Who or what is a Audiophile?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

"I think MC gets knocked largely because of the expense involved. I have heard lots of multi-channel set-ups but if I don't like the sound of the speakers in 2 channel - I don't see how adding 5-6 more of those speakers is going to make it better. And the speakers I like cost a bomb".

RGA,
I am consistently hearing this argument, and I quite frankly don't buy it. Last week I auditioned two mini-monitor based multichannel systems, one featuring the Sunfire CRM-2, and the other based on a custom design. These systems were assembled for me, and what surprised me was the quality of the sound I was hearing from the components(they both used receivers, and a PS3 for playback). Total cost for the speakers systems was about $5800, the receivers about $1200 a piece, and the PS3's were the older fat boys with SACD playback. The entire system cost less than $10k, and the sound was just magnificent from each of these systems. Going from my system in my signature to these systems never made be feel like I was losing anything. They sounded excellent with two channel music as they did with multichannel. I had just one complaint with the Sunfire speaker system. Their cutoff point was 115hz, so you had to use a 120hz crossover point to the sub. On occasion I was able to locate the sub because of that high crossover point, and the sub position in the room(It sat right behind the center speaker in the middle of the front wall)

This listening session taught me a very valuable lesson. High quality can be had at many price points, and system synergy is as important as the quality of the individual components. The guy who put this listening session together carefully chose components that work very well together. As you can see, the system was not all that expensive.

[RGA]

"I think MC gets knocked largely because of the expense involved. I have heard lots of multi-channel set-ups but if I don't like the sound of the speakers in 2 channel - I don't see how adding 5-6 more of those speakers is going to make it better. And the speakers I like cost a bomb".

RGA,
I am consistently hearing this argument, and I quite frankly don't buy it. Last week I auditioned two mini-monitor based multichannel systems, one featuring the Sunfire CRM-2, and the other based on a custom design. These systems were assembled for me, and what surprised me was the quality of the sound I was hearing from the components(they both used receivers, and a PS3 for playback). Total cost for the speakers systems was about $5800, the receivers about $1200 a piece, and the PS3's were the older fat boys with SACD playback. The entire system cost less than $10k, and the sound was just magnificent from each of these systems. Going from my system in my signature to these systems never made be feel like I was losing anything. They sounded excellent with two channel music as they did with multichannel. I had just one complaint with the Sunfire speaker system. Their cutoff point was 115hz, so you had to use a 120hz crossover point to the sub. On occasion I was able to locate the sub because of that high crossover point, and the sub position in the room(It sat right behind the center speaker in the middle of the front wall)

This listening session taught me a very valuable lesson. High quality can be had at many price points, and system synergy is as important as the quality of the individual components. The guy who put this listening session together carefully chose components that work very well together. As you can see, the system was not all that expensive.

Maybe I didn't say it well. The Audio Note AX Two is a $700 list pair of speakers. I could buy 3 sets of those for $2100 - add a processor and a couple of subs - the bass of the standmounts likely go to 60hz. Perhaps for the front L/R I could get the AZ Two standmount which run about $1300 and Hi-Fi Choice measured them down to 20hz in room and flat at 26 or 28hz. Not bad for small floorstander in an OB/Transmission line/Horn design.

I could be happy with with them in two channel. The problem is that most music is recorded and meant to be played in 2 channel. So when a person listens in 2 channel - the choice becomes do I want the best 2 channel reproducer or am I going to handcuff it with a lower model L/R speaker to gain the advantage of the much fewer MC recordings.

Not everyone has speakers they can add like sounding (ideall the exact same speakers) in a surround set-up. The only truly good set-ups I have heard for MC was when all the speakers were exactly the same speaker - those cneter channels that lie sideways - yet to hear a good set-up for music in such configurations.

I know from a retired dealer that George Lucas favored M&K for such applications and they're not all that expensive at all - a whole system can easily be had from them for under $8k including subs.

[Ajani]

Maybe I didn't say it well. The Audio Note AX Two is a $700 list pair of speakers. I could buy 3 sets of those for $2100 - add a processor and a couple of subs - the bass of the standmounts likely go to 60hz. Perhaps for the front L/R I could get the AZ Two standmount which run about $1300 and Hi-Fi Choice measured them down to 20hz in room and flat at 26 or 28hz. Not bad for small floorstander in an OB/Transmission line/Horn design.

I could be happy with with them in two channel. The problem is that most music is recorded and meant to be played in 2 channel. So when a person listens in 2 channel - the choice becomes do I want the best 2 channel reproducer or am I going to handcuff it with a lower model L/R speaker to gain the advantage of the much fewer MC recordings.

Not everyone has speakers they can add like sounding (ideall the exact same speakers) in a surround set-up. The only truly good set-ups I have heard for MC was when all the speakers were exactly the same speaker - those cneter channels that lie sideways - yet to hear a good set-up for music in such configurations.

I know from a retired dealer that George Lucas favored M&K for such applications and they're not all that expensive at all - a whole system can easily be had from them for under $8k including subs.

I'm sure I've seen this debate a few times before between E-Stat and Sir T (and possibly even myself) if I'm not mistaken...

I agree with you though... The question of whether to spend your budget on MC or stereo should be based on your music collection...

My entire music collection is stereo... So naturally my budget for upgrades is geared towards a stereo system rather than MC... Just the same way as I don't spend money on a TT as all my music is digital... and I'd have a very hard time sourcing vinyl locally...

Also, though you two keep talking about putting together good MC systems around $8K to $10K, that's still not exactly chump change...

For around $1K retail I could put together some fun stereo setups:

Nad integrated amp and CD player with PSB Alpha monitors

OR

Squeezebox Touch with Focal CMS40 Active Monitors

OR

Project Essential Turntable with Miniwatt SET amp and HSU HB1 Horn Monitors

At that price, I suspect I'd be stuck looking at HT-In-A-Box systems if I wanted MC... and I've yet to hear HT in a box that sounded good with music...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I'm sure I've seen this debate a few times before between E-Stat and Sir T (and possibly even myself) if I'm not mistaken...

Your not!

I agree with you though... The question of whether to spend your budget on MC or stereo should be based on your music collection..

I absolutely agree with this. However, my way to look at this is, am I going to stick with two channel forever, or can I have a quality system that is ready to play any and every format whether 2.0 to 7.1? I chose the latter.

My entire music collection is stereo... So naturally my budget for upgrades is geared towards a stereo system rather than MC... Just the same way as I don't spend money on a TT as all my music is digital... and I'd have a very hard time sourcing vinyl locally...

So you have no interest in purchasing multichannel music in the future? I guess when I am putting together a system, I am always looking for an easy upgrade path. I already had a 7.1 system before I had 7.1 software, that is how I think. Until I had 7.1 discrete software, I used prologic IIx to send 5.1 to the rear channels.

Also, though you two keep talking about putting together good MC systems around $8K to $10K, that's still not exactly chump change...

Yes, but most "audiophiles" pay more than that for their setups.

For around $1K retail I could put together some fun stereo setups:

Nad integrated amp and CD player with PSB Alpha monitors

OR

Squeezebox Touch with Focal CMS40 Active Monitors

OR

Project Essential Turntable with Miniwatt SET amp and HSU HB1 Horn Monitors

At that price, I suspect I'd be stuck looking at HT-In-A-Box systems if I wanted MC... and I've yet to hear HT in a box that sounded good with music...

You may spend more than 1K for a multichannel system, you can use it for more than one purpose. You can use it for movies AND music. It makes it more of a value IMO.

[RGA]

The problem for me is that in 2 channel I like Audio Note speakers a lot more than I like the sound of M&K standmounts with a sub for the reproduction of 2 channel music. To me it's not close.

I like the sound of the M&K in movies and surround sound music mind you but to me I would be giving up a LOT in 2 channel.

So the choices either become buy a second system for home theater/MC which I have often considered doing - or taking my system and adding to it by adding 2 rears and a pair of speakers to be used as a center channel which does work and then adding two subwoofers. My mains by themselves go below 30hz so I can set two subwoofer low enough that that I should not be able to locate them - which for whatever reason I always seem to be able to do. Apparently people should not detect location of subwoofers below 80hz but after a while I tend to locate a "weight" in the given region - ie the left if that is where the sub is situated. It's annoying and a reason I got rid of my highly touted subwoofer back in the day. UHF and others note that to do it right you really need two subwoofers and my experience concurs with that.

I can get speakers that are voiced similarly but to get the 2 more sets is well out of my price range. The cheaper alternative is actually a whole second dedicated system for me.

And some of us are picky about electronics - I have yet to see a a 7.2 Single Ended amplification system with zero feedback. That SS glare just doesn't go away - I can put up with it for home theater since we don't have reference point cues for explosions and our ears will likely focus on "effects" related sound through rear channels lessening the focus on instrument timbre. Ie - there is more to try and concentrate on and the finer points or details will be less noticed or "forgiven" by our ears due to more stimulation. The brightness in the M&K is far less a problem in home theater or MC music than it is when directly comparing it to better speakers on 2 channel for instance which is probably why I liked it for one application and not the other.

I think all of the above is different if you are starting out. Ajani noted that he has no vinyl turntable - well if you live in an area where this none - and the relatively high expense to geta high quality turntable - and then all the accessories and good phono stage and record cleaners - bah- don't bother.

As I said - if someone has invested $20,000 on their home 2 channel stereo and they own AN E speakers or Quad 2905 planars there is only so much one will be able to do here. Especially if they love the sound of it and own SE tube amps. Most of these amps do not have subwoofer outputs for a start - they are old school and have limited connection options.

If they love their speakers on 2 channel and have 5000 albums what can they realistically do here? There is not "matching" with Quads to a dynamic coned box. As the AN guy I can get "close" and run some of the smaller sets of speakers but again my amp has no Sub out. There is no SS amp that sounds like the OTO on two channel music (read or remotely as good) so it has to stay in the chain at least on 2 channel. A separate amp can drive the center and rears and do the processing and I'd be fine with changing the cables over (some people would not).

There is a lot of things that MC has that put a lot of people off. The ergonomics, the expense, it forces many to sell their systems, the space requirements and in the end IMO it is not done cheaply while retaining the quality of two channel - there is a reason I have $5000 standmounts not $500 standmounts. And I have heard most of the big time professional grade loudspeakers "before" I bought what I did - Genelec, PMC, B&W, M&K for example. If I liked their $1000 speakers better I would have bought them. In B&W's case I like their $15k+ speakers less let alone their $1k speakers.

[E-Stat]

am I going to stick with two channel forever, or can I have a quality system that is ready to play any and every format whether 2.0 to 7.1?

It is the music labels in charge of that question. The vast majority of music released today remains in stereo. When do you think that will ever change?

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I could be happy with with them in two channel. The problem is that most music is recorded and meant to be played in 2 channel. So when a person listens in 2 channel - the choice becomes do I want the best 2 channel reproducer or am I going to handcuff it with a lower model L/R speaker to gain the advantage of the much fewer MC recordings.

You are perpetuating a myth here. Who says you must trade down in quality just to get multichannel sound? Remember, the objectives of both kinds of systems are completely different. A two channel system seeks precision and accuracy that covers only 90 to 120 degrees in front of us. A multichannel system seeks that same precision 360 degrees around our heads. As long as each system meets their desired objectives, then there is no need to lower your performance perspective. One system can do both well.

Not everyone has speakers they can add like sounding (ideall the exact same speakers) in a surround set-up. The only truly good set-ups I have heard for MC was when all the speakers were exactly the same speaker - those cneter channels that lie sideways - yet to hear a good set-up for music in such configurations.

Since all of my systems use vertically placed center speakers like the L/R mains, I don't have that kind of trade off. I believe all of the speakers must have drivers with the same orientation, or you won't get that "acoustical bubble" effect. Accurate imaging is very important to me, and a horizontally mounted center speaker would totally destroy that.

I know from a retired dealer that George Lucas favored M&K for such applications and they're not all that expensive at all - a whole system can easily be had from them for under $8k including subs.

I he is right for liking them. I have a 7.1 system in my family vacation spot that features 3 stacked pairs of M&K MPS2510P speakers(yes two stacked speakers for each of the L/C/R channels), and four more surround speakers. They are combined with two M&K MPS5310 subs, and you have a system that is accurate, and extremely loud and clean.

Lucas uses M&K's in his sound editing suites.