-
Pix, you could have tried responding to the original post on this thread instead of fueling a flame war that has plenty of individual threads you could have gone to and drug back out. At this time both sides have made our point.
I'm guilty, it's hard to let statements go unchecked we feel strongly are not so but let's get this thread back on track.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
RGA, you should price out a starter AN system. Do they still offer the single box CD player at $2500.00? It's not easy to find a place to audition AN though or even dealers in the states. It would seem if any where though possibly LA.
I don't really want to just recommend an AN system because for example the old AN Zero system while terrifically musical and the whole system under $5k there are various limitations that other systems would do quite a bit better and if you value those aspects then the Zero system would come up significantly short.
A few things
1) There are several Audio Note dealers in Los Angeles but the place to audition the best stuff is in Colorado - audiofederation.com
Three in California I know of are:
Deetes Sound Room
Audio Image Ltd.
True Sound
2) They have a new Absolute Zero system (more than $5k now though) and is their entry level - I have requested the system for review. http://audiofederation.com/blog/cate...io/audio-note/
3) They have a new sub $3k cd player - it uses the solid transport that is being used in the top Sim Audio and Bryston machines. The reports from my dealer and a Bryston customer when I was in the store was that the AN one box was considerably better. Pretty tough to impressive the vocal Bryston guru's - they're nearly as bad as me.:yikes:
I am trying to get in some ARC, McIntosh, Shindo systems as well. The Shindo Field coil loudspeakers have been called some of the best available by ears I trust. But way way beyond most people's budget including way beyond mine.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
Pix, you could have tried responding to the original post on this thread instead of fueling a flame war that has plenty of individual threads you could have gone to and drug back out. At this time both sides have made our point.
I'm guilty, it's hard to let statements go unchecked we feel strongly are not so but let's get this thread back on track.
Amen to that Mr. P. With the permission from the rest of you I'd like to forward the wire discussion to the wire forum, from this particular thread. :) ;) Not that the discussion has not been useful, rather because whatever needed to be said, has been. At this point we can simply state that the wiring calls for auditioning and leave it at that. Thanks to all of you for understanding.
If you feel you simply have to discuss something additional, keep in mind that neither headphones nor power conditioners have yet to make an appearance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
This sounds like fun. I'm always up to day-dream about my ideal system.
I'll go for it right now. The following list observes some contraints:
- Stereo, not multi-channel
- Must fit in my current listening room; (I'm building a system, not a house).
- US$ prices, new, in the mid-range: see the total price tag.
Wow, thank you Bill. That looks great. Some follow up questions.
1. What were the components that this gear beat out? Why? Was it the sound quality, the price, something else?
2. Does the gear indicated have a characteristic? Especially considering you are a classical music buff. Example: Amp warm whereas speakers have very bright highs, or the opposite, and so on for the rest of the gear.
3. Now onto the computer stuff. I'm a computer programmer by trade, so this option is particular attractive to me, but it is difficult for me to imagine ( or dream if you will) of a possibility that a computer based system as a source will match a stand alone audio component. Anything you can offer to dispel my fears is most welcome hear.
4. Staying with the computer setup. We definitely need to mention the CODECs that are known to work in our audiophile world. Same would be true for the programs doing the encoding. Rippers is it? You've already mentioned the player so thank you for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
I would listen to completel systems - components change with what they're connected to.
My bias is to HE / Single Ended tube amplifiers.
Thank you being up front about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
But listing components as if a given preamp will always be better in every system is IMO a "lie" .......
Definitely agree with that particular sentence. One of my hopes for this thread was to find "Golden Pairs" components that are known to go together very well and complement each other perfectly.
Huge thanks to all who have replied and followed up so far.:thumbsup:
Rudy
-
Those of us who have been involved in this obsession for a long time have developed tastes, likes and dislikes. The gear we select is based upon those tastes. Some of the preferences we have may not seem rational to someone else.
For instance, I want nothing but tubes in a preamp. Speakers that are in boxes don't interest me at all. Equalizers and tone controls I can do without. Tube driven Eletrostatic speakers are something I can live with. Actually, I do and have for the last 10 years with my current speakers. What I'm trying to say is, you will develop your own likes and dislikes, form your own opinions and ultimately put together a system that satisfies you. It's getting to that point that's a large part of the fun in this hobby.
IMO:
For computer audio your best bet is to forget about CODECS. Store your music as wav files with no compression. If HDD space is a problem get bigger drives. Use drive mirroring to protect your music. As a programmer you know how unreliable HDD's are. I'm a soon to be retired Network Engineer (MCSE, CNE, Cisco, A+ etc) so I have lots of experience replacing HDD's. Sometimes I think HDD means "happy destroying data".
For ripping CD's EAC (Exact Audio Copy) is widely considered to be one of the best around. It does bit for bit ripping.
For computer based audio playback get a good (higher end) sound card and use an external DAC running off the SP/DIF interface. Then you can use your 2 channel system for everything with the DAC's analog outputs going into your preamp or integrated amp. Most of the players are pretty good as long as ASIO is used to bypass the Windows mixer. I've been trying them all and I may stick with Songbird (open source freeware). I've also been using Open Office as a replacement for Microsoft Office and am quite satisfied.
-
Back to the original topic - I think I might include a Squeezebox in my ideal system. I can't help it. I've got to have more stuff to tinker with than just a CD player.
-
Power conditioning is almost like cables, people are divided. I did not think switching a power cord would do anything. One day I borrowed some products to try and one was a Transparent power cord. It did make a pretty good difference. Enough I feel others could easily hear the difference. I kept the one I borrowed and replaced every one in my system that could be replaced. The most gain was noticed in my phono preamp and CD player. Power amps it helped some but the difference was more subtle. The effect was a much quieter background. It's not like you hear noise before adding the cord, it's what you notice not there after the cord. It's something you will probably have to hear to understand. The background is blacker and the sound is less restrained. The presentation has a more pristine quality. The other product I tried which I did think might help was a 6 outlet power conditioner. This went back. I suspect it didn't allow enough current to my Krell amp. The effect, it made the Krell's presentation softer, in a bad way, it decreased the attack or slam. Some years later I saw the PS Audio Quintessence and it mentioned outlets that did not limit current. I gave it a try and it helped my system. In much the same way as the power cords but more subtle, maybe because the cords were in place. I can see these types of products having a varied effect as every one has different electric items plugged into the lines and the service varies from one area to another.
In headphone there's only one word, Sennheiser. It seems here you are either a Senn or Grado person. I bought a pair of Sennheiser HD-600's and was blown away. I didn't know headphones sounded that good. Before buying I did audition some Grado models and they weren't my cup of tea. I found them exagerated in the bass with an overall warmth. I preferred the AKG's I was trying to replace. The HD-600's have a tight bass like I've not heard in phones before, the higher frequencies were extended without being harsh. I've purchased some 580's and a couple portable pair since, as well as a wireless pair for my daughter.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02audionoob
The unilateral comment is amazing. To make a comment with such simple assumption of correctness without acknowledging that there is a debate to be had on the topic is amazing.
And...If there's a difference up to a certain q level, it's debatable where that q level is. Some people seem to think there's a difference between the free interconnects and the inexpensive ones, but not a difference between the inexpensive interconnects and the expensive ones. That sounds like a rationalization to me.
By the way...Just exactly what do you mean by (or, quote,,a "mexican")?
One guy insisted the perp was black or "maybe a mexican".
Notice the quotes around it.
AND MY SCIENCE IS SOUND, but I really don't know why I should come up with
my own argument when there is such a well researched and put together web site already out there.
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
You can chase shadows if you want, I prefer to spend my few bucks on stuff that actually matters, instead of an imported industrial grade item that is made to look like a "specialty"
product.
My favorite wire experience, I was in Walmart buying a battery, in the "car audio"
section they had some pinkish looking 12 guage wire meant for car installs.
It looked suspicuosly like monster cable so I bought a couple of rolls, it was cheap.
Some of the best speaker cable I ever had.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
Those of us who have been involved in this obsession for a long time have developed tastes, likes and dislikes. The gear we select is based upon those tastes. Some of the preferences we have may not seem rational to someone else.
For instance, I want nothing but tubes in a preamp. Speakers that are in boxes don't interest me at all. Equalizers and tone controls I can do without. Tube driven Eletrostatic speakers are something I can live with. Actually, I do and have for the last 10 years with my current speakers. What I'm trying to say is, you will develop your own likes and dislikes, form your own opinions and ultimately put together a system that satisfies you. It's getting to that point that's a large part of the fun in this hobby.
IMO:
For computer audio your best bet is to forget about CODECS. Store your music as wav files with no compression. If HDD space is a problem get bigger drives. Use drive mirroring to protect your music. As a programmer you know how unreliable HDD's are. I'm a soon to be retired Network Engineer (MCSE, CNE, Cisco, A+ etc) so I have lots of experience replacing HDD's. Sometimes I think HDD means "happy destroying data".
For ripping CD's EAC (Exact Audio Copy) is widely considered to be one of the best around. It does bit for bit ripping.
For computer based audio playback get a good (higher end) sound card and use an external DAC running off the SP/DIF interface. Then you can use your 2 channel system for everything with the DAC's analog outputs going into your preamp or integrated amp. Most of the players are pretty good as long as ASIO is used to bypass the Windows mixer. I've been trying them all and I may stick with Songbird (open source freeware). I've also been using Open Office as a replacement for Microsoft Office and am quite satisfied.
A FEW POINTS.
One, you dont need a soundcard with a usb dac.
Codecs are fine, especially Flac or windows lossless, if you can tell any difference you are a German shepard.
And external HD'S are one of the best inventions ever
Everything I have is on at least two drives, except the CD collection, which is on the CD collection.
One thing I don't understand, who is buying these "media servers" for hundreds, or thousands when a three hundred dollar E-MACHINE computer will do the same thing?
Or any old computer, or a home built one?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy Gireyev
Definitely agree with that particular sentence. One of my hopes for this thread was to find "Golden Pairs" components that are known to go together very well and complement each other perfectly.
People often get on my case for suggesting system approaches but usually they follow similar logic only to a lesser degree.
Take the integrated amplifier - the best ones it is said have an advantage over separates because the two parts, Preamp/power amp are designed by the same manufacturer with short signal paths and are "perfectly tuned" to operate together. Makes lots of sense.
Then you have the makers that make great preamps and power amps - so you buy the matched pair and off you go. Makes sense.
But then you have the consumer who believes he/she knows more than the manufacturers. They buy a tube preamp from a maker who believes in tube superiority and that SS is to be shunned - shun the non believer - Charlie!! Then the consumer buys the preamp and then goes and drops large coin on a big SS power amp - the SS maker believes tubes should have died out decades ago and believes SS is technically superior and therefore is superior. I have seen people spend tens of thousands of dollars mixing such dissimilar designs and do what the makers themselves would be and are dead set against (not including the hybrid makers - personally have not heard a great one at any price).
But even those who do believe in the notion of system matching and synergy seem to always stop at the amplifier, when in reality the entire audio system needs to be viewed as ONE machine. From source to speakers in a 2 source system with preamp, power amp transport and dac - there could be more than 10 different cables in the system. Buy a new speaker cable or interconnect is pure luck if it works better or worse. Having the same wire from cartridge to speaker voice coil and every single wire inside the amplifiers and cd players and all the cabling connecting them would be more of a match if they were all exactly the same - I know of only a few companies that even think about this stuff because they have actual metallurgical engineering science behind them.
The system approach is starting to become more popular - and it makes sense for the consumer to actually hear the designer's intent. Krell now has speakers - so they have a complete system, and many others at entry prices like Rega are doing the same.
This is not to say that you won't prefer something else - say a different speaker or a different sounding CD player - but at least with the system approach you have an idea about the sonic aesthetic or sonic "goals" of the company. Of course there are system approaches that involve a mix and match of companies where both companies like to "show" together and you see this at the big trade shows. Wilson Loudspeakers are the choice of speaker for ARC amplifiers for instance so it makes a lot of sense that if you want to audition ARC why not audition them with what ARC believes is the best speaker - Wilson. Of course it backfires if you go and listen and you don't like it then you could conceivably cross both ARC and Wilson off your "to buy" lists. But makers like Shindo and AN have the same issue. If you don't like the system's sound then you may never buy anything from either of them. But these designers can live with that. Peter Qvortrup of Audio Note hates having his components auditioned out of system because if the sound is poor and his speaker is used with a SS amp the auditioner may blame the speaker even though he expressly states that they're designed for his amps. And if designing this is as much art as it is electronics engineering I have no doubt that they can be more than a little upset when in their view the poor sound was because of the SS amp.
Two recent system reviews - at stupid prices but it's important to hear this stuff at very high levels to see what is truly possible - and then work down to your budget
Shindo's crazy expensive system http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/m.../roadtour.html
Audio Note's crazy expensive system http://www.audionote.co.uk/articles/..._Note_engl.pdf
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
Wire is not wire, no matter what articles you pull off the internet. The Mac guy went against the grain to make publicity for himself and his company. Like any product there's bound to be one that doesn't do what it says but for the most part people will notice gain from better cabling. This is something one just has to try for themselves with an objective mind. You have to have gear that is good enough to reflect the difference and as any other component in the audio chain performance can vary with synergy of the system. To say you can measure sound with a volt meter is ridiculous, if that was so most all components would sound the same whether it's an amp or what ever. Sound of cables is a hotly debated topic and I'd urge any one not to take any one's word at this but definitely try for yourself. The naysayers could keep you from a valid gain in performance while if you are one that doesn't hear enough gain to warrant the expense then you wasted money. Any shop that sells higher end components has loaner cables or online dealer will allow 30 day trial. So nothing is lost by trying and then you will know which camp you will be in.
If one has been reading this site I'm sure you've read one of the many prior debates on this site that have been about cables
Wire is wire.
Simple as that.:1:
-
You mean, "Agree to disagree but disagree to wire", Pix?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
Those of us who have been involved in this obsession for a long time have developed tastes, likes and dislikes. The gear we select is based upon those tastes.
Precisely the info I am after.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
Some of the preferences we have may not seem rational to someone else.
Well I can't speak for someone else. But for me personally. If you state your biases, likes and dislikes and then explain your gear selection process. The characteristics of the gear you chose and the characteristics of the gear you passed on. Those three will combine to give me a reasonably clear picture that I may or may not choose to use later on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
What I'm trying to say is, you will develop your own likes and dislikes, form your own opinions and ultimately put together a system that satisfies you. It's getting to that point that's a large part of the fun in this hobby.
This is a given and was understood to be so, long before this thread was started. The object of this thread is not to replace my own selection process, but to augment it and give it context with experience of others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
For computer audio your best bet is to forget about CODECS. Store your music as wav files with no compression.
Hmmm. I just had one of those Duh! moments. Thank you Joe. Of course, this makes more sense. In fact I was looking for this exact option when I purchased my Creative Zen, a few years back, only to learn that first of all it does not offer that option, and second of all Personal Audio Players and Audiophile sound quality go together pretty much like oil and water. :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
For computer based audio playback get a good (higher end) sound card and use an external DAC running off the SP/DIF interface.
Hmmm, I was planning to bypass the whole sound card business, and just go for the external USB based DAC. My previous experience with the latter tells me that they are less convenient than sound cards and don't really replace them. But with the specialized application, I may be able to utilize them for this specific task of music reproduction.
Sounds cards, have to deal with a lot of noise issues on the motherboard, and my previous ones did not do a stellar job of overcoming that problem. My next PC will most likely be a Core i7 with a 1333MHz bus speed. That's a lot of noise to overcome, not to mention CPU and Power Supply fans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
Power conditioning is almost like cables, people are divided.
Yes I was afraid of that, but I'm hoping some semblance of a civil discussion will ensue that will provide valuable info. Like one you gave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
In headphone there's only one word, Sennheiser.
Wow, there's something I didn't see coming. Do you happen to remember which Grados, or even AKGs, you auditioned?
RGA Thanks for sharing your point of view and for the review links, although the second one does not seem to be forthcoming with the pricing, unless I missed it.
Rudy
-
Rudy
The pricing on the second one is "if you have to ask then you can't afford it." I'll give you the turntable price
The MC cartridge step up transformer that just powers the phono cartridge is $8,675.00US.
The Turntable with arm runs about $80,000 and their top cartridge (and what else would you use if you can afford $80k already) is I believe another $12k+ The turntable system alone is going to run a little more than $100,000. The top DAC is $76,000. So my bet is the system there would be running close to half a million bucks.
The scary thing is that this review kind of suggests that the TT3 is some kind of bargain compared to even more crazy expensive turntables from competitors http://www.audionote.co.uk/articles/...s/HFC10_AN.pdf
Bob Neil I have spoken to on other forums and he's a pretty passionate audiophile/reviewer turned dealer - he has the price lists for a lot of the stuff. I am just thankful they make stuff that is somewhat affordable on a teacher's salary. http://www.amherstaudio.com/
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
A FEW POINTS.
One, you dont need a soundcard with a usb dac.
Codecs are fine, especially Flac or windows lossless, if you can tell any difference you are a German shepard.
And external HD'S are one of the best inventions ever
Everything I have is on at least two drives, except the CD collection, which is on the CD collection.
One thing I don't understand, who is buying these "media servers" for hundreds, or thousands when a three hundred dollar E-MACHINE computer will do the same thing?
Or any old computer, or a home built one?
I don't like or use USB connections for music. I make my living with computers. The fact that USB connections require CPU time is a no no for me. USB was invented to make it easy for the average "dolt" to connect devices to a PC. By "dolt" I mean the consumer who won't read a manual and complains something doesn't work properly.
If you can cheaply purchase large HDD's why bother with any CODEC's at all. The less you do to any signal the better.
I build my own PC's. I've been doing so since I built a 386 based machine. The one before that was an original IBM. I still use the old IBM keyboards. They have the feel of a Selectric typewriter. I would never waste my money on a "media server" and I tell my clients both business and personal just that.
-
Rudy:
Your questions are sound, sensible and thought provoking. In my case, most of my gear is there to complement my speakers. To paraphrase what I said earlier, If it ain't large flat and dipolar I'm not interested. If you are not familiar with Magneplanars, ESL's or full range Ribbon loudspeakers it's very difficult if not impossible to describe their unique sound. However, if you like the sound of panels no box will ever satisfy you. Hearing some panels properly set up is the only way to understand this. Panel owners know this. All who have heard panels understand it although panels may not be their "Holy Grail".
Large panels just don't sound like anything else. I know that a well set up system will cause the speakers to "disappear". With most boxes you need to be in the sweet spot for this to happen. That's not so with panels. People come to my house, stand in front of my ESL's (3 feet away) while they are playing reasonably loud and ask, "Where is the sound coming from?". That just doesn't happen with any box speakers.
So, the reason I chose most of my gear is because it made my ESL's sound better. I really don't care to much about anything else. As I'm writing this I'm listening to Gota, Chillin' Children, it keeps drawing my attention.
As far as I'm concerned any speaker that is hard to use for background music because the music keeps drawing you in is for me. That's what panels in general and ESL's in particular do for me.
If you're ever in the Philadelphia area let me know. You can come over, we'll hoist a few and listen to some music.
That invite is extended to the rest of you, even Auric:prrr:.
Mile Davis, Tutu is on now. I don't want to type anymore.
-
"Wire is wire."
spoken like a TRUE receiver owner. he doesnt know what high end sound is about.
-
RGA, in my experience I have found a couple of your statements in total agreement. I have not had good success mixing tubes and solid state, pre/power. Maybe there's some that work and some claim to have the proper impedance but it just didn't sound right to me. I also subscribe to same brand systems to an extent. Maybe AN is the exception but I haven't heard any electronics manufacturer put out a decent line of speakers and that includes Krell. Krell's may not be bad at half or third the price but dollar to dollar Dyn's kill them bad. Linn could be an exception too.
Rudy the AKG's I had were only like a K-240. The Grado I heard a few pair, I can't remember what the models were but I went up to a model just under $300.00 at the time. I found the basic characteristic of the Grado the same.
-
"Mile Davis, Tutu is on now. I don't want to type anymore"
YES, one of my favorite miles albums. dont get me wrong, i have the miles/gil LP set and miles/coltrane as well but TUTU is right up there. a modern classic.
if you like that, try 'siesta'. marcus again but it sounds slightly like 'sketches' in its own way.the vinyl sound is better than the cd sound.
-
I have it. Mile is represented very well in my collection (44LP's and CD's). I wrote a database to keep track of my collection. I just checked it that's why I know how many by Miles. Right now I'm listening to Birdland from Heavy Weather. LP of course
-
aaaaaaaHHHH-weather report
do you have 'sportin life'? methinks you'sll like it. but then yer a smartass and alredy HAVE it.
anyway, my favorite cut is 'confians' which played on the jazz station here in LA without a back-announcement for a LONG time before i found out what it was. the whole album is good but confians is special. it does NOT sound like WR at all. i like to put that cut on and play GUESS THE BAND!
-
hifitommy:
WXPN (U of PA) used to have a theme song for one of their DJ's that they never identified. It took me several years to find out it was Young Rabbits by The Jazz Crusaders. I bought Happy Again for that one tune.
I have just about all of Weather Reports recordings. I don't have Domino Theory or Live In Tokyo.
-
Sorry to come in so late, Rudy, but I've been puttering and muttering about and needed to think upon a few things before I dipped the quill....
Getting back to the initial question, I would start by stating that as much as I love the equipment, the music comes first. In saying this, a "dream" system would include, first and foremost, the best and most enjoyable recordings available. It's easy to spend money on certain recordings, classical say, where the variety of recordings of the same piece is enormous. My father loves music, but I think he was more interested in the composition and not the artist when he bought his albums. Since becoming an active listener, I have developed preferences of artist, conductor, and recording company. The diligence takes more work, but pays off in dividends in the end.
A second point is spending some money on ensuring that the conditions for listening are optimal. Architects of dwellings seldom design sound rooms, and various products are available to ensure that the sound issuing from your speakers is balanced, musical and enjoyable. I understand Corning makes good room treatment materials; there are many others, but maybe someone else here can steer you in the right direction. Furthering the point along, I use an equalizer (gasp) while I listen to music. The ability to accentualte certain portions of the music and compensate for a speakers/cables or what not's short comings gives me comfort. I like to twiddle, and armed with my trust SPL meter, I reckon the sound that I listen to is somewhat respectable.
Following this up, I would pay some attention to the components that are enrolled to sample these recordings. While I don't have the experience of listening to any of the newest and best available equipment, there is no doubt that the improvements made over the years are real and significant. I recently bought a second-hand California Audio Labs Tercet Mk. III and find that player amazing. No doubt newer players are much better; but the satisfaction of listening to a musically involving player at such a reasonable price keeps me patting myself on the back.
A good LP player is almost essential in my book. Many recordings won't make it to CD or whatever comes next. Even if they do, used LP's are generally quite affordable and often increase in value. Second, LP's, IMO, are tangible and nostalgic. Like opening a good cigar or bottle of wine, the satisfaction of opening an LP sleeve is almost magical. Good players are available, and I would invest well in one that has withstood the tests of time. Dual, Linn Sondek and Sota all have very well established reputations and should last many years. Again, investing in these brands nearly assures that, should things turn bad, resale may be possible.
Your taste in music should have a bearing on the speakers you will choose. At the hazard of sounding over-grand, I would assert that no one speaker design can produce all music with equal aplomb. Certain music is simply stirring whilst played on planars, while other material is just as incredible on concentric drivers, etc. Like someone noted earlier, my musical tastes has become increasingly attuned to more intimate music, such as jazz and ensemble pieces. I still love big music, and play Pink Floyd and Beethoven when the mood comes. I have yet to find a speaker that covers all the territory, but Tannoy's higher priced prestige speakers are pretty darn good contenders. I have listened for some time to the Westminsters, Churchills, Signatures, Edinburghs and Studio Red Monitors, and can attest to their life-like and unstrained musicality.
Like speakers, the amplifiers and preamplifiers should consider the material that will be presented. Tubes are wonderful, and some argument has been made recently that they are capable of a wide range of flexibility with just about any material. Personally, I like the way they present the "intimate music" I referred to earlier. VTL makes very nice and reasonably priced amplifiers. Conrad Johnson is also a very fine manufacturer and are not over priced (yes, there are high-priced amps out there, but there are many reasonably priced ones out there, too!). Solid state wise, there are many brands available, including Accuphase and McIntosh. I listened to all of these brands, and the experience has been quite satisfactory. I'd lean toward to CJ, but I'll change my mind tomorrow....
A good tuner is also a good buy. Although radio is going to hell in a handbasket, I don't forsee its demise as iminent. As in all things, one should play into a manufacturer's strength. Magnum Dynalab seems to have the tuner down pat, I would certainly look into one of theirs.
No comment about interconnects and cables. Not my territory....
No doubt, my choices are a bit more old fashioned than some of the recommendations listed above. I have great respect for the new developments, but, sadly I have not been able to indulge myself in staying abreast of the newest and the brightest. Personally, I am becoming a bit of a nostalgic buff, in a sense. I expect shipment of a couple of older Kenwood units: a KA-6006 integrated and KT-6007 tuner in a day or two. By today's standards, they probably could be a lot better. Sansui made excellent integrateds and tuners back in the day as well, and many AU717's etc. are available in Craigslist and the like if you are interested.
Sorry to ramble on so, guys. Just thought I'd throw a chip in and see how far I could take it....
-
Well said Auric!
However, I'm puzzled. You like and own a CAL CD player, recommend a Linn or SOTA TT and still stick with vintage "mid-fi" electronics. I don't get it. Kenwood gear is OK, but you would probably get better sound with gear aimed at a higher sound quality level.
You talked about the room. It is possibly the most important component of all. I knocked down a wall, remodeled and redecorated my entire first floor for better sound. It was worth it.
You mentioned Tannoy speakers. They would sound "yummy" with some tubes. Maybe a pair of SET amps and a CJ preamp.
Not criticizing, just wondering.
-
Quote:
JoeE SP9 wrote: "You like and own a CAL CD player, recommend a Linn or SOTA TT and still stick with vintage "mid-fi" electronics."
I think that falls in one of those "different strokes for different folks" categories. Different people listen for different things.
While it is popular among some of the cognescenti to hear "massive" differences in electronics there are a lot of people who find the differences between amps far more modest than the differences between speakers or sources. I know in my case I made my last switch from solid state amplification back to tubes based far more on a love for the general tube concept than any sonic ascendancy into heaven.
I've got no problem with a fellow who puts speakers and sources several notches above amplifiers in the selection process. Of course, that is the neat thing about this hobby. With the extraordinarily wide range of equipment available on today's market there are a lot of different ways to chase one's dream.
-
Not knowing what the Kenwood cost, it could have been too good to pass up but I agree targeting a NAD, Cambridge or Rotel may have been a better way to go. Not that they are the best but I know Auric shops on a budget and these could be gotten reasonable if keeping an eye out. Certain Kenwood tuners are hard to beat, especially for reception.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Vintage tuners
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
Not knowing what the Kenwood cost, it could have been too good to pass up but I agree targeting a NAD, Cambridge or Rotel may have been a better way to go. Not that they are the best but I know Auric shops on a budget and these could be gotten reasonable if keeping an eye out. Certain Kenwood tuners are hard to beat, especially for reception.
In fact the '70s is considered the high point of tuners by some with many notable models from Kenwood and Sansui, and also Denon, Pioneer, and others. This was the heyday of analog tuners. The aforementioned makers competed with others in the higher end models to make ultimate "super tuners".
See a nice pic of an upper mid-range Denon TU-500 owned. Kinda sorry I sold; I owned it for about 25 years and it was in mint condition. However I wasn't listening to much radio by the time I sold and even less today, given the state of CBC Radio 2. I replaced the TU-500 with a very decent, digitally tuned Denon TU-767, paying less than a third of what I sold the former for.
But older tuners, especially those from the '80s and '90s, are a huge bargain. Tuners hold up well over the years and there is very little reason to buy an new one when there is a great selection on eBay, etc.
Check out 'Tuner Information Center' for great info on vintage tuners.
-
Hey Guys!
I was just curious. Linn TT', CAL CD player, Tannoy speakers and a vintage Kenwood amp. I would question anyone who chose that combination. I fully understand about working with a modest budget. I have been operating under budgetary restraints for the last couple of years. A divorce settlement and a son in a private college have made things quite tight. Thankfully, September will let me see some daylight. Divorcement settlement paid and senior year for son mean, I can finally buy some of the gear I've been lusting after.
Did anyone ever notice what my tuner is?
-
Well, it depends on which Kenwood amp, they made some decent higher end stuff. What i mean by higher end is better than their mass market, it would compete today with some of the mid-fi gear. The D series I owned was very good, the Basic line was pretty good, right after the D they built separates I think "L" series that was pretty well regarded and I'm not sure if or what they did similar to this in the 70's. Kenwood was a firm believer integrated amps was the best way to go. They never went as far upstream as Marantz or Denon though.
That reminds me, i saw a Yamaha M4 on CL, the ad said it was Class A. Anyone know about this amp?
-
diffs in electronics
"people who find the differences between amps far more modest than the differences between speakers "
yes, and no. once you start this trek, you find speakers that elucidate the music, then you change or borrow a piece of electronics that opens up the world. i have had some pretty good electronics in years past and been blindsided by a piece new to my system.
example: i had quatre and nad preamps that sounded great and thought i was moving up the chain with the adcom gfp565 with its glowing review in stereophile. had that for years, it was good.
THEN i was in audio den in van nuys california and a guy brought in an audio research SP3A1 in to trade for another piece. i snagged it for a song, took it home and was FLOORED by the improvement in sound. i wasnt sure WHAT to expect and certainly not that.
and that was with an oscillating power supply (a defect in need of repair). it went back to minnesota and came back just fine. years later a distortion reared its ugly head in the ARC and i put back in the quatre pre. GREAT. oh, its not as good as the arc but it made me glad i didnt dump it.
dont be so quick to think that electronics are much the same, theyre NOT. the more you improve the system, the better you can hear improvements. thats why we hear wire diffs and pursue better sounding wire. and you dont need to go broke doing that either. therein lies many other adventures and stories.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
RGA, in my experience I have found a couple of your statements in total agreement. I have not had good success mixing tubes and solid state, pre/power. Maybe there's some that work and some claim to have the proper impedance but it just didn't sound right to me. I also subscribe to same brand systems to an extent. Maybe AN is the exception but I haven't heard any electronics manufacturer put out a decent line of speakers and that includes Krell. Krell's may not be bad at half or third the price but dollar to dollar Dyn's kill them bad. Linn could be an exception too.
Rudy the AKG's I had were only like a K-240. The Grado I heard a few pair, I can't remember what the models were but I went up to a model just under $300.00 at the time. I found the basic characteristic of the Grado the same.
Turnabout is fair because in general I agree with the statement that: "A jack of all trades is the master of none" and if you have an "expert" in amplifier design does not necessarily mean he will be an expert in loudspeaker design." I have not heard the Krell speakers but I'd still like to hear an all Krell system because I want to KNOW what Krell believes is the pinnacle of music reproduction. Their speakers are expensive - this is what they claim to be the "THE" best they make or what they believe is the sound that they are striving for. I am not a Krell fan in the least bit but it may be that the speakers were to blame or a mismatch. If I can audition a whole system I might better know what they're after.
To follow up with what you say - LINN makes a complete system but generally the Sources are considerably better than their amplifiers or speakers.
I am not as knowledgeable about Shindo so can't really comment and as You know Audio Note does not have to be a master of everything because they bought out the master's of other fields. They hired Guy Adams of Voyd turntables and bought out the terrific SystemDek company. So AN really didn't have to be a jack of all trades designing and building everything from the ground up - 80-90% of the work was done and making improvements on a proven design is far less work than starting from scratch. And of course the Speakers were designed by Peter Snell - in fact those speakers put Snell Acoustics on the map - they were the only ones designed by Snell - he died and everything that followed is lesser. AN one company made up of several other companies and designers who specialized in their respective fields with one set of ears behind the company dictating what sound he is after and then goes out and buys or has designed what he is after. You want to make a filterless DAC because prototypes have sounded good but you need more expertise? What does AN do? Go out and hire the design engineer at Sonic Frontiers (already an industry leader in tube amps and DACs) to work with the guys on your team.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlsstl
I think that falls in one of those "different strokes for different folks" categories. Different people listen for different things.
While it is popular among some of the cognescenti to hear "massive" differences in electronics there are a lot of people who find the differences between amps far more modest than the differences between speakers or sources. I know in my case I made my last switch from solid state amplification back to tubes based far more on a love for the general tube concept than any sonic ascendancy into heaven.
I've got no problem with a fellow who puts speakers and sources several notches above amplifiers in the selection process. Of course, that is the neat thing about this hobby. With the extraordinarily wide range of equipment available on today's market there are a lot of different ways to chase one's dream.
I'm going to agree mostly with SS amplifiers. I've heard a few vintage amps versus some new $2k ones and you know I would probably agree - there are some very good vintage amps and SS power just isn't very different - more power maybe and newer better parts (but costly) and in many cases if you buy used for the same money you can do a lot better than a new model. A 1990's Sugden A21a IMO is pretty tough to better when we're talking SS amplifiers (assuming you have reasonably efficient speakers). It's the only SS amp I would part with my money for. Not because it's necessarily the best (for whatever that loaded word means) but because the sound is "right" it's well built, it is dead easy to use, it has no annoying artifacts that many other SS amps possess, it has enough power to run most speakers and when you sell it you will get pretty much what you paid for it.
You get single ended topology (SET) but without the worry over flea power or tube replacement. The best SE tubes sound better but let's put things into perspective - and consider the price and not just spend for spending sake. The a21a good enough to be a take it to the grave amp by a supremely reputable company.
Tubes soundly wildly different from each other and in a tube bases system - amplifiers make a much more noticeable difference (even in those blind tests people love) tubes sound different.
Turnatables make staggering differences as you move up the line. Speakers obviously have the largest frequency response differences - I do not believe frequency response is nearly as important as some give it credit for simply because the professional reviewers often BUY out of their own money speakers that measure quite a lot worse than what are deemed better measuring speakers which directly flies in the face of frequency being the critical factor.
-
I bought the two Kenwood units mentioned for $100.00. Except for a burned out power light (that was allegedly repaired by the seller for an additional $25.00) on the amp, the units are described and appear (per photos) to be in near mint condition. A few scrapes, but nothing to write home about. Mr. P is right: I shop on a budget, but I think finding diamonds in the rough like these is part of the fun.
JoeE, your question is a fair one, and I hope this is a sensible answer. Part of my rationale for buying the Kennys was based partially on sentimentality. The feel and appearance of some of the older stuff is satisfying and emotionally comforting to me. I have little doubt that performance wise they may well be overshadowed by more esteemed units made by Accuphase or other vintage units, but the price was right and I reckon the sound issuing from them will be very satisfactory. Having been on the planet for a while, I hope that some of the electronics have mellowed somewhat, and will make the listening all the more enjoyable. I'll let you know my thoughts when it's plugged in.
The questions about synergy are also well considered. For me, the source is an important issue. The CAL is a very fine, high fidelity piece. I reckon that the Kenny amp should handle it well. The resolution of the player should be fairly well discerned by the amp--with some loss of fidelity, but not enough to bother me hopefully--which may even soften things up a tinge. Again, I'll let you know.
The seventies (these were produced in '74) was a good era for SS, and manufacturers like Kenwood, Sansui and other Japanese brands produced some pretty amazing units then. The comments made Feanor regarding the tuners echoes my sentiments.
I have no illusions that the Kennys were not among the best vintage gear in the market and that there are other models that are very highly sought out, but for the price and condition, they seemed a baragin that could not be easily ignored. If they suit my tastes, they may stick around awhile; if they sound like hell, I will let them go with little more than a blink. Something tells me that they will sound very nice; their apparent quality of manufacture appears to indicate that they are robust enough to hang in for quite a few years. Who knows? Who cares? At 125 smackers, why not?
More to follow....
-
I believe a flat frequency response is what we are told we want but when it comes down to it I doubt many people really enjoy listening to a flat response. I don't have time right now to get into why I make this statement.
-
I could not agree more. As a baseline, it is very useful. Whether to cut or not to cut, that is the question!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifitommy
spoken like a TRUE receiver owner. he doesnt know what high end sound is about.
Spoken like a true audio snob who uses gear to justify his neurosis.
If you have a Hubble telescope or just a backyard model it doesnt really matter if the planet you're looking for doesnt exist.
Due to the law of deminishing returns there is only going to be a few percent
(if that) difference between a "receiver" and high end gear.
That extra few percent is what you're paying for.
This is typical, a webpage full of explanation of why what you are "hearing" is more between your ears than in your ears, why what you are claiming doesnt exist ,
and you shoot the messenger.
DOESNT MATTER, I know enough about the falibility of a human witness that I KNOW
that an "audiophile" talking about "air", etc IS FULL OF IT as a general rule.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
Spoken like a true audio snob who uses gear to justify his neurosis.
If you have a Hubble telescope or just a backyard model it doesnt really matter if the planet you're looking for doesnt exist.
Due to the law of deminishing returns there is only going to be a few percent
(if that) difference between a "receiver" and high end gear.
That extra few percent is what you're paying for.
This is typical, a webpage full of explanation of why what you are "hearing" is more between your ears than in your ears, why what you are claiming doesnt exist ,
and you shoot the messenger.
DOESNT MATTER, I know enough about the falibility of a human witness that I KNOW
that an "audiophile" talking about "air", etc IS FULL OF IT as a general rule.:1:
Pix, I agree! ... well, except the part about the "air". :thumbsup:
-
Hubble telescope or just a backyard model
with the backyard model, there will be planets you dont know exist, even when they are in plain sight with a better telescope. when i went from a vivitar camera to a canon sure shot (the first one and it wasnt that expensive), i couldnt believe the clarity and detail differences between the two cameras!
granted, there ARE receivers that will elucidate the differences of detail, dynamics, and imaging but they arent denons or marantz. they are rotel, and B&K. the higher end of marantz or integra may also suffice.
it has nothing to do with neurosis, just discovery. once you hear the better sound, you are anxious to move toward that. the AIR that feanor mentions is part of the improved definition of better electronics. like a better lens as in the canon/vivitar difference. the clearly defined space (and whats in those spaces) of either the camera or electronics.
and it REALLY doesnt have to be costly-the nad 3020 was a perfect example, high end for cheeeeep. better electronics have better internal components and power supplies, hence better performance heard.
if what you have is 'good enough' then stop there but dont ask everyone to agree that its as good as it gets.
-
And I think that at this point, there should be a discussion on the "passion" versus "rational" oriented issues of audiophilism. I subscribe to the point of view that while there is a level of excellence to aspire to, decisions made as to equipment used ultimately strikes a visceral chord. Call it performance or sentiment, the effect is the same and that is where the apple falls, my dear Newton!
I am sure my recent additions will not deliver the same delivery of performance, spec-wise, as current gear. On the other hand, I anticipate being quite thrilled with them nevertheless.
The rest is just gravy.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auricauricle
And I think that at this point, there should be a discussion on the "passion" versus "rational" oriented issues of audiophilism. I subscribe to the point of view that while there is a level of excellence to aspire to, decisions made as to equipment used ultimately strikes a visceral chord. Call it performance or sentiment, the effect is the same and that is where the apple falls, my dear Newton!
I am sure my recent additions will not deliver the same delivery of performance, spec-wise, as current gear. On the other hand, I anticipate being quite thrilled with them nevertheless.
The rest is just gravy.
Yes, that's the divide. Were we to have our gear behind a black curtain I suspect we'd save a bundle on stuff we can't actually hear.
Were we to purchase only on line without placing trust in the car, loan or real estate salespersons (currently working on commission) who said yes to each of our questions and offered endless assurances before the write up.
If they avoided suggesting insuring our satisfaction by purchase of any one of a dozen little 'special' packages proclaiming perfection if you'll just open me and connect.
Alas we have many goals when we shop for gear and the makers shape the experience as much as an EQ does the sound.
So, not having that block to the gear, or isolation from the sales 'experience' we create elaborate rationalization upon rationalization why this or that device is the be all or end all in the quest, this day, week or month.
Alas the '70's to '80's were, from my experience when the best of the best had been invented and introduced. Since then it more about spin than sound reproduction. Tubes were left behind for a reason (the wear, unlike solid state).
Perfection remains to be revealed.
Close your eyes and when settings are flat. Ask yourself: is what you hear transporting you to the real event? Verify this with the wife or one of the kids. They probably can hear better anyway.
If not, is it the space or can you compensate with a tweak or two on the EQ?
Audit this on another system until you find that closed eye experience. Once this happens you stop the quest and enjoy the music.
Some variations between vocal, jazz or classical may be presented by some speakers better, but you can have three sets or a good EQ.
The rest is bliss... '
-
You know I find some of the comments here insulting. Especially the ones that incenuate that people are so inadequate that we would buy whatever some one tells us is good. That's the largest load of crap you all dish out. Either you've never heard any true high end gear or you just like talking out of your rear. I've heard a lot of high end gear I would not own, like the current high dollar Classe' or much of the current ARC. Sorry if that offends any owners but it's my taste. The sales people were not short on praise of this gear. In fact, I brought home some ARC separates to try before buying my current CJ gear. The CJ was bought with out audition with the agreement it could be returned as no one in my area sells it. The ARC did not impress me, the CJ was like, just what the doc ordered. So don't go saying we will buy based on whatever sales people feed us.
Manufacturers abandoned tubes because they smelled money, just like when the IC was introduced. i don't think any one with audio knowledge would praise the sound quality attributes of IC's. I do have to hand it to ARC for keeping the tube technology going. Tube gear vary in sound and performance the same way solid state does.
|