PDA

View Full Version : Half-a-brain loonies and internet geeks



sastusbulbas
08-12-2008, 23:04
I am posting this here as initial response elsewhere seem not to get the point, not sure I do either but bear with me...

Having just read today's Fi Choice, a certain article caught my interest. Internet Geeks.

The point that got me reading was with regard to internet opinion on computer audio, this initial interest was quickly eroded by what I felt was a general opinion/assumption of public forum members and their misguided opinions.

Now I do not claim to know everything, nor do I agree on everything I read on forums (or magazines for that matter), but I did find it slightly belittleing as a forum member to read the opinions of this articles author regarding forum members.

I think the avid magazine reader has came under a lot of flack in recent years for "believing" what is written in magazines, many forum members are completely intolerant of any magazine derived opinion because of exactly the same facts, figures, science, pseudo science, surmising and opinion based reviews many magazine reviewers have given over the years, there always seems to be someone on a forum who can discredit a review or piece of kit and belittle the forum member who mentioned the article. These days there seems to be a lot more forum members willing to slander reviews and their readers than there is anyone backing up review and magazine articles with robust evidence.

Hence my opinion that most of the (claimed by the author of said article) half a brain lunatic bigoted argumentative forum members who spout what may be apparently rubbish are the end result of misinformed and skewed magazine articles which never get defended or have their claims backed up with robust evidence, or seem to have misplaced any common sense and reasons why five years previous such an item may have been detrimental to the system.

So far the only evidence getting any sort of airplay within forums is by people willing to provide what seems like conclusive robust evidence to discredit every forum member (or indeed magazine reviewer) who has made a purchase or fell for the apparent "Foo" claimed in an audio magazine.

I myself feel I am labelled a "Foo" believer on one side of the fence, and a half a brain dimwitted lunatic on the other side, leaving me straddled on an uncomfortable wire fence. I am sure other forum members do.

Until robust evidence is provided and technology sufficiently explained to the average audio purchaser and magazine reader which holds up against argument with technical merit, we will always have dreaded geeks with opinion of no merit due to magazines and AES articles and other engineer based opinion.

How does any regular member of the public defend himself within a public forum with regards to his choice of speaker cable or mains cable when so much foo seems to be abundant, and no clear technical debate is instilled by any subjective magazine review of such, until magazines change their approach what else can we expect to see other than the virulent forum debate spawned by the industries actions.
Of course it is not possible or in the magazines interest to lay bare the truths about any item such as say a cable and it's performance or origins, nor ensure the customer makes the best evaluated choice. ( I guess it is a bit like the way the government lies about the average wage and cost of living to keep a divide between classes)
Magazines and the audio industry should take some of the responsibility, cables and audio supports would be a good start for an area to clean up some of the bull and balance the scales of debate.

Here is one, are all the claims and adverts and reviews of Chord Co Signature speaker cable nothing but hype with no technical merit, and is it true the cable cost pennies from an outsourced supplier? Are customers being ripped off by purchasing 5m pairs of cable for £1200 when it can be sourced elsewhere for £5 per metre?

What about big name companies offering DVD players at ridiculous prices just because of a nice case and badge, with no change at all to the electronics and such?

When ARE the customers interests going to be looked after? With the word Critic in the title I guess some truths had been wrongly expected? I cannot imagine a restaurant reviewer only discussing the good food, pretty sure if something is rubbish or from a packet they are forthcoming with such opinion, is it unfair to expect the same in an audio journal? If no action is taken how can one make complaint against what their own industry has helped create?

Steve

Primalsea
08-12-2008, 23:41
I think it all boils down to polarisation. Some articles I have read have just come across as arrogant thinking from an arrogant person. You get the impression that if you agree you are in the club with the good guys and if you don't then you are stupid and incapable of making any sound judgement.

I have been in situations with dealers/manufacturers who do a similar thing. Once at a show I was speaking to a guy was just the most opinionated twat I had ever met. Everything had to be his way or you were stupid. He used squash balls as isolation between layers of his idler TT plinth. I said I use squash balls under my CD player too but I cut them in half. I all got back was a load of crap "Whay would you do that, Air suspensions is the best you can do, blah blah. In the end I just said well if I don't cut them in half my CD player will roll of the F*****G table.

Anyway..

All to often I see posts on forums that rubbish people for owning something and standing by it. These posts often back themselves up by by the poster insulting the ability of the target to make choices about their own equipment.

I'm afraid the shit gets thrown from both sides and has the result of bostering the self importance of some people while insulting others the result is agressive posts from the insulted parties who feel personally under attack. This then leads to shootout and anyone who was on the fence tends to natrually gavitate to the path of least resistance.

At the end of the day many people are no better than the teenage girls who used to fight over if Bross or Brother Beyond was the better band.

StanleyB
08-12-2008, 23:49
Reminds me of a sale I had yesterday. The punter cancelled the order because his best mate had never heard of me before:mental:.

muffinman
09-12-2008, 00:18
I have been in situations with dealers/manufacturers who do a similar thing. Once at a show I was speaking to a guy was just the most opinionated twat I had ever met. Everything had to be his way or you were stupid. He used squash balls as isolation between layers of his idler TT plinth. I said I use squash balls under my CD player too but I cut them in half. I all got back was a load of crap "Whay would you do that, Air suspensions is the best you can do, blah blah. In the end I just said well if I don't cut them in half my CD player will roll of the F*****G table.



I wish, i wish, i wish i was there.
i would have soiled myself :lol::lol::lol:

anthonyTD
09-12-2008, 12:40
I think it all boils down to polarisation. Some articles I have read have just come across as arrogant thinking from an arrogant person. You get the impression that if you agree you are in the club with the good guys and if you don't then you are stupid and incapable of making any sound judgement.

I have been in situations with dealers/manufacturers who do a similar thing. Once at a show I was speaking to a guy was just the most opinionated twat I had ever met. Everything had to be his way or you were stupid. He used squash balls as isolation between layers of his idler TT plinth. I said I use squash balls under my CD player too but I cut them in half. I all got back was a load of crap "Whay would you do that, Air suspensions is the best you can do, blah blah. In the end I just said well if I don't cut them in half my CD player will roll of the F*****G table.

Anyway..

All to often I see posts on forums that rubbish people for owning something and standing by it. These posts often back themselves up by by the poster insulting the ability of the target to make choices about their own equipment.

I'm afraid the shit gets thrown from both sides and has the result of bostering the self importance of some people while insulting others the result is agressive posts from the insulted parties who feel personally under attack. This then leads to shootout and anyone who was on the fence tends to natrually gavitate to the path of least resistance.

At the end of the day many people are no better than the teenage girls who used to fight over if Bross or Brother Beyond was the better band.

great:lolsign:
reminds me of a guy i used to be involved with [business wise] everything made by him was great, the best thing since sliced bread etc, anything you mentioned you had, or heard from some other manufacturer, was "SHIT" irespective wether he had heard it or not! that was the main reason i had to get away from him, well, that and the small matter of him being a crook! but lets not go there. :eyebrows: anyway, i think there is a lot of merit in what is said here, unfortunetly a lot of people dont seem to have the balls, or the faith in their own gut feelings to stand by what their own ears are telling them.. untill they do, i fear they will continue to have their pants taken down, etc, etc...
i hope to be considered as one of those small manufactures out there who considers and respects others opinions, but also having the knowledge to actually be able to provide them with something sonically better for their hard earned cash, not just, well, taking their pants down....:)
regards,anthony,TD...:)

Prince of Darkness
09-12-2008, 13:30
He used squash balls as isolation between layers of his idler TT plinth.

I've tried this, it's not that good (in my opinion:)). Better than springs, but I found that just putting wooden blocks in was a lot better. I now use glass marbles.:ner:

Colin
09-12-2008, 15:09
Just goes to show, I thought most of it was willy waving. Is it really that much different from playground bickering. When it comes to audio equipment the best review, comment, or critical acclaim and box can receive are the one's awarded by your ears. Why worry if your brand is the cheapest, most expensive, or god forbid the latest 5 star award winner from ***** mag.

The Internet certainly can bring out the pack instinct in people, and generate a certain amount of follow the leader. (search for tongue in cheek emoticon failed) Its easy to avoid, just buy a unfashionably bland brand that sounds better than people expect. That way you are either to be pitied, I mean to say he uses Rega or Rotel (its all he can afford you know), Or a fashion conscious wanna be (he uses apple and AVI you know)

Steve Toy
09-12-2008, 15:11
There are three approaches to dealing with unwanted energy that interferes with turntables and all other electronic components:

1) Absorb or cushion the energy in something squidgy or containing air like Sorbathane, Vibrapods, squashballs (cut in half or not), inflatable bladders etc.

2) Ground the energy to a heavy mass like slate, granite, a metal cavity filled with sand or a solid lump of wood.

3) Ground the energy quickly to earth.

There is no hard-and-fast rule on this as different mechanical designs respond to different approaches. Generally electronics tend to respond better to 3) whilst turntables and speakers can respond to any one of the above although not all. Beware that approaches 1) and 2) don't kill the dynamics though and make everything sound sloth-like.

In all, Mr Squashballs-are-the-panacea looks a bit of a ****

Marco
09-12-2008, 15:14
Just goes to show, I thought most of it was willy waving. Is it really that much different from playground bickering. When it comes to audio equipment the best review, comment, or critical acclaim and box can receive are the one's awarded by your ears. Why worry if your brand is the cheapest, most expensive, or god forbid the latest 5 star award winner from ***** mag.
The Internet certainly can bring out the pack instinct in people, and generate a certain amount of follow the leader. (search for tongue in cheek emoticon failed) Its easy to avoid, just buy a unfashionably bland brand that sounds better than people expect. That way you are either to be pitied, I mean to say he uses Rega or Rotel (its all he can afford you know), Or a fashion conscious wanna be (he uses apple and AVI you know)

Great post, Colin - especially the bit in bold.

It never ceases to amuse me how some (apparently) experienced enthusiasts require the 'crutch' of a favourable magazine review to facilitate their hi-fi buying decisions. It's exactly the same with the scientifically-minded in hi-fi and measurements!

Similarly, on forums and elsewhere, I find it sad (and rather strange) that people allow themselves to become victims of their peers... Be your own man, I say, not a puppet just to be popular!

Marco.

anthonyTD
09-12-2008, 15:42
Just goes to show, I thought most of it was willy waving. Is it really that much different from playground bickering. When it comes to audio equipment the best review, comment, or critical acclaim and box can receive are the one's awarded by your ears. Why worry if your brand is the cheapest, most expensive, or god forbid the latest 5 star award winner from ***** mag.

The Internet certainly can bring out the pack instinct in people, and generate a certain amount of follow the leader. (search for tongue in cheek emoticon failed) Its easy to avoid, just buy a unfashionably bland brand that sounds better than people expect. That way you are either to be pitied, I mean to say he uses Rega or Rotel (its all he can afford you know), Or a fashion conscious wanna be (he uses apple and AVI you know)

nail and head comes to mind,:eyebrows: well put collin.
anthony,TD...

tfarney
09-12-2008, 16:23
This is an appropriate thread to come back to. Marco sent me an email the other day to ask if I had left for good (thanks for thinking of me Marco). I hadn't, but the truth is that this thread gets to the heart of why I lost interest for a bit.

I think some of you have probably figured out that I'm more or less in the camp that believes in testing and audible limits, believes that once you get past the competence of the top of "mid-fi," a term I really don't even accept as valid, or the entry level of "high-end," a term I think has more to do with cost than performance, the differences in electronic kit are minute, and that the secret of life is plenty of headroom behind transducers that make your ears happy. Period.

And that's not really were AOS lives. This is a high-end board, and while I'm cool with anybody getting their bliss in any way that works for them, once I've said that....

a) I believe plenty of clean headroom in the transducers that make your ears happy is all that really matters.

b) If you have a $2,000 DAC (substitute appropriate pounds or dollars for amps, preamps, cd players, etc) you're listening to (at least) $1500 worth of psychological bias.

c)...and this one is rough...redbook cds and solid state are demonstrably, measurably superior to vinyl and valves.

....I've more or less said it all. And if you respond that you're hearing things that can't be measured, that ears are infinitely more sensitive than any measurement equipment, more telling than any listening test methodology, that my kit is not resolving enough to hear what you hear, that you'll trust your ears, thankyouverymuch, you've more or less said it all.

At that point we can either get into the kind of destructive tit for tat, false objectivism and self-proclaimed elitism this thread is about and that this board has avoided, or we can agree that it is all subjective, my kit is better than yours if I enjoy it more and vice versa.

And silence falls over the board.

Tim

Marco
09-12-2008, 16:33
Hi Tim,

Welcome back. During 'working hours' we're always thinking about our members! Nice post. The only bit that I find necessary to dispute (or challenge) is this:


redbook cds and solid state are demonstrably, measurably superior to vinyl and valves.


Define "superior" in a universal context. Do we listen with our ears or with an oscilloscope? :)

Marco.

P.S I don't see AOS as a "high-end board"; merely a board which promotes open-mindedness and the use of one's ears as the final arbiter when choosing hi-fi equipment. Once such a process has been adopted the chosen equipment may be 'hi-end', 'low-end' or even dead end! ;)

We promote no particular bias in terms of hi-fi approach, and the huge variety of systems assembled at various costs used by our members demonstrates this.

Steve Toy
09-12-2008, 17:04
I think Ali Tait recently posted an article on here that gets to the bottom of why solid state measures better yet valves often seem to sound better. I think the gist went along the lines of passing a constant noise down a ss amp and it measures better than the valve amp. The rub is that music just isn't a constant noise (pick yor colour - white, grey, brown or pink) it is a series of events. It would seem that ss amps actually distort much more than valves when asked to do something fast and loud, i.e. tell the musical story.

Solid state is the car that performs on the drag race over a perfectly smooth surface; the valve amp will win the rally.

The only measurements the objectivist has access to with amplifiers are the ones akin to the drag race.

I'll add that at least one forum effectively collapsed through perpetual circular subjectivist/objectivist debating. I will say that if you can't trust your ears you should look for another pastime/way to spend your disposable income for nothing else really matters.

tfarney
09-12-2008, 17:13
Hi Tim,

Welcome back. During 'working hours' we're always thinking about our members! Nice post. The only bit that I find necessary to dispute (or challenge) is this:



Define "superior" in a universal context. Do we listen with our ears or with an oscilloscope? :)

Marco.

Well, this is where we get into the subjective stuff that can be very limiting to conversations. Clearly, I was talking about measurement, and a redbook cd has lower noise, lower distortion, better dynamic range, etc....

If I listen with my ears (which are the only ones that matter to me :)), to a really well-mastered redbook cd, it sounds better too. Your mileage may vary, of course, but hear clarity, depth, detail and sweet, sweet music in good digital that is, to my ears, masked by vinyl's surface noise, RIAA curve and inner groove distortion. Right now I'm listening to Knopfler's "Sailing to Philadelphia," a wonderful recording with a great depth of inner detail that I would not want masked by vinyl's limitations.

Valves? If they are really well done, they're nearly as open a window as good solid state or digital, but then that sort of defeats their purpose, which gets to the really subjective stuff: If the sound of vinyl or horns or even old-school "tubey" tubes pleases you and increases your listening pleasure, that's all that matters. The pursuit of "live in my living room" may as well be the search for the holy grail, anyway. Microphones don't hear like ears. Studios don't sound like clubs and concert halls, and multi track recording is an inherently flawed, nearly impossible methodology for simulating the sound of a live performance.

IE: It's going to sound like a recording anyway. Forget transparency. Forget resolution. If it sounds good it is good.

Tim

Colin
09-12-2008, 17:15
I would say that from an objective view point it can be shown that Red Book CD does outperform Vinyl. As in a well Recorded master, well engineered for transfer to Vinyl and CD, the CD will measure better than Vinyl. Trouble with that is that I will still buy the big plastic pizza thingy. Why? Don't know, it’s a question I have asked myself many times, don't know is not true of course, I know why, I prefer vinyl, but I don't know if I prefer the sound of vinyl, if I prefer the tactile thing with vinyl, or just the joy of reading a media carrier that is easy on the eye. I cannot separate one out from the other, as they are all part of the (sorry about this-imagination runs away again) Vinyl Experience.

That would to me suggest that part of the audiophile thing comes from not just the pleasure of the music, but from taking pleasure from the whole experience, justification of leisure maybe, but enjoyment of sensory pleasure certainly. If we get more pleasure by using more esoteric kit, then that has to be personal choice. If we feel that our ears are better suited to meeting our audio needs than a Journo, with or without test meter, than that has to be fine too. What I can manage without is the mine's bigger, better, newer, etc bitching contests that can easily ensue any personal preference discussions

tfarney
09-12-2008, 17:17
I will say that if you can't trust your ears...

I can and I do. I just don't hear the same things the vinyl/valve camp hears.

Tim

greenhomeelectronics
09-12-2008, 17:25
Thing is with measuring things is that we would expect the things that come out well in test to sound the best but that is rarely true.
If we consider the "perfect" amplifier it will produce a signal at it's output that is identical to the signal at it's input in every characteristec except amplitude. Put simply the output is the same as the input but bigger. All amplifiers should be theoretically capable of doing this and under test will all show a similar (in scientific terms) Total harmonic distortion. Yet there are monumental differences in amplifier performance so there has to be something in there that can not be measured, there also has to be a degree of distortion (difference between input and output) that can be beneficial - the thing that adds character if you like. What is true for amplifiers is no doubt true for any other component. I know there are many other parameters eg slew rates, transient current, damping factor etc but hopefully you get my drift.
I guess what I am trying to say is that what may be scientifically superior may not be audibly superior, particularly when it is so hard to replicate real life in a lab environment.
I will continue to trust my ears, keep an open mind and respect other people's opinions and choices as long as they coincide with my own thoughts :-)
As a final thought, one of the regulars here posted about my sterling speaker cables on another forum. Some people came along and agreed with his positive observations, others did not. Strangely the ones that criticised or questioned my cables had, without exception, neither seen nor used them. I wonder what that tells us?
All the best to all, sorry if that rambles a bit.
Dave.

tfarney
09-12-2008, 17:26
That would to me suggest that part of the audiophile thing comes from not just the pleasure of the music, but from taking pleasure from the whole experience, justification of leisure maybe, but enjoyment of sensory pleasure certainly. If we get more pleasure by using more esoteric kit, then that has to be personal choice. If we feel that our ears are better suited to meeting our audio needs than a Journo, with or without test meter, than that has to be fine too. What I can manage without is the mine's bigger, better, newer, etc bitching contests that can easily ensue any personal preference discussions

I agree completely. If we could simply agree that these technologies sound different, and state our preferences without insisting on the superiority of our personal choices, we'd be done. But then, if we took that same idea and extended it to all the other choices we make, we've cut off the audiophile discussion at the source. We'd have to talk about music, and how various recordings sound on our various types of kit, recognizing that it is all pretty subjective. Might make an interesting board actually...

Tim

Marco
09-12-2008, 17:33
All amplifiers should be theoretically capable of doing this and under test will all show a similar (in scientific terms) Total harmonic distortion. Yet there are monumental differences in amplifier performance so there has to be something in there that can not be measured...

How absolutely true, Dave! The fact is not everything in hi-fi genuinely heard by our ears can currently be measured, as ably demonstrated by your point above. This is the mistake objectivists make and won't admit.

If we accept this fact then how can our currently available measurement parameters for hi-fi (and partnering apparatus) possibly tell the whole story? This kind of makes Tim's earlier assertion somewhat moot:


redbook cds and solid state are demonstrably, measurably superior to vinyl and valves.


"Measurably superior" using currently known parameters, maybe, but as has been correctly stated, that doesn't necessarily tell the whole story...

Tim (and others) I'll get back you later. I must attend to dinner :)

Marco.

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 17:55
I remember an audio magazine where Tim de Paravicini stated that valves and solid state can sound the same, and vice versa, it was all in the design and circuit topology.

I have also seen technical data showing actual dynamic range of vinyl to be higher than CD. There used to be a link going around.

There is also some debate over VTA being as claimed with regards to changes in sound.

Personally I like large powerful and silent solid state power amps, I like certain valve pre amps if silent. I like XLR. I like 16 bit 44khz digital because I use such material. I like record players because most reissues of old stuff is rather poor.

Most of all I like large speakers with good amplification.

Recently I have been getting fed up with cables and supports and computer audio.

The reason for this post was due to an article which seemed to belittle forum members.

I am aware digital is getting better, but I feel that early detrimental reports of audio from computers seem to have been swept under teh carpet, with only the highlights being reported. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY COMPUTER COMPONENTS DESIGNED FOR AUDIO USE OR TESTED AS SUCH. So as far as I am concerned it is all FOO until more robust testing is done.

Hi-Fi Choice last month stated to a reader that testing such was impossible due to codecs and such producing variable results. Says a lot I think, to put that in context is like stating we cannot review CD players because of different analogue stages and such.
In other words Hi-Fi Choice CANNOT discuss any sort of technical or performance differences between computers and related software for music, showing them as complete charlatans.

Which is why I am starting to get fed up with, and give up on cables, for years people have claimed to have heard differences, discussed reviews and magazine articles, and quoted claims made by manufacturers, just to get slated, slandered and de-buncked as muppets by the technical fraternity.

No matter how much abuse a customer or reader has came under, in the last ten years I have not seen one reviewer or manufacturer stick his neck out and substantiate any claim or provide any technical evidence or support to such debate.

That is starting to tell me something......

Racks and supports are more of a domestic problem, well the government too, but some other day...

Only opinion mind you, but at the end of the day the strongest argument is on teh other side of the fence, and the only people arguing on the manufacturers and magazines behalf are what seems to be referred to as half a brain idiots and Foo believers.

The industry attitudes are going down the Pan, and reviewers are slagging off certain types of forum members, yet it is due to the magazine reviewers that such mentality exists.

I said before for such attitudes to change the industry HAS to start providing ROBUST evidence. We can already see the changes in review styles, commitment is in retreat, why, well I think until evidence is produced we know why.

Mike
09-12-2008, 18:03
If the sound of vinyl or horns or even old-school "tubey" tubes pleases you and increases your listening pleasure, that's all that matters. The pursuit of "live in my living room" may as well be the search for the holy grail, anyway. Microphones don't hear like ears. Studios don't sound like clubs and concert halls, and multi track recording is an inherently flawed, nearly impossible methodology for simulating the sound of a live performance.

IE: It's going to sound like a recording anyway. Forget transparency. Forget resolution. If it sounds good it is good.

I really like that bit. :)

DSJR
09-12-2008, 18:04
I find myself agreeing with all of you here....... (duh!)

I used to love the test reports of anciant times, where listening tests were barely mentioned and the first HiFi Choice issue where Angus MacKenzie slaughtered a few sacred speaker cows (there were reasons why some of the speakers were bad - overdriving in the prior technical tests apparently, but the Martin Colloms authored "Choices" that followed were far more careful in their wording).

In the eighties, "perceived" sound quality with no established audio or musical reference became the norm and all sorts of rubbish product got w@nked over. Interested consumers didn't know what was going on (and the few left still don't IMO) yet still need an opinion to help their choice I think.

I rarely read mags these days, so haven't seen the article referred to, but as in all hobby areas, there are the "ego's" who really believe what they believe. Some of these own Naim, others Linn, yet more have Quad for example. The best of these people like to have a yarn about different products online and I for one have learned much from reading various discussions on different products. The others just want a fight and this is where it falls down...

I have to say that the interesting thing recently for me has been a B&O forum I occasionally post on. The people there are more than ready to say when they think B&O have gone wrong with certain products and there's more than one suggestion for adding a thin felt style mat to some of their turntables (and not from me either!) to improve the sound (often it does, but that's for another time). Cap kits are available apparently for their better 1970's receivers like the 3000, 4000 and 4400 (and they're very much better than the Jap Crap we often sold) and the number of recommendations to replace the crossover caps in their speakers astounds me. yet when this kind of thing is suggested for equally old Naim gear the "noise" is so loud it raises the roof!

Anyway, I've had my say. I hope it's not totally off the track...

tfarney
09-12-2008, 18:06
How absolutely true, Dave! The fact is not everything in hi-fi genuinely heard by our ears can currently be measured, as ably demonstrated by your point above. This is the mistake objectivists make and won't admit.

If we accept this fact then how can our available measurement parameters for hi-fi (and partnering apparatus) possibly tell the whole story?

Tim (and others) I'll get back you later. I must attend to dinner :)

Marco.

OK, let's forget measurement for a moment. It doesn't serve the discussion anyway. Let's talk only about what we hear which is, of course, what matters. This....


Yet there are monumental differences in amplifier performance so there has to be something in there that can not be measured...

...is completely contrary to my listening experience. Perhaps, as another friend on another board as suggested, it is that once you hear the difference, it is all you hear, and it looms much larger than life. Perhaps. But if I hear monumental or, for that matter, anything more than subtle differences between well designed and implemented electronics, I assume something is broken. I've had opportunities to A/B solid state, digital and valve amplification, driving the same, pretty revealing transducers (Sennehiser HD580s, Vienna Acoustics Mozarts). They sounded different. But the differences were very subtle, not monumental. I'm sure any of us would have found ourselves describing the differences in subtle, subjective terms. One seemed a bit leaner. The other had an lower midrange warmth, an upper midrange smoothness. The third seemed to reveal a bit more inner detail as the noise floor dropped away...that kind of thing.

Subtle, by any definition. Swap the Senns for a pair of AKGs, the Viennas for Klispchorns? Now we can, perhaps, start using words like monumental, day and night, dramatic....I sometimes think more than half of the audiophile debate is a matter of semantics :).

Wasn't it Wilson Audio that once made a huge impression on a trade show full of audiophiles, vendors and dealers with their flagship speaker, only to reveal at the end that the source was an iPod? If no one could walk into that booth and spot that one blind...

Tim

Colin
09-12-2008, 18:13
being slagged off for holding differing views is nothing new, neither is the manufacturing and supply side of consumer products making 'iffy' claims about the product being supplied. For all I know anti ageing creams and I/C cables fall into the same category, as in it seems to be down to the consumer to prove they don't, rather than the maker to prove they do, or don't.

Computer audio is in the middle of a re-birth at the moment, partially I assume because the sound has improved, partially because of the popularity of the Ipod and its ilk, and I would think partially because it can. By that I mean that computers, networking and Hi Fi all pretty much fall into the boys toys box, and if the boys can find a challenge then they will. The improvement, and change to computer stored and generated audio is managing to divide itself into camps though, Windoze v Mac appearing to be the main ones at the mo.

To keep the holding differing views thought, while tapping this on my laptop, in the background I'm ripping CD's to flac, I'm being different though, using *nix software on a intel PC, not apple but SuSe.

We can all do are own thing, experience, thought process, and spare cash normally being the telling factor

Marco
09-12-2008, 18:21
I sometimes think more than half of the audiophile debate is a matter of semantics :)


Indeed, Tim! I also think that in many cases it's down to the hugely varying levels of listening experience of the participants concerned.

Quite simply, although a highly subjective term, "monumental" differences do exist between amplifiers, and indeed between other items of hi-fi equipment (I can cite relevant examples if you wish) but unless your available benchmark from which to judge is suitably diverse and wide-ranging then it's very easy to arrive at the conclusions you've reached ;)

Great discussion this, chaps. Right, I must run. More later!

Marco.

tfarney
09-12-2008, 18:38
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY COMPUTER COMPONENTS DESIGNED FOR AUDIO USE OR TESTED AS SUCH. So as far as I am concerned it is all FOO until more robust testing is done.


This is based in misunderstanding, I think. There is only one thing you can do to design computer equipment for audio use: Make it quiet. And there are silent servers being made for this purpose. Beyond that, it is a matter of the software, and that matter is a very simple one of keeping the digital information bit perfect throughout the process. This is built into the Mac operating system through Core Audio -- if you don't believe there are computer systems designed for audio, visit a recording studio (they're called Macs) -- and is easily attainable in XP and Vista. And that's it. Keep the zeros and ones perfectly matched until they reach digital to analog conversion. If anyone tells you that anything else prior to the DAC effects the quality of the audio signal, sit back and patiently await the sales pitch for the bridge. Prior to the DAC there is no audio signal, and matching bits are all that matter. There is nothing else. Bit perfect digital communication is not difficult, new or in need of development. It is a very mature technology, and the very same one that keeps Voodoo from showing up at your end of this communication as ooVodo. Properly implemented, all the computer-as-source approach does is eliminate all the mechanical problems of a rapidly spinning disk and allow you to organize your music collection into a very intuitive database.

Tim

tfarney
09-12-2008, 18:52
Quite simply, although a highly subjective term, "monumental" differences do exist between amplifiers, and indeed between other items of hi-fi equipment (I can cite relevant examples if you wish) but unless your available benchmark from which to judge is suitably diverse and wide-ranging then it's very easy to arrive at the conclusions you've reached ;)

Marco.

My benchmarks include more than 30 years as a musician, playing the actual instruments with other musicians and hearing them right in front of me, Marco. They also include working in quite a few recording studios full of top-notch pro gear and listening to tons of consumer audio (phile and otherwise), of varying designs and price levels, for many, many years.

I'm quite sorry to have to say so, Marco, but this kind of condescension is at the heart of my absence from AOS for the past few months. Not that it is unique here. The last defense of the self-appointed audiophile authority is always the lack of experience or the limitations of the systems of those who don't see things his way. Same as it ever was.

Tim

Marco
09-12-2008, 19:05
Tim,

You misunderstand me. I'm not questioning your experience as a musician in terms of you using it to judge hi-fi equipment, far from it. I have virtually no real benchmark as far as playing real instruments are concerned, so I would be in no position to question you in that respect.

As you've often mentioned yourself in previous posts (or at least suggested as much) your hi-fi experience isn't quite as extensive as that of your experience of hearing real music played as a musician. I suspect that I have a more wide-ranging and diverse benchmark from which to judge with hi-fi equipment, that's all (although I perhaps wish it were the other way round like with you), and of course that is what we were discussing...

If one wishes to hear "monumental" differences between amplifiers then simply listen to a 2-watt single-ended tube amp versus a 1kw transistor amp through appropriate speakers using otherwise the same system.

I trust that clears up the confusion :)

Right, can I finish dinner now? :eyebrows:

;)

Marco.

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 19:12
This is based in misunderstanding, I think. There is only one thing you can do to design computer equipment for audio use: Make it quiet. And there are silent servers being made for this purpose. Beyond that, it is a matter of the software, and that matter is a very simple one of keeping the digital information bit perfect throughout the process. This is built into the Mac operating system through Core Audio -- if you don't believe there are computer systems designed for audio, visit a recording studio (they're called Macs) -- and is easily attainable in XP and Vista. And that's it. Keep the zeros and ones perfectly matched until they reach digital to analog conversion. If anyone tells you that anything else prior to the DAC effects the quality of the audio signal, sit back and patiently await the sales pitch for the bridge. Prior to the DAC there is no audio signal, and matching bits are all that matter. There is nothing else. Bit perfect digital communication is not difficult, new or in need of development. It is a very mature technology, and the very same one that keeps Voodoo from showing up at your end of this communication as ooVodo. Properly implemented, all the computer-as-source approach does is eliminate all the mechanical problems of a rapidly spinning disk and allow you to organize your music collection into a very intuitive database.

Tim

Hmm Exactly where problems start.

Make it quiet, yet one of the biggest bug bears regarding computer audio (from Mac and PC) was due to power supplies introducing noise into the mains, and operating systems running tasks in backgrounds. Do you also remember early attempts of computer audio with valve circuits in motherboards? Inside a computer (MAC or PC) used to be regarded as a pretty poor place for audio circuitry in the past.

As for MACs in recording studios, that was not always the case, and there are plenty of software for PC only. MACs have gained popularity and made an effort to address a certain clientèle that is all. My work gets better deals on Apple computers than any PC manufacturer offers, hence why they are popular, student card holders get discount too, and they are by far the best and easiest option for the lifestyle concious teenager with a bedroom band.

Lets not start the MAC shite because it has been well enough proven that both MAC and PC audio quality can be improved on, both have their pro's and con's and MAC I-Tunes is getting worse than Windows updates. I have used MAC and PC since the original beige G3 dawned (a product which had video and audio RCA outputs), where overclocking MACs involved a solder iron. I still remember when digital recording became possible due to companies releasing CD burners for PC, and the first TOAST.

As for nothing before the DAC being important, that is exactly the sort of blind stupidity that makes your above opinion questionable and therefore worthless. Hello, DAC's use PROCESSING and ERROR CORRECTION!

Any idiot knows that not all digital sources are perfect, most studios re-clock for that reason. Jitter was an issue hence DAC manufacturers addressed it!

If there was no variation in digital sources then professional DAC manufacturers and such would not have designed DAC's with enough processing to ensure all input sounded as similar as damn near identical as possible.

Manufacturers would not put effort into matching output impedance cable impedance and input impedance in digital systems.

The very existence of error correction and DAC's designed to perform well regardless of input may well be regarded as PROOF not all digital sources were the same.

Which is why we have two sides, one spouting Voodoo the other DooDoo.

If a DAC is designed to perform well and offer the same level of fidelity regardless of input with judicious processing, how can you tell someone the input is the same? And how well can a product be expected to perform if test bench results are more important and the product is designed to sound the same with a specific quality target regardless of input?

Your sort of patronizing shite and MAC fashion Nazi behaviour is as much to blame as magazine journalism for the attitude you get in response.

Processing DVD to 1080 should be as good as any other 1080 display but of course we can see that is not true, can't we? Pretty sure if it was with ears and a test bench we would have the same babble.

Bugger the signal, we can "MAKE" it sound correct.

And remember it is OK to act like an idiot, my excuse is internet magazines and forum hype.

;)

PS a hard drive is a rapidly spinning disc, and I am sure many are well aware computer audio is the next best thing currently, but still a child under constant improvement and development, I care not if it is a MAC or PC, so far I have not been as satisfied as I would like with both. Nor have I been satisfied with the It's better cause, as there has not been any technical debate regarding whey certain performance parameters exist in computer audio, all we have is claims and people saying "this sounded better" and it is exactly like cables all over again.

Steve Toy
09-12-2008, 19:12
I'm quite sorry to have to say so, Marco, but this kind of condescension is at the heart of my absence from AOS for the past few months. Not that it is unique here. The last defense of the self-appointed audiophile authority is always the lack of experience or the limitations of the systems of those who don't see things his way. Same as it ever was.




Tim,

Marco did put a little wink smiley after his post. To me that meant it was a bit of well-intended ribbing. Your more objectivist stance on here is probably the most reasonably argued one from that particular camp I've ever come across. We are poles apart on the issue of amps sounding different (particular when we start changing driver valves in our amps and hearing what we consider to be considerable differences...) but your opinion is as valid as Marco's on this. When we express opinions (and that's all they are) we do so with our Admin hats well-and-truly OFF!

Our own experiences do vary enormously but every one is a truth even with the apparent contradictions. I will say though that when a number of people are present together simultaneously sharing a particular audio demonstration, differences of opinion on what is heard are extremely rare. Any differences that subsequently exist are simply down to preferences.

Marco
09-12-2008, 19:23
Make it quiet, yet one of the biggest bug bears regarding computer audio (from Mac and PC) was due to power supplies introducing noise into the mains, and operating systems running tasks in backgrounds. Do you also remember early attempts of computer audio with valve circuits in motherboards? Inside a computer (MAC or PC) used to be regarded as a pretty poor place for audio circuitry in the past.


Great points, Steve; highly relevant, and often overlooked by the pro-computer audio fraternity... Switch-mode PSUs, widely used in computers, are not in my experience in any way 'hi-fi friendly' - quite the opposite in fact, they're as 'noisy' as hell. No discerning hi-fi designer would feature them in any of his (or her) designs, and equally, I suspect that no discerning audiophile/enthusiast would use equipment featuring one in their system. I certainly wouldn't.

Jeez, at this rate it looks like I should just put my dinner in the bin! :lol:

:cool:

Marco.

P.S Tim, Steve (Toy) is absolutely correct in his assessment of our earlier situation.

anthonyTD
09-12-2008, 19:24
Thing is with measuring things is that we would expect the things that come out well in test to sound the best but that is rarely true.
If we consider the "perfect" amplifier it will produce a signal at it's output that is identical to the signal at it's input in every characteristec except amplitude. Put simply the output is the same as the input but bigger. All amplifiers should be theoretically capable of doing this and under test will all show a similar (in scientific terms) Total harmonic distortion. Yet there are monumental differences in amplifier performance so there has to be something in there that can not be measured, there also has to be a degree of distortion (difference between input and output) that can be beneficial - the thing that adds character if you like. What is true for amplifiers is no doubt true for any other component. I know there are many other parameters eg slew rates, transient current, damping factor etc but hopefully you get my drift.
I guess what I am trying to say is that what may be scientifically superior may not be audibly superior, particularly when it is so hard to replicate real life in a lab environment.
I will continue to trust my ears, keep an open mind and respect other people's opinions and choices as long as they coincide with my own thoughts :-)
As a final thought, one of the regulars here posted about my sterling speaker cables on another forum. Some people came along and agreed with his positive observations, others did not. Strangely the ones that criticised or questioned my cables had, without exception, neither seen nor used them. I wonder what that tells us?
All the best to all, sorry if that rambles a bit.
Dave.

great post dave...
anthony...

Marco
09-12-2008, 19:40
Too right. It should be made into a permanent sticky for reference! :clap:

Especially this bit:


I guess what I am trying to say is that what may be scientifically superior may not be audibly superior, particularly when it is so hard to replicate real life in a lab environment.


The 'scientific types' in hi-fi often conveniently overlook this fact!

Anthony, what's your view of switch-mode PSUs when used in a hi-fi equipment context?

Marco.

Steve Toy
09-12-2008, 19:48
Anthony just built me a 200 VA I&E super-regulated transformer to replace a SMPSU for my CD player. It's made a really big improvement. I guess that says it all.

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 19:49
Great points, Steve; highly relevant, and often overlooked by the pro-computer audio fraternity... Switch-mode PSUs, widely used in computers, are not in any way 'hi-fi friendly'!

Jeez, at this rate it looks like I should just put my dinner in the bin! :lol:

:cool:

Marco.

P.S Tim, Steve (Toy) is absolutely correct in his assessment of our earlier situation.

Yet all my points could be completely wrong or irrelevant in average homes or listening environments, as I said we seem to have side stepped issues of detrimental performance claimed years ago, and believe it is better, yet still have small individuals showing that with different software what we think is better can still be improved.

No one (apart from Audio manufacturers designing servers) as far as I am aware has made any attempt to look at what does and does not affect audio within computers with any real effort, I am aware some motherboards are better than others, some GPU's may require shielding, background applications and circuit routing may affect performance, but there is no robust evidence.

I was interested in designing my own HD digital transport, this was to replay any digital file from standard CD to 24bit/192khz audio. Data transfer would have been the likes of EAC or such for CD and HD downloads via FLAC and such, these would have been stored on 1tb Samsung drives, and audio files transferred to a solid state drive for critical listening.

Biggest issues were audio quality shielded PSU's, motherboards which are not detrimental, and an OS designed for such application, which would switch off all apps and unused drives utilising the simplest data transfer via a bespoke media player. (6" touch screen interface on faceplate)

I could still build this, though it's costly. But why, I would be using standard PC kit designed for PC use, and from preliminary investigation is no more enjoyable than a bespoke CD player, and FACT initially very inconvenient to implement. Hardly audiophile stuff.
So maybe I will wait until apple or Linux get their act together. At the moment an apple laptop does seem the way to go for audio, with a PC laptop for movies, but the apple costs around three times the PC equivalent and still not specified as I would like, so a compromise which I still think is no better than my CD replay devices, and a laptop for movies is not better than a £200 BlueRay player.

anthonyTD
09-12-2008, 19:59
Too right. It should be made into a permanent sticky for reference! :clap:

Anthony, what's your view of switch-mode PSUs when used in a hi-fi equipment context?

Marco.
:help::doh::wah:
just to start with:lolsign:
seriously though, one of the main reasons for switch mode power supplies to be used so widely in virtually everything from TV's to computers is because of their efficiency, the reason they are so efficient is because they switch, and thats the problem, to cut a long story short, the power stations should realy be having an easier life now you would think, but quite the oposite is probably closer to the truth, how come, well the switching noise from all those switch mode power supplies in all of our consumer equipment is being sent back down the power lines and in some cases causing the generators to over heat! apart from them being small/compact,light, and cheap to manufacture, i see no positive reasons to even place one near an audio system let alone in one!!!
anthony,TD...

tfarney
09-12-2008, 20:01
Hmm Exactly where problems start.

Make it quiet, yet one of the biggest bug bears regarding computer audio (from Mac and PC) was due to power supplies introducing noise into the mains, and operating systems running tasks in backgrounds. Do you also remember early attempts of computer audio with valve circuits in motherboards? Inside a computer (MAC or PC) used to be regarded as a pretty poor place for audio circuitry in the past.

As for MACs in recording studios, that was not always the case, and there are plenty of software for PC only. MACs have gained popularity and made an effort to address a certain clientèle that is all. My work gets better deals on Apple computers than any PC manufacturer offers, hence why they are popular, student card holders get discount too, and they are by far the best and easiest option for the lifestyle concious teenager with a bedroom band.

Lets not start the MAC shite because it has been well enough proven that both MAC and PC audio quality can be improved on, both have their pro's and con's and MAC I-Tunes is getting worse than Windows updates. I have used MAC and PC since the original beige G3 dawned (a product which had video and audio RCA outputs), where overclocking MACs involved a solder iron. I still remember when digital recording became possible due to companies releasing CD burners for PC, and the first TOAST.

As for nothing before the DAC being important, that is exactly the sort of blind stupidity that makes your above opinion questionable and therefore worthless. Hello, DAC's use PROCESSING and ERROR CORRECTION!

Any idiot knows that not all digital sources are perfect, most studios re-clock for that reason. Jitter was an issue hence DAC manufacturers addressed it!

If there was no variation in digital sources then professional DAC manufacturers and such would not have designed DAC's with enough processing to ensure all input sounded as similar as damn near identical as possible.

Manufacturers would not put effort into matching output impedance cable impedance and input impedance in digital systems.

The very existence of error correction and DAC's designed to perform well regardless of input may well be regarded as PROOF not all digital sources were the same.

Which is why we have two sides, one spouting Voodoo the other DooDoo.

If a DAC is designed to perform well and offer the same level of fidelity regardless of input with judicious processing, how can you tell someone the input is the same? And how well can a product be expected to perform if test bench results are more important and the product is designed to sound the same with a specific quality target regardless of input?

Your sort of patronizing shite and MAC fashion Nazi behaviour is as much to blame as magazine journalism for the attitude you get in response.

Processing DVD to 1080 should be as good as any other 1080 display but of course we can see that is not true, can't we? Pretty sure if it was with ears and a test bench we would have the same babble.

Fuck the signal, we can "MAKE" it sound correct.

And remember it is OK to act like an idiot, my excuse is internet magazines and forum hype.

;)

PS a hard drive is a rapidly spinning disc, and I am sure many are well aware computer audio is the next best thing currently, but still a child under constant improvement and development, I care not if it is a MAC or PC, so far I have not been as satisfied as I would like with both. Nor have I been satisfied with the It's better cause, as there has not been any technical debate regarding whey certain performance parameters exist in computer audio, all we have is claims and people saying "this sounded better" and it is exactly like cables all over again.

No fanboy elitist Mac shite intended. I thought i made it clear that it is a pretty simple matter to get bit-perfect data out of Windows as well. Core Audio makes it simpler in OSX, and its early implementation won Mac the lion's share of the pro business, but I didn't mean to overstate it. The right software, and throwing a few virtual switches in Windows will do the trick and even the score, even in the humblest Windows machines.

The "noise" I was referring to is the physical noise of fans and spinning hard drives, not the electronic noise in the internal computer environment. The latter problem is, while overstated these days, very easily addressed with the very common solution of getting the digital to analog processing outside of that environment - the external dac.

Error correction in DACs does not correct bit errors, which do not exist unless something is terribly wrong, but timing errors - jitter - most of which is generated by the very DACs that are attempting to correct it. Actual bit errors would not result in the subtle distortions attributed to jitter by those attempting to sell more and more expensive DACs. They would result in unmistakable errors that would not even warrant discussion in audiophile circles. It would result in the audio equivalent of me typing "voodoo" and you receiving "ovoodo," thus my poorly-chosen example. Sorry it pissed you off.

And yes, a hard drive is a spinning disc, but it doesn't spin to "play" the music. It simply sends data, in batches, to RAM, verifies a bit perfect match of the data in RAM back to the data on the hard drive, and then the data is sent from RAM to the DAC. The spinning disc is effectively isolated from the problem.

Last but not least, I don't claim that computer audio is "better." Given properly implemented error correction and isolation of the DAC from either disc, there should be absolutely no difference, with the same DAC, between a computer as source and an optical drive as source. The zeros and ones will be identical and the quality of the audio signal will be determined in their conversion and in the analog equipment that follows.

Computer vs optical disk is a simple choice. Do you like the convenience of having all of your music in a database, or do you prefer going through the disks, optical or vinyl, and laying your hands on the media? The voodoo is in believing either is superior to the other. And if there is anything I actually said, as opposed to something you perceived, which justifies all the anger and obscenity in your post, I offer my apology. If not, I'll accept yours.

Tim

Marco
09-12-2008, 20:05
As a final thought, one of the regulars here posted about my sterling speaker cables on another forum. Some people came along and agreed with his positive observations, others did not. Strangely the ones that criticised or questioned my cables had, without exception, neither seen nor used them. I wonder what that tells us?


Dave,

It tells us that they are typical inflexible thinking, belligerent, closed-minded objectivists, always spoiling for a fight (and boy did I give them one in the past :eyebrows:) when their dyed-in-the-wool mindset is challenged. I've encountered and indeed 'crossed swords' with many of the breed in the past. Ignore them. Their hi-fi 'views' are based on nothing much more than hot air and years of ingrained prejudice. Fortunately AOS doesn't seem to attract their type, and long may it continue :)

I think that the subjectivist 'use your ears always' message and open-mindedness we promote acts towards them like garlic does to a vampire ;)

Marco.

SteveTheShadow
09-12-2008, 20:07
Hmm Exactly where problems start.

As for MACs in recording studios..... MACs have gained popularity....
MAC shite......MACs involved a solder iron.....MAC fashion Nazi behaviour



It's bloody Mac!!! not MAC.

MAC stands for MEDIA ACCESS CONTROLLER and has nothing to do with makes of computer.

FYI pal the company is Apple... not MAC

Apple makes the Macintosh computer ...ie they make Macs.

I'm sick and tired of this ruddy misuse.

Nobody I know who uses a Mac is a Nazi or a fashionista. We just prefer to use a proper computer with a decent operating system not the upside down and backwards third rate malware infested knock-off that is Windows!

Rant over.

Steve

DSJR
09-12-2008, 20:21
I'm way out of my comfort zone here, but as I understand it, one advantage of computer audio is the better error correction compared to "real time" reading of CD discs and "correction on the fly" - at least I think that's how I read it...

The trouble with this bl***y hobby is that it's so subjective. The heart almost always rules the head where HiFi is concerned and as our ears are VERY easily fooled (our eyesight is very much better - that's the way we're made I'm afraid), there is much error possible.

Marco, can I take up something you said earlier? Comparing a little single ended valve amp with a mega power solid state one will definitely bring out audible differences and these differences will be measurable too. I read recently of Carver (?) once designing a transistor amp to sound identical to a reference Conrad-Johnson ss model. All he needed to do was dirty the performance up here and there......................

In my experience, I think I can say that the best amps within reason all sound very good with negligible differences between them. I once removed an expensive Krell power amp to check out a client's Quad 606 and was stunned how good (musical and spacious) the latter sounded, stone cold too and nothing like as "bad" as I thought it would sound. The key here is that the speakers were fairly efficient and with a reasonable impedance curve (Wilson Witt's mk1 actually).

Sorry if I'm thread cr@pping..

Marco
09-12-2008, 20:24
Tim,


The "noise" I was referring to is the physical noise of fans and spinning hard drives, not the electronic noise in the internal computer environment. The latter problem is, while overstated these days, very easily addressed with the very common solution of getting the digital to analog processing outside of that environment - the external dac.


Yes, but that won't help if the whole lot is connected to the same mains supply. The switch-mode PSUs in use throughout your average computer audio system will 'infect' every other component connected to the same supply with generated noise, and incidentally, the same goes for your average DAC or CD player ;)

Digital equipment of any description is notorious for chucking noise into the mains.

The only solution is to use a seperate mains line for the SMPS gear and try and isolate it from the rest of the equipment, but even that won't fully cure the problem.

Furthermore, I'm not sure I would agree that the problem of noise created by SMPSUs is "overstated". Read what the likes of Anthony here has written (someone with years of experience designing both valve and transistor equipment and supplying it commercially to enthusiasts and also to professional studios) for closer to the real truth.

Marco.

tfarney
09-12-2008, 20:26
Dave,

It tells us that they are typical inflexible thinking, belligerent, closed-minded objectivists, always spoiling for a fight (and boy did I give them one in the past :eyebrows:) when their dyed-in-the-wool mindset is challenged. I've encountered and 'crossed swords' with many of their breed in the past. Ignore them. Their hi-fi 'views' are based on nothing much more than hot air and years of ingrained prejudice. Fortunately AOS doesn't seem to attract their type, and long may it continue :)

I think the subjectivist 'use your ears always' message and open-mindedness we promote acts like garlic does to a vampire ;)

Marco.

Agreed. And at the opposite extreme are audiophile tweakers who insist on the superiority of what they hear in spite of a complete lack of evidence beyond their own subjective opinions. It is anything but open mindedness. Open mindedness, Marco, would be "I like the sound of my system, I hope you enjoy yours." Open-mindedness would negate the need to discuss all of this, much less challenge all comers to hear what you hear. True open-mindedness would kill off all of the audiophile arguments and, therefore, the audiophile dialog once and for all, as it would leave us with nothing to discuss. I guess we'd just have to go listen to music.

Peace out.

Tim

Colin
09-12-2008, 20:27
*

Marco
09-12-2008, 20:33
It's bloody Mac!!! not MAC.

MAC stands for MEDIA ACCESS CONTROLLER and has nothing to do with makes of computer.

FYI pal the company is Apple... not MAC

Apple makes the Macintosh computer ...ie they make Macs.

I'm sick and tired of this ruddy misuse.

Nobody I know who uses a Mac is a Nazi or a fashionista. We just prefer to use a proper computer with a decent operating system not the upside down and backwards third rate malware infested knock-off that is Windows!

Rant over.

Steve

As Michael Winner would say: "Calm down dear, it's only a (bloody) computer!" :lol:

;)

Marco.

Marco
09-12-2008, 20:53
Tim,


And at the opposite extreme are audiophile tweakers who insist on the superiority of what they hear in spite of a complete lack of evidence beyond their own subjective opinions.


But if that's all the evidence they need why shouldn't they proclaim what they, through practical experience of experimenting with their equipment, have discovered? Their experiences are not automatically 'incorrect' or 'invalid' simply because of a lack of supporting evidence.

No-one, certainly not me, is claiming any "superiority" and saying that I am unquestionably 'right' about hi-fi. All I offer is (hopefully) an informed opinion; that's all any of us can do and to comment from whatever our experience has told us so far.

Such experiences, however, are just as valid as those of any scientist or 'objectivist type' qualifying what they've discovered with measurements (as discussed already, who knows if the measurements obtained tell the whole story or not?) and quite simply because, as far as hi-fi equipment is concerned, and how it treats music signals, science currently doesn't have all the answers. Therefore we use our ears and we report what they tell us in an open-minded way. This is what this forum is about.

We (as admin) simply facilitate the process by providing the requisite friendly environment in order for informed discussion to take place.

I do love a robust debate as long as respect is given to the opinions of all participants, and shown to the participants themselves. We will always strive to achieve that here :)

If anyone thinks this hasn't happened on this thread please let me know.

Marco.

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 20:56
No fanboy elitist Mac shite intended. I thought i made it clear that it is a pretty simple matter to get bit-perfect data out of Windows as well. Core Audio makes it simpler in OSX, and its early implementation won Mac the lion's share of the pro business, but I didn't mean to overstate it. The right software, and throwing a few virtual switches in Windows will do the trick and even the score, even in the humblest Windows machines.

The "noise" I was referring to is the physical noise of fans and spinning hard drives, not the electronic noise in the internal computer environment. The latter problem is, while overstated these days, very easily addressed with the very common solution of getting the digital to analog processing outside of that environment - the external dac.

Error correction in DACs does not correct bit errors, which do not exist unless something is terribly wrong, but timing errors - jitter - most of which is generated by the very DACs that are attempting to correct it. Actual bit errors would not result in the subtle distortions attributed to jitter by those attempting to sell more and more expensive DACs. They would result in unmistakable errors that would not even warrant discussion in audiophile circles. It would result in the audio equivalent of me typing "voodoo" and you receiving "ovoodo," thus my poorly-chosen example. Sorry it pissed you off.

And yes, a hard drive is a spinning disc, but it doesn't spin to "play" the music. It simply sends data, in batches, to RAM, verifies a bit perfect match of the data in RAM back to the data on the hard drive, and then the data is sent from RAM to the DAC. The spinning disc is effectively isolated from the problem.

Last but not least, I don't claim that computer audio is "better." Given properly implemented error correction and isolation of the DAC from either disc, there should be absolutely no difference, with the same DAC, between a computer as source and an optical drive as source. The zeros and ones will be identical and the quality of the audio signal will be determined in their conversion and in the analog equipment that follows.

Computer vs optical disk is a simple choice. Do you like the convenience of having all of your music in a database, or do you prefer going through the disks, optical or vinyl, and laying your hands on the media? The voodoo is in believing either is superior to the other. And if there is anything I actually said, as opposed to something you perceived, which justifies all the anger and obscenity in your post, I offer my apology. If not, I'll accept yours.

Tim

Hi Tim, good points and well put, thanks, and of course I do apologise for the attitude in which I posted.

greenhomeelectronics
09-12-2008, 21:01
Thanks Marco for your kind Words.
AnthonyTD, it's the switch modes without power factor correction that are the nightmare, they can do all sorts of nasties to the neutral. I seem to recall some legislation being sought many years ago when I was in telecoms, it was a particular problem with larger units. I clearly remember BT demanding all PSUs be PFC, don't know if it ever became law though.

I bought a Mac but it weighed a ton, let the rain in and made me look foolish:lolsign:
Dave.

Primalsea
09-12-2008, 21:04
How the hell did this get on to a war on PC's and Mac's??

I have used PC's for 20 years (I had a 286 when I was 13) and Mac's for 10 years. There is no way I would by a Mac for personal use as I find them to be style over substance. However I'm very fimilar with PC's and I know how to set them up properly. PC's never run as they should out of the box and most people don't even realise this or know how to sort it. Mac's tend to just work well from the off and so are actually the better choice for most people. This is in complete opposition to my boss who is a Mac fanatic. I love winding him up, everytime we have a problem with one of the Macs in the office I shrug and say "My PC has never done that".

I have managed to get my laptop (a pc) set up well as a music server. All it took was an external sound card and a DAC64 to make it go well though. I agree the SMPS's used on computers are hopeless. Rub a sensitive part of you skin over the case or a ground and you will feel a shock (do this at your own risk I don't want to see a photo of a burnt bellend on the forum). Optical connections will do the job of getting rid of SMPS noise though.

Marco
09-12-2008, 21:12
Rub a sensitive part of you skin over the case or a ground and you will feel a shock (do this at your own risk I don't want to see a photo of a burnt bellend on the forum).


Indeed. I find the smell of raw chipolatas slowly cooking somewhat repugnant :lol:


Optical connections will do the job of getting rid of SMPS noise though.

Interesting, Paul. How so?

Marco.

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 21:12
It's bloody Mac!!! not MAC.

MAC stands for MEDIA ACCESS CONTROLLER and has nothing to do with makes of computer.

FYI pal the company is Apple... not MAC

Apple makes the Macintosh computer ...ie they make Macs.

I'm sick and tired of this ruddy misuse.

Nobody I know who uses a Mac is a Nazi or a fashionista. We just prefer to use a proper computer with a decent operating system not the upside down and backwards third rate malware infested knock-off that is Windows!

Rant over.

Steve

Sorry but isn't Apple software initially a knock off of Linux? And have they not became more like PC with their change in processor? Personally as a user of Apple OS, Windows OS and Linux Distro's I see no one as superior, just what people prefer.

Anyway I will call it MAC if I like, it seems to highlight the way people SHOUT it's "virtues" :ner:
Anyway as a user of Apple software since concept I am aware to some extent of it's differences and continual development over the years, which never really matured or became popular until the Tiger OS was developed and Microsoft shafted their users even more.

Apple always were a little above the average punter cause they looked cool were given away as props in movies were offered at good discount to businesses and students, were more expensive than PC's and the people who kept messing up PC's due to a lack of knowledge felt secure.

They used to shaft users with standard PC hard drives at twice the price of any normal PC shop stock, were limited in the amount of HD space you could have, had poor GPU options, and it was always possible to build a more powerful PC for half the price which worked just as well.

Apple was the original half baked knock off, which only gained popularity due to it being profiled as a lifestyle product for a certain clientèle, and Windows losing a grip of reality and becoming too popular to keep control within its own interests.

;)

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 21:16
As Michael Winner would say: "Calm down dear, it's only a (bloody) computer!" :lol:

;)

Marco.

No Computers are PC's not MACS









:eyebrows:

anthonyTD
09-12-2008, 21:18
Thanks Marco for your kind Words.
AnthonyTD, it's the switch modes without power factor correction that are the nightmare, they can do all sorts of nasties to the neutral. I seem to recall some legislation being sought many years ago when I was in telecoms, it was a particular problem with larger units. I clearly remember BT demanding all PSUs be PFC, don't know if it ever became law though.


I bought a Mac but it weighed a ton, let the rain in and made me look foolish:lolsign:
Dave.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lolsign:

Mike
09-12-2008, 21:23
Glad to see things are 'calming down a bit'. :)

Once again, I see a thread where I feel a 'tongue in cheek' smiley might be useful. Maybe?

'ROB'! <Hint>


:lolsign:

Marco
09-12-2008, 21:29
Glad to see things are 'calming down a bit'


They were never 'un-calm' as far as I'm concerned Mikey. Passionate and robust debates are to be welcomed as long as people remain polite and respectful :)

You're too much of a delicate little flower though to hack it :eyebrows:

;)

Marco.

Mike
09-12-2008, 21:30
Yeah..... Whatever!

Marco
09-12-2008, 21:35
You're not off in wee huff again, I hope :ner:

Marco.

Beechwoods
09-12-2008, 21:43
I have been so tempted to step in and say something nice about having a Mac, but what the hell

http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/mad/mad0007.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/free-party-smiles.php)

http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/mad/mad0018.gif (http://www.thescubasite.com)


:lol:

Mike
09-12-2008, 21:45
You're not off in wee huff again, I hope :ner:

Marco.

Pffffft... don't be such a fanny! :pat:

Marco
09-12-2008, 21:48
Hehe... Good!

Marco.

tfarney
09-12-2008, 21:49
As we might say, horribly, down here in the deep south of the US...

Y'all boys are sumpin'.

Tim

Marco
09-12-2008, 22:27
I'll put that one in my 'special book', Tim :)

Dave,


Marco, can I take up something you said earlier? Comparing a little single ended valve amp with a mega power solid state one will definitely bring out audible differences and these differences will be measurable too.

Indeed. Like Tim said earlier, debates like this are partly due to semantics; in this case the use of the word "monumental".

I guess that truly "monumental" differences in hi-fi only really occur with speakers or when the same equipment is used in a different room.

However, I've certainly heard, let's call it, 'very significant' differences between amplifiers, particularly as you say between low-powered tube amps and high-powered transistor amps when used in the same system with appropriate speakers.

Marco.

greenhomeelectronics
10-12-2008, 10:58
Yes, monumental was probably overstating it a bit, maybe hugely significant would have been more appropriate :)
Whatever words are used the sentiment remains the same, it's a great hobby we have and it's great to enjoy our music in our homes on the best sytsem that we can put together - whatever that might be. Long may it continue.
Dave.

Marco
10-12-2008, 11:29
LOL! I was replying to Dave (DSJR) whom I was quoting :lolsign:

But, in any case, I agree :)

Marco.

DSJR
10-12-2008, 13:12
We hobbyists (almost always male I suspect) do tend to obsess about things and blow small differences up out of all proportion. It's good to have a hopefully understanding partner who speaks their mind (often female) as they don't have the same pre-conceived ideas as "we" do...

Filterlab
10-12-2008, 13:24
Nobody I know who uses a Mac is a Nazi or a fashionista. We just prefer to use a proper computer with a decent operating system not the upside down and backwards third rate malware infested knock-off that is Windows!

A fine pair of sentences Steve. :)

Primalsea
10-12-2008, 20:50
Marco,

The noises that you can hear through your hifi when its connected to a computer is caused by the SMPS. I have only ever found this to be transmitted via the earth connections. To get rid of them you have to isolate the grounds between your hifi and the computer. This can be done by balanced connections, a transformer based ground loop isolator or by optical connection.

sastusbulbas
10-12-2008, 21:24
Marco,

The noises that you can hear through your hifi when its connected to a computer is caused by the SMPS. I have only ever found this to be transmitted via the earth connections. To get rid of them you have to isolate the grounds between your hifi and the computer. This can be done by balanced connections, a transformer based ground loop isolator or by optical connection.

Early days reported detrimental performance before computers were even connected to audio systems, just like fridge freezers it was recommended you switch of any PC even if it was in the next room?

tfarney
11-12-2008, 02:13
I have an external hard drive, containing all my music, connected to my computer via usb. I have the computer connected to a usb audio converter via usb, which is connected to a DAC/amp via digital coax. All digital components go to one power strip, all analog to another. Each power strip is plugged into a separate circuit. Even through very sensitive Etymotic ear canal headphones, there is no noise.

Tim

SamJones
11-12-2008, 07:03
I have an external hard drive, containing all my music, connected to my computer via usb. I have the computer connected to a usb audio converter via usb, which is connected to a DAC/amp via digital coax. All digital components go to one power strip, all analog to another. Each power strip is plugged into a separate circuit. Even through very sensitive Etymotic ear canal headphones, there is no noise.

Tim

I have a similar setup to yours but plugged into a single strip. An oscilloscope may measure some minor noise but it's well below the detection threshold of my ears. The computer is equipped with quiet temperature controlled CPU and power supply fans which are barely audible with the low power requirements of audio. Like Macs, a PC running GNU/Linux has no problem with bit perfect audio but at a fraction of the cost.

Computer audio has proved ideal for me and I would unlikey retrograde to a CD player or turntable, they have clearly had their day in my opinion.

Marco
11-12-2008, 09:46
An oscilloscope may measure some minor noise but it's well below the detection threshold of my ears.


Precisely - and Tim's, too, and everyone else's, but nevertheless the noise exists and you do hear it; just not as 'noise'.


Early days reported detrimental performance before computers were even connected to audio systems, just like fridge freezers it was recommended you switch of any PC even if it was in the next room?


Steve, you are absolutely correct. It's not just noise in the mains supply itself; it's airborne interference such as RFI which things like mobile phones and computers generate that interferes with hi-fi systems. Quite simply, when you expose the room your hi-fi system lives in to the outside world (by having phone connections, modems, computers, and aerials for TVs, etc) installed in its vicinity, you're in turn exposing the sensitive circuitry in your hi-fi system to the forms of interference they attract or generate.

I have experimented quite extensively in the past with this and can clearly hear the detrimental sonic effect of having a PC (by which I mean a large stand-mounted computer, or these days my laptop) switched on in the same room where my hi-fi system is, especially when the PC or laptop are sharing the same mains supply. Separate circuits isolate things to an extent but ultimately you only have the one incoming household mains supply, so every appliance connected to it adds a detrimental effect in terms of noise, which is thus transmitted to all other items sharing the same supply, and this can be heard with sensitive audio equipment as degradation in sound quality, particularly in more revealing systems.


All digital components go to one power strip, all analog to another. Each power strip is plugged into a separate circuit. Even through very sensitive Etymotic ear canal headphones, there is no noise.


Tim, there *will* be (measurable) noise present in your system as a result of your digital computer gear (it's the same with my CDP and DAC), but your ears won't hear it as such: it will be translated as distortion, manifesting itself on music signals, and thus the sound reproduced by your hi-fi system (heard through headphones or whatever) even if you don't realise it - there is no getting away from this unfortunately. That's why filters are designed for the purpose and these can be shown through measurements to demonstrably remove the noise created as described above, the only thing is that most filters in doing so remove some of the music, too, hence why I, for example, don't use them and simply optimise my room and my system in such a way that any noise generated by the aforementioned items is minimised as far as possible.

There is nothing in my listening room apart from my hi-fi system, all my music, a carpet, and a few comfy chairs! All the necessary everyday stuff which causes interference to the system is kept in the lounge downstairs :cool:

Mains supplies worldwide have never been as 'noisy' since the advent of all the paraphernalia digital or otherwise we use nowadays - mobile phones, computers, household appliances, entertainment media, fluorescent (and especially flashing Christmas tree) lights, you name it; they all chuck noise into the mains supply to the detriment of our hi-fi systems. You can address the problem to an extent but never fully cure it. One of the best ways of reducing its effect, though, is to use analogue equipment mainly and keep computers, and other items using SMPSUs, well away from hi-fi systems! ;)

Marco.

SteveTheShadow
11-12-2008, 13:13
Now this is interesting!

I use a pair of homeplugs that use the mains wiring as an ethernet network for the Squeezebox, one by the computer and the other plugged into the same power strip as the DVD player, the TV and the Cable box.

That puts me beyond the pale, so I suppose any opinions I might have or might have expressed regarding hi-fi equipment and its sound quality or lack of can be completely dismissed as nothing more than the rantings of a fool :lol: My credibility was pretty tenuous on here before this revelation...now it must surely have been shot to pieces.

Steve

Marco
11-12-2008, 14:15
LOL!

Steve, not everyone is a lunatic like me with a dedicated music room and will go to the same extreme lengths with a hi-fi system and the mains, not to mention whatever else is necessary. 'Normal' folk live in the real world where living rooms have 'stuff' and children in them getting in the way, along with the hi-fi, so just continue building your very nice speakers, etc, and ignore my ramblings ;)

You are anything but a fool :)

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 14:53
Tim, there *will* be (measurable) noise present in your system as a result of your digital computer gear (it's the same with my CDP and DAC), but your ears won't hear it as such: it will be translated as distortion, manifesting itself on music signals, and thus the sound reproduced by your hi-fi system (heard through headphones or whatever) even if you don't realise it - there is no getting away from this unfortunately. That's why filters are designed for the purpose and these can be shown through measurements to demonstrably remove the noise created as described above, the only thing is that most filters in doing so remove some of the music, too, hence why I, for example, don't use them and simply optimise my room and my system in such a way that any noise generated by the aforementioned items is minimised as far as possible.

Well, Marco, all I can say to all of that is that someone is going to have to explain to me, with some credible science and some good references, how it is that noise in my system, which is below the threshold of human audibility, can somehow attach itself to my music, hiding its very noise-ness, and manifest itself as a distortion of the sound field or frequency response or whatever. I heard the noise. I separated components into separate circuits. The optimization, without filters, you speak of above. The noise dropped below audibility. Yet you tell me it is there, quite audible, riding the notes like little parasites, transformed into something else entirely?

You're going to need some serious science to back that up, my friend. I don't trust your ears on this one, and neither should you.

By the way, I sell the aforementioned filters. They are designed to remove noise, not musical distortion. The noise they remove only distorts the music to the extent that it is audible enough to mask certain frequencies, but in all but the most extreme examples, the opposite is the case. And they remove the noise from the power supply (not the one in your amp, the one in your wall), before the music is even in the loop, so it is quite impossible for them to filter some of your music too. Perhaps I misunderstand. Are you talking about some other "filters?"

Tim

Marco
11-12-2008, 15:28
Tim,


Well, Marco, all I can say to all of that is that someone is going to have to explain to me, with some credible science and some good references, how it is that noise in my system, which is below the threshold of human audibility, can somehow attach itself to my music, hiding its very noise-ness, and manifest itself as a distortion of the sound field or frequency response or whatever.


RFI and EMI (effectively forms of noise) are known phenomena and exist in your mains supply so therefore adversely affect the performance of audio equipment connected to said supply - you can look up exactly what they are (and their effect) on the Internet :)

You can partially filter out RFI and EMI in your mains supply, caused by computers and such like, and as far as our interest in hi-fi systems go, anything emitting an electromagnetic field near sensitive audio circuitry, but normally it comes at a price - and that price is the removal of some of the music signal with it. I can't speak for your filters as I haven't tried them, but they'd have to be different from every other ones I've tried, which all 'sit' on the sound in a negative way.

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 15:48
Tim,



RFI and EMI are known phenomena and exist in your mains supply - look up what they are (and their effect) on the Internet :)

You can partially filter out RFI and EMI in your mains supply, caused by computers and such like, and anything emitting an electromagnetic field near sensitive audio circuitry, but normally it comes at a price - and that price is the removal of some of the music signal with it. I can't speak for your filters as I haven't tried them, but they'd have to be different from every other ones I've tried, which all 'sit' on the sound in a negative way.

Marco.

I'm familiar with noise in power, Marco. I'm also familiar with where it is introduced to the signal chain, which is prior to the introduction of any musical signal, or even any digital information. This is where it is filtered -- when and where there is nothing but electrical power. No music. No data. Just voltage and noise. If filtering it there "sits" on the sound in a negative way for you, I can only conclude that you miss the noise. :)

Tim

Marco
11-12-2008, 16:16
Indeed. I think you know full well what I mean, though ;)

It's all very well filtering the mains at source (before the music signal) but that doesn't stop equipment in the replay chain later (a computer in your case, for example) putting electrical noise back onto the mains supply as a result of the function of its SMPS when switching kicks in.

The only way to cure the noise is to remove the source of the interference: in your case, your computer. Personally, I wouldn't have one near my hi-fi system. When I invest in a computer audio set-up, the PC or laptop will be kept in a totally separate room, away from the rest of my gear and on a different electrical circuit. I will simply use some high quality low-loss cable to hook it all up.

Tim, we could go round and round in circles all night debating this and in a real sense get nowhere. I *know* what I hear; if you choose to dismiss that then it is your prerogative, but there will never be an occasion in hi-fi when after thorough listening that I don't trust my ears implicitly, whether in the absence of scientific reasoning or not, because they are bloody good and have never let me down yet! :)

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 16:22
You misunderstand me. If you hear noise introduced further into the signal chain, by computer or cd player or toaster, they're your ears and you must trust them. But if filtering power, prior to the introduction of an audio signal seems to somehow remove some part of that audio signal for you, well, your ears have managed to violate not only physics, but the time-space continuum. :)

Again, perhaps we're talking about different filters. Are these fitlers of which you speak in the audio signal chain somewhere?

Tim

Marco
11-12-2008, 16:25
Yes, we appear to be talking about different things!

What I'm referring to are simply filters which plug in-line with the mains supply, normally near the point of a mains power strip, although I don't use such things. The ones I've installed there so far have all had a negative effect on the sound.

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 16:36
Yes, we appear to be talking about different things!

What I'm referring to are simply filters which plug in-line with the mains supply, normally near the point of a mains power strip, although I don't use such things. The ones I've installed there so far have all had a negative effect on the sound.

Marco.

No, if I understand what you mean by "mains" I think we're talking about a slight variation on the theme. The filters I'm thinking of are typically built into the power strip, but in more or less the same place. Are these filters somewhere between the power outlet on the wall and the first audio component? Are they designed to filter noise from power before that power reaches your system?

Tim

Marco
11-12-2008, 16:45
Are these filters somewhere between the power outlet on the wall and the first audio component? Are they designed to filter noise from power before that power reaches your system?


Yes, and they are normally plugged into a power strip or wall socket, which the system is connect to.

Like I said, the ones I've tried so far installed at that point in the mains supply have all sat on the sound, apart from one which Anthony TD designed and brought to me a few months ago, and which I'll be looking into in more detail, but the likes of Russ Andrews Accessories stuff, Vertex AQ, and countless other types I've tried, have been crap.

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 17:14
Yes, and they are normally plugged into a power strip or wall socket, which the system is connect to.

Like I said, the ones I've tried so far installed at that point in the mains supply have all sat on the sound, apart from one which Anthony TD designed and brought to me a few months ago, and which I'll be looking into in more detail, but the likes of Russ Andrews Accessories stuff, Vertex AQ, and countless other types I've tried, have been crap.

Marco.

There is, evidently, a fold in the time-space continuum in your listening room. You should really have that looked into. :)

Tim

Mike
11-12-2008, 17:21
Well, there is a school of thought that some filters/power conditioners etc. can in some circumstances sort of limit the dynamic range of some amplifiers. As if the delivery of current is being slowed when the amplifier demands it for loud/fast transients. Or something. Wonder what effect they have in the impedance?

I've had little experience of any commercial designs so can't comment with any authority myself. It's interesting though, do carry on please! :)

Cheers...

Marco
11-12-2008, 17:25
There is, evidently, a fold in the time-space continuum in your listening room. You should really have that looked into. :)


I shall consult 'Dr Who', but not as far as I'm aware, or are I suspect the hundreds of others who've tried such devices over the years in their system and reported the very same thing ;)

I'll have a word with Anthony and I'm sure he'll be able to explain better what's happening in a technical sense.

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 18:57
I shall consult 'Dr Who', but not as far as I'm aware, or are I suspect the hundreds of others who've tried such devices over the years in their system and reported the very same thing ;)

I'll have a word with Anthony and I'm sure he'll be able to explain better what's happening in a technical sense.

Marco.

Alas...this is the only Dr. Who I'll be likely to consult with...

http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/cms/2004/other/pete_townshend_rs_958_170.6478946.jpg

Tim

Marco
11-12-2008, 19:03
Sorry, who is he? :scratch:

Marco.

Beechwoods
11-12-2008, 19:06
I think he worked with Dave Gilmour (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9fcmVKTzm-w) from Pink Floyd once but it wasn't very good.


:lolsign:

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 19:07
Well, there is a school of thought that some filters/power conditioners etc. can in some circumstances sort of limit the dynamic range of some amplifiers. As if the delivery of current is being slowed when the amplifier demands it for loud/fast transients. Or something. Wonder what effect they have in the impedance?

I've had little experience of any commercial designs so can't comment with any authority myself. It's interesting though, do carry on please! :)

Cheers...

hi mike,
there is mileage in what you say me ole flower, basically a lot of the filters on the market filter out noise very crudely using capacitors in various configurations across the live, neutral and earth, but as you say most have a negative affect on audio equipment being used on our mains supply, now one of the main differences in our mains supply to the USA is unlike our supply where we have a live, neutral, and earth, in the USA they have two lives, and the earth is either connected to true earth ground, or generally the metal chassis of equipment is connected via capacitor to either one of the lives!
i suppose they work on the assumption that because their voltage supplies are only around 110 to 120 volts at full potential, if you were exposed to the naked supply and real earth [ground] you would only be in contact with around 55 to 60 volts,[either one of the lives] which in most cases is not lethal, unlike our 240v...
this may be why filters which are used on our supply that are known to as marco says "sit on the sound" have a different affect on the mains in the USA.
just my rambling opinion on this mind you.:)
anthony,TD...

Marco
11-12-2008, 19:12
Thanks for that, Anthony. So no folds in the time-space continuum in your listening room, then? :eyebrows:

Marco.

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 19:20
Thanks for that, Anthony. So no folds in the time-space continuum in your listening room, then? :eyebrows:

Marco.

nope,
now where did i put my flux capacitor...;)
Anthony,TD...

Marco
11-12-2008, 19:27
I think he worked with Dave Gilmour (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9fcmVKTzm-w) from Pink Floyd once but it wasn't very good.


LOL. Call me thick (if fact, I'll do it - 'thicky'; there! :mental:) but what's that got to do with Dr Who? :confused:

Marco.

Mike
11-12-2008, 19:30
Thicko!

Time continuum - Back to the Future - car with 'flux capacitors' in it?


:doh:

Mike
11-12-2008, 19:32
Which in fact has absolutly NOTHING to do with Dr Who! :lolsign:

I just wanted to call you thick. :eyebrows:

Marco
11-12-2008, 19:33
Well...

A) I've never seen 'Back to the Future', and know nothing about flux capacitors.

B) What's that got to do with the picture Beechy posted and Dr Who? I'm more confused now than ever, so therefore a double thicko! :confused: :confused:

:lol:

Marco.

Mike
11-12-2008, 19:34
B) What's that got to do with the picture Beechy posted and Dr Who? I'm more confused now than ever, so double thicko! :confused: :confused:

Look up a bit! :ner:

Beechwoods
11-12-2008, 19:34
LOL. Call me thick (if fact, I'll do it - 'thicky'; there! :mental:) but what's that got to do with Dr Who? :confused:.

:doh:

Marco
11-12-2008, 19:38
Haha, well, will someone please just (exactly) explain from the beginning... :ner:

Marco.

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 19:39
i must admit guys i didnt get the pete townsend bit at all, i must be as thick as marco, well maybe not that bad.:eyebrows::mental::lol::lolsign::gig:

Mike
11-12-2008, 19:41
Haha, well, will someone please just (exactly) explain from the beginning

Well...

The earth cooled and then the dinosaurs came, but they got too big and died. And then...

Oh, hang on.... How far back do you want me to go BTW?

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 19:42
Well...

The earth cooled and then the dinosaurs came, but they go too big and died. And then...

Oh, hang on.... How far back do you want me to go BTW?
:doh::lolsign:

Marco
11-12-2008, 19:44
i must admit guys i didnt get the pete townsend bit at all, i must be as thick as marco, well maybe not that bad.:eyebrows::mental::lol::lolsign::gig:

I didn't even know it was bloody Pete Townsend!!

And what's that red thing on his hand all about? :scratch:

:lol:

(I've never looked at him much before, TBH, and certainly aren't his No1 fan).

Marco.

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 19:46
I didn't even know it was bloody Pete Townsend!!


And what's that red thing on his hand all about? :scratch:

:lol:

(I've never looked at him much before, TBH, and certainly aren't his No1 fan).

Marco.

ITS BLOOD!!!:doh:

Mike
11-12-2008, 19:50
<Think Dobie Gray>



Oh, give me the beat, boys, and free my soul
I wanna get lost in another thread that drifts away

Beechwoods
11-12-2008, 19:50
And what's that red thing on his hand all about? :scratch:

He famously cut his hand on his geetar string doing his trademark 'windmill' overarm strumming thing. Went through the muscle apparently. Very rock and roll :lol:

Filterlab
11-12-2008, 19:56
Well...

A) I've never seen 'Back to the Future', and know nothing about flux capacitors.

Oh my god! You should see the Back to the Future films just from a reference point of view, and they are very entertaining. I didn't realise there was anyone left in the western world who hadn't seen it! LOL!

I'll lend you my special edition box set if you like. ;) x

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 19:59
Oh my god! You should see the Back to the Future films just from a reference point of view, and they are very entertaining. I didn't realise there was anyone left in the western world who hadn't seen it! LOL!

I'll lend you my special edition box set if you like. ;) x

its a bit far fetched though, the delorian was never that fast!!!:lol:
A...

Marco
11-12-2008, 20:00
He famously cut his hand on his geetar string doing his trademark 'windmill' overarm strumming thing. Went through the muscle apparently. Very rock and roll

Ok, maybe not so famously, but what's that got to do with Dr bloody WHO! :lol:

And Mikey, it gets worse... Who or what is "Dobie Gray"? :lolsign: :confused:

I think a lot of these things either happened before my time (apart from Back to the Future) or it's stuff I'm just not into!

Marco.

Mike
11-12-2008, 20:02
And Mikey, it gets worse... Who or what is "Dobie Gray" :lolsign: :confused:


Oh FFS! :doh:


May I recommend the following for 'Sir': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogygia

Marco
11-12-2008, 20:06
I think I'll bow out gracefully now as I haven't got a scooby-doo what "Ogygia" has got to do with "Dobie Gray", and I'm not reading through all that shite! :ner:

:wave: :door:

Marco.

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 20:13
I think I'll bow out gracefully now as I haven't got a scooby-doo what "Ogygia" has got to do with "Dobie Gray", and I'm not reading through all that shite! :ner:

:wave: :door:

Marco.

hi mate,
i have to be honest i havent got a clue how we got to here from mains filters either, the mind boggles!!!:scratch:
:lolsign:

Mike
11-12-2008, 20:15
Oh bejeezus!

Marco, it's an on-line encyclopedia! - you type in what you want to know about and..... well if you can't figure out the rest, there's no hope for ya!

Anyway... You'll know the song I'm referring to. Check here: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zaPnOASOWIU

Marco
11-12-2008, 20:21
I thought you were sending me a link to Wiki which directly defines who or what "Dobie Gray" is!!

Why can't you just tell me minus the bloody dictionary links. Is that too simple? :lol:

S'ok, thanks EVENTUALLY to your You Tube link I've found out they're a band - never heard of them, though, sorry. :)

Marco.

P.S I still don't know what all this has got to do with Dr Who and mains filters!!!!!!!!!!

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 20:28
still dont understand what DR who has to do with pete townsend..
tim, explain ???
Anthony...

Marco
11-12-2008, 20:29
Yes, PUHLEESE God do.... !

This post requires a full and exact explanation:


Alas...this is the only Dr. Who I'll be likely to consult with...

http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/cms/2004/other/pete_townshend_rs_958_170.6478946.jpg

Tim

Marco.

Marco
11-12-2008, 20:55
He famously cut his hand on his geetar string doing his trademark 'windmill' overarm strumming thing. Went through the muscle apparently. Very rock and roll :lol:

Out of interest, in what year did this monumentally 'famous' event occur?

Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 21:33
hi mate,
i have to be honest i havent got a clue how we got to here from mains filters either, the mind boggles!!!:scratch:
:lolsign:

We used a flux capacitor to pass through the time/space continuum to a point when Pete Townsend was still a radical young guitarist in the WHO, and placing Marco's music signal in the path of his power filter, thus....

nevermind.

Tim

Marco
11-12-2008, 22:00
Way too cryptic for our tiny minds, Tim! ;)

Marco.

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 22:02
of course,:doh:
i cant beleive i never got the connection, i must have been half a sleep!!!
cheers tim.
:)

Marco
11-12-2008, 22:08
I was bloody unconscious!

And to think this thread title is called "Half-a-brain loonies" :lolsign:

Marco.

anthonyTD
11-12-2008, 22:30
I was bloody unconscious!

And to think this thread title is called "Half-a-brain loonies" :lolsign:

Marco.

I think between us, we won that title hands down mate.:lolsign:

Mike
11-12-2008, 22:57
Tish!... Bloody simpletons! :doh:

Marco
11-12-2008, 22:57
Hehehehe... The problem for me is I've never really been into The Who in any great capacity, so wouldn't even recognise Pete Townsend if he walked into my living room now, never mind from an old photograph! :)

I like their music, for sure, when I hear it (I think I might have one album by them somewhere), but I wasn't even born when they formed (1964 I think?). All that stuff kind of passed me by and as I'm not a huge fan even now I don't really have the background knowledge some folks here take for granted ;)

I'm an 80s boy (or late 70s) - that was my main music era. I started seriously listening to music and buying it when I was about 12, so we're talking 1977 onwards. Punk (and the likes of ABBA, and some of the disco stuff out around then) kicked it off for me, along with bands like Queen and Pink Floyd. As soon as the 80s started though I was into electronic music and bands like Depeche Mode, Yazoo, Human League, etc - The Who were not even on my radar and haven't been since. Sacrilege I know, but there you are...

I listen to all sorts now, though :cool:

So if I didn't even recognise the photograph Tim posted I had bugger all chance of knowing what he was referring to!


Marco.

tfarney
11-12-2008, 23:31
It's like reading Shakespeare, Marco. Understanding the cultural and historical references is half the game. Young sprout.

Tim

Primalsea
11-12-2008, 23:53
Meanwhile back on planet Earth in December 2008 a group of Hifi worriors are discussing mains filters (which was nothing to do with the original topic anyway).

Passive mains filters can actually cause a gain at some frequencies and their performance varies based on load. They only way a passive mains filter should be used is if it is designed especially for the item. However equipment with dynamic loads will cause a problem as well as constantly changing performance.

The filter may reduce some noise but will effect the current and voltage angles albeit at frequencies much higher than 50Hz. However this can have an effect on the powersupply of the equipment. You may not hear this as a reduction or increase in the noise floor but it will effect the "sound" the equipment makes.

SMPS's tend to add to the noise already on the mains. This again can't always be heard as noise floor but it will polute the equipment and can manifest as a subjective hardening of the sound. If your hifi is producing unwanted sound, even if you can't hear it its still making it along with the sound you do want. This means that its doing extra work on top of what you want it to do. Its not unresonable that it will effect the quality of the music replay.

Its late so hopefully that makes some sense.

Marco
12-12-2008, 00:00
Indeed, Tim.

Like lots of things in life it depends what your frames of reference are. I know lots about stuff I'm really into but am pretty ignorant about things that don't interest me, even when those things may be very popular and known well by others. If I'm not into something I'm unlikely to learn much or know much about it. I tend to live within my own 'zone' in many aspects of life and can be quite insular-minded in that repsect - that's just the way I am :)

Marco.

tfarney
12-12-2008, 01:19
Indeed, Tim.

Like lots of things in life it depends what your frames of reference are. I know lots about stuff I'm really into but am pretty ignorant about things that don't interest me, even when those things may be very popular and known well by others. If I'm not into something I'm unlikely to learn much or know much about it. I tend to live within my own 'zone' in many aspects of life and can be quite insular-minded in that repsect - that's just the way I am :)

Marco.

Sounds pretty human, Marco. What I know about Depeche Mode could be carried in a very small pocket.

Tim

Beechwoods
12-12-2008, 06:39
Out of interest, in what year did this monumentally 'famous' event occur?

http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/thewho/articles/story/6478110/behind_the_cover_pete_townshend

April 1980, as far as that pic is concerned :) but it's a bit of a trademark. I think I was thinking of when the whammy bar went into his hand... some time in 1994 (is there a :yawn: smiley anywhere?!)


I'm an 80s boy (or late 70s) - that was my main music era. I started seriously listening to music and buying it when I was about 12, so we're talking 1977 onwards.

I first got into The Who as a result of the Quadrophenia movie, released in 1979. It came at the start of the second mod revival, very contemporary with bands like The Jam around at the time. The album came out in '73.

You can't be into everything though Mr. Marco! But you should check Quadrophenia out, it is a great album and great film (interesting cast, Sting, Phil Daniels, Ray Winstone, Leslie Ash, Toyah...)

Marco
12-12-2008, 09:32
Cheers, Tim. I'm just honest and upfront about things - I'm a very open, 'straight up' kind of guy; if I don't know about something, I say so, rather than bullshitting just to save face. I'm quite happy to admit my ignorance on a particular subject. At least then people know that when I'm commenting about something I do know about, my views are based on genuine experience and knowledge, and not waffle for the sake of it. :)

Too many people are the other way, IMO!

Beechy,


April 1980, as far as that pic is concerned but it's a bit of a trademark. I think I was thinking of when the whammy bar went into his hand... some time in 1994 (is there a :yawn: smiley anywhere?!)


Cheers for the info, but like I said I wouldn't know. In either 1980 or 1994 I wasn't into The Who, but I'll certainly remember about them now! :eyebrows:


I first got into The Who as a result of the Quadrophenia movie, released in 1979. It came at the start of the second mod revival, very contemporary with bands like The Jam around at the time. The album came out in '73.


Ah, I was never into the mod thing at all. I think that I may have seen Quadrophenia once but I really can't remember it. Undoubtedly it's a classic; I should watch it again sometime. You see, I was a biker or 'rocker' (well, I got my first motorbike in 1981) and hated the mod thing with a passion; probably why I wasn't into the music! There were guys at school with their (what I thought) silly looking Parker jackets with 'targets' on the back, which we (the 'rockers') put to good use in more ways than one - let's just say a few 'bull’s-eyes' were struck with some 'interesting' missiles :guns: :eyebrows:.

Also, the girls at our school seemed to fancy 'rockers' more than mods maybe because of the leather jacket, tight 'drainpipe' jeans and Doc Marten boots thing (I had 18-hole Docs with green laces and a proper biker's jacket with Gong's 'Flying Teapot' on the back), so between the girly thing and not particularly liking the music there was no attraction in being a mod for me whatsoever.

The mods at our school tended to be spotty, geeky, guys with greasy hair and were not seen as 'cool' by us in any way - at least this was our mentality at the time. They had their silly little scooters ridiculously adorned with mirrors and were to us a joke. I used to love coming into school with my Yamaha RD50 'fizzy' with its 'racing bike' exhaust and which had been tuned to do a whopping 70mph! Well, it seemed fast then as bikes in those days were restricted to 30mph... All I'll say is that I was never short of female passengers on the back and places to go during the lunch break ;)

Musically at that time I flitted between typical 'rocker' bands of the day such as Rush, AC/DC, Sabbath, UFO, Motorhead, etc, and 'new romantic'/electronic stuff such as I described earlier and the likes of Howard Jones, The Thomson Twins, Kajagoogoo, Blancmange, OMD, ABC - all sorts of shit. I'll even admit to liking Wham!, Michael Jackson and Duran Duran :lol: :o

So you can see how The Who didn't really fit into my world at the time, and they've not really come into my 'zone' much since.

Marco.

Filterlab
12-12-2008, 10:03
its a bit far fetched though, the delorian was never that fast!!!:lol:
A...

Indeed, in fact one was lucky if the battery on the DeLorean could sustain a start up. Not the finest engineered cars in the world.

Marco
12-12-2008, 10:07
Paul,


Passive mains filters can actually cause a gain at some frequencies and their performance varies based on load. They only way a passive mains filter should be used is if it is designed especially for the item. However equipment with dynamic loads will cause a problem as well as constantly changing performance.

The filter may reduce some noise but will effect the current and voltage angles albeit at frequencies much higher than 50Hz. However this can have an effect on the powersupply of the equipment. You may not hear this as a reduction or increase in the noise floor but it will effect the "sound" the equipment makes.

SMPS's tend to add to the noise already on the mains. This again can't always be heard as noise floor but it will polute the equipment and can manifest as a subjective hardening of the sound. If your hifi is producing unwanted sound, even if you can't hear it its still making it along with the sound you do want. This means that its doing extra work on top of what you want it to do. Its not unresonable that it will effect the quality of the music replay.

Its late so hopefully that makes some sense.


Yes to me it makes sense as it's exactly what I was describing earlier to Tim, but put in more technical way. I completely agree with you.

Tim,

What's your opinion on what Paul has written? :)

Marco.

Beechwoods
12-12-2008, 10:10
LOL Marco, nice memories. I was 6 in '79 and my year of Musical awakening was 1987. My Bloody Valentine, House Of Love and The Sugarcubes. I was 14.

I've never had to consider taking sides in the mods v rocker thing... I'd have been a hippy anyway. On the road and off to Stonehenge :)

Marco
12-12-2008, 10:44
LOL. We liked the hippies - they were always considered 'cool', so we left them alone to do their shit. I had a few hippy mates at school. Our school was pretty divided, though.

There were the 'geeks' who never dressed 'cool' or tried to keep up with fashion. They were intelligent and always in the top sets at school and passed all their exams with an 'A', but total 'swots' with it, shit at sports, and never seemed to like having a laugh. They very rarely had girlfriends.

There were guys kind of in between, and then there was us - the 'cool dudes' (LOL - I know, but that was the mentality at the time! :eyebrows:) who used to wear all the latest gear, be good at sports, had motorbikes or cars and usually a nice looking girlfriend (although we didn't mind 'doing' the odd growler at a party if we were drunk enough :bum:). We'd always compete with each other about who could 'pull' the nicest looking girl at school, and serious street cred was given to the one who did - that kind of shit, but were also in many cases just as intelligent as the geeks and also usually in the top sets at school. The difference was we didn't have to try as hard to pass exams and get an 'A'...

We'd be out at a party the night before an exam, roll in at funny-o-clock in the morning and still manage (just!) to get up for school (with a boot up the arse from from our parents!) do the exam, mostly passing with flying colours, or wait until the absolute last minute before completing an 'ink exercise' on the bus to school, usually the morning it was due to be handed in, as homework the teacher had given us a week before, but when it was handed in the answers were usually right. The trick was to work smart, not hard, so you paid attention in class when you needed to and larked around the rest of the time!

Whereas the 'geeks' would constantly study and always have their homework done well in advance - even go to the bloody library at lunch break and do homework or read books and stay there until the bell went, even in summer! No way - we were out playing football, smoking dope, and making all sorts of mischief until the last minute, usually coming into class covered in mud and getting 'tut, tut' looks from the 'geeks', and of course the teachers. The 'geeks' became Prefects, and we took the piss out of them. You get the picture... ;)

Ah, those were the days! :cool:

Marco.

Mike
12-12-2008, 13:17
Anyone remember this bit:


one of the main differences in our mains supply to the USA is unlike our supply where we have a live, neutral, and earth, in the USA they have two lives, and the earth is either connected to true earth ground, or generally the metal chassis of equipment is connected via capacitor to either one of the lives!

I'd forgotten about the way USA mains is supplied. Two 'lives' and an earth eh?..... If you squint a bit does it look a little bit like a balanced supply to anyone else?

And what do we know about balanced systems and noise rejection?... Could it be, that the USA's mains powers system doesn't suffer as badly from noise ingress as our UK system?

Thoughts anyone?

tfarney
12-12-2008, 13:59
Paul,



Yes to me it makes sense as it's exactly what I was describing earlier to Tim, but put in more technical way. I completely agree with you.

Tim,

What's your opinion on what Paul has written? :)

Marco.

Well, to the point that I understand it, Marco, it sounds like the kind of audiophile subtlety, and there are a few of them, that I never hear. I don't assume that's because they don't exist. It could sometimes be because I don't listen for them. Doesn't keep me from questioning them and occasionally fencing with those who obsess over them, though :). You and Steve have me pegged as an absolutist, and I'm far from it. A pragmatist is more like it.

Maybe the power conditioners I'm accustomed to are active? They appear to have the opposite effect described -- keeping voltage steadier than it is coming out of the wall, and reporting on it by the second. Of course I don't suppose they couldn't be active regulators containing passive filters? I'm no electrician.

Tim

anthonyTD
12-12-2008, 17:51
Anyone remember this bit:



I'd forgotten about the way USA mains is supplied. Two 'lives' and an earth eh?..... If you squint a bit does it look a little bit like a balanced supply to anyone else?

And what do we know about balanced systems and noise rejection?... Could it be, that the USA's mains powers system doesn't suffer as badly from noise ingress as our UK system?

Thoughts anyone?

hi mike,
you would think so, but a lot of the audiophiles i deal with in the states seem to have noise and mains problems, i know they have a wide variation on mains voltage from one state to another, also the two lives would need to be exactly out of phase with each other to get noise cancelation. the other thing most people dont take into acount when designing a piece of equipment which is dual mains ready is the mains frequency diffrence, ours being 50hz theirs 60hz, this means that a mains transformer designed here on 50hz will become more efficient when run on 60hz hence you will have a higher secondary voltage, for the same given primary voltage than over here !!!:doh:
anthony,TD...

Mike
12-12-2008, 17:54
Just wondered.

I remember Noel Keywood writing about building a balanced supply for his house. Was interesting if perhaps a little extreme.

DSJR
12-12-2008, 18:05
I've used mains filters on source components for some years as living in Luton was a nightmare for good sounding audio (it's a nightmare in other ways too, but I'll be kind on this occasion ;)). I read in HFN that the "filter" should have a 10 times capacity for it to work properly and I found that the Roxburgh 6A filter (£40 from Farnell) worked a treat without killing things (have I mentioned it on here before? - I'm having a senior moment...LOL).

Where we live now, the mains is as good as gold and these things are unnecessary, although I've left one on the CD player, which sounds better for it and another on the tuner, which makes not one iota of difference. The power amps and active ATC's have been left well alone, except for an habitual ferrite on the mains leads....

anthonyTD
12-12-2008, 18:06
Just wondered.

I remember Noel Keywood writing about building a balanced supply for his house. Was interesting if perhaps a little extreme.

Its one way of canceling out certain types of noise.
The main problem most audiophiles have is self inflicted i am afraid, they use mains conditioners to filter out the crap coming in, but then re-inject at source by using equipment with err, lets be diplomatic here, less than ideal power supplies!
the only effective way to get anywhere near the ideal is to first of all use a filter "that actualy works" in the main supply, and then one in line with each piece of equipment plugged into it, that way you could be pretty sure that your not cleaning up your mains supply, only to be re-corrupting it further down the line.
anthony,TD...

anthonyTD
12-12-2008, 18:10
I've used mains filters on source components for some years as living in Luton was a nightmare for good sounding audio (it's a nightmare in other ways too, but I'll be kind on this occasion ;)). I read in HFN that the "filter" should have a 10 times capacity for it to work properly and I found that the Roxburgh 6A filter (£40 from Farnell) worked a treat without killing things (have I mentioned it on here before? - I'm having a senior moment...LOL).

Where we live now, the mains is as good as gold and these things are unnecessary, although I've left one on the CD player, which sounds better for it and another on the tuner, which makes not one iota of difference. The power amps and active ATC's have been left well alone, except for an habitual ferrite on the mains leads....

hi dave,
i agree about the current rating on filters, its an absolute nessesity for the filter to have any chance of working without degrading the sound of your system.
anthony,TD...

Primalsea
12-12-2008, 19:11
I don't know is USA mains is balanced or not but for balanced lines to reject noise well the load has to be of identical impedance on both lines. I presume the output impedance also has to be identicle on both lines as well.

The other thing for balanced lines is that they are supposed to be twisted so that each line is exposed equally to any interference ie common mode.

The other thing about filters is have you ever thought about where the interference goes once its been filtered out?? It gets dumped on the earth. If your not careful you just end up with the noise getting into your equipment through the earth instead.

anthonyTD
12-12-2008, 19:34
I don't know is USA mains is balanced or not but for balanced lines to reject noise well the load has to be of identical impedance on both lines. I presume the output impedance also has to be identicle on both lines as well.

The other thing for balanced lines is that they are supposed to be twisted so that each line is exposed equally to any interference ie common mode.

The other thing about filters is have you ever thought about where the interference goes once its been filtered out?? It gets dumped on the earth.
If your not careful you just end up with the noise getting into your equipment through the earth instead.

agreed,
Thats why a good earth, as short as posible to ground is a must for a good low noise floor.

Dave Cawley
13-12-2008, 14:28
ours being 50hz theirs 60hz, this means that a mains transformer designed here on 50hz will become more efficient when run on 60hz hence you will have a higher secondary voltage, for the same given primary voltage than over here !!!

It depends mostly on the turns ratio, not frequency.

Dave

Marco
13-12-2008, 15:46
Hi Tim,


Well, to the point that I understand it, Marco, it sounds like the kind of audiophile subtlety, and there are a few of them, that I never hear.


Lol! Well, you may brand it as "audiophile subtlety", Tim, but when I've tried mains filters in the past which have been 'total dogs' and about of much use as a hard-on in a nunnery (and believe me there are a few for sale in the UK just like that) which quite simply kill dynamics (and therefore the music with it), the effect is rather more significant than "audiophile subtlety" - it is far more fundamental than that. With respect, like you say, you've not heard it, so you wouldn't know...


I don't assume that's because they don't exist. It could sometimes be because I don't listen for them. Doesn't keep me from questioning them and occasionally fencing with those who obsess over them, though.


I guess that it depends what you define as "obsess". When I discover something, outside of main equipment upgrades, the effect of which I feel is significant (i.e. a bit more than "audiophile subtlety" ;)), I experiment with it and analyse things in detail for usually around a period of a week, just to make sure that what I'm hearing is genuine and not imagined.

It's all too easy for one's ears to be fooled into thinking that there is a genuine improvement when experimenting with hi-fi when in reality it's simply different rather than better but perhaps better, seemingly, at first. The difference with me, however, compared to your average, 'measurements obsessive', is that I don't need any 'proof' to come to an informed conclusion other than that provided by the God-given auditory vessels on the side of my head. I am extremely thorough though, trust me, but after a period of stringent assessing of any possible beneficial sonic effect with new hi-fi equipment or ancillaries, I have complete faith in my hearing acuity and what my ears have judged as correct or otherwise. I recommend nothing on this forum or express any opinions on any subject which hasn't been thoroughly evaluated and carefully considered before 'putting pen to paper', as it were.

However, once the period of assessment is over and I've decided that whatever it was (new cables, valves, etc) has made a genuine improvement and decided to incorporate it/them into my system then I "obsess" no more - I simply sit back and enjoy the music. I don't piss around for the sake of it - that's not where my head is at. It could take many months again, or even longer, before I discover something else which I feel is worth investigating, and in the interim I'll simply be enjoying music in a state of complete satisfaction. You must remember that because I have the luxury of working from home I listen to a huge variety of music on average for 6-7 hours per day, so I'm far from being a 'hi-fi obsessive'.


You and Steve have me pegged as an absolutist, and I'm far from it. A pragmatist is more like it.


Not at all. Steve can speak for himself but I've "pegged" you as no such thing! You just have a different, but equally as valid, way of looking at hi-fi. I enjoy our exchanges because your rather more objective and scientifically enquiring mind forces me to question my decisions and think more about if what I'm doing is right, which can only be a good thing. I am not someone who makes up his mind quickly about things or is easily influenced by 'flavours of the month' or what is considered de rigour by the cognoscenti - I am extremely single-minded and hard to please with hi-fi, therefore comments from others who think differently, such as you, help validate my conclusions.


Maybe the power conditioners I'm accustomed to are active? They appear to have the opposite effect described -- keeping voltage steadier than it is coming out of the wall, and reporting on it by the second. Of course I don't suppose they couldn't be active regulators containing passive filters? I'm no electrician.


The results of power filters on hi-fi systems here in the UK could be a different ball game to what is achieved with them in the States, simply because of the different voltages involved and their knock-on effect on filters and the hi-fi systems they're being used with. I therefore cannot comment on the results you're obtaining, so in that respect you should perhaps keep an open mind as to the results I've obtained here with power filters instead of 'pegging' it rather glibly with superficial terminology such as "audiophile subtlety".

Do continue though to keep giving me your little 'reality checks'. I enjoy 'fencing'! :)

Marco.

anthonyTD
13-12-2008, 19:45
ours being 50hz theirs 60hz, this means that a mains transformer designed here on 50hz will become more efficient when run on 60hz hence you will have a higher secondary voltage, for the same given primary voltage than over here !!!

It depends mostly on the turns ratio, not frequency.

Dave
hi dave,
turns ratio will be dependant on the size of the core used, ie, some people use more windings than steel, and vice versa,,,so without going into too much indepth detail i think my opinion still has merit...
anthony...

John
13-12-2008, 21:16
My experience of clean power has been interesting I use a reginarator to clean up my mains and in my system finds it makes a difference however I tried it at a friends house and it made no difference I could hear. He lives in a Modern House I live in pre 2nd world war house. I am guessing the age of the mains my make a difference here but no idea why. I had friends around and we taken the P500 out of the power chain and there is a noticable loss of resolution. So I believe this technology has to be tried out in the home before purchase as it might make no difference or it might make a noticable difference
I remember reading much the same thoughts from Howard when demostrating the power plant

anthonyTD
13-12-2008, 21:35
My experience of clean power has been interesting I use a reginarator to clean up my mains and in my system finds it makes a difference however I tried it at a friends house and it made no difference I could hear. He lives in a Modern House I live in pre 2nd world war house. I am guessing the age of the mains my make a difference hear but no idea why. I had friends around and we taken the P500 out of the power chain and there is a noticable loss of resolution. So I believe this technology has to be tried out in the home before purchase as it miht make o difference or it might make a noticable difference
I remember reading much the same thoughts from Howard when demostrating the power plant

hi john,
good point, another thing we are not considering is the distance each of us are away from the nearest distribution transformers, this may well be a significant factor why some report a diffrence, and some dont.:)
anthony,TD...

Marco
13-12-2008, 21:59
Indeed. The fact is the 'dirtier' and 'noisier' the electrical supply, the better a filter will work!

It is also a fact, for example, that older properties have considerably inferior electrical installations overall than their more modern counterparts. For starters, as far as hi-fi systems are concerned, performance will be adversely affected by the use of underrated 40, 60 or 80A main distribution box fuses instead of the 100A ones used now as standard in most modern homes, thus in a hi-fi context, reducing impedance at the head of the incoming mains supply, and in turn improving system performance. Futhermore, in some cases older properties will have completely outdated and incorrectly specified wiring looms, and again this will impact on the performance of any hi-fi system connected in circuit.

My house (an early 19th century property) had fuse wire in use inside an antiquated bakelite consumer unit until I updated it with RCDs, fitted a new CU, and had the house completely rewired. Even before I installed my current rather elaborate and bespoke mains set-up I could clearly hear a significant improvement in the performance of my system!

Probably 90% of Hi-fi enthusiasts, even those who consider themselves as 'dedicated to the cause' vastly underestimate the effect of the electrical supply on their hi-fi equipment - they're too obsessed with boxes and don't concentrate enough on the items necessary to optimise their performance. You're lucky if people spend a few extra pounds on some decent mains leads and a power strip, never mind doing things properly from the source first, and installing a separate dedicated circuit (and/or mains regenerator/effective filter(s)) to supply clean power to their hi-fi system. Doing so makes a huge difference: as they say, you don't run a Formula 1 racing car on 2-star fuel!

Electricity is the 'fuel' used to power your hi-fi system so its relative quality (in terms of it being as 'pure' and as free as possible from noise and interference such as RFI and EMI) is just as important to a hi-fi system's performance, in order to hear music at its best, as the fuel in a racing car is to the performance of its engine. I can assure you, when you hear how significant the sonic benefits are of optimising the mains set-up for your hi-fi system you'll never pay such scant regard to this aspect of system building again...

I could go on about this more, but I've written about it many times in the past. I live forever in the hope that one day the penny will drop!!

Marco.

tfarney
14-12-2008, 16:22
I guess that it depends what you define as "obsess". When I discover something, outside of main equipment upgrades, the effect of which I feel is significant (i.e. a bit more than "audiophile subtlety" ), I experiment with it and analyse things in detail for usually around a period of a week, just to make sure that what I'm hearing is genuine and not imagined.

Well, I suppose "subtle" is a relative term! So, of course, is "obsess," and while I mean no offense, the process you describe above would meet the criteria from my relative point of view. I suspect there are many things you hear that I don't hear, Marco, and mostly because I don't listen for them. If something is blatant enough to get in the way of the music without requiring much analysis, or without requiring a shift of concentration from the music to the problem, I'll look for the cause. Otherwise, I'll just keep listening to the music. Perhaps that makes me not much of an audiophile. Still, what I define as good sound is much closer, I think, to this crowd that the iPod/earbud people, so I continue to hang around your ilk :ner:.

Tim

Spectral Morn
14-12-2008, 18:05
Hi Guys

I was unable to offer an opinion on the original topic of this thread as I was yet to get my Jan copy of Hi-fi Choice. I now have and have read the article written by Mr Malcolm Stewart. Here goes.

" Unfortunately, we suffer democracy on the internet, which means that any lunatic with half-a-brain can post his opinions"(Jan 2008 Hi-fi Choice Malcolm Stewart cr).

Mr Stewart's article is in the main about computer audio (fair enough) but then takes a swipe at us(those who post on Forums). He raises many interesting points in his piece and asks the question why many audiophiles are not into computer audio. Now I for one feel in the minority on this forum and others in so much as I have not taken up with music from a PC/Mac source. This has little to do with sound quality as it is possible to gain good sound using external dacs from computers and servers etc. My reasons for not embracing this technology probably stem from my age(mid 40's ) and the fact that I have a thousand plus lp's and probably as many if not more cd's and I value handling solid media. I don't see the point in putting this material on a HD or the like. It is just as easy to play the original and the quality will be better IMO. I do have a dislike for the way music is more of a commodity now and is not cherished in the same way as it used to be and in many ways this is due to the boom in the internet and downloading and all the ways that many chose to store and listen to their music. I was never into portable audio and believe it or not I don't own a mobile phone (if I did it would be just for making calls and nothing else). I miss the way things used to be and watch sadly as traditional ways of buying music are dying around me. I miss being able to walk into a shop and talk about music and get recommendations from some one in front of me. Don't get me wrong places like this and the internet are useful too and I do use them more but I feel I am in away being forced to because that is the way things are going. As Malcolm puts it "The way Forward". Call me a Dinosaur if you want but I prefer to live in the past way of doing things until I have no choice. In regard to how I listen to music, I feel the past suits me better and offers higher sound quality IMHO. Besides why would I want to dump my collection of audio ,my set up systems ( that work for me and I enjoy ) to replace it with new kit. As an aside I am not against technology,when I see a value in it, and I have early adopted many things including, Sky +, Hard Drive video recorders and the like.

Mr Stewart expresses his frustration with people like me( I think) but then goes on to attack in the most rude way those of us who read and contribute to forums. Now like any one he has a right to his opinion, but something that does annoy me is he makes sweeping statement, generalizes and does not qualify his facts(none are presented). Are there people on forums who should read and not post, I have to say yes. There are some who don't know enough and should wait until something comes up they do know about, or who should ask questions and try to learn. There are of course those who just want to, and get their kicks out of creating mischief, but I wont mention them again.

He, Mr Stewart goes onto say he feels like posting responses but cant be bothered as(and I paraphrase) because he feels he would be casting pearls before swine. This is a pity as his and his friends experiences would be enriching to all of us . Does he enjoy music via a computer, Yes he does and I have no issue with that but once again we(those who use/post on forums) are all being tarred with the one brush. This is not true for the most part on AOS and Zg (the forums I have experience on). The level of debate here(AOS) is fairly high(with the exception of thread drift) and the quality for those into the technology of the hobby or the subjective side of things is very high. I have been stretched a lot and I for one both enjoy and benefit from that. Not to much in the way of half-baked loonies here, so far IMO. I should point out I have not explored all of the forum's ( AOS ) content yet.

So please Malcolm involve your self on forums if you have issues, but don't resort to pure rudeness to express yourself. I for one have been involved in the audio trade since 1989 and while I would not class my self as a technician but more of a subjectivist, I think I and others on Forums have much of value to share and for free. He speaks about the democracy of the internet, perhaps he is referring to it being free and views that as a threat, to the medium he has made his career in i.e the printed paid for word. Just to clarify my position on this I love books and can't see myself ditching them either for Sony E-book or whatever it or its future products will be called. Quality of content however is king.

He uses words like "Truth" and frankly his experience(and I do respect him) is no more or less valuable or truthful than any one else's,if that information is qualified. A lot of the info on forums and the internet in general needs to be checked out but to dismiss it all as the ravings of lunatics is both short sighted and as I have said earlier very rude. What truth do you hold to? Your many years of experience is valuable as our mine and others who post here and on other forums. Is the truth in the form of measurements which can be open to a certain amount of interpretation, and subjective approaches have there own issues too, but all of this can come to form a body of consensus and is of value to those interested in this hobby. Something I like to insist on is that things are always qualified, at least then knowing all the facts we can check it out for ourselves. Sadly this is less the case in the printed press these days say compared to 14 years ago. Just compare an issue of Hi-fi News to one from that time or Stereophile or the Absolute sound etc. On line mags can afford space to fully explore a product, all its strengths and weakness and in depth and so can the space forums allow. This info must however always be checked out, so any crap, mis-information or hidden agendas can be filtered out. The printed press is not immune to these issues either.

Regards D S D L ---- Neil :)

Colin
14-12-2008, 19:11
As with Mr Louth's post. I only got around to reading Mr Stewarts piece over the weekend. I fail to understand why he has the nerve to assume that it is only internet fora that attract half brain lunatics. (guilty as charged) The magazines have over recent years shown a similar gathering.

I also feel he has quite possibly misread a few tongue in cheek comments.

I also fail to understand why he would wish to attack people who have little, if any interest in computer audio. It is not an age thing however, I am in my mid 50's, and have used computers to store, and play music for some 8+ years. but in my office, not in my main listening space. My elder son who is mid 20's, uses computers as part of his working, and leisure life, will not contemplate using one for audio, far preferring a CD player a record deck as the source.

Could it possibly be that the rag's are concerned at the increasing use of the internet, both for fora, and online publications, that are to my mind making overall a better job of informing what remains of the Hi-Fi buying public of what is happening in the market place. They are also far better at linking the hardware and the software into a cohesive piece than the magazines are.

Primalsea
14-12-2008, 19:21
To be fair forums tend to fire flak at the mags. However the posts are normally aimed at one or two mags but quick, informal typing makes it seem like it's aimed at all mags which is not the case.

As I said earlier a lot of the agro is just from statements that polarise people into camps for lack of a better word.

There is a univesal law of internet comunication which is if you send an email with 4 questions you never get all for answered. Usually you're lucky if you get one answered badly.

This is par for the course and resonable people know when something has just been phrased badly and usually apologise if the altercation was a result of them not reading posts properly.

Anyone who can't see the worth of forums despite their downsides need to re-evaluate, I think.

Togil
14-12-2008, 20:53
Sorry are we here talking about Malcolm Steward ( not Stewart ) the moderator of the Hi Fi Critic Forum ?

Colin
14-12-2008, 21:12
Yes, sorry my error, still if he can forget we are customers, I can forget how to spell his name.

Spectral Morn
14-12-2008, 21:26
I didn't know that he was a moderator on hi-fi critics forum. So I take it that it is immune from the kind of half-a-brain lunatics he says we are. So are all other forums thus populated ?

Do I detect a conflict perhaps.

If his comments are targeted at just those who are luddites in regard to computer audio( I doubt that ) then perhaps he should have qualified his comments to read thus.

Regards D S D L ----- Neil :)

Marco
14-12-2008, 21:38
Neil,

Great post! You've raised many issues that I'd like to comment on in detail. I'll look forward to doing so tomorrow :)

At the moment I'm too busy listening to music (I've just installed some new 6SL7-type valves in my preamp which are quite frankly amazing) so I'll go through your points later.

In the meantime I'll leave you with this thought...

With the recent 'rant' of Roy Gregory in Hi-fi+, along similar lines to that you described of Mr Steward above, and Noel Keywood chucking his toys out the pram somewhat on HFW because 'folk on forums' have a love affair with the Denon DL-103 cartridge (what his problem is I really don't know), are some of those running hi-fi magazines going into 'meltdown', with leading journalists and reviewers seemingly running scared of forums and the threat they offer to the existence of reporting hi-fi on a 'physical' magazine format and the lifestyles/perks this is helping maintain?

Marco.

Mike
14-12-2008, 23:36
are some of those running hi-fi magazines going into 'meltdown', with leading journalists and reviewers seemingly running scared of forums and the threat they offer to the existence of reporting hi-fi on a 'physical' magazine format and the lifestyles/perks this is helping maintain?

Hmmm.... I guess it could depend on what you mean by 'some'.

Marco
14-12-2008, 23:49
"Some" = those currently running hi-fi magazines or influential members of such who've 'gone off on one recently' ;)

Marco.

Steve Toy
15-12-2008, 04:10
By "gone off on one" you mean gone as far as actually attack the notion of hi-fi forums.

Mike
15-12-2008, 08:02
"Some" = those currently running hi-fi magazines or influential members of such who've 'gone off on one recently' ;)

Marco.

And what percentage of HiFi journalists do you perceive that to be?

Do we have any numbers? Or are we going to be 'tarring them all with the same brush'? ;)

Mr. C
15-12-2008, 09:34
Interesting as Mr Stewart gave the HDX the most glowing review in existence, a couple of months back in HFC I believe. PC audio<>Half-a-brain loonies and internet geeks <>HDX ;-)
Perhaps a conflict of interest is sculling around in there some where?
For the record, our reference high-end system uses PC driven audio as it's source, so that is our vested point of interest here!
Marco, why not, draft a letter and invite Malcom to quantify his comments, as they were posted in the Public domain.
For example I personally favor that MP's/ local councilors/ charity workers are made to declare any vested interests such as Free-Masony/relatives working for industry/magazine connections/which company their are directors of etc.
I would like to see ALL Jurno's have their 'statement of interest' printed in the mags their work is published in.
I know that golden pigs will not fly LOL, however it would be nice to finally understand which position they are actually coming from.
Controversial maybe, yet the card would be open so to speak that way at least the reader of the piece would be 'more informed' as to possible 'back room' issue that *may* have a bearing on the piece being reviewed.
Over the last 4 years I have met nearly 20 high profile Jurno's, some at great length others for no more than 20 minutes.
The vast majority have been polite, articulate, interested, and courteous.
Some have a very singular whit, other incredibly dry.
A couple were down right rude and obnoxious, a couple of floppy head ex public school boys (James May types), a few refugees from Woodstock too. A great mix.
Would you trust them do give you a fair unbiased review on broad spread of equipment, what ever that equipment was, within a real home style enviroment?
Let's have your views on this please...........

Marco
15-12-2008, 10:33
And what percentage of HiFi journalists do you perceive that to be?

Do we have any numbers? Or are we going to be 'tarring them all with the same brush'? ;)


Lol. It's not difficult; I'm being very specific and not generalising in the slightest. Who’s been going on about forums recently? Answer: Roy Gregory and Malcolm Steward, therefore those are whom I'm referring to!

Like I said, I'd perhaps also chuck Mr Keywood into the mix after his comments below to a readers' letter about a DL-103 in this month's magazine (the chap had merely written in to say how happy he was with his new turntable and was eloquently extolling the virtues of it and the 103), to which Noel replied:


You'd be right to sell that tat ["tat" no less, eh?] Nigel and keep an eye on modern product. I well know and have used at length V15s and 3009s and they are "pleasent" shall we say. The Denon DL103 has sonic attractions perhaps, but is a grossy over rated product that is coloured and inaccurate; it's an internet special that's been talked up in the (deluded) collective conciousness [note spelling error again!]. You'd be better advised to get a good modern moving coil from Ortofon [Mr K has got Ortofon on the brain - does he have shares in the company?], Audio Technica or Dynavector [yes, perhaps just because he happens to favour the more analytical presentation of those cartridges - but does 'Nigel'?] I believe, unless you prefer romance to all else.


Now don't get me wrong, Noel's entitled to his opinion the same as anyone else, but does he have to be so insulting and unconstructive with it? "Deluded" and "tat" indeed! Poor Nigel, eh? He only wrote in to tell of his happiness with his new turntable and cartridge and was subjected to dog's abuse! I wonder if he'll be renewing his subscription?

And what's Noel's sudden obsession with "modern" this "modern", that? Does he think that all modern kit is automatically better than old stuff? I doubt it, as the same man is a valve amp and Garrard aficionado par excellence! So it's ok then to extol the virtues of "modern product" versus old in reference to cartridges, but somehow the same doesn't apply to turntables and amps from their respective eras? His views are totally inconsistent and don't seem to align with the ethos of HFW, which has always championed both new and old gear, the latter providing that it's performance is still competitive today. The 103, when properly partnered and set-up definitely comes into that category, otherwise I (and 1000s of others) wouldn't be using it!

The problem with the 103 is that magazines always make the mistake of reviewing it with a modern turntable and tonearm and judge it accordingly on that basis - it simply will not work as it should that way. It needs to be assessed in the context in which it was originally designed. Fortunately, to make the review relevant today that doesn't necessarily mean wheeling out an old SP10 or Garrard with a suitably high-mass arm to match. All one needs is a Technics SL-1200 or 1210 (preferably modified by KAB or Sound Hi-fi), fitted with a Jelco SA-750D S-shaped detachable headshell arm, and a nice high-mass headshell, like the LH-18 from Audio Technica: all 'modern' currently available equipment, and through a nice phono stage (preferably valve) which uses the necessary matching transformers, and away you go... I guarantee that if Noel (or David) heard the 103 in that context (both) their conclusions would be somewhat different!

But will they do that in order to give the 103 a fair hearing before judging, instead of arriving at ill-informed conclusions such it being "an internet special that's been talked up in the (deluded) collective conciousness" based on relative ignorance from using the wrong partnering equipment?

The funniest thing of all though, is that with Mr Keywood the words "Denon DL-103" appear to be permanently impregnated in his mind, and like a red flag to a bull goes charging off in a 'fit of rage' even when the DL-103 wasn't even being referred to.

How so?

Well, Nigel, at the end of his letter wrote:


Next stage? Enjoy the Sony as well as the LP12 and JBE Slate Series 3. And next year? Renovate/sell/exchange some or all of the rest of the collection - SL150, DENON DP2000, Mayware V, Hadcock, 228, SME 3009 Fixed, Shure V15 III, Rothwell transformer, Staglines N and K.


He never even mentioned the bloody DL-103 and yet Noel duly 'went off on one' as detailed above!! :lol: :mental:

So, I'd like to know what exactly his problem is with this particular cartridge, aside from issues regarding its sonic presentation. His innate dislike of the 103 appears to be run rather more deeply than simply not liking how it sounds...

Perhaps next time David joins us he could bring Noel with him to explain himself? :)

Marco.

anthonyTD
15-12-2008, 12:49
Interesting as Mr Stewart gave the HDX the most glowing review in existence, a couple of months back in HFC I believe. PC audio<>Half-a-brain loonies and internet geeks <>HDX ;-)
Perhaps a conflict of interest is sculling around in there some where?
For the record, our reference high-end system uses PC driven audio as it's source, so that is our vested point of interest here!
Marco, why not, draft a letter and invite Malcom to quantify his comments, as they were posted in the Public domain.
For example I personally favor that MP's/ local councilors/ charity workers are made to declare any vested interests such as Free-Masony/relatives working for industry/magazine connections/which company their are directors of etc.
I would like to see ALL Jurno's have their 'statement of interest' printed in the mags their work is published in.
I know that golden pigs will not fly LOL, however it would be nice to finally understand which position they are actually coming from.
Controversial maybe, yet the card would be open so to speak that way at least the reader of the piece would be 'more informed' as to possible 'back room' issue that *may* have a bearing on the piece being reviewed.
Over the last 4 years I have met nearly 20 high profile Jurno's, some at great length others for no more than 20 minutes.
The vast majority have been polite, articulate, interested, and courteous.
Some have a very singular whit, other incredibly dry.
A couple were down right rude and obnoxious, a couple of floppy head ex public school boys (James May types), a few refugees from Woodstock too. A great mix.
Would you trust them do give you a fair unbiased review on broad spread of equipment, what ever that equipment was, within a real home style enviroment?
Let's have your views on this please...........

some good points in there mr C.:)
anthony,TD...

anthonyTD
15-12-2008, 12:51
Lol. It's not difficult; I'm being very specific and not generalising in the slightest. Who’s been going on about forums recently? Answer: Roy Gregory and Malcolm Steward, therefore those are whom I'm referring to!

Like I said, I'd perhaps also chuck Mr Keywood into the mix after his comments below to a readers' letter about a DL-103 in this month's magazine (the chap had merely written in to say how happy he was with his new turntable and was eloquently extolling the virtues of it and the 103), to which Noel replied:



Now don't get me wrong, Noel's entitled to his opinion the same as anyone else, but does he have to be so insulting and unconstructive with it? "Deluded" and "tat" indeed! Poor Nigel, eh? He only wrote in to tell of his happiness with his new turntable and cartridge and was subjected to dog's abuse! I wonder if he'll be renewing his subscription?

And what's Noel's sudden obsession with "modern" this "modern", that? Does he think that all modern kit is automatically better than old stuff? I doubt it, as the same man is a valve amp and Garrard aficionado par excellence! So it's ok then to extol the virtues of "modern product" versus old in reference to cartridges, but somehow the same doesn't apply to turntables and amps from their respective eras? His views are totally inconsistent and don't seem to align with the ethos of HFW, which has always championed both new and old gear, the latter providing that it's performance is still competitive today. The 103, when properly partnered and set-up definitely comes into that category, otherwise I (and 1000s of others) wouldn't be using it!

The problem with the 103 is that magazines always make the mistake of reviewing it with a modern turntable and tonearm and judge it accordingly on that basis - it simply will not work as it should that way. It needs to be assessed in the context in which it was originally designed. Fortunately, to make the review relevant today that doesn't necessarily mean wheeling out an old SP10 or Garrard with a suitably high-mass arm to match. All one needs is a Technics SL-1200 or 1210 (preferably modified by KAB or Sound Hi-fi), fitted with a Jelco SA-750D S-shaped detachable headshell arm, and a nice high-mass headshell, like the LH-18 from Audio Technica: all 'modern' currently available equipment, and through a nice phono stage (preferably valve) which uses the necessary matching transformers, and away you go... I guarantee that if Noel (or David) heard the 103 in that context (both) their conclusions would be somewhat different!

But will they do that in order to give the 103 a fair hearing before judging, instead of arriving at ill-informed conclusions such it being "an internet special that's been talked up in the (deluded) collective conciousness" based on relative ignorance from using the wrong partnering equipment?


The funniest thing of all though, is that with Mr Keywood the words "Denon DL-103" appear to be permanently impregnated in his mind, and like a red flag to a bull goes charging off in a 'fit of rage' even when the DL-103 wasn't even being referred to.

How so?

Well, Nigel, at the end of his letter wrote:



He never even mentioned the bloody DL-103 and yet Noel duly 'went off on one' as detailed above!! :lol: :mental:

So, I'd like to know what exactly his problem is with this particular cartridge, aside from issues regarding its sonic presentation. His innate dislike of the 103 appears to be run rather more deeply than simply not liking how it sounds...

Perhaps next time David joins us he could bring Noel with him to explain himself? :)

Marco.

:lolsign:

DSJR
15-12-2008, 13:05
These people know less than you guys do. Surprised? I'm not.

Mr Keywood is a highly competant engineer I'm sure, but he leaves the subjective reviewing to others...

The DL103 does have its foibles and I for one, couldn't live with the conical tip and the tracing (not just tracking) problems this introduces at end of side (the HF definitely drops in level towards side end and this is bad enough with many eliptical styli as it is).

I have found it interesting to read that the DL103 really does need a massive arm to behave itself best but am not at all surprised to be honest. Heavy shells are available for the Technics arm and I'm sure a proper counterweight can be manufactured to take this into account. I wonder how much better the Jelco arm is then?

Marco
15-12-2008, 13:57
Hi Dave,


Mr Keywood is a highly competant engineer I'm sure, but he leaves the subjective reviewing to others...


Of that there is no doubt, and I enjoy reading his personal articles every month and his knowledgeable insight into hi-fi in a number of areas.

However, if that's the case and he leaves the subjective stuff to others, then David (as editor) should keep him well away from the letters page unless the query is technical in nature, instead of Mr Keywood dolling out ill-informed 'advice' based on inaccurate information and prejudice ;)


The DL103 does have its foibles and I for one, couldn't live with the conical tip and the tracing (not just tracking) problems this introduces at end of side (the HF definitely drops in level towards side end and this is bad enough with many eliptical styli as it is).


That's absolutely correct, and there's no getting away from it - you can't deny the laws of physics. *However*, when set-up properly and used with the right ancillaries the effect of this is no where near as pronounced or as significant as is often inferred by the 103's detractors. And what effect there is, is rendered as an insignificance given how, when correctly set-up and partnered, the 103 sounds so god-damn musically 'right' and addictive.

I suspect that when thus optimised much of its magic is due to the use of Alnico magnets, which when used in loudspeakers or cartridges in my experience always give great bass, warmth of tone, and a naturalness of presentation that makes music entertaining, easy on the ear, but not dull or boring; simply with the 103 there is a total lack of the false 'excitement factor' and forwardness which I hear in most modern cartridges and which I don't feel is faithful to the sound of real voices and instruments. In my opinion, this is a 'patina' superimposed onto the music which is completely unnatural, even if some like the 'excitement' it gives the sound. This type of sound is, however, wrongly in my opinon deemed as 'right' or more 'accurate' - I consider the opposite as true. But then what is unquestionably 'accurate' in hi-fi? I don't believe there is such a thing, so you may as well just choose your own sonic flavour or favoured brand of distortion.

I know what the 103, though, is capable of sonically because I have the necessary experience - you've got no idea how many hours I've spent optimising the performance of this cartridge and getting to know what makes it tick; like you say far more so than Noel or probably any magazine reviewer! Therefore perhaps it's about time they sat up and took notice of what people like me have discovered and use the information accordingly to review the 103 in the right context and as such arrive hopefully at more informed conclusions?


I have found it interesting to read that the DL103 really does need a massive arm to behave itself best but am not at all surprised to be honest.


Given its pedigree, I don't see why this should come as a big surprise. I discovered this fact, Dave, I think sometime around 1984, and therefore the same rules apply today... The 103, whilst remaining in production, has not changed one iota since it was originally introduced so therefore neither has the context in which it requires to be used. Why should all of a sudden different rules apply or indeed it be expected to work optimally with modern ancillaries? Would you put incompatable modern parts in the engine of a classic car and expect it to run properly? Furthermore, as already mentioned, there's modern kit currently in production which allows it to be heard properly as intended by the manufacturer so there's no excuse to assess it with anything different.

HFW are known for 'going the extra mile' to review equipment in a context which is liable to ensure it performs optimally. I could cite numerous examples of this - it's one of the reasons why I buy the magazine every month. But for some bizarre unknown reason, to my dismay, the same fastidious effort isn't applied when reviewing the 103. It appears to be a case of 'shove it on modern turntable 'X', on a Rega arm, and hope for the best'; consequently when it sounds like a bag of nails it's the 103's fault and not the inappropriate choice of ancillaries!

All I'm asking for is some parity. I don't really give a monkey's what Noel thinks of the 103 (I will continue to use and enjoy it regardless), providing his opinion is grounded on sound knowledge and experience, otherwise there's no point in him expressing it in a well-established and respected national hi-fi magazine when his views appear to be based on a large dose of ignorance. Despite how it may seem, I'm not a 103 'fanboy'; I simply seek accuracy and informed comment on the matter so that people whom are less knowledgeable on the subject can make an informed choice and not be put off by someone's (apparently) deeply-ingrained bias.


Heavy shells are available for the Technics arm and I'm sure a proper counterweight can be manufactured to take this into account. I wonder how much better the Jelco arm is then?


The former is certainly available on AOS in terms of custom-made bespoke counterweight balances from the likes of John (Thrunobulaxx), but in actuality the supplied counterweieght balance with the Jelco arm fairly easily balances out my 103R (or Pro) and the high-mass Audio Technica headshell (a combined weight of some 30g including mounting hardware and cartridge wires) so there's no immediate requirement for a custom-made item.

How much better is the Jelco arm? Have you not read my detailed review on the other thread? :)

Marco.

John
15-12-2008, 16:18
I finally read the article in HIFI Choice by Malcolm
To be honest apart from being a bit of geek I really do not really feel part of his view on members who participate on forums. I think from most people point of view people either see my love of music as either enduring, quirky or geeky I guess at worse we can be seen as being similar to train spotters !!
I enjoy listening to music in a variety of formats including computer based audio. I can also hear silences as well!!!
I think what Malcolm is endangering a further polarising of people’s views and creating an us and them attitude that is not healthy. Most people on forums read magazines. Yes there will always be a few loud empty vessels with strong opinions but handing out insults is counter productive. I value being part of a debate sharing experiences and listening to others I see that there are many paths to achieving a great sound and strongly believe the main thing to remember is to enjoy the music.
I hope Marco can encourage Malcolm to be part of this debate as Mr C has suggested

Marco
15-12-2008, 17:05
I hope Marco can encourage Malcolm to be part of this debate as Mr C has suggested.


I will invite him to come here, or take the discussion to his forum where I am already a member :)

Marco.

NRG
15-12-2008, 18:47
.... But for some bizarre unknown reason, to my dismay, the same fastidious effort isn't applied when reviewing the 103. It appears to be a case of 'shove it on modern turntable 'X', on a Rega arm, and hope for the best'; consequently when it sounds like a bag of nails it's the 103 that's blamed and not the inappropriate choice of ancillaries!

...

Not entirely true Marco, I went to great lengths to get the 103 sounding good in my review of the 103 for HFW. I spent a great deal of time and effort researching it and consulted a contact in the broadcast industry, with many years of knowledge and first hand experience, on how to get the best sound from it... Noel may not like the cartridge (funny he said he'd never mention it again, ever, a year or so back) but Peter Comeau certainly does and there's one pair of ears that I trust with an opinion.

...as for inappropriate ancillaries maybe its more a case of an inappropriate cartridge choice for today's ancillaries...faced with ditching my then setup just to please the 103 was a non starter for me so I went the Ortofon route and never regretted it.

Marco
15-12-2008, 19:07
Hi Neal,

Yes, I remember your review and it was pretty well-balanced, but this is contrary to the attitude that unfortunately both David and Noel display when answering readers' letters regarding the 103. David's response in this month's magazine was negative, but at least humorously tongue-in-cheek, whereas Noel's was downright rude! There was no excuse for that. In my view they should show the same level of thoroughness and open-mindedness in their replies to letters about the 103 as you did in your review.

Furthermore, in order to put the record straight, as it were, I feel that the 103 should be given another chance, but this time assessed with more 'sympathetic' ancillaries, perhaps in conjunction with a review of the Jelco SA-750D arm on a Sound Hi-fi modified SL-1210? Both are examples of "today's ancillaries" and are current products, so therefore are 'relevant' in a 'let's promote what (retail shop-based) dealers sell and make profit from' context, which I suspect is more the real reason why the 103 is not 'flavour of the month' in magazines. I would use a 103R or Pro in any review, not the standard 103, as it is quite inferior to both. This would kill two birds with the one stone, as David has expressed an interest in this.

The essence of what I'm trying to achieve here, and what I consider very important, is to ensure that HFW readers writing in requesting information about the 103 receive knowledgeable and impartial advice based on listening experience where the 103 has been assessed correctly with appropriate ancillaries, rather than what appears as advice based on personal bias and a lack of testing the cartridge in an appropriate context.

I don't think that's too much to ask! :)

Marco.

Spectral Morn
15-12-2008, 19:37
Hi Marco

I was looking forward to your reply to my post, but you have got bogged down in HFW and DL103 cart. Not unrelated but not a response as such.

Regards D S D L ---- Neil :)

Marco
15-12-2008, 20:23
Hi Neil - yep, you're right. Sorry, but that's the way it goes sometimes. Rest assured though I'll reply to your earlier post later, more likely tomorrow, as I'm busy at the moment installing a brand new cartridge on my turntable :)

Marco.

David Price
15-12-2008, 22:55
Well come on chaps - Noel's entitled to his view. Cut the guy some slack, Jack! He is a qualified audio engineer who has reviewed and/or measured just about every cartridge in existence, as well as written about them at a high level for 35 years. Can you match that? Doesn't experience count for anything all of sudden in this brave new world of forums? He's also used countless different arms to do just about every variant of the DL103 over the years, including SME 12 inchers, 3009S2, SME III, etc.

You guys are making the mistake of assuming that just because we don't share your view, we haven't heard the DL103 in the right arm. This is a problematic leap of logic. First, we have. I myself bought one with my own money (!) 9 years ago and ran it in my LP12/Ittok for nearly six months. Also put it in a SME III and Acos Lustre too, damped and undamped. Didn't like its treble, simple as that.

The interesting thing here is that you're doing the old 'ad hominem' defence of the DL103; if you don't like the message, attack the messenger(s). That doesn't defend the DL103, it just tells us you can't make a serious case for it. Actually, the best case for it you CAN make is to tell the world why you like it - put into words why it does it for you. Then we might find that we're all individuals, with individual subjective likes and dislikes (i.e. tastes) - and that's where the differences lie. Not because Noel is going off on one, Malcolm Steward has alleged vested interests or so and so is a floppy haired public school type. This is all 'noise' - the ceaseless chatter generating heat but no light.

Can't you accept that just because someone might disagree with your strongly held views, it doesn't make them stupid/ignorant/corrupt/in hock with the manufacturers, etc.? I don't like Gordon Brown, but I accept that there are some very intelligent people around who do, it's just that I happen to disagree with them. I do not automatically then ascribe corrupt/nefarious/prejudiced motives to their behaviour. To have a difference of opinion is to be democratic - if you insult those who hold counter views to your own then you're a fascist or an autocrat. That's why when I insult the DL103, I do it - as someone astutely pointed out - tongue (slightly) in cheek!








I guarantee that if Noel (or David) heard the 103 in that context (both) their conclusions would be somewhat different!

But will they do that in order to give the 103 a fair hearing before judging, instead of arriving at ill-informed conclusions such it being "an internet special that's been talked up in the (deluded) collective conciousness" based on relative ignorance from using the wrong partnering equipment?

The funniest thing of all though, is that with Mr Keywood the words "Denon DL-103" appear to be permanently impregnated in his mind, and like a red flag to a bull goes charging off in a 'fit of rage' even when the DL-103 wasn't even being referred to.

How so?
Marco.

Marco
15-12-2008, 23:27
Lol. I'll come back to you on this, David.

Right now I'm enjoying the sonic virtues of a brand new £450 Japan-only 'Special Anniversary' edition of the 103 (a 103SA, shown in link below) in a recently purchased high-mass 'classic' Fidelity Research S/5 headshell (originally from the legendary FR66 arm) fitted to the Jelco - now *this* is a seriously good 103 - in fact the best I've ever heard :gig:

Denon DL-103SA: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Denon-DL-103SA-103-SA-Pick-up-MC-Tonabnehmersystem_W0QQitemZ380077677996QQcmdZViewI temQQptZPlattenspielerzubeh%C3%B6r?hash=item380077 677996&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1301%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C 240%3A1318

More later!

In the meantime you will admit, though, that Noel got his wires crossed with poor old Nigel in the letters section? :)

Marco.

Spectral Morn
16-12-2008, 00:00
My own gripe with Malcolm was his broad attack on forums and those who post on them. I accept that there are some who as you say just make a lot of noise and don't have any light to shine on the subjects they respond to. However reading between the lines it would seem that Malcolm is tarring all who post on forums as being "half-a-bran lunatics". The context of his opinion piece is computer audio and his frustration with those who are Audiophiles and are so against it. Now I don't have any issue with those who listen to music this way. I choose not to (reasons why outlined in my post, a few pages back), however I do take issue when a writer broadly attacks those who post on forums and does so in a way that is so rude. If Malcolm is so frustrated why not tackle those who he disagrees with at the time rather than in such a broad way in print. It is after all part of his job description to inform his readers about audio and his passions therein. While it is a fact that not all who read about your passions and interests will share them, at the very least it would make an interesting and informative read for the rest of us who may learn a little or a lot from his experiences. He however feels to do so would be to cast pearls among swine (my paraphrase). I don't pay good money for magazines to be spoken to in such a cheap way by any journalist and further more I don't feel it is a particularly rewarding way for ones points to be put across in/on any medium. To often this type of nonsense goes on unchallenged on some Forums. I guess I expected better of him in the accountable real print medium. I for one do hold him to account for this type of gutter language. He has forgotten to offer qualifications and paints the lot of us with very insulting words.

It is also a pity that he did not site examples (I do realize that copy space is limited in these types of articles) of the sites and comments that had so angered him to state that forums are populated by half-a-brain lunatics. Are there some such on forums sadly yes, but not as many as he seems to think there are IMHE. I have been involving my self on forums since June of this year and the one thing that bothers me a lot is the lack of qualification in the posts/threads. With a lack of information to support claims and experiences. This makes it hard to gain any insight as to why things sound the way they do, or why some one likes or dislikes something. I must say that this lowest common denominator style is also prevalent in printed audio magazines too, and has been for at least the last 8 years or so( part of the great dumbing down happening in society and the media in general). It would be hard to learn as much as I did from todays mags as I did from audio magazines say in the mid to late 80's and the early 90's. After a break in reading magazines from 1996 to 1999 ( I was out of the Audio trade and heart broken at this state of affairs) I was shocked at just how little meat was present in any of the titles I used to find so valuable, Hi-Fi News, Stereophile, The Absolute Sound and the like. Content (the written word ) had been replaced by lots of pictures and very little about how the product under review sounded. Plenty of what it does, features and technology but very little on sound. This has got worse over the last few years. If I want background info, I can go online or read an information sheet to find this out. I read magazines to find out how things sound and via a number of opinions get a consensus on how that particular product sounds. Its strengths and any weakness and any ways that can stretch already good sound (tweaks etc) and raise the performance further. Most great products can be improved by the understanding of what mains leads or isolation products can push an extra few percent out of it, and if its speakers what type of room and positioning will give it the best chance to work well, or brilliantly. Modern mags reliance on lots of pictures (just how many views of a product do you need) , squeeze this sort of depth out and leave a type of audio porn mag, lots of pictures and precious little to read and learn from. Hi-Fi News had become like this a few years ago and thankfully has improved a bit recently, still to many pictures though and still a poor imitation on what it used to be back in the late 80's.

I find your magazine to be in some ways more like the older style, providing a good read but still I would say, that with a few less pictures ( or smaller ones ), and more of the written word, you could give greater insight into the products you carefully pick for review. Thank you for being involved on this forum. I for one appreciate that participation a lot.

Regards D S D L ----- Neil :)

David Price
16-12-2008, 01:00
thanks Neil - an interesting piece of context to this particular strand. I haven't read it all to be honest, so I waded in and responded to a few of the posts in general without having read Malcolm's original post.

However - what I am calling for - and indeed this is precisely what you give in your post - is a clear, logical and well reasoned argument. I'm afraid what puts me off forums is all the personal attacks and the gleeful joy that some posters seem to show in having a go at the mags/journalists, sometimes in a very personal way, and/or putting everyone in the same pigeonhole.

Hi-fi hacks are just people like folk on this forum, there are some perfectly decent and honest ones, some loonies, some eccentrics, some dullards, some fairly benign, others not, etc. It's just a bit depressing for me to see everyone being tarred by the same brush. I'd like to see more substantive argument (which is just what you give in your post) - reasoned discussion of facts rather than personal attacks (usually made from a position of ignorance).

I'm also fascinated by this magazine vs. forum thing. Actually, it seems Malcolm joining in too. But there seem to be battle lines being drawn between magazine journos and forum posters here, and I'm not sure why. I post on the Jaguar Enthusiasts Club forum often (normally asking how to fix something else that's gone wrong with my old XJ6), but I still read Classic Car magazines and don't assume that the reason the XJ6 isn't featured very often is down to a conspiracy/ulterior motives on the part of the journalists! Nor do I wish the end of Jaguar World magazine, because they said the early XJ40s are rubbish (and I have one, and know this not to be the case)! I can't quite see why hi-fi forums have got so political (with so many personal attacks and conspiracy theories) when other 'special interest' forums haven't. Am I missing something?

Marco
16-12-2008, 01:10
Hi David,

I agree, and think that I've more than provided "clear, logical and well reasoned arguments" for the DL-103 in my previous posts, too, have I not?

More on-topic, if a fellow journalist in another magazine (Malcolm Steward) is going to refer to everyone on forums as being "Half a brain loonies", without exception, he must expect some sort of backlash! It's precisely this type of silly behaviour that's created the "magazine vs. forum thing" you refer to.

I haven't read Mr Steward's article in Hi-fi Choice, but it appears to be little more than a rant. At least Roy Gregory was fairly constructive in his criticism of forums and made some pertinent and fair points.

Marco.

Togil
16-12-2008, 06:14
Lol. I'll come back to you on this, David.

Right now I'm enjoying the sonic virtues of a brand new £450 Japan-only 'Special Anniversary' edition of the 103 (a 103SA, shown in link below) More later!

In the meantime you will admit, though, that Noel got his wires crossed with poor old Nigel in the letters section? :)

Marco.

It isn't Japan only, it's also for sale in Germany

Price Euro 499

Marco
16-12-2008, 07:07
How very true, Hans. I even linked to a German Ebay seller - senility is kicking in rather early! :eyebrows:

My mistake, it used to be Japan-only.

Obviously David is choosing to ignore my questions, deflecting attention away from the howler Noel made, and also my pertinent observations about Noel's rather scathing and unjustified attack on the 103, hey ho...

As Neil (D Louth) says:


I do take issue when a writer broadly attacks those who post on forums and does so in a way that is so rude...


Quite! And the same applies to Noel Keywood's recent remarks to a reader's letter in HFW.

Never mind, Neil. David's skirting around the issue gives me all the more time later to answer your previous post! :)

Marco.

Steve Toy
16-12-2008, 12:22
Marco, I suspect David has said as much as he needs to say on the 103 and Mr Keywood and can perhaps be left alone now on this. I agree that if battle lines are now drawn, we know where the fault lies for that... it would be that of a certain Critic rather than being of a World view.

I think we can be excused for our "inquisitive tone" and you can rest assured that it will remain "relaxed" -- if the 'magazines' are out to get anyone, I don't think it is anyone here.

Marco
16-12-2008, 12:47
There are no "battle lines" as far as I'm concerned, Steve. I simply seek clarity on some of David's and Noel's comments regarding the 103, which I'm sure David will oblige me with in due course :)

Marco.

P.S I'm at my lunch ;)

DSJR
16-12-2008, 15:02
The "us vs them" HiFi feeling has been with us in the UK ever since the late seventies, when a certain pair of UK manufacturers tried (and succeded) in splitting the industry up. Those dealers without these agencies being lower class to those that had and who were doing so well, at least until the mid eighties, when one of them launched their own amps... In fact, the "in" crowd were probably the most opinionated and ignorant of them all as they had no exposure to other products (the reps stayed well away from these people). I only survived it because my formative years were spent working with some fabulous international brands and I always had a question as to why my (supposedly) fabulous Isobariks sounded so coloured and chrome plated in the mid and treble compared to the BC1's I'd sold previously.....

I've been reading audio mags since the mid sixties and very much miss the more technical nature of the reviews. Having said that, I reckon most reviewers back then would have open mindedly tried their level best to find out if something they heard but couldn't then measure could actually be measured scientifically.

David Price
16-12-2008, 18:41
Hi Marco - shall be make the DL103 thing a separate strand? I am calling it "The Great Denon DL103 Debate"! Then I don't have to read 18 pages of this last one - frankly don't have the time! See you there...

Neil McCauley
16-12-2008, 20:34
In the March Heathrow show this year I demonstrated the Harbeth 40.1 monitors using an LFD linestage 3 and 2 mono LFD PA3 power amps. Primary signal source was the Funk sapphire, Arthur K modified Ittok and …….. the cheapest 103D we could find. This went into the most musically engaging UK-built phono stage I know, the LFD MCT. The MCT is devoid of adjustment.

Adam Smith of Hi-Fi World wrote that this entire Stereonow combo was the best sound at the show.

Thank you ........ and goodnight.

Marco
16-12-2008, 20:52
David, please just quote my post #160 and answer it directly! There is no need for another thread on this subject :)

Marco.

Mr. C
16-12-2008, 22:48
I genuinely thought the prime purpose of this thread was to discus Malcolm S's drubbing of the internet fraternity and generalisation that all forum users are archetypal sadac's.
I have to be honest here, and not get worked up over a TT, no matter how good it may be, that is sidebar issue to be fair.


A few light hearted observations from over the years here from a non hifi friend who helps us out at shows.

"Mind you if you drop into most hifi shows sporting valve orientated/horn powered jazz playing systems, you do see a lot of 45 yo+ men with pony tails and stony faced expressions, attempting to 'move' their crossed legs to alleged 'beat' of the music."

"You know under-neath every tail there is an asshole!"

"Usually discussing the 'hoppiness' of hook Norton ales, whilst attempting to reminisce about the best sound they have ever heard, from a 1985 valve this and that, hooked up with two pieces of wet string playing through speakers the size of barn doors that looked hideous' But man it sounded good!"

"This room is shite, my mates system would kill this crap stone dead, he uses quality stuff, Musical fidelity!"

"Were all Audio journalists at the back of the queue when looks were dished out?"

Anyway, perhaps some more construct comments relating to Jurno's ability and integrity to actually perform their profession.
Howabout the respective publications show us the listening environments their reviewers use to 'appraise' the equipment and the supporting kit, any listening room anomalies, particular way the reviewer 'judges' the equipment.
Do reviewers have a 'preferred' brand/s?, would you give a valve amp to solid state lover or a CD player to a vinyl-head?
2009 is looming with intent, it would be nice to see more openness and transparency in the publications. Too much to ask?
Would do you say........

Spectral Morn
16-12-2008, 22:57
Your last suggestions are exactly what old Hi-fI mags used to do and regularly. I am thinking of say 1980's HI-Fi News, Stereophile, the Absolute Sound etc. With the dumbing down recently of many audio titles its only on 6 Moons or Positive feed back etc that you will get this depth and meat in a review. Though 6 Moons doesn't seem as thorough recently IMO.

Regards D S D L ---- Neil :)

Mr. C
16-12-2008, 23:03
Hello Neil,

Perhaps bringing these 'old ways' more up to date would be a positive step for the magazines, help them gain some respectability and kudos back, as well as readers.

Spectral Morn
16-12-2008, 23:09
I agree whole heartedly.

Regards D S D L ---- Neil :)

Spectral Morn
18-12-2008, 23:43
Hi Guys

Just spent some time on another forum (GASP) reading the comments there relating to this thread ( topic ) and accompanying posts. One of the guys who posts here ( Sastusbulbas ) got a rough ride ( despite being a gentleman during his postings IMHO) and at no time did Malcolm Stewart involve himself during the short discussion there. I read a few other threads to see if he ever did and he does. I also note that Marco had visited on the 16th and included a link to these pages on AOS.

I find this all very sad. I think it a poor showing not to at the very least engage on his own forum and state/explain or apologise ( in full or part) for what he had printed in hi-fi Choice. He may not feel repentant at all for his opinion, and he is entitled to hold his opinion but he is not entitled, I feel to express it so nastily in print and without qualifying it.

I suppose it will be a cold day in hell for him to appear here, to do similar if he won't on his own forum as its moderator.

He should still be held to account for his rudeness and generalizations. But how if he will not engage in conversation, which would be polite (I hope ) but robust.

I could join his Forum but I don't see the point.

Still annoyed, Sad and disappointed but not surprised D S D L ----- Neil

David Price
19-12-2008, 10:30
Hi Marco - well there I was, finally with a moment free, to answer your points on the DL103. But we're back onto the original topic of the thread. Do you want to reinstate that strand I started, or shall we just leave the DL103 debate for another day? David

sastusbulbas
19-12-2008, 10:40
It's like Question Time, the politicians always seem to sidetrack there too, do you have any opinion regarding the original topic Dave? To be honest I think my original point went over most peoples heads.

Dave Cawley
19-12-2008, 10:51
I have completely lost the plot! What is this thread about??

But better than anything, from eBay just received a first pressing of The Who Quadrophenia, lovely....................

Dave

David Price
19-12-2008, 11:04
Hi Sastusbulbas - well I'm hardly likely to agree with Malcolm here, am I? I'll get the internet equivalent of a lynching! (Joke, BTW!)

I think it's sad that such a fault line seems to be developing between magazines and forums - I don't see why this should happen, as it doesn't seem to happen with forums devoted to other interests of mine (like classic cars, music, etc.). I think there a lot of people who like talking about hi-fi politics on forums, rather than actually talking about hi-fi, which perplexes me.

I think some people overstate the importance of magazines - if you don't like the reviewer(s), then don't buy the mag - it's not like there's only one 'state-owned hi-fi magazine giving an official view' that you are forced or coerced to buy now, is it?

I also think some people take this all too seriously - D Louth's posting about Malcolm having to 'repent' and 'be held to account' are a bit over the top. It's not a 'sin' to say what he said (it's a free country and he didn't break the law), and he doesn't have to be held to account by anyone (except his maker, or bank manager) - he's not a democratically elected politician or a public servant; we're not paying his wages (especially the outraged folk on forums!)

Let's not forget there are countless wars, disease epidemics and natural disasters happening around the world at any given time - in the great scheme of things these are outrageous and scandalous, not the writings of a hi-fi hack (or forum poster) for that matter. A sense of perspective is often useful at times like this - especially at Xmas...

Ultimately, I think people should have confidence in themselves and their own choices. When you get to this point, you no longer feel challenged or affronted by the writings/rantings of others and you can take them with a pinch of salt when needed. Life is too short - don't let other people's opinions get to you, unless you secretly fear they are right!

Gerry
19-12-2008, 11:11
I have completely lost the plot! What is this thread about??
Dave

The thread along with a few others appears to me be about HFW and NK in particular not liking the Denon 103.
The idea is to get DP to comment on their disdain for this cartridge and provide an explanation as to why, along with explaining NK's comments in the last HFW letters section.

To me, it appears some what unfair (and in keeping with some of the HiFi mags editors comment son BB's) that pressure is being bought to bear on an individual to answer for some else and their thoughts/comments.

At the end of the day this a free country and someone can say or think what they like. Weather you agree with it is neither here nor there.

I for one love the 103 & 103R. I also have a number of other cartridges I like too. I don't personally agree with NK or DP's view of the 103 and the context in which it is reviewed. But I really don't give a dam! I like what I like and I don't need to question anyone about it or feel the need to have others conform to my view, or try to pressurize them into thinking the same.

It is all system dependent after all. My system suits the Denon, big heavy Jap arms on DD's & Idlers (yes I have too many TTs).
Of course if DP and NK want to hear it on proper TT they're welcome to (DP ask Richard (Vantage)).

Anyway my piece said....of course you can disagree....and all IMHO:)

regards
Gerry

David Price
19-12-2008, 11:17
Gerry - well said that man! DP

Dave Cawley
19-12-2008, 11:25
OK, got it! Freedom of speech is very important. And Hi Fi World do more to promote vinyl than any magazine out there, bless them!!

Dave

David Price
19-12-2008, 11:48
Alright, well I've got a few minutes spare, so let's get to the DL103 debate.

Noel and I were simply expressing an opinion. We certainly don't agree about everything, but we both feel the DL103 isn't an exceptional cartridge - nor should we expect it be considering its modest price. However, it certainly has a 'character' that some find very pleasing, and this can also be an excellent palliative for certain types of system.

To me, the DL103 sounds involving, engaging and musical - as per all lowish compliance Moving Coils like the Decca London, for example. This sort of sound is a function of the cartridge's suspension, as much as anything else, but means you need a high mass arm to prevent mistracking/bad sound. In the same way that a heavy car with stiff springs rides better than a light one with the same suspension, so the Denon demands a massy platform. Also, fluid damping seems to help this more than most.

One big downside is the stylus profile, which so my Japanese hi-fi nut friend tells me was developed for broadcast applications - basically for NHK in the nineteen sixties. This originally meant tracking forces of 3-5g to prevent needle jump on air! A spherical stylus was thus mandatory, and that's how it has stayed. This is not the ideal profile for tracking a microgroove LP, not least because of the end-of-side treble drop out. Sonics seem to suffer right across the arc of the disc, manifesting as lack of 'inner detail' and treble finesse. There's also a record wear issue; opinion is divided but there is a considerable body of evidence to show spherical tips wear records faster than elliptical (or variant) tips.

Periodically, limited edition versions of the DL103 have been released in Japan with elliptical styli - I owned one myself in the early nineties which I brought brand new. Still, these didn't sound dramatically different, suggesting the cantilever material/suspension/motor/body/wiring also 'add' a lot of character. I have heard a DL103 with the body removed (a popular tweak amongst Japanese DL103-philes) and it's quite a lot cleaner and more open. Denon fitted a square plastic body to the '103, for reasons of durability, ease of installation to the headshell and ease of cueing - it wasn't designed for low resonance.

Having run a DL103, in several arms (Ittok, Acos Lustre, Denon DP3000) and decks (Linn, Michell, STD, Pioneer PL600) in the early nineties, I decided it wasn't for me. I liked the lively, punchy, engaging sound but couldn't live with the rather 'elementary' treble and lack of detail. I moved to an Audio Technica AT-0C9, and then an AT-33E which I loved. In Japan (where I lived), the Denon sold for about Y18,000 (£80 at the time) and the AT about the same, so there was no contest for me.

I'm not a fascist, so I'm not going to tell anyone who's getting a nice sound out of their DL103 that they're stupid or misguided, as I can accept that its distinctive presentation should really 'make' some systems (and 'break' others!), but conversely I'd ask you not to assume that there's some kind conspiracy at HFW against the DL103. There isn't! However, I think we do knock it a little 'gratuitously' sometimes, I admit - sorry if this upsets sensitive souls!

David

Spectral Morn
19-12-2008, 12:51
Firstly thank you for your response to the Denon DL 103 debate, much appreciated I am sure by all on AOS. Marco I think is on holiday, so will respond in his own time. I do not have anything other than a passing interest in the DL 103 Cartridge by the way. Never heard one so can't comment.

As to my last posting. I do acknowledge that Malcolm is freely entitled to his opinion ( something I state in the post) on whatever topic he wants, as am I and your good self too. However what added further fuel to my concern about his recent comments was the very poor response Sastusbulbas got to his post on Hi-Fi Critics Forum, either total disinterest or as he say "very political answers worthy of politicians ", I.E evasion and changing the subject. His Thread and postings were very gentlemanly but received very little debate (unlike here ). I spent awhile looking around and found that not only did Malcolm respond to posters on other threads ( not Sastusbulbas thread )but also moderated some one who was rude on a thread (as it is deleted I don't know what was said ). I think that what he said in his comment piece is a classic example of lowest common denominator journalism and in it he is, in the broadest brush strokes possible, making all who post on forums and not just on computer related topics a target for his insults. He was not prepared to allow some one on his forum to use insulting language, so why should we accept this either. Who is moderating him. My main gripe is the language used and his generalizations about forums and their members.

His choice to moderate rudeness but yet to dish it out where he can not be moderated strikes me as being a classic example of double standards and rank hypocrisy.

Should people be free to have and express opinions Yes, but they should explain themselves properly and not decend to gutter language to do so.

One other fact not really discussed here is his dislike of the democracy and freedom the net and forums gives its users. Are there those who can't string two words together and should really not post ? Yes. Are there those who don't understand their topics ? Yes. However for most people it is fairly easy to know who they are and the democracy of the net allows their misinformation or lack of understanding to be challenged ( in I would hope a kind and gentlemanly way. I know thats not the case all the time ,but Moderators are here to ensure fair play ) something it is hard to do with the printed media, who for many years had the monopoly on the topics they write about and not all ways were exempt from misinformation and extreme bias themselves. The net is a double edged sword but I for one welcome its democracy/freedom as long as information is qualified fully. I am sorry that Malcolm feels frustrated by that fact but the Genie is out of the bottle and it is way to late to put it back.

I do agree with David that there are many more important issues in the world to worry about or deal with, but I also feel that rudeness should be challenged when it comes up. It is to easy to descend to insults and miss the chance to be critical without the decent to gutter level language, plus I find generalization very frustrating.


Regards D S D L ----- Neil :)

Primalsea
19-12-2008, 19:34
Hi Sastusbulbas,

We did go a little off road didn't we, infact mostly we didn't even find the road in the 1st place.
To be fair your initial post was really a few issues wrapped up in one package making it quite heavy going.

However, some of what you said was illustrated in following posts. At the end of the day it's all about choice, you choose what you want to do and what you want to say. Hifi is a bit bizarre as its a very personal and subjective thing that defines the quality of equipment. A complaint about a particular hifi item becomes a personal complaint to someone who owns it (and likes it) as it's qualities were judged by them. to dismiss the item is to dismiss the users ability to make judgement.

This isn't really the case, its all in peoples heads unless someone is rather rude and outspoken. People shouldn't take it all so personally.

The truth is there are people out there who do look out for peoples interests but there are a lot of twats as well. The twats tend to be the ones that cause all the sensational moments that are far more interesting than the good guys who haven't got axes to grind. Its all smoke an mirrors, heat but no light etc.

sastusbulbas
19-12-2008, 20:25
I think it's sad that such a fault line seems to be developing between magazines and forums - I don't see why this should happen, as it doesn't seem to happen with forums devoted to other interests of mine (like classic cars, music, etc.). I think there a lot of people who like talking about hi-fi politics on forums, rather than actually talking about hi-fi, which perplexes me.
Opinion, Most magazines do not openly support the deception of a customer for proffit. Hi Fi Magazines clearly do.

I think some people overstate the importance of magazines - if you don't like the reviewer(s), then don't buy the mag - it's not like there's only one 'state-owned hi-fi magazine giving an official view' that you are forced or coerced to buy now, is it?
Opinion, Hi Fi Magazines made their own rules up and buried their own heads in the sand, I think people are underestimating the effect blatant product hype and advertising have in the British audio scene. It is not about being forced but people are coerced and conned, buy this product look how good it is etc etc.

I also think some people take this all too seriously - D Louth's posting about Malcolm having to 'repent' and 'be held to account' are a bit over the top. It's not a 'sin' to say what he said (it's a free country and he didn't break the law), and he doesn't have to be held to account by anyone (except his maker, or bank manager) - he's not a democratically elected politician or a public servant; we're not paying his wages (especially the outraged folk on forums!)
Opinion, He is writing personal opinion in a publication, without investigating the cause and effect of the complaint! The forums are festering because of such opinion, of course it should be taken seriously. It is not a free country, I cannot claim my Magic soup can cure cancer and have a reviewer give it four stars, then belittle someone who claims I am making it up.

Let's not forget there are countless wars, disease epidemics and natural disasters happening around the world at any given time - in the great scheme of things these are outrageous and scandalous, not the writings of a hi-fi hack (or forum poster) for that matter. A sense of perspective is often useful at times like this - especially at Xmas...
Opinion, Lets look at things at home, British society is nothing like Question time and politics show, we still have deliberate class segregation, different levels of education and quality of public services dependent on postcode, made up hype surveys regarding minimum wage, fuel poverty etc etc, our economy is a mess, and yet we have a society that excepts ever increasing fuel costs, bank charges, will happily pay more for a home and support magazines that blatantly lie and support product which costs more than it should. A sense of perspective, a £2 per meter cable should be shown for what it is by a reviewer, instead of that reviewer giving that product 4 stars for a £1200 stereo pair. We have people in this country duped into spending hard earned cash for over hyped off the shelf re-badged components, and magazines choose only to review what is necessary so as to not upset the apple cart!

Ultimately, I think people should have confidence in themselves and their own choices. When you get to this point, you no longer feel challenged or affronted by the writings/rantings of others and you can take them with a pinch of salt when needed. Life is too short - don't let other people's opinions get to you, unless you secretly fear they are right!
opinion, People can have a false confidence, reading the magazines and agreeing with reviews, just to have that confidence shattered by a forum mob, where it is replaced by mistrust and suspicion, they can argue in defence of technical debate given.

Do let other opinions get to you, THIS IS IMPORTANT, as if your confidence in a product is based on a magazine review, or technical information from a manufacturer, YOU MAY HAVE BEEN CONNED. You may have spent more money than you had to for a re-badged product which only got a favourable review to keep things sweet.

Hi David,

Sadly I feel people can be lulled into a false sense of security. Magazines HAVE done this to consumers, ALL magazines have stated opinion, hype and supported all sorts of made up rubbish regarding all matter of Hi Fi Retail products, WITHOUT robust technical evidence.

The forum divide and and Hi Fi Geeks and lunies are born from this. We have divides within forums, those that will not now believe anything without robust proof, and those who are alienated and belittled for supporting manufacturer and magazine claims.

The car magazines do not lie and make up shite, nor do they recommend and hype up a product with a stupendous review system which never seems to be less than 4 out of 5 stars.

FACT...A fancy cable costing hundreds per metre can be submitted for review, looking splendid in its nylon mesh and logo'd shrink wrap and bling plugs, and get a fabulous write up making it out to be splendid value for money. Even though the reviewer knows it is available for a couple of quid per metre from a component catalogue.

There have been plenty of technical Foo made up and relentlessly pushed into customers minds by manufacturers and magazines, I have had such admitted, but magazines decide not to upset the apple cart and support such an industry.

Until magazines start to defend technical debate with robust evidence, and look after customers by giving a true account of a product, it's origins, and its performance and value, we are only going to see more and more of a divide on forums and mistrust of magazine reviewers.

The FACT is that magazines HAVE lied to customers, have mislead them, and have made fools out of them, they have allowed manufacturers to do the same, and only ever seem to offer favourable review to the "correct" product.

Why do we not see manufacturers or reviewers defend product which is under scrutiny or debate on forums?
Why do we not see "robust" technical debate offered on forums by manufacturers of product, or by reviewers of product?

Hi Fi and the British audio scene has went to the dogs, full of con men and opinionated bigots, no one cares for the customer or his requirements and everyone in that industry seems happy to support each other with over hyped over priced products which extract the unsuspecting customer from his hard earned cash.

Why don't we ever see, product A is shite, it is a Pioneer budget DVD player in a Goldmund badged case, save thousands and buy the Pioneer model.

Or, Magic speaker cable Co have a cheek, what we have here is identical to RA component catalogue number 3445. You can get this without the bling Nylon for £2 per metre, saving you £118 per metre.

Or, This speaker is nothing more than a car speaker stuck in a DIY cabinet with a cheap Pro audio DEQ unit, avoid at all cost.

All we see is 4 stars, 5 stars, superb, very good, blah blah blah, with no robust technical debate or such. No one but the forums seem intent on protecting the potential customer from buying useless overpriced twaddle or falling for magazine technical FOO.

Magazines now have NO credibility, THEY are now full of half brained lunatics and that is what is doing the damage many ignore or turn a blind eye to.

;)

kt66
19-12-2008, 20:36
I have completely lost the plot! What is this thread about??

But better than anything, from eBay just received a first pressing of The Who Quadrophenia, lovely....................

Dave

I think Classic Records pressing is slightly better. The print of the booklet isn't as good though.

sastusbulbas
19-12-2008, 20:43
At the end of the day it's all about choice....

Except it is not, freedom of choice requires clear cut information on the choices and variables, and magazines do not do this, the general consumer is an open target, at the moment I akin the audio industry to those that go around kidding on they are gas men and stealing money from the vulnerable.

The sooner the magazines and manufacturers return from profit cuckoo land the better.

I am giving up all magazines and new Hi Fi for that reason, because the industry and its attitude sickens me. How low will it go? If any of them lost their job, would they resort to selling £2 socks for £60 a pair to the dying!

:)

Alex Nikitin
19-12-2008, 22:15
Until magazines start to defend technical debate with robust evidence, and look after customers by giving a true account of a product, it's origins, and its performance and value, we are only going to see more and more of a divide on forums and mistrust of magazine reviewers.

I think it is not possible to provide a "robust evidence" about a hi-fi equipment performance based only on technical merits. If that would be possible, there would be no need for listening at all :) . Measurements and technical details do provide some information and are essential for sorting out badly designed or potentially unreliable or dangerous products. However the technical side would never tell the whole story, for a very simple reason - at the end there is a human person with a subjective perception. So far there is no way to evaluate the sound quality in a purely objective way. It is certainly gives some space for a dishonest people trying to make money - however in a long run most of these "snake oil" type products do not survive.

For me measurements in hi-fi magazines do provide a pleasant reading and (as I have designed measuring equipment for over 30 years) more the better. However at best these would give me only some indication of the design approach and potential compromises, saying very little about actual sound quality. For that you have to listen and there is no other way, if the equipment meets at least basic technical requirements.

Alex

aquapiranha
19-12-2008, 22:27
Magazines and forums both have their strengths and weaknesses. For example both can recommend a product based either on personal preference or for a more covert reason, such as a desire to sell a product (mostly in the case of the magazines) to somehow gain from it. No matter how much "experience" and individual claims to have, there can be but one opinion that matters, and that is the opinion of the person using the product. It is for this reason that people should listen if possible before making a decision, or, a choice could be made on recommendation along with the asumption that a mistake may be made. I see lots of people making judgements, suggestions and even thinly veiled insults about products, but at the end of the day the only people they are fooling is themselves since anyone with an ounce of sense will see these comments for what they are - opinions, nothing more. there are too many self appointed wannabes in this hobby, so as usual it is caveat emptor.

One mans poison etc.... the sooner everyone realises we all like different things the better.

:)

sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 01:24
I think it is not possible to provide a "robust evidence" about a hi-fi equipment performance based only on technical merits. If that would be possible, there would be no need for listening at all :) . Measurements and technical details do provide some information and are essential for sorting out badly designed or potentially unreliable or dangerous products. However the technical side would never tell the whole story, for a very simple reason - at the end there is a human person with a subjective perception. So far there is no way to evaluate the sound quality in a purely objective way. It is certainly gives some space for a dishonest people trying to make money - however in a long run most of these "snake oil" type products do not survive.

For me measurements in hi-fi magazines do provide a pleasant reading and (as I have designed measuring equipment for over 30 years) more the better. However at best these would give me only some indication of the design approach and potential compromises, saying very little about actual sound quality. For that you have to listen and there is no other way, if the equipment meets at least basic technical requirements.

Alex

No sorry, too simple, in the last 30 years which magazines or manufacturers have backed claims made of Cables in an online Forum debate? NONE.

The fact is that forum members are continually disproving such as rubbish as are blind listening tests. When such happens magazines and manufacturers shirk away and leave the customer holding his cable like an empty dog leash.

And if there is a theory on it not being possible to measure, then at least manufacturers and magazines could START with that!

Personally though, it does not excuse the fact that many dealers and magazines know a product is not worth thousands, is sourced from a component catalogue, yet still give it a hyped review when a customer could buy it unbranded for pounds IF they knew better.

Nor does it excuse the fact that some reviewers know of such products yet keep quite about it.

Alex Nikitin
20-12-2008, 02:05
The fact is that forum members are continually disproving such as rubbish as are blind listening tests. When such happens magazines and manufacturers shirk away and leave the customer holding his cable like an empty dog leash.

And if there is a theory on it not being possible to measure, then at least manufacturers and magazines could START with that!

Personally though, it does not excuse the fact that many dealers and magazines know a product is not worth thousands, is sourced from a component catalogue, yet still give it a hyped review when a customer could buy it unbranded for pounds IF they knew better.

Nor does it excuse the fact that some reviewers know of such products yet keep quite about it.

Please, don't start about "blind listening tests". To make these even a little bit worthwhile takes a lot of effort, time and money. And even than they generally prove very little. These tests are a useful tool on some occasions but mostly just a waste of time. Any attempts to "prove" something in a "blind test" made at home or in a similar environment are completely useless.

And second - could you please provide an example of such a cable as you have described. I would love to buy one cheaply from RS .

Alex

sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 05:28
Please, don't start about "blind listening tests". To make these even a little bit worthwhile takes a lot of effort, time and money. And even than they generally prove very little. These tests are a useful tool on some occasions but mostly just a waste of time. Any attempts to "prove" something in a "blind test" made at home or in a similar environment are completely useless.

And second - could you please provide an example of such a cable as you have described. I would love to buy one cheaply from RS .

Alex

Alex , blind tests, you cannot prove they do or do not work. I have seen more forum attempts at validating this than manufacturers or magazines. Suffice to say it seems valid enough to prove stuff does not work, and manufacturers and magazines say nothing.

Alex, you want to provide a link to a manufacturer telling anyone in a public forum about their cables? Chord maybe? You got technical data showing any cable to be so vastly superior in LCR values it has to be worth £100 per mono metre when an identical cable exists for a couple of quid per metre?
I have seen plenty of internet discussion regarding cables, NEVER have I seen a manufacturer defend a product or customer.

That is the crux of the matter, and anything from anyone else's lips is hype and bull.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS NO HI FI MAGAZINE OR MANUFACTURER HAS EVER DEFENDED A PRODUCT OR REVIEW ON AN INTERNET FORUM.

I think many who read magazines buy blindly, believing the techno babble and reviews, fooling themselves into believing they have a better sounding product, only to go onto a Hi Fi Forum and find out other think they are fools for believing such tripe, and not only that, the non Foo brigade are willing to provide technical Data showing it to be tripe.

Many who suffer such belittleing will turn their backs on such matters and pursue other interests and areas of performance.

At the moment their are two areas that concern me,

Cables, all types.

Computer Audio.

Two contentious areas full of Foo, hype, bull, made up crap, and all manner of who knows what! Cables are the worst, and computers are getting like cables. Though both have an odd balance of perspective no one seems able to pin anything down which has been technically debated found sound, collaborated and have similar opinion in magazines and forums.

Are Hi Fi cables a con?

Can we have magazines look into computer audio and expect anything more than left overs from a computer industry where sound quality IS NOT paramount?

Can we expect the magazines, reviewers and manufacturers to embrace fora and develop understanding of the how and why of product?

Can we expect magazines to look at viable cost effective alternatives and opinions for the audio customer?

The truth is that before the internet Fora, magazines, reviewers and manufacturers were able to say what they wanted and make all sorts of wild claims, take a look at the woodwork now, things are changing.

Take a step outside the box and look in. If that is too difficult spend some time reading all the magazines and looking through the forums. To me it's clear something has gotten lost.

StanleyB
20-12-2008, 06:30
TO MY KNOWLEDGE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS NO HI FI MAGAZINE OR MANUFACTURER HAS EVER DEFENDED A PRODUCT OR REVIEW ON AN INTERNET FORUM.
I have, and on many forums. Ended up getting banned on most of them.

sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 06:31
May I ask what product?

Beechwoods
20-12-2008, 08:08
I assume Stan is referring to his Beresford DAC.

StanleyB
20-12-2008, 08:11
May I ask what product?
The Beresford TC-7510 DAC.

Primalsea
20-12-2008, 09:07
I used to think exactly the same way but a few things changed the way I looked at things:

First of all I learnt to lighten up a little :) (no offence intended)

I also had a few uncomfortable moments that betrayed my then belief and more importantly - assumptions.

Not always but a few times I have heard differences that I cant explain. In most occasions it's been a bummer for me as its often been new equipment that I wanted to keep but I didn't like the result.

This is not just amps or speakers, I once bought a remote control mains socket fo the hifi. This was great as I could just switch the whole thing on from anywhere in the room, I had everything to gain. However there was something different with the sound, I noticed that I was find the treble quite course an dthe bass a little shy. I left things as they were for a while but just couldn't live with it. I took the adapter out and I had my old system back. Madness I thought, I must be a loony. A month later I put it back in thinking I that I imagined it but the same thing happened!!

There is a lot of shit out being sold by unscruplus people but dont assume that everyone is telling porky pies.

NRG
20-12-2008, 10:58
TO MY KNOWLEDGE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS NO HI FI MAGAZINE OR MANUFACTURER HAS EVER DEFENDED A PRODUCT OR REVIEW ON AN INTERNET FORUM.


I have, and on many forums. Ended up getting banned on most of them.

Also Ashley James on this very forum.

David Price
20-12-2008, 12:51
Hi S,

Your argument seems to be based on the assumption that the magazines are personally holding a gun to your head, forcing you to buy a particular product, if it gets 4 or 5 stars. Of course, this isn't the case. Magazine reviewers are merely stating opinion - which in some magazines like ours is backed up by 'objective' measurements (which cannot be influenced by 'hype'). You can take it or leave it as you please. We constantly say, in our magazine, that our reviews are an entry point into the discussion, and not a 'final answer'.

The question of whether a product is good or not depends on so many variables. Loudspeaker/amplifier matching is critical, as is speaker/room matching - to name but two vital factors. All we can claim is that - in our room, with our ancillaries, with our tastes and our music - a product has real worth and is worth auditioning, and give reasoned argument why...

This is a long way from you being conned. We are not issuing 'a compulsory purchase order' on your behalf for a particular product that gets a good review. There's something called 'agency', which is the ability for individuals to act in their own interests, which exists here - which you are denying. You're perfectly at liberty to act as you wish here!

I'm a big reader of magazines, and heartily disagree with what I read often. For example, it saddens me deeply that BMW can apparently do not wrong in CAR magazine. But I read those reviews 'actively', not passively. I can see that - for that journalist, this car is great. I can also tell that he's probably a late twenty-something boy racer who actually thinks lowered suspension and ultra low profile tyres are a great idea for Britain's 'traffic-calmed', potholed roads (like I used to do). I don't then automatically allege he or his magazine is corrupt and out to con me. This is where I struggle with your conclusions...

I actually think you make some astute observations, but the explanations you offer simply aren't possible to substantiate. In this sense, your are outside the box looking in - but you can't see through the walls so you're simply guessing, and in a very tendentious way.

A few little details that make your conspiracy theory a little wobbly:

[1] all magazines try very hard to be different from one another, because they are in commercial competition with one another - this makes it *less* likely for all magazines to uniformly agree with each other, not more.

[2] magazine editors are by nature rather competitive folk and are constantly trying to prove their rivals wrong! So reading a 5 star review in a rival title if anything makes them less inclined to print rampant praise of a product!

[3] journalists are by nature rather opinionated, contrary and petulant beings, and would rather listen to their own instincts than those of others - again this makes them even more determined to find fault with things their peers like, not less.

[4] the editorial departments of magazines are culturally very different to the marketing ones. To put things in slightly comic, exaggerated terms, the journos regard the marketeers as wide boys with the gift of the gab, and the marketing folk think the journos are po-faced, self-important, head-in-the-clouds types. Not a great start for a close working relationship...

I am not defending hi-fi journalism/magazines per se, because it is impossible to defend it *all* for the same reasons it is impossible to attack it *all*. Hi-fi magazines are not one single whole homogenous block.

I think that yes - absolutely - there have been some real howlers in all magazines over the years, and some less than great moments in all magazines, but these all happen independently and for a number of reasons (none of which are ever accurately identified by people on forums) - rather than the single overarching conspiracy theory you suggest. The way your argument runs is that there's almost a 'polit bureau' of hi-fi journalism, with central edicts being written telling journalists/editors what they are - and not - allowed to say. Anyone who's worked in any form of publishing will find this amusing, and publishers would retort, "the chance would be a fine thing".

David



"Sadly I feel people can be lulled into a false sense of security. Magazines HAVE done this to consumers, ALL magazines have stated opinion, hype and supported all sorts of made up rubbish regarding all matter of Hi Fi Retail products, WITHOUT robust technical evidence."

The forum divide and and Hi Fi Geeks and lunies are born from this. We have divides within forums, those that will not now believe anything without robust proof, and those who are alienated and belittled for supporting manufacturer and magazine claims.

The car magazines do not lie and make up shite, nor do they recommend and hype up a product with a stupendous review system which never seems to be less than 4 out of 5 stars.

FACT...A fancy cable costing hundreds per metre can be submitted for review, looking splendid in its nylon mesh and logo'd shrink wrap and bling plugs, and get a fabulous write up making it out to be splendid value for money. Even though the reviewer knows it is available for a couple of quid per metre from a component catalogue.

There have been plenty of technical Foo made up and relentlessly pushed into customers minds by manufacturers and magazines, I have had such admitted, but magazines decide not to upset the apple cart and support such an industry.

Until magazines start to defend technical debate with robust evidence, and look after customers by giving a true account of a product, it's origins, and its performance and value, we are only going to see more and more of a divide on forums and mistrust of magazine reviewers.

The FACT is that magazines HAVE lied to customers, have mislead them, and have made fools out of them, they have allowed manufacturers to do the same, and only ever seem to offer favourable review to the "correct" product.

Why do we not see manufacturers or reviewers defend product which is under scrutiny or debate on forums?
Why do we not see "robust" technical debate offered on forums by manufacturers of product, or by reviewers of product?

Hi Fi and the British audio scene has went to the dogs, full of con men and opinionated bigots, no one cares for the customer or his requirements and everyone in that industry seems happy to support each other with over hyped over priced products which extract the unsuspecting customer from his hard earned cash.

Why don't we ever see, product A is shite, it is a Pioneer budget DVD player in a Goldmund badged case, save thousands and buy the Pioneer model.

Or, Magic speaker cable Co have a cheek, what we have here is identical to RA component catalogue number 3445. You can get this without the bling Nylon for £2 per metre, saving you £118 per metre.

Or, This speaker is nothing more than a car speaker stuck in a DIY cabinet with a cheap Pro audio DEQ unit, avoid at all cost.

All we see is 4 stars, 5 stars, superb, very good, blah blah blah, with no robust technical debate or such. No one but the forums seem intent on protecting the potential customer from buying useless overpriced twaddle or falling for magazine technical FOO.

Magazines now have NO credibility, THEY are now full of half brained lunatics and that is what is doing the damage many ignore or turn a blind eye to."

Neil McCauley
20-12-2008, 13:08
David, you write with eloquence, passion and I do believe sincerity. Moreover I like your style. Frankly even if I didn’t in the main agree with what you say, I’d applaud your message panache. However, in the main I do agree with what you’ve said here and elsewhere too. I value your opinions – even on those rare occasions when I don’t agree with them.

Meanwhile, I'm listening to ‘Jet Plane In A Rocking Chair’ from the “In Concert November 1975’ CD by Richard and Linda Thompson. And it’s good. And I'm feeling good - which is pretty rare these days.

And I'm thankful I'm not living in the Congo, or some other s**t hole.

And I'm thankful that so many were prepared to die in WW2 to help stop my ancestors and me not to end up under Josef Mengele’s scalpel

And that Buddy Guy is still alive and kicking

And that I can still take a healthy and pain-free dump when I want – and without assistance

And a lot more besides …… including discovering AOL.

And yes, reading your missives too.

Boys ‘n girls – I'm out of here, and pretty much everywhere else until January 5. Whatever you do, and however you do it, have a good one.

Spectral Morn
20-12-2008, 13:19
Happy CHANUKAH (Festival Of Lights)

You are a great communicator yourself Sir.

As to what you are thankful for. And the congregation says AMEN.

Regards D S D L ----- Neil :)

Alex Nikitin
20-12-2008, 13:26
Alex , blind tests, you cannot prove they do or do not work. I have seen more forum attempts at validating this than manufacturers or magazines. Suffice to say it seems valid enough to prove stuff does not work, and manufacturers and magazines say nothing.

It is not valid, that is the problem. It is just another way of fooling yourself and others, probably even more evil as it pretends to be "scientific".


Alex, you want to provide a link to a manufacturer telling anyone in a public forum about their cables? Chord maybe? You got technical data showing any cable to be so vastly superior in LCR values it has to be worth £100 per mono metre when an identical cable exists for a couple of quid per metre?
I have seen plenty of internet discussion regarding cables, NEVER have I seen a manufacturer defend a product or customer.

There some examples already given. I have seen many other manufacturers to defend their products both in their replies to magazine reviews and on the forums. I would not expect reviewers ever do the same on the subjective part of their evaluation, only on the measurement side.


That is the crux of the matter, and anything from anyone else's lips is hype and bull.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS NO HI FI MAGAZINE OR MANUFACTURER HAS EVER DEFENDED A PRODUCT OR REVIEW ON AN INTERNET FORUM.

I think many who read magazines buy blindly, believing the techno babble and reviews, fooling themselves into believing they have a better sounding product, only to go onto a Hi Fi Forum and find out other think they are fools for believing such tripe, and not only that, the non Foo brigade are willing to provide technical Data showing it to be tripe.

"Non Foo brigade" most of the time just supplying a different kind of Foo with pseudo-scientific smell :), that is my opinion. I design SOTA measurement equipment at work for many years. I know what it is possible to measure and what is not. And there is always a measurable difference even between two very similar cables, for example. However usually the "pseudo-scientific" crowd would dismiss these differences as irrelevant in audio or insignificant. It is not a matter of measurement - it is usually a matter of interpretation of the results that is a problem.


Many who suffer such belittleing will turn their backs on such matters and pursue other interests and areas of performance.

At the moment their are two areas that concern me,

Cables, all types.

Computer Audio.

Two contentious areas full of Foo, hype, bull, made up crap, and all manner of who knows what! Cables are the worst, and computers are getting like cables. Though both have an odd balance of perspective no one seems able to pin anything down which has been technically debated found sound, collaborated and have similar opinion in magazines and forums.

Are Hi Fi cables a con?

Can we have magazines look into computer audio and expect anything more than left overs from a computer industry where sound quality IS NOT paramount?

Can we expect the magazines, reviewers and manufacturers to embrace fora and develop understanding of the how and why of product?

Can we expect magazines to look at viable cost effective alternatives and opinions for the audio customer?

You are asking too much :) . The magazine people do what they can - and first of all they are trying to sell the stuff. It is their business. Is it surprising that the most popular magazines are less technical? Most we can expect from "the magazines, reviewers and manufacturers" - is to be reasonably honest in their information and their subjective opinions. If you look in the past of hi-fi magazines you will see that there were many attempts to do exactly what you are asking, and where are these publications now? Also different magazines do address different customers - that is also quite clear.

It is very nice to see David Price here in this forum - he did provide rather interesting inside view of hi-fi reviewing. It is not a very easy business and I do respect reviewers for what they do - thought for many years in the industry I had my share of bad reviews as well as good reviews.


The truth is that before the internet Fora, magazines, reviewers and manufacturers were able to say what they wanted and make all sorts of wild claims, take a look at the woodwork now, things are changing.

Unfortunately, another side of this Internet freedom of information is that anybody pretends to be an expert and the value of a real expertise is diminished. It is a very sad state of affairs as the real knowledge and experience are lost in the high level of noise. Most of the time people reading the Internet would rather believe something they understand on a common sense level. It is in many cases rather incorrect understanding. Not many real experts would have time and ability to defend their knowledge on a public forum. It requires another special skill :) .


Take a step outside the box and look in. If that is too difficult spend some time reading all the magazines and looking through the forums. To me it's clear something has gotten lost.

Yes. The respect for a proper skill in the art. Not just in hi-fi thought.

Alex

Neil McCauley
20-12-2008, 13:28
Well. Thank you Neil. I'm lapsed. A non-believer. But not ashamed of my ancestry. And happy to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps. And now ........ I really must depart.

David Price
20-12-2008, 14:53
thanks Howard - likewise!

Funnily enough I'm off for the Xmas period now too - so I'd like to wish *everyone* on AOS, and off it, a Merry Christmas. See you in the Happy New Year - have a good one!

anthonyTD
20-12-2008, 15:10
"Non Foo brigade" most of the time just supplying a different kind of Foo with pseudo-scientific smell , that is my opinion. I design SOTA measurement equipment at work for many years.
I know what it is possible to measure and what is not. And there is always a measurable difference even between two very similar cables, for example. However usually the "pseudo-scientific" crowd would dismiss these differences as irrelevant in audio or insignificant. It is not a matter of measurement - it is usually a matter of interpretation of the results that is a problem.
hi alex,
well put.:)
regards,anthony,TD...

anthonyTD
20-12-2008, 15:14
thanks Howard - likewise!

Funnily enough I'm off for the Xmas period now too - so I'd like to wish *everyone* on AOS, and off it, a Merry Christmas. See you in the Happy New Year - have a good one!

hi David,
likewise, and i for one would like to thank you on behalf of AOS for your contributions and apreciate your input on all things hi fi related, hope to see you here again in the new year.
regards,anthony,TD...:)

Mike
20-12-2008, 15:15
+1

anthonyTD
20-12-2008, 15:17
Well. Thank you Neil. I'm lapsed. A non-believer. But not ashamed of my ancestry. And happy to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps. And now ........ I really must depart.

hi Howard,
thanks for your contributions on AOS, have a good one, and looking forward to your input in the new year.
regards,anthony,TD...:)

anthonyTD
20-12-2008, 15:21
+1

???
ARE YOU DRUNK AGAIN MIKE ?
or am i missing something?
maybe youve fallen asleep on the + button again.:lolsign:

Mike
20-12-2008, 15:32
Just being lazy.... I was 'seconding' what you said.

anthonyTD
20-12-2008, 15:59
Just being lazy.... I was 'seconding' what you said.

i guessed that,
just jesting with you mate.;)
already looking forward to more of your best in the new year.:)
anthony....:)

Dave Cawley
20-12-2008, 18:29
OK Howard and David, have a good time, will see you both after the New Year!

I'm hanging around, so if anyone wants to start a cable thread, I have some interesting comments!

Regards

Dave

sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 19:02
Hi S,

Your argument seems to be based on the assumption that the magazines are personally holding a gun to your head, forcing you to buy a particular product, if it gets 4 or 5 stars. Of course, this isn't the case. Magazine reviewers are merely stating opinion - which in some magazines like ours is backed up by 'objective' measurements (which cannot be influenced by 'hype'). You can take it or leave it as you please. We constantly say, in our magazine, that our reviews are an entry point into the discussion, and not a 'final answer'.

Thankyou David, It is not an argument, nor based on assumption or guns or being forced. This is a dramatised thread showing just how things can turn opinion. Maybe you are being defensive, but the fact is that people make decisions to purchase items based on what they read in reviews. Take the reference "you" out, as it was about customers in general. (I actually like Hi Fi World)

The question of whether a product is good or not depends on so many variables. Loudspeaker/amplifier matching is critical, as is speaker/room matching - to name but two vital factors. All we can claim is that - in our room, with our ancillaries, with our tastes and our music - a product has real worth and is worth auditioning, and give reasoned argument why...

I know this fine well, and have debated such many a time, I have also been dismissed as a Foo monger for suggesting ancillary quality plays a part in perceivable difference, and that hearing acuity can vary between listeners.

This is a long way from you being conned. We are not issuing 'a compulsory purchase order' on your behalf for a particular product that gets a good review. There's something called 'agency', which is the ability for individuals to act in their own interests, which exists here - which you are denying. You're perfectly at liberty to act as you wish here!

Again this is not about YOU against ME David, as for denying something called "agency" get a grip. That can only be relevant IF the customer is aware of the facts, the very nature of advertising is to entice the customer that the purchase of a product would be in his interest. In the case of the Goldmund Eidos 18 that was clearly not the case. In the case of Chord cables apparently being identical to RS components catalogue items that may not be the case. The Chord cables are debatable as I have not seen conclusive evidence, but the Eidos was clearly a con. As I have had another reviewer state that such goes on, but magazines are unwilling to upset the apple cart, clearly this infers manufacturers and not customers are paramount to that publication?

I'm a big reader of magazines, and heartily disagree with what I read often. For example, it saddens me deeply that BMW can apparently do not wrong in CAR magazine. But I read those reviews 'actively', not passively. I can see that - for that journalist, this car is great. I can also tell that he's probably a late twenty-something boy racer who actually thinks lowered suspension and ultra low profile tyres are a great idea for Britain's 'traffic-calmed', potholed roads (like I used to do). I don't then automatically allege he or his magazine is corrupt and out to con me. This is where I struggle with your conclusions...

I too am a big reader of magazines, just about every Hi Fi magazine since the late 80's, plus fitness magazines, Bicycle magazines, computer magazines etc etc. I don't feel about the others the way I do about certain Hi Fi comics, and maybe too much spin is being put on my conclusions, the initial thread was my opinion regarding HI Fi magazines having "some" responsibility for half a brain loonies and internet geeks. These are not so much my conclusions, as they have all been offered by others at some point within forums.

I actually think you make some astute observations, but the explanations you offer simply aren't possible to substantiate. In this sense, your are outside the box looking in - but you can't see through the walls so you're simply guessing, and in a very tendentious way.

I do not need to substantiate that some magazines have got rather poor, my "explanations" are not substantiated because they are intended to open debate which I assume will answer the assumptions. I think I can see quite clearly, maybe that is the problem.

A few little details that make your conspiracy theory a little wobbly:

This is your "wobbly" assumption, as it is not "MY" conspiracy theory, but an opinion many fora members have on all Hi Fi fora, this is what makes it clear you have no idea what "looking from outside the box" entails, as you are clearly thinking within your own box. Maybe this is my mistake as I presume all arguments and debate is well known throughout fora.

[1] all magazines try very hard to be different from one another, because they are in commercial competition with one another - this makes it *less* likely for all magazines to uniformly agree with each other, not more.

No, advertising revenue, only reviewing "good" products, opinionated review, self importance, same reviewer names going around, same products being passed. Magazines are not night and day. This is only opinion mind you :) to many forum members most magazines are full of the same old shite.

[2] magazine editors are by nature rather competitive folk and are constantly trying to prove their rivals wrong! So reading a 5 star review in a rival title if anything makes them less inclined to print rampant praise of a product!

Hmmm, not sure about that.

[3] journalists are by nature rather opinionated, contrary and petulant beings, and would rather listen to their own instincts than those of others - again this makes them even more determined to find fault with things their peers like, not less.

Hmm, lets replace journalist with Forum members...

[4] the editorial departments of magazines are culturally very different to the marketing ones. To put things in slightly comic, exaggerated terms, the journos regard the marketeers as wide boys with the gift of the gab, and the marketing folk think the journos are po-faced, self-important, head-in-the-clouds types. Not a great start for a close working relationship...

A bit like the Foo and Non Foo brigades!

I am not defending hi-fi journalism/magazines per se, because it is impossible to defend it *all* for the same reasons it is impossible to attack it *all*. Hi-fi magazines are not one single whole homogenous block.

I think that yes - absolutely - there have been some real howlers in all magazines over the years, and some less than great moments in all magazines, but these all happen independently and for a number of reasons (none of which are ever accurately identified by people on forums) - rather than the single overarching conspiracy theory you suggest. The way your argument runs is that there's almost a 'polit bureau' of hi-fi journalism, with central edicts being written telling journalists/editors what they are - and not - allowed to say. Anyone who's worked in any form of publishing will find this amusing, and publishers would retort, "the chance would be a fine thing".

Sorry but again you have it wrong, this is general forum consensus, not my argument, of course they would expect a reviewer to state the hi fi magazines are not controlled by the advertising brands and such.

David



Steve

PS,

Thankyou David for the reply.

sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 19:05
It is not valid, that is the problem. It is just another way of fooling yourself and others, probably even more evil as it pretends to be "scientific".



There some examples already given. I have seen many other manufacturers to defend their products both in their replies to magazine reviews and on the forums. I would not expect reviewers ever do the same on the subjective part of their evaluation, only on the measurement side.



"Non Foo brigade" most of the time just supplying a different kind of Foo with pseudo-scientific smell :), that is my opinion. I design SOTA measurement equipment at work for many years. I know what it is possible to measure and what is not. And there is always a measurable difference even between two very similar cables, for example. However usually the "pseudo-scientific" crowd would dismiss these differences as irrelevant in audio or insignificant. It is not a matter of measurement - it is usually a matter of interpretation of the results that is a problem.



You are asking too much :) . The magazine people do what they can - and first of all they are trying to sell the stuff. It is their business. Is it surprising that the most popular magazines are less technical? Most we can expect from "the magazines, reviewers and manufacturers" - is to be reasonably honest in their information and their subjective opinions. If you look in the past of hi-fi magazines you will see that there were many attempts to do exactly what you are asking, and where are these publications now? Also different magazines do address different customers - that is also quite clear.

It is very nice to see David Price here in this forum - he did provide rather interesting inside view of hi-fi reviewing. It is not a very easy business and I do respect reviewers for what they do - thought for many years in the industry I had my share of bad reviews as well as good reviews.



Unfortunately, another side of this Internet freedom of information is that anybody pretends to be an expert and the value of a real expertise is diminished. It is a very sad state of affairs as the real knowledge and experience are lost in the high level of noise. Most of the time people reading the Internet would rather believe something they understand on a common sense level. It is in many cases rather incorrect understanding. Not many real experts would have time and ability to defend their knowledge on a public forum. It requires another special skill :) .



Yes. The respect for a proper skill in the art. Not just in hi-fi thought.

Alex

Yes I agree with many of your points Alex :)

sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 19:08
Well. Thank you Neil. I'm lapsed. A non-believer. But not ashamed of my ancestry. And happy to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps. And now ........ I really must depart.


I don't know if I want to believe or not LOL, but that is more to do with the forums than the magazines :)

As for Krav Maga helping, I don't agree. It is not defence.

StanleyB
20-12-2008, 19:15
I'm hanging around, so if anyone wants to start a cable thread, I have some interesting comments!

OK:)

Mike
20-12-2008, 20:50
I don't know if I want to believe or not LOL, but that is more to do with the forums than the magazines :)

As for Krav Maga helping, I don't agree. It is not defence.

Huh? :scratch:

anthonyTD
20-12-2008, 21:16
Huh? :scratch:

pm mate.:)

sastusbulbas
21-12-2008, 03:28
Huh? :scratch:

What part?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Popeck (Stereonow) View Post
Well. Thank you Neil. I'm lapsed. A non-believer. But not ashamed of my ancestry. And happy to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps. And now ........ I really must depart.

I don't know if I want to believe or not LOL, but that is more to do with the forums than the magazines

As for Krav Maga helping, I don't agree. It is not defence.

I will try to explain your "Huh" away,

Neil had mentioned festival of lights in a reply to Howard, a Jewish festival, Howard states he is not a believer, and also states happy to defend the rights of others and mentions Krav Maga.

My reply was a tongue in cheek statement that I don't know if I want to believe (religion-God) but jokingly this lack of faith may be due to Forums, after all like cables I might get dismissed due to a lack of robust technical data! (This is not a rub at religion but fora mentality)

The Krav Maga is more hit and miss I guess, it is Hebrew for close combat, it was developed by Imi Lichtenfeldfirst during the 30's, around 1949 Krav Maga was introduced and taught the the Israeli military. ( In that context " to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps" does have some relevance)

Technically it is not "self defence" but proper hand to hand combat, though many places in the UK offer Krav Maga self defence classes which are slightly removed/varied from the actual Military combat training. Hence me piping up "its not defence".

Apologies,
Steve

Mike
21-12-2008, 09:40
Thanks for the clarification Steve - apologies unnecessary! :)

There's that much going on in this thread I was getting a bit dizzy. :lolsign:

As far as I'm concerned you, and everyone else, are free to believe/disbelieve in whatever whatever takes your fancy. Or not.

Carry on!...... :popcorn:

Marco
02-01-2009, 10:54
It'll be interesting to read David's reply to the above comments (and comment he will I'm sure) when he returns after the festive holidays :)

Marco.