What audio brands are you not attracted to?

[Ajani]

Just because your goal is to have components of one brand don't mean you have to buy them all at once, matching gear can be a goal and just go about it one piece at a time.

Yep... that's what I'm saying... you don't need to buy the entire system at once, but if you hear a really great setup at your dealer, you can start with just one piece and buy the rest of the setup in time...

Whether they admit it or not most high end manufacturers have a certain sound of their own. Whether be created on purpose or just there due to topology. When components play together with the same sonic signature the result in most instance is very good.

That sounds like something I would say... I've never bought into this HiFi nonsense where all manufacturers claim that their products are truer to the live performance than everyone else's... Some brands aim for PRAT, others for detail, some for warmth and easy listening, some for tonally neutrality, others for dynamic impact... some aim for a bit of all, but are generally masters of none...

I find manufacturers generally have a house sound... and so you don't need to buy the most expensive products in their line, to get a good dose of the manufacturer's sound....

[hermanv]

Or brands that you consider to be over-rated? Here I'll start.. B&W, McIntosh, NAD, Klipsch

cheers,
elapsed

I was in general agreement about the McIntosh until I heard their insanely priced monoblocks driving their very expensive if not insanely priced Mac speakers. I was impressed while expecting not to be.

A quick note on Maggies: Famous for being placement and room acoustics sensitive as well as needing a very low source impedance amp with excellent damping.

[elapsed]

I was in general agreement about the McIntosh until I heard their insanely priced monoblocks driving their very expensive if not insanely priced Mac speakers. I was impressed while expecting not to be.

I recently auditioned an $85,000 system consisting of McIntosh MC-500 pre, MC-1201 monoblocks, XRT1K loudspeakers, and fronted by a fully loaded Linn LP12 (Lingo/Keel/Ekos/Akiva, my dream $20,000 turntable). Neutral and boring were the only words that come to mind. I'd love to give this gorgeous system a better chance, but I suspect the room was letting her down. The little Naim integrated in the next room for $1,800 was giving this entire McIntosh system a run for its money

I'm certain it often comes down to a poor auditioning room.. has anyone else had this experience?

cheers,
elapsed

[hermanv]

I'm certain it often comes down to a poor auditioning room.. has anyone else had this experience?

cheers,
elapsed

Absolutely!

[RGA]

The system matched approach limits shoppers because as Mr. P noted there are few companies who make the whole chain and even fewer of those few that make "world class" components in each area. The saying "jack of all trades but a master at none" will no doubt creep into the minds of consumers. Audio Note is not really different because in fact they bought the platforms of many other "masters". The speakers are in fact revamped original Snells - Snell and LL Beranek in 1940 were where the speakers originated and essentially put Snell on the map - He died in 1982 and since then the mighty Snell brand has slowly steadily fallen apart with newer worse sounding designs. And this goes to many other components they make - they hired the top designers of other companies like Sonic Frontiers, Voyd, Systemdeck and co-work with other companies like SEAS, Bosendorfer, and Rega. So they are not jack of all trades as an individual but share the work in a sense under one umbrella. Still it is one person behnd the helm that decides which turntable maker to buy out, which designer to hire, which capacitor sounds better in which part of which amp, which transformer will match sonically with the speaker, which wires to use, and the resulting sound. Very few makers do that. They make a speaker and you don;t have any idea what the belief system of the designer is - except that the speaker needs a min of 50 watts and a max of 200 watts. Therefore, all amplifiers must sound the same and react the same to the loudspeaker. Not So IMO

The other suggestion (and obviously more practical) was made by Ajani is to listen to a complete system the dealer has pieced together - the dealer spends all day with the stuff and likely has pieced together the "best matches" - at least the best matches of the gear he carries. You may not always agree but I find I agree with the dealer at Soundhounds in most cases. He has say 8 big SS and 6 Tube amp makers to mix and match with a B&W or Paradigm or Magnepan they usually get the best sound from the speakers that you can probably get. But you need a dealer that carries a wide array of gear, has listened to virtually everything and who you KNOW has a similar ear to you and while cares about earning profit does actually care that you as a customer enjoy your stereo. I've come across 1 dealer in 20 years that I trust to do those things and actually cares about music reproduction - most of the rest are used car salesman selling Chevy one week and stereos the next.

[hermanv]

RGA: I largely agree.

Obviously the speaker designer companies profit motive and the dealers profit motive will color their choices. It's not necessarily a deception, they may actually hear what they want to hear.

In either case, IMHO this is the reason that the dedicated individual or enthusiast who takes the time to agonize over every detail will get the better results. This applies to both he designer and the dealer. It is one reason that old established companies do better, they have paid off the loans or the building for the business and can afford to put some principles first and profit second.

[IBSTORMIN]

Cerwin Vega, JBL, Infinity & Klipsch all sound fine for the money... Plus you should keep in mind that most people only hear these brands in best buy and with some ultra cheapo receiver... not on a good quality 2 channel rig...

To add to this, it seems what is in the Best Buy stores is a knock-offf of the higher end equipment.....the same tweeter that is in their best with multiple mid-range drivers is now put into a 2-way configuration and it is WAY too bright. The Infinity speakers I have are a good example of this, the Prelude PFR has 4-5.25 midrange with one silk tweeter and sounds really good, smoother than their Overture 3's of the same line in the 90's which in comparison sounds too bright. Their bookshelfs are way too bright and boomy with a back port. The Infinity 2000's replacement of this is the Prelude MTS and is class "A" rated but you put that CMMD tweeter in anything with lesser mid/bass and it is TOO bright and irritating. Infinity, after loosing alot of market, realized this and changed to the MMD driver in their lower end speakers, which is not as bright. Klipsch is the same way, BB speakers are just TOO bright but I haven't heard their high end stuff. JBL is also too bright with their Titanium tweeter in their lesser speakers.The only thing I like in Cerwin Vega is their 15" sub I have, it's not a lot of power but it is musical and clean. I just don't like Polk. Infinity designs a line of drivers and a couple years later when Infinity changes drivers, Polk picks up what Infinity was using. Infinity's 90's silk dome is what I lat saw that Polk is using now, but Polk doesn't do it as well as Infinity. Polk always sounds distorted to me, not smooth and clean. And of course, Bose is a four letter word.
As you can tell, I like Infinity and climbed to the top of their 90's line and am happy with it but.......I wonder what others would sound like it my system....Prelude MTS, Martin Logan, Maggies???

[hermanv]

The big block stores are focused on impulse buyers. As a result speakers they sell will have a lot of flash/bang. Which is to say an exaggerated treble, bass or both. Most serious buyers will spend far more time listening.

A serious buyer will also wonder why people might spend several grand for a speaker pair when all five surround speakers and the sub woofer retail for under $900 at the big box store.

I worked in telephony and know that many studies were done to ascertain the minimum sound quality level people would tolerate when cell phones were first being developed. People are conditioned to accept poor quality sound, listen to any PA system. (ps: I personally suspect that poor sound is why people who can drive fine talking to a passenger can not drive fine while using a cell phone. Subconsciously a lot of brain horsepower is being diverted to making those awful noises from the phone into recognizable speech.)

It takes exposure over hours or even days for your ears to learn what they have been missing. Listening for an extended period of time to a truly good system, will open your ears.

[E-Stat]

I recently auditioned an $85,000 system consisting of McIntosh MC-500 pre, MC-1201 monoblocks, XRT1K loudspeakers, and fronted by a fully loaded Linn LP12 (Lingo/Keel/Ekos/Akiva, my dream $20,000 turntable). Neutral and boring were the only words that come to mind....I'm certain it often comes down to a poor auditioning room.. has anyone else had this experience?

On both counts. Business took me to none other than Binghamton, NY last month and I was given a most gracious tour of the McIntosh facility culminating with an audition to their best gear in a dedicated music/HT room. They used the massive XRT2K speakers sourced by MDA1000/MCD1000 through the C1000 (SS) preamp and a pair of the MCW2K amplifiers. My host played a number of pieces of music. The sound was quite dynamic and the bass was quite extended, but not overblown. But it lacked the kind of focus and dimensionality I've heard with other systems despite the purpose built room. Speakers have never been their strength. Can you say "comb filtering" with all the side-by-side drivers? Perhaps their electronics would be better showcased using other speakers. A reviewer friend currently has the 2300/2301 combo and says they are quite nice driving Scaenas with an EMM Labs or Clearaudio Reference front end and Nordost Odin cabling.

rw

[hermanv]

Probably my favorite reviewer is Andrew Cordesman. His tastes seem to match mine and he rarely uses hyperbole. Also he can actually afford most equipment he reviews, so he is not dependent on the generosity of any manufacturer.

He thought quite highly of a pair of Mac speakers (the XR2K's I think). I too have heard them perform very well. Like a fine sports car their strengths are subtle, they are mellow and invite very long sessions. The were driven by an all Mac set-up with mono blocks and the Mac surround sound processor.

Good equipment is more interactive with the listening room and set-up than lesser gear, a single session can easily give the wrong impression either better or worse than the "average" set-up.

I for one can't afford the stuff and I do find their front panels too over the top in a glitzy way.

[RGA]

I have not heard of that reviewer but I would like to let you know that the price reviewers pay - depending on the review outfit would be about dealer cost - which varies depending on the company. But that is true across the board with every company so a reviewer may get a $10k piece of equipment for $3k but that would be in line with all companies so there isn't any real difference to the reviewer - in the sense that they would be less objective because while they can get a $14k Magnepan for less than half the price - they could also get the Quad 2905 retailing for $14k at less than half the price - the reviewer will still choose what he would have chosen if he had $14k.

Where the moral issue comes into play, at least for me, is that because a reviewer like myself can get something discounted heavily we may not be as objective as we would otherwise be when looking at what the average consumer would pay. A Quad 2905 at dealer or reviewer cost looks a lot better at $5k than $14k.

We get the price no doubt because once it is opened and used it is no longer a new item which makes it a bit of an albatross for the manufacturer. Reducing the price and not having to have it shipped back is a large reason for the lowered price as well. On small inexpensive items, though I am only guessing as I have not been a reviewer very long they may give it to reviewers for free since shipping may cost more than the profit they would have made on the unit.

All things that honest people reviewers contemplate. I review for an online publication with fellow reviewers who have purchased $190,000 loudspeakers - money is not a concern at all for them and they likely choose to review the cost no object - if you have to ask the price you can't afford it types. Their job in a sense is easy.

Reviewing the $3-5k amps that I have reviewed recently makes me feel a sense of pressure that this is a price range where audiophiles may make their second or third jump from the levels of Arcam or Audio Refinement etc. These consumers are not "rich" in most cases but work damn hard and want something with a great deal of satisfaction for the buck. I'm an audio reviewer on a teacher salary so I think about these things. Could I see myself buying the unit out of my own money and would I be happy long term given the retail price. If the answer is yes then I will review it. If the answer is no then I would tell the editor to send the stuff to another reviewer.

[hermanv]

Companies have been known to leave review equipment with a reviewer for a couple of years, in this example the price paid is zero.

The reviewer I spoke of is Anthony Cordsman not Andrew as I printed. Anthony used to write for Audio and lately writes for TAS. He is an international affairs consultant who used to work for the state department and an avid audio hobbyist.

[Mr Peabody]

RGA, unless your magazine was under pressure to always write good reviews why would you pass on equipment you can't see yourself buying, just write what you honestly think. Doing things the way you describe you become one of these guys whose reviews are always positive and you don't know whether to trust them or not. Unless, you were able to try the same gear, and in that case, who needs reviews.

[Ajani]

RGA, unless your magazine was under pressure to always write good reviews why would you pass on equipment you can't see yourself buying, just write what you honestly think. Doing things the way you describe you become one of these guys whose reviews are always positive and you don't know whether to trust them or not. Unless, you were able to try the same gear, and in that case, who needs reviews.

To add to this point: Passing on gear you aren't interested in is pretty much how mags like Stereophile operate (reviewers generally only review their specific interests).... Hence a reviewer who loves inefficient speakers and monster power amps will never be caught dead reviewing a flea watt amp or horns....

While the advantage is that reviewers only review the type of gear they have experience with, the disadvantage is that just about all reviews are positive and you'd never know from a review that maybe only that 1 reviewer in the magazine liked the particular product (or type of product)...

What I'd love to see is a kind of good cop/bad cop approach to reviewing.... having both the Tube/Horn expert and the monster amp/inefficient speakers reviewers give opinions on the same tube or monster amp would be interesting... Let the expert write the main review and the other reviewer do a small commentary (or long if they please)... I know some mags/websites have 2 reviewers write up a product, but I think they use 2 who are interested in that kind of product, rather than 1 expert and 1 non-fan....

[Mr Peabody]

To review equipment would be a dream come true. I personally would love to hear whatever I could get my hands on. I would try not to stereotype topologies. I have yet to hear a decent horn speaker but I would sure review some I haven't heard in hopes of finding a good one. I have found tube gear can vary as much in presentation as tube gear. I believe variety would also keep the job more interesting.

[arrow 68]

Anything i can't pay for in cash.

[RGA]

Mr. P and Ajani

I see what you guys are saying because I made the same points - but looking at it from the manufacturer's end you can surely see the problems with the negative review.

There is little motivation for a manufacturer to send gear to someone who writes a lot of bad reviews. And since the competition largely is positive they will simply send gear to those publications. Furthering the problem for me is that because I believe in the system approach it would be very difficult for me, at least at present, to evaluate a Bryston amplifier in my home when I know that my speakers are not at all designed for such an amplifier. I could tell you the resulting sound but it would put Bryston in an unfavorable light when in fact it is a mismatch of technologies.

What I see is that if a maker sends gear to a publication they request certain reviewers who they feel will be more favorable to the design. Magnepan won't send speakers to John Marks of Stereophile because he does not like them at all. They will send it to the panel fan. B&W is not likely to send me a loudspeaker - while others at Dagogo prefer them they will get the product. We're people too and I would rather enjoy my nights listening to stuff that I like not stuff that I don't like. I don't get paid so I prefer to choose things I like listening to.

If B&W really wants me to review the 705 I would and it would largely be a negative review. If you're B&W you're going to request Jack or one of the other guys that likes the sound of B&W. As a reviewer I really have no say in the matter. Except on forums which is sometimes why they're more valuable in a sense.

Also consider that a lot of people like Magnepan - if you think it's the best value going does reading John Marks' view help? I suppose in a way it's good to get a dissenting view but you as the auditioner should still be doing that and having a strong enough ego to say you know what the speaker doesn't do it for me no matter the reviews.

And the more negative reviews you write - well friends may come and go but enemies accumulate. I see no reason to give a negative review to something I know going in I would not like. I will try to come at the stuff i do like from the other angle and compare to other gear I like a lot less. Grant Fidelity's Rita is $5k and pretty much does whatever any SS amp can do for less money, sounds better than virtually all of them, is better built is nice to look at and has bags and bags of ultimate power and drive capability. That is fun to review and positive. The downside was lugging the bloody 100pound beast up elevators and stairs and in and out of a car. I really need to get paid for these reviews.

[Mr Peabody]

I can see your point to some extent, why would Vandersteen send me one of their speakers knowing I don't like their sound when the speaker could be better served by a Vandy fan reviewer. And, you sort of have a nitch going, for lack of a better word, maybe approach is better, with the high sensitivity speaker low power amp thing. Let me say though, my 1.1x sounded very good as the front end for my Krell amp. I'm using it now in my second system as the front end for some Adcom and it still sounds good. I'd like to hear one of their more expensive DAC's to see how it sounds. The 1.1x sounded excellent with my CJ gear as well it's just not as good as this T+A player I found.

I'll have to look at some of the Grand Fidelity. What tubes do they use? I can't afford $5k but I'm always interested in a brute force tube amp. Typically, quality tube sound with lots of power costs big dollar. That's what led me to my decision to monoblock two MV60's. They were very reasonable used. They are very good sounding amps I think it's just hard to sell two channel amps any more and being tubed with a power rating of 50 wpc just don't have a long line of buyers.

[elapsed]

More and more reason not to trust reviews... as well all know, audio is highly subjective. How can I know that my tastes are in line with the reviewer? And even more so when all reviews are positive for the most part. Are there any Jeremy Clarkson (BBC Top Gear) type characters in audio to give an honest opinion across the full audio spectrum? I guess audio is a much more touchy subject than cars, no one wants to hear that somebody dislikes what they have invested substantial money into

On a similar topic, have any of you read The Vinyl Anachronist series? It's interesting to read how the Technics SL1200 fanboys rip into the author for his opinion on belt-driven vs direct-drive turntables, and also how his taste has developed over the past decade

http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl.html

Also, gotta love some of his quotes.. "At 45, I'm still dancing, tapping my feet and even playing the occasional air drums on my lap when listening. I meet so many audiophiles who listen to records motionless and silent, with a grim look on their faces. **** that. Try listening to Patricia Barber or Eva Cassidy or any other audiophile favorite while having passionate sex on the floor between your speakers. Your stereo will never sound better. Just make sure you apologize to your partner when you have to get up and flip the record over. You know - just like in the old days. "

cheers,
elapsed

[VintageTurntable]

Harman/Kardon,Nad,Nikko,Technics,Realistic (Radioshack)

[JoeE SP9]

Believe it or not Mac gear has never interested me.The big blue meters don't do it for me.

[audio amateur]

Cerwin Vega

[E-Stat]

Believe it or not Mac gear has never interested me.The big blue meters don't do it for me.

Same with me. On the one hand, I have toured their impressive facility in Binghamton and find a dedicated group of audio enthusiasts. Unfortunately, their passion lies more with the elaborate eight step process for making gee whiz back lit glass panels than sonic results. Meters on a turntable? Meters on a preamp? Meters all by themselves for a car? Backlit tubes? The cosmetics remind me of pimped out Cadillacs with the gold package and chrome everything else. My first exposure to them was a system with a C-28 preamp, 2105 amp and Bozak speakers (along with the MPI-4 Maximum Performance Indicator. The light show was spectacular. The sound, however, was utterly boring, flat and devoid of detail.

A reviewer friend tells me the current C-2300 preamp and the 2301 amps are actually very nice. Unfortunately, I can't get past the cheesy cosmetics.

rw

[E-Stat]

Cerwin Vega

I went to my first audio show in '74 where CV was showcasing their biggest horn system. They were playing the Lalo Shifrin theme from Mission Impossible at ear bleeding levels where your pants legs were flapping in the wind. Loud, yes. Refined, articulate, musical, realistic? None of the above. Like most all sound reinforcement systems I've ever heard.

rw

[audio amateur]

I went to my first audio show in '74 where CV was showcasing their biggest horn system. They were playing the Lalo Shifrin theme from Mission Impossible at ear bleeding levels where your pants legs were flapping in the wind. Loud, yes. Refined, articulate, musical, realistic? None of the above. Like most all sound reinforcement systems I've ever heard.

rw

I can't recall having ever heard Cerwin Vega. It's the philosophy and looks that completely put me off.