stuff I talk most about is not what I actually own. And that's the difference being objective about a piece of gear and saying it's the best CD player because I have it and so you will have to spend what 3 times more to get something better since you say twice as expensive will be "smoked". Puhleeze.
    Well, I'll admit it. In 2001 I didn't want to spend more that a couple large on a CD player. I've always had an idea to try to get 90%-95% of the absolute best performance at the best price. You really do have to pay that extra magnitude if you want to get the best-or-nothing. That being said, I auditioned several CD players and heard many more and the Alpha 9 was my choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    I was never convinced by Meridian then or now. My dealer carries current some pretty upper scale Meridian - and it's good - certainly better than Arcam but it's not that great. Lots of people were not in the Meridan camp then or now. I would take the Arcam stuff on a bang for buck for digital over Meridian in a heartbeat. Don't equate money with being better. Some very expensive stuff is not all that good. Big name and design blather hype and sexy looks doesn't make it so. I hear a $30,000 Linn CD player that was bolted to the floor get anhialated by a $3,500 tube cd player. Really wasn't close. That Linn was long gone never to return and they still carry the tube cd players. It is no contest. $26,500 saved to boot.
    I'm sure Meridian didn't need you either. Back then or now. I'm not sure what "upper scale" Meridian means, but the 800 that I heard pretty much set the mark for playback in my book. Didn't matter the price, that was "state-of-the-art in my book. Possibly not anymore with the latest codecs, but back in 2000 nothing I heard was better.



    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Yes I had young quality hearing back then unlike the geezers who need endless bright ssshshshshy treble to have any sort of treble.
    Wow, ssshshshshy eh? Perhaps your readers need to know what you think about the "over 30 crowd" after a statement like this?


    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    And the breasts I was sucking on were models and strippers.
    No girlfriends or boyfriends eh? Figures.


    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Sorry buddy but the Alpha series was the same time frame as the Cambridge 6 series and that was mid to late 1990's. Back in those days I didn't know what good sound truly was all about. That is probably true (I did buy the CD 6) - I also actually thought the likes of B&W, Paradigm, Bryston, Magnepan, Cambridge Audio and Arcam was hi-fi - LOL - yes those were the days of ingnorance. Some people actually go out and listen to real audio reproduction.
    First off; I'm not your "buddy" Call me that again and I'll be forced to edit you posts. Something I've NEVER done before.

    Second; You've managed to diss some of the best gear out there in just one paragraph. Paradigm makes some EXCELLENT speakers. Their top of the line rivals the best dynamic speakers made anywhere, and at a great price! I would take an old 80's vintage B&W Matrix over your floppy woofered speakers on any day of the week! Bryston makes some of the best built amps in the world. Magnepan is owned by more audiophiles than ANY other quality speaker. For decades! Cambridge Audio and Arcam battle to this day for the best value in HiFi, and even though I chose Arcam for my CD player, Cambridge makes some GREAT gear too that I would be proud to own.



    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    That's funny. Yes I bought the Arcam Delta 290 based on Stereophile raves too so I can't blame you for that. But then I went and auditioned some "REAL" products and figured out that I have better ears than most of them. Got rid of the Arcam for something far superior. I suggest you do the same and audition something good.
    This is one of the big difference between you and me; I never tell anyone to get rid of their gear. I might tell you that I think there's better out there, but I would never say to go audition REAL products as if yours wasn't. Very poor form, especially for a "reviewer" [sic]
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  18. #68
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    It's actually not poor form. Some reviewers and magazines may like the "La -La everything is just Perfect" Ed Wood voiceover but I value good audio reproduction over being diplomatic. And I am not the only one who calls it like they hear it. UHF has been quite successful at calling a dog a dog when they hear it. They still don't get Arcam for some of the comments they made - nor do they get sent Paradigm speakers.

    And Stereophile gave less than flattering reviews to Bryston and Hi-Fi Choice gave their integrated three stars out of five which is shockingly low for them. UHF was less than thrilled with some of their models as well - and UHF is Canadian so no home town niceness there.

    Maybe you should read stuff that doesn't just say - everything is perfect and it all comes down to your taste. After all if that was true you would own a $50 CD player. Clearly $50 CD replay is "junk" compared to an $1800 Alpha 9. And let's not mince words by "softening" the commentary to possibly imply that the $50 CD replay is better than it is - it's rubbish and it should be called rubbish. Just as a NAD CD replay is not Meridian it should not remotely be implied that it is in that league because it flat out isn't just as the OTO is not remotely in league with a Jinro or a big LAMM, Cary, Wavelength, Einstein. I may like it but I am not deluded into thinking because that is what I paid that it is "the end of the line" or a perfect amplifying device.

    The fact that review outlets water down the commentary (not necessarily the writers but the editors) is why we have so much mid-fi stuff being heralded as "High End" And I don't even like the term High End - I would rather use a different term that doesn't simply seem to go by price. The Cambridge Audio CD 6 was referred to as "entry level" "High End" and that monicker is B.S. It implies that it is in some sort of league with the big boys and it isn't. It is better than a Sony mega changer - and some mediocre dull sounding stuff - but that doesn't mean it does a credible job of portraying the musical event whether it has an established brand behind it or not is meaningless.

    "Magnepan is owned by more audiophiles than ANY other quality speaker. For decades!"

    Bose is the number one selling speaker manufacturer out there. That only confirms that lots of people don't have good ears. So what?

    More people own a Ford Focus than own a Ferrari or a Bentley. A Ferrari is better and less people own it. Just because most people own mid priced stuff doesn't mean that has any bearing on what the "actual" great stuff "REALLY" is.
    Last edited by RGA; 08-29-2010 at 03:03 PM.

  19. #69
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    It's actually not poor form. Some reviewers and magazines may like the "La -La everything is just Perfect" Ed Wood voiceover but I value good audio reproduction over being diplomatic. And I am not the only one who calls it like they hear it. UHF has been quite successful at calling a dog a dog when they hear it. They still don't get Arcam for some of the comments they made - nor do they get sent Paradigm speakers.

    And Stereophile gave less than flattering reviews to Bryston and Hi-Fi Choice gave their integrated three stars out of five which is shockingly low for them. UHF was less than thrilled with some of their models as well - and UHF is Canadian so no home town niceness there.

    Maybe you should read stuff that doesn't just say - everything is perfect and it all comes down to your taste. After all if that was true you would own a $50 CD player. Clearly $50 CD replay is "junk" compared to an $1800 Alpha 9. And let's not mince words by "softening" the commentary to possibly imply that the $50 CD replay is better than it is - it's rubbish and it should be called rubbish. Just as a NAD CD replay is not Meridian it should not remotely be implied that it is in that league because it flat out isn't just as the OTO is not remotely in league with a Jinro or a big LAMM, Cary, Wavelength, Einstein. I may like it but I am not deluded into thinking because that is what I paid that it is "the end of the line" or a perfect amplifying device.

    The fact that review outlets water down the commentary (not necessarily the writers but the editors) is why we have so much mid-fi stuff being heralded as "High End" And I don't even like the term High End - I would rather use a different term that doesn't simply seem to go by price. The Cambridge Audio CD 6 was referred to as "entry level" "High End" and that monicker is B.S. It implies that it is in some sort of league with the big boys and it isn't. It is better than a Sony mega changer - and some mediocre dull sounding stuff - but that doesn't mean it does a credible job of portraying the musical event whether it has an established brand behind it or not is meaningless.

    "Magnepan is owned by more audiophiles than ANY other quality speaker. For decades!"

    Bose is the number one selling speaker manufacturer out there. That only confirms that lots of people don't have good ears. So what?

    More people own a Ford Focus than own a Ferrari or a Bentley. A Ferrari is better and less people own it. Just because most people own mid priced stuff doesn't mean that has any bearing on what the "actual" great stuff "REALLY" is.
    And your gods gift to the reviewing word? Telling it "like it is" when nobody else will. Calling Paradigms dogs are we? That would make the killer Bryston 14b SST that I heard crap and what, NAD gets the flush now too? I would take their M2 amp over ANYTHING you've called "Great". And your even implying that Magnepan the "BOSE" of Hifi?! Wait till I post this to the MUG bb!!!

    Oh your in way over your head now. Best to give up when you, well....best too just give up before you run out of feet for your mouth.

    The Jinro hmmm... it's is the copper AN eh? I was wondering when you would get AN into the thread. (I just won $10 thanks!!!) it's nice in a euphonic way, but if you want to hear a pretty amp I would suggest you bid on this one;

    http://cgi.ebay.com/Shindo-Montille-...item2eaf5cffeb

    Of course it's not a Lamm, but you'll never be able to afford one of those anyway, best not even listen.

    Really this is getting tiresome. Enjoy your "reviewing" but don't give up your day job. As a matter of fact I would get quite used to it if I were you.








    ,
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  20. #70
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Amazing too, when you consider that the Alpha 7 was the go-to easy sale for audio dealers because it really showed how much better a quality CD player sounded compared to consumer grade.

    My epiphany came with the Alpha 9 when the sales rep put in a HDCD sampler and it was like someone cranked up the dynamics by a magnitude.
    That is a recording capability that gives an advantage to any CD player with HDCD encoding. So yes an HDCD played on HDCD capable CD player will be better than a player without it in an apples to apples comparison (from the same maker using the same transport). I did not audition the Alpha 9 with any HDCD encoded music which would obviously sound a lot better than the 7. Although level matching is important with HDCD.

  21. #71
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    And your gods gift to the reviewing word? Telling it "like it is" when nobody else will.
    Yes if you read what I said instead of inventing strawmen - I said that UHF gave Arcam a bad review and Arcam no longer sends them gear - they were telling it like it is - so how is that me and nobody else will? Strawman. UHF has given poor reviews to Castle loudspeakers and Bryston off the top of my head. Are they afraid that owners will be upset - too freaking bad - they called it like they heard it. Hi-Fi Choice also gave poor reviews to Bryston - and so did a recent Stereophile. In the la-la world of everything is great it's surprising that nobody stops and thinks - gee that's THREE magazines that have been luke warm to not really liking Bryston amps. But if I say it - oh that's just one guy's opinion and it's JUST RGA being dogmatic on tubes or SET. No it's quite a lot of reviewers who have heard quite a lot of gear coming to the same conclusions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Calling Paradigms dogs are we?
    Really where did I say that? Another invented argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin

    That would make the killer Bryston 14b SST that I heard crap and what, NAD gets the flush now too? I would take their M2 amp over ANYTHING you've called "Great".
    Yes YOU would because you don't actually audition anything. So of course YOU would say it sounds better than "ANYTHING" I call great because you judge all stereo gear because you don't like the personality of the person you're debating with. That's quite hilarious.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    And your even implying that Magnepan the "BOSE" of Hifi?! Wait till I post this to the MUG bb!!!
    No that is your reading of it. The point was that high sales is not indicative of anything. Bose sells more that doesn't mean better. Magnepan may sell well in the U.S that does not mean anything. The best of the best sells in far smaller numbers not greater numbers because the elite stuff in virtually any consumer product is expensive. Cars, watches, stereos, jewelry, clothes, televisions, etc. The fact that most people can only afford $500 -$2,000 speakers doesn't mean much. The 1.6 was in my top 3 under $2k as well so it really doesn't mean a whole lot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    Oh your in way over your head now. Best to give up when you, well....best too just give up before you run out of feet for your mouth.

    Of course it's not a Lamm, but you'll never be able to afford one of those anyway, best not even listen.
    I am not sure what affordability has to do with anything perhaps you can explain that to me. I don't see $20,000 amplifiers and speakers in your system? Nor is this an indicator of quality hearing. Being rich doesn't mean you have taste, or better ears. Perhaps you believe it is so.

    What a joke. It's off topic if anyone other than Geofcin posts it - why not delete all your own off topic posts?
    Last edited by RGA; 08-30-2010 at 05:06 PM.

  22. #72
    Silence of the spam Site Moderator Geoffcin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,326
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Yes if you read what I said instead of inventing strawmen - .
    LOL!!! Strawmen eh? What form of medical Marijuana have you been smoking! You did JUST write this didn't you;

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    I also actually thought the likes of B&W, Paradigm, Bryston, Magnepan, Cambridge Audio and Arcam was hi-fi - LOL - yes those were the days of ingnorance. Some people actually go out and listen to real audio reproduction. .
    Or beauties like this one;

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    "Magnepan is owned by more audiophiles than ANY other quality speaker. For decades!"
    (and) Bose is the number one selling speaker manufacturer out there. That only confirms that lots of people don't have good ears. So what?
    The implications of a statment like this are clear and obvious.

    I could go on and on with quoting some of your more "corlorful" statements, but the whole thing has grown old. People have seen the real you, and there's no way that you can redirect your statements when it was quite clear what you meant when you posted them.

    In any case, despite all of the fun I've had it's time to end this off topic excursion. This line is officially closed.
    Audio;
    Ming Da MC34-AB 75wpc
    PS Audio Classic 250. 500wpc into 4 ohms.
    PS Audio 4.5 preamp,
    Marantz 6170 TT Shure M97e cart.
    Arcam Alpha 9 CD.- 24 bit dCS Ring DAC.
    Magnepan 3.6r speakers Oak/black,

  23. #73
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    I'd like to know which Bryston amps got bad reviews. Stereophile liked the big monoblocks.

  24. #74
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    I'd like to know which Bryston amps got bad reviews. Stereophile liked the big monoblocks.
    Fremer's review of the 7B SST2 in Stereophile
    UHF's review of the 3B or 4B but I believe it was the 3B
    Hi-Fi Choice review of the 100 integrated.


    This is what Fremer had to say

    Against the Parasound Halo JC 1s
    The Parasounds couldn't have sounded more different. Their bass was deeper, tighter, and better controlled, yet not overdamped, so that textures were fully resolved, and rhythm'n'pacing were far more nimble. Image specificity was greater, and dimensionality was more fully expressed. Transients were faster and more effervescent while being free of artificial etch. Reverb was expressed as genuine depth where appropriate, dropping way down in level into the noise floor before dissipating. Images leapt from the speakers and floated more freely in a huge three-dimensional space—but most noticeable, and almost immediately, was the delicacy, resolution, and coherence of the reverb's decay.

    Neither pair of Brystons matched the Parasounds' low-level resolution and microdynamic delicacy. With the much nimbler, more holographic-sounding Parasounds there was more musical information to consider and more musical pleasure to be had. Detractors might say the Halos' top end was brash, but I counter that that was the fault of the recordings, not the amps, which had a sweet top end despite all their resolution and transparency.

    Conclusion
    If I owned a pair of Bryston 7B SST2s, I'd make sure to find out whether they contained the old or new transformers. The improvement produced by the new transformers was significant.

    Nonetheless, even the improved version, while sounding pleasant enough—and particularly rich in the midrange—couldn't get my Wilson Audio MAXX 3 speakers to live up to their sonic potential, despite having enough power to do so. It's not a matter of cost—the similarly priced Parasounds did so with ease.

    But while the better of the two pairs of Bryston monoblocks always sounded pleasant, they rarely sounded exciting. The original pair elicited this conclusion: "I listened happily to the pair of them for a month, concentrating on the many things they did well. But their presentation was sort of like tofu: nourishing, but in need of spicing up to be truly tasty. Replacing the darTZeel NHB-18NS preamplifier with Musical Fidelity's all-tube Primo added needed texture and dimensionality. The Audio Valve Sunilda phono preamp added interest. Changes of cable produced useful results. But overall, the Brystons' presentation lacked the microdynamics I was used to from the Musical Fidelity Titan."

    While the second pair of 7B SST2s was clearly an improvement over the first, that conclusion stands. In my experience, it is hard to beat a lot of good, clean power, and the Bryston 7B SST2 offers that, plus ultra-low distortion, in a superbly built, reliable package at a very reasonable price. But before buying a pair, listen to the competition.
    http://www.stereophile.com/solidpowe...er/index4.html

    Here is the problem - microdynamics and it has always been a problem for me with every system I have tried Bryston in. I have to crank it up to make certain cues out. Where they and many other SS amps fall down is on transients and decays. SS does a fine job of getting the initial sound but not the edges of notes and so I hear an up front crisp clear strike and it sounds hacked off. It simply doesn't have the resolution with simple instruments (one vocal one guitar) and I use that kind of music before I bother with full scale orchestra. Yes separation is all fine and good and re-creating high volume level orchestra is all fine and nice but if you can't simply get the timbre and tone, transietn attack and decay of one guy playing one guitar then nothing else it brings to the table can be worthwhile because it certainly isn't getting that right with 20 instruments - it's just spacing it all out. With 20 instruments though it's far harder to hear the attack and decay of each instrument because there are so many playing all at the same time so the weakness goes unnoticed. But since most music is not played at 120db and has 110 piece orchestras - most music is of the small scale single voice with a backing band of 4 to 5 instruments it is here that most systems fall down. A small tube system will get the instruments and vocals better but may have trouble with the spatial cues at higher levels and jumble them up in the center more. But that compromise IMO is easily the better one because if the violin and cello sound "real" whether they are well spaced is less important since we were not at the event or the recording studio and the spatial cues are not a known entity. The sound of a violin or a piano however is. Microdynamics are critical (all dynamics are critical) and it's what few systems do well.

    I'm not saying put all your stock into Fremer but his comments are not dissimilar to the others over the years from UHF or Hi-Fi Choice or what I and numerous other forum posters hear. Having said all that I would still consider them for my home theater set-up down the line. Why? Because they sound a lot like most SS amps of this stripe and they have a great warranty and support. For music replay not my cup of tea but for home theater where cues are less experientially known and big slam bang effects it is impressive. Also safe to buy used because you can flip them easily.

  25. #75
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
    The Finial, now ELP TT is totally analog. There is no digital conversion. Excerpt from ELP's site.


    True Analog Playback
    The laser beam travels to the wall of the groove and back. The reflection angle is transferred to the audio signal, meaning that the LT maintains analog sound through the entire process, without any digitization. As a result, the LT cannot differentiate between an audio signal or dirt on the record. To keep your records clean, we recommend a record vacuum cleaner (see our Accessories page).
    DOUBT THAT, and even if thats the case, whats the point? Just a ridiculously
    expensive needle, IMHO.
    like using the Starship Enterprise to go to the store for a slurpee .
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

Page 3 of 7 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
  •