View Full Version : A Sit Down at Marco's
It's ben five years since Marco first invited me round for a listen to his set up. We live about 40 miles apart so hardly a trek to the end of the earth but for one reason and another it was only yesterday that I got over there for a session.
After an outstanding lamb curry (thanks again Del) we retired to Marco's womb-like listening room for a blast of his Tannoy Lockwood Majors. The room is on the small side with sloped ceilings with the Tannoy's tucked away into the far wall. I've heard big Tannoy DC on many occasions and they ranged from sounding a bit naff to very good indeed. Unlike most large speakers they work fine in small rooms up against walls. It sounds counter-intuitive but this is the fourth time now I have heard these monster speakers in a little space so I can testify to the truth of it. If you only have a small room but want big speakers the Tannoy DC is one way of having that cake and eating it, albeit not a cheap one.
So onto the listening. CD first and Marco played a recent digital recording of some Italian bird I had never heard of. Sort of reminiscent of Enya. Not my sort of thing at all but from straight from the off I could hear that this system was going to be a cut above the average. 'Wide-band' is a much overused term but this was, from the superbly controlled deep bass right up to cymbals and bells glistening away at the top end. Next up some Yello, again not my sort of thing but this record does have some deep bass effects that I have heard plenty of expensive speaker systems struggles with. Sure they can put out a sound wave at that low frequency but it's just a sound, not what is actually on the recording. There is a big difference. The system resolved these effects extremely well, 10 out of 10 in fact.
By now I had the suspicion that Marco was picking out audiophile recordings to really show off the system's abilities. Well that might work with a civilian listener but I am the Waffen SS of listeners :) So I suggested we listen to some real music in the form of ZZ Top's First Album (that's actually what it's called). Now instead of production gimcrackery I could hear how the system would do replaying a miked up guitar amp in a studio recorded on analogue tape some 40 years ago.
And stunningly good it was. Whilst I felt the size of the room and the lack of space between and behind the speakers curtailed the sound stage a bit from what it could be I could still hear right into the studio and mentally construct the space in which the instruments were being recorded. Tape hiss was obvious, as it should be on this recording (you don't really hear it so well on the vinyl version due to 'roar') and bass , drums and guitar sounded properly 'real' and realistic. The presence was exceptional, that old cliché of feeling like you could hear a pin drop came immediately to mind.
We played a couple of tracks from ZZ Top's 'Mescalero'. All Top albums are superb recordings. Bass guitar on this was suitably lithe and bone crunching at the same time. Fifteens in massive cabs like this really do move some air and I could properly feel the bass guitar as well as hear it. A properly visceral experience that makes the vast majority of other loudspeakers sound like toys in comparison.
Next up was Rammstein! (is that how you spell it). It's really just modern German punk rock with a slick production but it succeeds remarkably well on those terms and I quite like it. But hey enough about the music what about the kit? Well again I couldn't really fault it and I'm a fussy bugger when it comes to audio, present me with a great sounding system and the first thing I will do is try to pick a fault with it. Sick mind I know. But once I have sat there for a bit and you can't find a flaw then I can start enjoying it.
One of the things I like about the Akai speakers that I use is that they make sense of any recording you play on them. You really get the impression that you are hearing the sound balanced as the producer intended. I don't know if you really are, obviously, but it feels that way. Marco's Tannoys also pull off this trick and the Rammstein wall of sound was presented in totally cohesive, top to bottom glory. We didn't have meter but I'd wildly guess the SPL was averaging about 80db or maybe even a bit more but there was absolutely no break up, no distortion, no collapsing of the sound and no sign that the system was under any stress whatsoever. I know Marco likes to listen louder than I do and I was expecting to have to ask him to turn it down a bit but that was completely uneccessary, I could have listened all day at that level with no fatigue whatsoever.
Finally Alice in Chains with a live recording and again superbly deep and controlled bass, sounding just like it would at a gig, as did the drums, particularly the kick drum. It is really hard to get this sort of quality of reproduction and ally it with effortless dynamics and slam. Believe me, I know. Again just really impressive. if I had to pick a fault really it was the same as I mentioned earlier which is that soundstage is curtailed a bit. it was clear that the system was able to put this recording into it's proper size and shape and re-create the venue like an audio hologram between the speakers but there just wasn't enough physical space there for it to manage it. To an extent I am spoiled since my own room is considerably larger and I can site the speakers in free space and get that effect to work fully so my criticism here is really based on what I am use to and is not particularly objective. We discussed this and Marco pointed out that he has used the Tannoys in larger rooms and feels that it is just a different compromise rather than better and he may well be right.
In any case onto vinyl and a spin on the uber-Technics kicking off with Eric Clapton - Unplugged. It actually took me a while to distinguish that this was vinyl we were now listening to and not the CD player. people who moan about the 'pops and crackles' with vinyl should have been there to hear this. Only a tiny amount of vinyl 'roar' (not unsurprising to hear this sat so close to such sensitive speakers) gave it away. That was true of every record we span apart from some Falla that seemed to have some intermittent groove damage on the right channel. Not enough to detract from enjoying it though even though I am not into Classical. We also played Elvis, Harry Belafonte (his music sucks but what a voice and amazing live venue ambience), and Sinatra: Live at the Sands. The latter is one of my favourites and I know it note by note. But I'd not heard Sinatra's voice sounding quite as real as this before. On my system (with the CD version) it is a little more 'smoothed over'. Quite revelatory, that was.
This is a valve system using a Croft pre and a Tube Distinctions copper valve power amp but if I did not already know this and the amps were in a different room to the speakers I would never in a million years say that it was valves I was listening to. I've heard piss poor valve power amps and integrateds before, costing a few hundred quid from China and whilst their owners seemed happy I could not live with the mushy bass, the syrupy mids and the slightly weird top end that sounds initially pleasing until you realise that it is just wrong. You can't do a good valve power amp on the cheap. it would be interesting to me to swap out the valve power amp for a solid state just to see what the valves are bringing to the party, not sure if Marco has ever done this.
So there you go. A very, very impressive system and without any flaw that I could detect except as I said for my taste I would like those speakers with a bit more room around them for the soundstaging. Other than that it's pretty much the best system I have ever heard and although not cheap it cost a lot, lot less than some of the systems I have heard that, frankly, don't even come close. Marco said that the Tannoys with their re-worked crossovers owed him about £5K. I can say for certainty that you could put these things up against speakers at ten or twenty times that and they would make a mockery of them. That's audio value for money, folks!
And many thanks to Marco for his hospitality, it was a really fun day.
Nice writeup Martin. Sounds like a great day! and sure his system is the best I'll ever hear not that I'm likely to. Lol.
Oh yes I have a crappy Chinese valve amp:eyebrows:
Oh yes I have a crappy Chinese valve amp:eyebrows:
Never mind! Worse things happen at sea! ;)
istari_knight
18-10-2014, 11:57
:worthless:
Agreed on ZZ Top recordings. Was listening to Tres Hombres the other day and the track Master Of Sparks just blew me away. Consumption on La Futura does the same thing. In both cases you must listen to the track before to get the effect.
Another forum member with some great Tannoys is Tom (montesqieu or something like that). Paul at RFC did the x-overs and cab design. They really are great IMHO.
Sounds like a good day out Martin, and where many of us agree is that few speakers do kick drum quite like big Tannoys! Agreed RE the ZZ Top Justin...whether you like the music or not, some of their production was simply stunning.
Yup doing some ZZ now with the SPL meter reading 80-85 C Weighted with half second sampling. About the right volume level for it I reckon.
ZZ Top seem to have guitar amps to die for. Just great distortion on them. Overdriven valves ARE rock and roll.
Spectral Morn
18-10-2014, 14:03
:worthless:
+ 1
Regards Neil
What pics? Y'all know what Marco's system looks like, Big cabs, crazy little door, stacks of Mana... we didn't take a picture of the curry, either.
MikeMusic
18-10-2014, 14:25
Heaven
A day of music
:carrot:
we didn't take a picture of the curry, either.
Now I am disappointed... :ner:
Some folk are never bloody happy:eek:
Gordon Steadman
18-10-2014, 15:34
Some folk are never bloody happy:eek:
What is there to be happy about?:(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJUhlRoBL8M
Hi Martin,
It was a pleasure having your over to visit, and I’m glad that you enjoyed yourself. Next time, I’ll either collect you in my car at Chester station, or from your place, as it will save the ridiculously long train journey of 2.5 hours (for such a short distance). No wonder some of us hate, and thus never use public transport! :doh:
After an outstanding lamb curry (thanks again Del)…
No worries. We’ll cook something traditionally Italian next time you visit. Incidentally, it was Railway Lamb, which I believe is someone else’s favourite you know ;)
So onto the listening. CD first and Marco played a recent digital recording of some Italian bird I had never heard of. Sort of reminiscent of Enya.
Lol - 'the bird' in question is Elizabeth Valletti. The album (introduced to me by Jerry, jandl) is a beautiful mix of gentle, light-classical arrangements and melodic vocals, superbly produced. See here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Innocenti-Elisabeth-Valletti/dp/B000007W99/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1413644551&sr=8-2&keywords=valletti
I thought that I’d start with something calming and soothing, after your long journey, rather than battering your intestines with some heavy rock music. I was keeping that for later! :eyebrows:
By now I had the suspicion that Marco was picking out audiophile recordings to really show off the system's abilities. Well that might work with a civilian listener but I am the Waffen SS of listeners. So I suggested we listen to some real music in the form of ZZ Top's First Album (that's actually what it's called). Now instead of production gimcrackery I could hear how the system would do replaying a miked up guitar amp in a studio recorded on analogue tape some 40 years ago.
Audiophile recordings - moi? I was simply going through the CDs I had scattered around the floor, acting as the playlist from the last few days, as I was too lazy to get up and look for anything else…! Don’t forget the Dave Brubeck or UB40 tracks either. There was so much stuff I wanted to play you, but time just flew by.
Whilst I felt the size of the room and the lack of space between and behind the speakers curtailed the sound stage a bit from what it could be I could still hear right into the studio and mentally construct the space in which the instruments were being recorded.
Yeah, that’s a fair comment, a situation which I’m sure would be improved with a bigger room. I’m not a ‘soundstage freak', though (I strive for my system to excel in other areas, namely realism, information retrieval/ultimate resolution, transparency, tonal accuracy, scale, tunefulness, rhythm and musical flow), although the sound-staging qualities of the system I believe are none too shabby, which indeed you commented as being “nicely wide”, with the classical piece on vinyl, from the De Falla ballet (Nights in the Gardens of Spain/'The Three Cornered Hat').
We played a couple of tracks from ZZ Top's 'Mescalero'. All Top albums are superb recordings. Bass guitar on this was suitably lithe and bone crunching at the same time. Fifteens in massive cabs like this really do move some air and I could properly feel the bass guitar as well as hear it. A properly visceral experience that makes the vast majority of other loudspeakers sound like toys in comparison.
That “properly visceral experience” is other primary goal of my system’s capabilities, as it’s precisely what you get when attending live musical events, whether rock orientated or listening to a classical orchestra in full flow. It’s what gives you goosebumps/makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck, and that only happens when what you’re listening to sounds REAL.
One of the things I like about the Akai speakers that I use is that they make sense of any recording you play on them. You really get the impression that you are hearing the sound balanced as the producer intended. I don't know if you really are, obviously, but it feels that way. Marco's Tannoys also pull off this trick and the Rammstein wall of sound was presented in totally cohesive, top to bottom glory. We didn't have meter but I'd wildly guess the SPL was averaging about 80db or maybe even a bit more but there was absolutely no break up, no distortion, no collapsing of the sound and no sign that the system was under any stress whatsoever. I know Marco likes to listen louder than I do and I was expecting to have to ask him to turn it down a bit but that was completely uneccessary, I could have listened all day at that level with no fatigue whatsoever.
So no distortion, due to ‘soft-clipping’ then? :eyebrows: The volume level on the Croft was never any higher than at the 10 o’clock position (from zero volume at 6’ o’clock), so we could’ve played music much louder than we did (I can turn the dial almost the full way round before the sound remotely loses the plot - essentially, your ears will pack in before the system does), and the same level of control and effortlessness would’ve been evident. I was aware, though, that this was your first visit and didn’t want to blow your ears off! We’ll do that next time... :D
Finally Alice in Chains with a live recording and again superbly deep and controlled bass, sounding just like it would at a gig, as did the drums, particularly the kick drum. It is really hard to get this sort of quality of reproduction and ally it with effortless dynamics and slam. Believe me, I know. Again just really impressive. if I had to pick a fault really it was the same as I mentioned earlier which is that soundstage is curtailed a bit. it was clear that the system was able to put this recording into it's proper size and shape and re-create the venue like an audio hologram between the speakers but there just wasn't enough physical space there for it to manage it. To an extent I am spoiled since my own room is considerably larger and I can site the speakers in free space and get that effect to work fully so my criticism here is really based on what I am use to and is not particularly objective. We discussed this and Marco pointed out that he has used the Tannoys in larger rooms and feels that it is just a different compromise rather than better and he may well be right.
Yup, all fair comment. Your Akais share similar sonic and musical characteristics with my Lockwoods, as both are extremely fast and revealing, but also effortlessly musical. However, as you mentioned in the car on the way to the station, the difference is in ultimate scale and bass extension, as indeed is only natural considering the respective sizes of both pairs of speakers. I do like your Akais a lot, though. I certainly wouldn’t be letting them go in a hurry, that’s for sure!
In any case onto vinyl and a spin on the uber-Technics kicking off with Eric Clapton - Unplugged. It actually took me a while to distinguish that this was vinyl we were now listening to and not the CD player. people who moan about the 'pops and crackles' with vinyl should have been there to hear this. Only a tiny amount of vinyl 'roar' (not unsurprising to hear this sat so close to such sensitive speakers) gave it away.
The funny thing is that that is how vinyl replay is supposed to sound, when done right! All it takes is a quality T/T, optimally set-up, playing mint condition vinyl, properly cleaned on an RCM. There’s no ‘magic’ to the process. I think you’d agree that there’s little to differentiate in my system between the sound of CD and vinyl, which is precisely the way I like it. For me, when you’re listening to vinyl, you don’t want to ‘hear’ the turntable, just the music! Therefore, that’s why I’ve said before that, without looking, I often forget what it is I’m listening to, vinyl or CD.
However, some folk like to wallow in the euphonic coloration of vinyl replay, done badly, and claim it somehow as ‘musicality’, and that’s fine if it’s what you enjoy, but it certainly isn’t high-fidelity. For me, top-notch vinyl replay and top-notch digital replay should be next to indistinguishable. I still feel that the former has the edge (as you intimated with Frank Sinatra Live at The Sands), and believe that to be the case in my system, but there’s not a lot in it, when using the respective sources.
The reason for that, in my own system, is that I use a high-quality CD player, from the ‘golden era’ of the breed, where the top models from the Japanese majors, such as Sony, were designed to show what the format was truly capable of, and both it and the matching (multi-bit) DAC, have been expertly modified (by Audiocom), with the use of various top-notch modern internal parts, allowing them to reveal the true potential of what ‘Red-Book' CD has to offer.
The Techy, in turn, has been modified/voiced to sound like 'digital, done well’, largely devoid of the distortions/colorations normally associated with vinyl replay, but capable of delivering that ‘certain magic’ and beguiling musical realism, which for me one only gets with vinyl at its best.
This is a valve system using a Croft pre and a Tube Distinctions copper valve power amp but if I did not already know this and the amps were in a different room to the speakers I would never in a million years say that it was valves I was listening to. I've heard piss poor valve power amps and integrateds before, costing a few hundred quid from China and whilst their owners seemed happy I could not live with the mushy bass, the syrupy mids and the slightly weird top end that sounds initially pleasing until you realise that it is just wrong. You can't do a good valve power amp on the cheap. it would be interesting to me to swap out the valve power amp for a solid state just to see what the valves are bringing to the party, not sure if Marco has ever done this.
Again, that’s what happens when a properly designed valve amp is used, rather than one which merely adds euphony. It’s mostly all in the quality of mains and output transformers, although Anthony is, quite simply, a master at designing valve amps that excel at making music sound like music, and not a poor facsimile of such. There is nothing whatsoever ‘pipe & slippers’ about the sound of his amps, nor are they simply ‘brutal' sounding: they possess grace/finesse and power in equal measure.
The other thing to factor in is the effect of the Mana racks, without which the sound of the system, particularly bass response, would be seriously impaired (I kid you not), along with the hard-wired optimised mains supply, feeding the system. Those last two factors are fundamentally responsible for creating what you heard, as they simply allow the system components and speakers to reveal their full potential, along with allowing such large speakers to work, keeping things ‘together’, in a fairly small room, especially at high volume.
So there you go. A very, very impressive system and without any flaw that I could detect except as I said for my taste I would like those speakers with a bit more room around them for the soundstaging. Other than that it's pretty much the best system I have ever heard and although not cheap it cost a lot, lot less than some of the systems I have heard that, frankly, don't even come close. Marco said that the Tannoys with their re-worked crossovers owed him about £5K. I can say for certainty that you could put these things up against speakers at ten or twenty times that and they would make a mockery of them. That's audio value for money, folks!
Thanks for your honest comments. That’s precisely why I always go on about SPPV! ;)
And many thanks to Marco for his hospitality, it was a really fun day.
You’re very welcome. Next time, you should stay over (we have a spare room), and we’ll have more time to do things properly, especially having a chat with Del and a nice meal together with some wine, etc, or whatever else you’d like to drink :cool:
Marco.
P.S I’ll move this temporarily into Blank Canvas, in order to allow folks to comment who may not see it here.
Hi Martin,
It was a pleasure having your over to visit, and I’m glad that you enjoyed yourself. Next time, I’ll either collect you in my car at Chester station or from your place, as it will save the ridiculously long train journey of 2.5 hours (for such a short distance). No wonder some of us hate, and thus never use public transport!
It really wasn't all that bother. It would only have been 1.5 hours if it hadn't been for the delay at Crewe.
Audiophile recordings - moi? I was simply going through the CDs I had scattered around the floor, acting as the playlist from the last few days, as I was too lazy to get up and look for anything else…! Don’t forget the Dave Brubeck or UB40 tracks either.
That UB40 is a classic demo LP! I use the vinyl version myself to demo my turntable when my cronies come around - you don't fool me ;)
Yeah, that’s a fair comment, which I’m sure would be improved in a bigger room. I’m not a ‘soundstage’ freak though (I strive to achieve other qualities from my system, namely realism, information retrieval/ultimate resolution, transparency, tonal accuracy, scale, tunefulness, rhythm and musical flow), although the sound-staging qualities of the system I believe are none too shabby, as indeed you commented with the classical piece on vinyl, from the De Falla ballet (Nights in the Gardens of Spain 'The Three Cornered Hat').
Yes it reproduced a good sense of the venue but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm not really sure how to describe what I am talking about, perhaps soundstage is the wrong term.
So no distortion, due to ‘soft-clipping’ then? The volume level on the Croft was never any higher than at the 10 o’clock position (from zero volume at 6’ o’clock), so we could’ve played music much louder than we did, and the same level of control and effortlessness would’ve been evident. I was aware, though, that this was your first visit and didn’t want to blow your ears off! We’ll do that next time
Well the advantage of soft clipping is that you don't really hear it, the clues in the name ;) But no I could not at any time detect any hint of anything - I couldn't 'hear' the amplification at all. With speakers that sensitive and sat so close I suspect we were using very few watts to get the SPL we were listening at.
The funny thing is that that is how vinyl replay is supposed to sound, when done right! All it takes is a quality T/T, optimally set-up, playing mint condition vinyl, properly cleaned on an RCM. There’s no ‘magic’ to the process.
Yep!. RCMs are not foo. :)
I think you’d agree that there’s little to differentiate in my system between the sound of CD and vinyl, which is precisely the way I like it. For me, when you’re listening to vinyl, you don’t want to ‘hear’ the turntable, just the music! Therefore, that’s why I’ve said before that, without looking, I often forget what it is I’m listening to, vinyl or CD.
However, some folk like to wallow in the euphonic coloration of vinyl replay done badly, and claim it somehow as ‘musicality’, and that’s fine if it’s what you enjoy, but it certainly isn’t high-fidelity. For me, top-notch vinyl replay and top-notch digital replay should be next to indistinguishable. I still feel that the former has the edge (as you intimated with the Frank Sinatra Live at The Sands), and believe that to be the case in my system, but there’s not a lot in it.
The reason for that, in my own system, is that I use a high-quality vintage CD player, from the ‘golden era’ of the breed, where the top models from the Japanese majors, such as Sony, were designed to show what the format was truly capable of, and both it and the matching (multi-bit) DAC, have been expertly modified to excel at revealing the true potential of CD replay. The Techy has been modified/voiced to sound ‘like digital, done well’, largely devoid of the distortions/colorations normally associated with vinyl replay, but capable of delivering that ‘certain magic’ and beguiling musical realism that for me one only gets with vinyl at its best.
Actually I did slightly prefer the CD player over the turntable. Not much in it though.
The other thing to factor in here is the effect of the Mana racks, without which the sound of the system, particularly bass response, would be seriously impaired (I kid you not), along with the hard-wired optimised mains supply, feeding the system. Those last two factors are fundamentally responsible for creating what you heard, as they simply allow the system components and speakers to reveal their full potential, along with allowing such large speakers to work, keeping things ‘together’, in a fairly small room, especially at high volume.
Indeed there is all that attention to detail that I didn't mention.
. Next time, you should stay over (we have a spare room), and we’ll have more time to do things properly, especially having a chat with Del and a nice meal together with some wine, etc, or whatever else you’d like to drink
Yep we can do that at some point in the near future :)
It really wasn't all that bother. It would only have been 1.5 hours if it hadn't been for the delay at Crewe.
You must have more patience than me, as I couldn’t be arsed with such inconvenience. S’up to you though, so you can choose how you’d rather get here next time :)
That UB40 is a classic demo LP! I use the vinyl version myself to demo my turntable when my cronies come around - you don't fool me...
Lol, well next time you can bring whatever music you like, and I’ll play it. My system hasn’t been ‘tuned’ to favour any specific genre of music, or to excel solely with ‘audiophile recordings’, but rather to make recorded music, of any description, sound as lifelike as possible.
Yes it reproduced a good sense of the venue but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm not really sure how to describe what I am talking about, perhaps soundstage is the wrong term.
No, I know what you’re getting at. Every system has its limitations, so perhaps you’ve identified a genuine one in mine, although Quad ESL-owning friends have visited and commented (as that’s their ‘bag’, as it were, and what their ears are most attuned to), on how wide the soundstage is with the Tannoys and also how good the stereo imaging is, etc, as a result of the ‘point source’ effect of Tannoy DCs.
As valid as it is for them, I simply don’t listen to music in that way. How many people go to live music events, of any description, and marvel in the ‘3D soundstage’ created by the band or orchestra?
As I said, Del and I regularly go to listen to live music (the evening before you visited, we were in town attending a mesmerisingly beautiful performance of the Welsh classically trained female harpist, Catrin Finch, playing two different harps, and African world music artist, Seckou Keita, playing the Kora). It was fantastic, and a real pleasure to have experienced it.
Therefore, my benchmark with hi-fi is for my system to replicate, as closely as possible, the sound of real voices and instruments - and from being exposed to regularly listening to that sound over the years, I have a pretty good idea of what is musically accurate and what isn’t.
Well the advantage of soft clipping is that you don't really hear it, the clues in the name. But no I could not at any time detect any hint of anything - I couldn't 'hear' the amplification at all. With speakers that sensitive and sat so close I suspect we were using very few watts to get the SPL we were listening at.
Exactly, and *that* is the whole point. With using such large and efficient speakers in a relatively small room, the system (and my valve amp) doesn’t have to try hard at all to generate realistic volume and scale, totally effortlessly.
Therefore, if that’s the case, why would the amp clip, softly or otherwise, when its under no strain whatsoever?? Honestly, the blinkered bullshit the uninitiated spout, simply to make them look ‘smart’ (when quite the opposite is true), is comical! :D
Actually I did slightly prefer the CD player over the turntable. Not much in it though.
Lol - I’m actually pleased about that, as I know how good the T/T is, after having tested it against all manner of other quality T/Ts over the years, but the CDP and DAC (as a combo) have never been used anywhere other than in my system, simply because the CDP is wedged into the bottom of my rack (as it’s physically too big for it), so in order to move it, I’d have to empty that rack of all the kit housed in it, and that’s unlikely to happen anytime soon!
However, I’ve taken the Sony DAC to numerous bake-offs, including the Owston fest, where it received a rave response, and most recently to Martin T’s place, where it was put up against his high-end Ayre CDP and Mike Music’s Rega Isis, with shall we say interesting results ;)
Indeed there is all that attention to detail that I didn't mention.
The attention to detail in a system - what I call the ‘infrastructure’ - is of fundamental importance, in terms of allowing it to make recorded music sound as close as possible to the real thing: the mains supply, equipment supports, judicious choices of cables; it ALL matters!
I guarantee that you could take the same collection of boxes and speakers, and use them without that infrastructure in place, and the sonic results would be nowhere near the same. Often it’s the ‘small details’ that can transform a merely good system into a truly great one - and I’m not just talking about mine!
Marco.
The Barbarian
18-10-2014, 22:41
The world now knows {yet again} how great those speakers are! is this not the result of the exersize?
No, dude, it’s about two music lovers/audio enthusiasts getting together for a listening sesh, eating a half-decent curry and talking pish! :D
Marco.
I simply don’t listen to music in that way. How many people go to live music events, of any description, and marvel in the ‘3D soundstage’ created by the band or orchestra?
.
Everyone! That's why they go instead of stopping in and listening to the CD. It's reality - the orchestra is actually there in a building with you so you don't need to wprry about having soundstage or 3D, it's sort of inherent to the whole thing.
walpurgis
18-10-2014, 23:14
Nah. At live performances the treble is always too harsh and forward and the bass coloured. ;)
Well, Martin, no-one I know (and I have quite a few music loving friends) leaves a music gig and comments afterwards on the ‘beautiful 3D soundstage’ the musicians created… Perish the thought! If I came out with that pish, my mates would give me a bloody good slagging - and rightly so.
They’re too busy getting down and boogying (as am I), or when attending a classical concert, in awe at the sheer scale and power of an orchestra in full flow. That stuff is what gives me the goose bumps, and why I go and listen to live music.
Like I said, it depends on how you listen to music (how you ‘connect’ with it), and thus what shakes your tree! :)
Marco.
Nah. At live performances the treble is always too harsh and forward and the bass coloured...
Aye, that’s exactly what I was thinking when sat inside the Manchester Arena, listening to Rammstein tear the roof off!! :lol:
This is what you want to be doing at most gigs, not worrying about 3D soundstages…. :hairmetal: :fingers: :hairmetal:
However, we go to many more intimate, acoustic gigs these days (especially playing jazz, folk and classical music), than we do to rock concerts, where PA systems are used. Therefore, I know full well how to differentiate between what’s responsible for the totally different sonic presentation of both, and how to make my system recreate those effects as closely as possible.
That’s why the system does delicacy and finesse as well as all-out visceral grunt and effortless scale! ;)
Marco.
walpurgis
18-10-2014, 23:34
The comments on CD were interesting. There seems to be a dismissive view of CD these days. Admittedly, CD badly done is dire (the same applies to vinyl), but I find the CD sound I get superb and I have a very decent vinyl setup to compare with. Just listen to a good Wadia, Mark Levinson, Theta, Meridian, etc., system and the sound, although different to vinyl is still excellent. I still keep going back to my cheap Pioneer PD-S505 Precision player through my Monarchy Audio DAC and it may not be the last word in resolution, but it just sounds so musical.
Canetoad
19-10-2014, 00:03
That UB40 is a classic demo LP! I use the vinyl version myself to demo my turntable when my cronies come around - you don't fool me ;)
Which UB40 album is that?
The Black Adder
19-10-2014, 06:39
A great write up there Martin. I've yet to hear the pleasure of Marco's rig but I'm sure it's bloody lovely.
Which UB40 album is that?
Their first album, ‘Signing Off’, and the track “Madam Medusa’:
cC-rdaat9HI
…played LOUD and proud! Some seriously deep baselines and realistic drum sounds on that one :eyebrows:
Marco.
A great write up there Martin. I've yet to hear the pleasure of Marco's rig but I'm sure it's bloody lovely.
We’ll sort that very shortly, Joe. PM me some suggested dates for November, and we’ll defo hook up! :cool:
Marco.
brian2957
19-10-2014, 07:33
A great write up there Martin. I've yet to hear the pleasure of Marco's rig but I'm sure it's bloody lovely.
+1 :)
What CD player and DAC do you use Marco? Sounds like a good day indeed- apart from the inclusion of UB40!
Did his system sound better than yours Macca?
Did his system sound better than yours Macca?
I like a man who is not afraid to ask a direct question ;)
Short answer is yes.
Long answer is I'm not that keen on near-field set ups. My speakers are about 18' from the listening pos, with about 6' behind them to the back wall Marco's are about 7' from the LP and right against the back wall. I felt there was some compromise to the performance there, in comparison. I bought my house because it had a room that I could do that far field set up in and going back to nearfield is not a compromise I would want to make. But a lot of people prefer near field so that is entirely subjective.
But - the Lockwoods are about three/four time the size of my Akais so although both speakers employ 15'' drivers the sheer weight and scale the Lockwoods can put out can't be matched by the Akais. So six of one and half a dozen of the other.
On top of that though if we move into the areas of subtle detail and 'pin drop' presence, that totally raw sound where there appears to be nothing in the signal except the music, Marco's system has the edge although mine is not too shabby in that regard. I guess this could be down to the hot-rodded SONY CD/DAC and efforts Marco has made with power supplies, mains supplies and so forth. Those things don't make a huge difference but as with everything else these things add up and are noticeable, particularly if you have got everything else sorted.
All thee comments above refer to CD replay - for vinyl I use a lightly tweaked stock SL1200 that gives a good sound but is not in the same league as Marco's uber Technics which is positively forensic in what it does.
If I pinched Marco's Techy and his speakers and set them up in my room that would be the best of both worlds :)
Also you've got to consider cost. Counting the TT and it's ancillaries I've only spent around £2500 on my system and Marco an order of magnitude more so in that respect it would be a pretty poor show if my set up was better, especially since Marco has been careful to get full value for money with all his components. For example £5K for the Tannoy Lockwoods is just a steal by any terms. You could drop £100K in a high end dealership and not get as good results.
walpurgis
19-10-2014, 09:36
So when are you getting some big Tannoys Martin? :D
So when are you getting some big Tannoys Martin? :D
I've nearly bought some a number of times, usually after just hearing them in someone else's set up. Remember when Paul at RFC was selling his? That was really tough to resist. Another two years mortgage will be finished so I might indulge at that point. But I'd still prefer some 4 series JBL, if I'm honest.
What CD player and DAC do you use Marco? Sounds like a good day indeed- apart from the inclusion of UB40!
Hi Drew,
Both are vintage items, circa 1989 (see my signature for the full system), however it’s a Sony X-777ES and Sony DAS-R1 - both extensively modified by Audiocom. I’ve yet to hear a modern CDP or DAC, at any price (or indeed any FBA set-up), outperform them :)
Marco.
Ali Tait
19-10-2014, 10:04
Their first album, ‘Signing Off’, and the track “Madam Medusa’:
cC-rdaat9HI
…played LOUD and proud! Some seriously deep baselines and realistic drum sounds on that one :eyebrows:
Marco.
Yup, one of my fave albums. Sounds great on vinyl.
If I pinched Marco's Techy and his speakers and set them up in my room that would be the best of both worlds :)
Lol… Don’t dismiss or underestimate what the amplification is doing, dude. Trust me, the Copper amp in particular, and its synergy with the Tannoys, not just musically, but in terms of the grip, control and sheer authority it provides, is a significant part of my system’s sound. You’ve also heard, down at Jason’s, what the Croft preamp is capable of in isolation in a totally alien system.
What’s also worth remembering is that I’m pretty much at the end of my hi-fi journey, and so have a system that’s the culmination of about 10 years work, choosing the right components to work together as a system, and fine-tuning their performance, via modifying key areas of their design, in order to produce the best results and highest SPPV. Therefore, the effect of a totally sorted and settled system, rather than a 'box-swapper’s nightmare' (Jerry excluded), is also what you’re hearing :)
Marco.
Yup, one of my fave albums. Sounds great on vinyl.
Indeed… I have the album on CD, vinyl and the track ‘Madam Medusa’ on a 12” single. If you think the CD or vinyl album sounds great, you should hear the dynamics and frightening bass heft on the 12” single of MM! :eek:
Marco.
Ali Tait
19-10-2014, 10:25
My vinyl came with the 12" included, yes, great track with great dynamics-bass you can feel. :-)
Lol… Don’t dismiss or underestimate what the amplification is doing, dude. Trust me, the Copper amp in particular, and its synergy with the Tannoys, not just musically, but in terms of the grip, control and sheer authority it provides, is a significant part of my system’s sound. You’ve also heard, down at Jason’s, what the Croft preamp is capable of in isolation, in a totally alien system.
Marco.
The XTZ amp I use would walk it with your Tannoys, Marco. Maybe we should try that at some point just out of interest. I reckon there would be no loss of grip and control - in fact I'd have money on it - but it perhaps might not match up in other areas.
Thanks Macca. An honest response, as I would have expected. But I cannot help feel a tinge of disappointment that you didn't strike a blow for the common man by saying ' do you know what, for all the money he has spent, I think mine sounds better' and thus giving hope to those with shallower pockets. It must be a double edged sword listening to top notch systems. On the one hand you know what you can aim for but on the other you may feel it's out of your reach. I think I may be better staying in my splendid isolation!
Thanks Macca. An honest response, as I would have expected. But I cannot help feel a tinge of disappointment that you didn't strike a blow for the common man by saying ' do you know what, for all the money he has spent, I think mine sounds better' and thus giving hope to those with shallower pockets. It must be a double edged sword listening to top notch systems. On the one hand you know what you can aim for but on the other you may feel it's out of your reach. I think I may be better staying in my splendid isolation!
Yep, sometimes it is better not to know what you are missing. If I had gone to listen to Marco's system 5 years ago I would have been pretty depressed. Hope is not lost though I have always though it must be possible to get a high end sound without spending a shitload of money and after years of paying attention, reading and taking in everyone's opinions on what makes for a good sound and not being afraid to go with gut instinct purchases and left -field approaches I am sort of getting there.
And it is all relative. I can imagine folk who have spent hundreds of thousands being a bit gutted if they heard Marco's system. And I can imagine a few owners of ten or twenty grand systems being a bit gutted if they heard mine. Pissing contests aside though if your personally happy with what you've got going on then that's it, nothing more needs to be done unless it's just for fun or curiosity.
M
Yep, sometimes it is better not to know what you are missing. If I had gone to listen to Marco's system 5 years ago I would have been pretty depressed.
It was hearing the AoS/Marco system at Scalford a few years back that showed me the direction I needed to go on my HiFi journey. That system had pretty much everything I value in music reproduction. So, out went the Naim amps and CD player, Neat speakers, Nordost cables and even the SME turntable. Depression, no! Inspiration, yes!! Thanks Marco.
My vinyl came with the 12" included, yes, great track with great dynamics-bass you can feel. :-)
It is great I have it on 12 inch vinyl too - was obsessed with it for ages. They should play stuff like that at hi-fi shows. They don't however.
Even with a high quality TT set up you should see how Apogee bass panels react to vinyl - especially 45 RPMs. You can see something with most dynamic speakers but with lights shinning on the ribbons you can see the most complex patterns being formed. Play the same track digitally and all the "mess" disappears.
Madly, you can even "see" the difference between various digital playback sources. The L4 Lampizator produces significantly more complex patterns than the B7 does. The simpler the patterns look the better the sound usually. It is a "free" visual distortion analyser.
EDIT: the MRT ribbons to a much lesser extent show the same thing. However, some messy looking tracks can sound very good as the noise/distortion obviously acts as some kind of dither. The more you analyse the ribbon movement the better you get at making sense of it:)
Ali Tait
19-10-2014, 17:14
Interesting, I'll have to check that out once I get the statics up and running again.
Interesting, I'll have to check that out once I get the statics up and running again.
Not sure you will see that much. Ribbon excursion is much more pronounced than my ML Ascent panels used to be. Also, not much reflectivity from mylar as opposed to foil. Also, the bass panels go down to 25Hz (but still respond MUCH lower visibly - just that output DB is down relative to the rest of the frequency spectrum) as opposed to around 280Hz for the ML if I remember right. The ML Descent woofer would go crazy with vinyl. I used to turn it off when I had it.
Ali Tait
19-10-2014, 17:29
I have ER Audio Acorns, a rather large design, and I recall seeing patterns if light was shining through the speakers just right.
Been a while since they were working through.
I have ER Audio Acorns, a rather large design, and I recall seeing patterns if light was shining through the speakers just right.
Been a while since they were working through.
The lower they go the more you will see. I'm using LED lights that are effectively a 50Hz strobe I guess.
Jerry (JANDL100) and Paul (RFC) have seen the complex patterns formed, as have many others.
Ali Tait
19-10-2014, 17:45
It's surprising how low these will go, they have discreet high, mid and bass panels.
There was an interesting article in the mail about Bass frequencies and its effects on water etc
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2292678/The-incredible-water-sculptures-created-SOUND-How-bassy-sine-waves-make-corkscrew-stream-appear-stand-still.html
Ali Tait
19-10-2014, 17:52
Aye, seen similar vids on yoo toob, interesting stuff.
The XTZ amp I use would walk it with your Tannoys, Marco. Maybe we should try that at some point just out of interest. I reckon there would be no loss of grip and control - in fact I'd have money on it - but it perhaps might not match up in other areas.
I do agree and think you’re right, so we should try it sometime. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, eh? :)
Marco.
M
It was hearing the AoS/Marco system at Scalford a few years back that showed me the direction I needed to go on my HiFi journey. That system had pretty much everything I value in music reproduction. So, out went the Naim amps and CD player, Neat speakers, Nordost cables and even the SME turntable. Depression, no! Inspiration, yes!! Thanks Marco.
Hi Peter,
Don’t know what to say… You’re very welcome! For me, comments like that make everything we do on AoS worthwhile :)
Marco.
PaulStewart
19-10-2014, 20:16
:worthless:
Just not a picture of the curry please, I'm still on the thousand calorie a day diet :laugh:
Canetoad
19-10-2014, 22:29
Their first album, ‘Signing Off’, and the track “Madam Medusa’:
cC-rdaat9HI
…played LOUD and proud! Some seriously deep baselines and realistic drum sounds on that one :eyebrows:
Marco.
Ta! :)
That UB40 Lp is a classic and nothing like red red wine and all that shite...
How's it goin' Down Under, Bernie? :)
Canetoad
19-10-2014, 23:11
Hi Martin,
I've found a copy on a certain auction site down under. Had a brief listen on Spotify and it sounds pretty good. I don't have any UB40. I always thought white guys couldn't really do reggae music.
I can't believe it's been 10 months since I left Scotland! Time flies. Doing OK but still looking for work. The wife is working and the young fella is enjoying his new school so things are improving. The job is the last piece of the puzzle to get into place. I've been spending my time undoing 14 years of wear and tear on my house, so keeping busy. It does allow me to listen to plenty of music.
Still have the Ditton 44s and will be tinkering with the crossovers at some point. Just built a 9 x 3 metre shed to use as a workshop to tinker around. My Mum footed the bill for that bless her. I guess she must have missed me while I was living in Europe.
Not looking forward to a hot Christmas. The first for a long time. That's something I'll always miss I think. Christmas had to be COLD!
Cheers mate. Sorry to thread crap Marco. :eyebrows:
Cheers Bernie. I dream of a warm Christmas :) Good luck with the work thing. That stuff always works out eventually.
anthonyTD
20-10-2014, 13:09
A good day was had by all then!
Both Marco and Del are great hosts, and always makes one feel very welcome.:)
A...
One day, I'd like to hear my diminutive (in physical size) Proprius amps driving some big speakers.
I am amazed at what they have done to my system, but self imposed budget constraints stop me from buying something bigger and better.
Still, you need to have something to look forwards to in life.
A good day was had by all then!
Both Marco and Del are great hosts, and always makes one feel very welcome.:)
The greedy bugger wanted a doggie bag, too! :eyebrows:
Btw, I believe that you were thinking of pulling out of the pro-industry business?
Marco.
anthonyTD
21-10-2014, 12:04
Hmmm, cant say i have ever intentionaly built anything for the pro industry, apart from Amplification for studio monitoring!
Since i started Tube Distinctions i have concentrated my efforts on designing and producing amplification for the two channel Audio market, which is where my passion is, Although it is true that i have built some odd bits and pieces over the years which as i say' includes amplification for studio monitoring and processing etc.I have a lot of Musician customers, some who are into the hi end audio market, some not, maybe its this side of my bussiness that some get confused with,:scratch: the truth is; a lot of musicians have come my way over the years as they value my experience in producing equipment that can faithfully [as posible] reproduce music in a way that they can relate to.
A...
Hmmm, cant say i have ever intentionaly built anything for the pro industry, apart from Amplification for studio monitoring!
Didn’t a couple of Copper amps make it into a specialist recording studio in London, for that very purpose? :)
Marco.
anthonyTD
21-10-2014, 14:18
They did indeed, they were made specifically for an all analog studio, However; the first of the pair was sent to Jason Kenedy editor of then Hi Fi Choice mag for review in around 1997. some years later the studio and its equipment was split up and sold on, which is how you were able to get your hands on one of them, infact you actually own the review model!
A...
Didn’t a couple of Copper amps make it into a specialist recording studio in London, for that very purpose? :)
Marco.
Oh goody, daddee - dosh that mean then that I have an exshtra shpeshial PA amp? :eyebrows:
Or maybe in years to come, when it’s sold on the Antiques Roadshow, that will add extra provenance, especially if you’ve blessed it with your bath water! :D
Marco.
anthonyTD
21-10-2014, 14:27
:lol::lol::lol:
Yea, something like that! :)
A...
Oh goody, daddee - dosh that mean then that I have an exshtra shpeshial PA amp? :eyebrows:
Or maybe in years to come, when it’s sold on the Antiques Roadshow, that will add extra provenance, especially if you’ve blessed it with your bath water! :D
Marco.
for vinyl I use a lightly tweaked stock SL1200 that gives a good sound but is not in the same league as Marco's uber Technics which is positively forensic in what it does.
I meant to pick you up on this earlier, Martin, as far as those who continue (in a rather blinkered way) to dismiss the efficacy of ‘maxing out modifications’ on a Techy. How would you describe the differences in sonic and musical presentation of both our T/Ts (yours being virtually stock), in terms of in your opinion, the cost of the mods I’ve carried out being warranted in out-and-out performance?
Also, how would you describe the sound of the SPU Royal? Was it what you expected or not? Just curious! :)
Marco.
Without comparing both decks back to back in the same system I don't think I could give any useful insight there. Your deck sounds very neutral, almost like digital. As you know I think digital is better if it is neutrality (i.e closeness to the original recording) you want so that is meant as a positive comment. I can guess that some people expect a bit more 'flavour' from their vinyl replay so an uber-Techy might not be for them.
And same applies to the SPU really. I've heard an SPU before against a bunch of other carts and it was the top one for me so I guess you could say I like them but in truth I am not a serious vinylista and wouldn't consider splashing out on such an expensive cartridge, good though it undoubtably is.
Your deck sounds very neutral, almost like digital. As you know I think digital is better if it is neutrality (i.e closeness to the original recording) you want so that is meant as a positive comment.
No worries, I'm taking it as one, because that’s precisely what vinyl replay sounds like on a ‘sorted’ direct-drive turntable. You have to watch, however, that things don’t stray into sterility, which I why I use an inherently ‘musical sounding’ arm and cartridge combo. The SPU playing a major part, in that respect. It’s all about balancing the ‘Yin’ and ‘Yang’, as it were.
I don’t think digital is better, but I like my T/T to sound like ‘digital done well’, which I’d suggest is how the Sony CDP/DAC sounds. Conversely, I like my CDP/DAC to sound ‘analogue", but in a good way. For me, the old multi-bit DACs possess that type of sound (very ‘musical’), with superb bass, but a little 'rough around the edges’. However, some judicious modifications, using the best modern components (a-la Audiocom), sorts that out.
Next time you visit, I’ll play you the best recordings I’ve got on both CD and vinyl, and you can say if you still prefer digital.
For me, if we use some you have heard, such as The Harry Belafonte 'Live at Carnegie Hall', and Sinatra 'Live at The Sands', on LP (both all-analogue recordings from start to finish), digital, as good as it is when it’s *really* good, still doesn’t sound as natural or as lifelike as that - and you hinted at such yourself when you mentioned that you preferred my vinyl version of Sinatra to your CD copy...
I can guess that some people expect a bit more 'flavour' from their vinyl replay so an uber-Techy might not be for them.
Absolutely, and there’s nothing wrong with that. However, if you value a turntable acting simply as an effective ‘transcription device’ (count me in), an “uber-Techy”, as you call it, IME, is about as good as it gets. ‘Flavour’ I’m not interested in, as by definition, its a deviation from transparency, and thus ultimately, high-fidelity.
And same applies to the SPU really. I've heard an SPU before against a bunch of other carts and it was the top one for me so I guess you could say I like them but in truth I am not a serious vinylista and wouldn't consider splashing out on such an expensive cartridge, good though it undoubtably is.
I think you made a good point when you compared it, musically, with your Nagaoka. I know what you mean by that: both have an ‘effortless’ style of music-making and a very natural sounding sonic presentation, although the SPU (as should be expected) offers greater insight into recordings and possesses explosive dynamics, when the music demands. In that respect, one could call it a ‘Nagaoka on steroids’! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Next time you visit, I’ll play you the best recordings I’ve got on both CD and vinyl, and you can say if you still prefer digital.
For me, if we use some you have heard, such as The Harry Belafonte 'Live at Carnegie Hall', and Sinatra 'Live at The Sands', on LP (both all-analogue recordings from start to finish), digital, as good as it is when it’s *really* good, still doesn’t sound as natural or as lifelike as that - and you hinted at such yourself when you mentioned that you preferred my vinyl version of Sinatra to your CD copy...
Your Sinatra is digitally remastered though. You'll need to get a first pressing ;)
My comment on that and the vinyl/cd was relating to how it sounds on cd in my system compared to how it sounded on vinyl in your system. Not a level playing field. I'd expect the CD to outperform the vinyl on your system, that would be an interesting comparison to do.
Your Sinatra is digitally remastered though. You'll need to get a first pressing ;)
I’ve got one, along with about another 30 original 1950s Frank Sinatra albums on Capitol :)
My comment on that and the vinyl/cd was relating to how it sounds on cd in my system compared to how it sounded on vinyl in your system. Not a level playing field. I'd expect the CD to outperform the vinyl on your system, that would be an interesting comparison to do.
Well, I’d expect the opposite, especially when comparing original all-analogue recordings on vinyl, played on the Techy, with any recording on CD, played on the Sony. That’s something if you remember I was going to demonstrate, but we ran out of time.
Therefore, next time you visit, bring your Sinatra CD and we’ll do the comparison, along with carrying out the same with various other examples I’ve got of the same albums on both vinyl and CD. Should be an interesting one!
Marco.
Yes we will do that but I suspect that all that will happen is I will prefer the CD and you the vinyl and we just won't agree. But we'll see, Always more interesting to have a belief overturned than to have it confirmed.
Talking of Sinatra; I just got a 6 record set of his on Capitol.....looking forward to it.....Ol blue eyes is the man.
Yes we will do that but I suspect that all that will happen is I will prefer the CD and you the vinyl and we just won't agree. But we'll see, Always more interesting to have a belief overturned than to have it confirmed.
Yes I agree.
However, what you should bear in mind is that I have a rather ‘analogue sounding’ CDP, completely divorced from the norm, which makes sonic comparisons with my turntable very close. That is not usually the case, especially with today’s rather 'brightly lit’, somewhat sterile and monochromatically-toned CD players, which sound markedly different from any half-decent T/T.
Perhaps what you need to do is bring your own CD player up, with some selected CDs, and we’ll use that as the ‘digital benchmark’, rather than my Sony? :)
Marco.
Not sure I follow that logic, Marco. We are going to compare vinyl with digital so vinyl gets your five grand fully loaded Technics and CD gets my Parasound CD1000 I bought off of Frank Effem for a pony? I mean it is a good CD player but shouldn't it be a level playing field? Best possible source equipment for both formats?
Lol… Perhaps my logic wasn’t explained very well!
What I’m getting at is that the Sony is far from ‘the norm’, or representative of what one will hear from a CD player today at any price. In essence, it doesn’t sound like a typical CDP, but that’s got nothing to do with price.
It's simply because multi-bit DACs (using TDA1541 chips) are the most ‘analogue sounding’ DACs ever made (and so are the vintage CDPs that use them), much more so than the bitstream players of today. The Sony has been further improved in that respect with the Audiocom mods.
Therefore, what I’m getting at is that if you want this test to work, and highlight the differences between analogue and digital, as one would normally experience them, we’d have to use a CDP typical of those available today, as our ‘digital benchmark’, priced accordingly in order to compete with the Sony on a level playing field.
Unfortunately, as you say, your Parasound doesn’t quite fit the bill… Do you see what I mean now? :)
Marco.
So your vinyl set up is typical of how one would hear vinyl today but your CD player is not typical of how one would hear CD today?
Neither is typical, they are both extensively modified one offs.
I suppose we could go to Richer Sounds get them to set up a demo system and do the comparison there, not sure what turntables they have though. ;)
You’re not getting what I mean. Let’s try again...
The reason why vinyl and CD sound so close in my system is because the CDP is much more ‘analogue sounding’ (in the right way) than the ‘high-end’ CDPs or DACs sold today. Basically, modern digital sources are voiced rather differently from the Sony.
Therefore, if you want to conduct a test highlighting the differences between CD and vinyl typically heard in your average system, then mine is not the best one to use to carry out such a test. The issue is not with the Techy; it’s with the Sony.
Are we cutting through the fog now? ;)
Marco.
What I was interested in was would I prefer, say, the vinyl version of Live At The Sands to the CD version on your system. Not on your system but with a different CD player. But we could do that as well I suppose.
What I was interested in was would I prefer, say, the vinyl version of Live At The Sands to the CD version on your system.
Sure, we can do that, but the difference isn’t going to be as marked as it would be using a typical modern high-end CD player in my system, instead of the Sony. That’s the point I was making.
The only reason I can live with a digital source in my system is because the CDP/DAC I use ameliorates the rather ‘spotlit’, monochromatic sound of CD, highlighted by most of today’s digital equipment.
Marco.
walpurgis
21-10-2014, 22:34
I get what you're saying Marco.
I've selected my CD player (transport) and ancilliaries to complement my vinyl setup. I'm not claiming to have 'the ultimate' of anything, but the CD and TT sources both sound lovely and moving from one to the other does not produce a shock or revelation. They just work together well. :)
My Alchemy dac does that for me...it produces a sound that no other Ive tried can. gives the vinyl nothing in SQ or that analogue touch tbh
Precisely, chaps.
It’s about choosing a CDP and/or DAC and T/T, which mimics, as closely as possible, the best traits of either, whilst minimising the worst ones! ;)
Marco.
walpurgis
21-10-2014, 22:56
Precisely, chaps.
It’s about choosing a CDP and/or DAC and T/T, which mimics, as closely as possible, the best traits of either, whilst minimising the worst ones! ;)
Marco.
Bloody long road to go down though, unless you're in 'the trade' and can borrow bits or compare stuff at work.
I have got there though. Expensively! (it pays to have an analytical ear though. I soon know what suits)
I'm not claiming to have 'the ultimate' of anything, but the CD and TT sources both sound lovely and moving from one to the other does not produce a shock or revelation.
In terms of the first bit, me neither. However, I’ve successfully managed to ‘voice’ the sonic presentation of my CDP/DAC in order that it mimics, as closely as possible, the best attributes of a good turntable, and vice versa with my T/T.
That’s precisely why, as you say, moving from one to the other does not produce a major ‘shock or a revelation’. It sounds like you’ve achieved something similar in your system, too :)
Marco.
southall-1998
21-10-2014, 23:00
Geoff has spoken guys! He tells it like it is with hifi!!
S.
Indeed - Geoff, he da man! :youtheman:
Btw, Macca, next time you visit, I’ll let you hear the Celestion 66s (down in our respectably-sized lounge, where I listen to music when let out of the broom cupboard :eyebrows:), as that produces a different sound again, using exactly same system upstream.
The only variable then, other than the speakers, is the room - and that’s an interesting one, which may prove to you that ‘size isn’t everything’! ;)
Marco.
okay some points I have to tackle.
'Analogue sounding CD players' - there's no such thing it is just marketing speak. Remember when CD came out lots of enthusists rejected it as hard sounding and unnatural compared to their turntables? In reality of course they just had punchy speakers and hard edged amps that compensated for their mellifluous sounding belt drive decks and MC carts. Stick a more neutral signal (with some bandwith and dynamics in it) through them and it all sounded a bit nasty, but CD got the blame.
That's why those early multi-bit players that were dismissed in the day as 'not as good as a rega planar 2' are now highly sought after.
Added to that a lot of systems still do not sound great with CD and the reason for this (my theory) is the pre-amplification stage adding noise and distortion.
On paper at least even a budget CD player should outperform any turntable providing it isn't being held back by the amplifcation. that doesn't mean you won't still prefer the to listen to the turntable, but that is subjective appraisal of the sound not objective appraisal of accuracy to the recording.
walpurgis
22-10-2014, 11:34
There are CD players that have a less 'digital' character. The obvious candidates (to me) in descending cost order I suppose are Mark Levinson, Wadia, Meridian and also the Pioneer PD-S505 Precision should definitely be included, some of the older Sonys were pretty sweet sounding too (not used the K.I. SE Marantz players, but I suspect they should be mentioned here). A well chosen DAC obviously helps.
I disagree, No CD player has 'digital character' although I grant you there can be quite considerable differences in presentation between different cd players or DACS. By quite considerable I mean to an enthusiast. A civilian is likely not to notice most of the time.
The whole thing came about because the manufacturers needed to find a way to sell CD players to the flat earth crowd. They had rejected the format as it stood so in came 'Bitstream' to give a 'more analogue' sound but it was all complete bollox. The flat earthers (and I was one) only gave in to digital in the end because record shops stopped selling vinyl so if they wanted to buy new music they had no choice. Not to worry though as by then you could buy CD players with tube output stages, add on boxes that ran the signal through tubes, or what the hell you could just buy some warm and cuddly sounding valve amps and soften it all up that way. Is it really a surprise that the valve revival happened at exactly the same time as new releases on vinyl started to dry up?
Now Marco's system is interesting because it uses valve amps that don't sound warm and cuddly nor does the amplification hamstring the sound of CD. Although we didnlt compare the same albums on CD and vinyl I did feel quite certain that the system's overall performance was markedly better with CD. Whether that is because I listen for different things or have different parameters for what I consider to be quality reproduction I don't know. Obviously that view will not fit with the narrative of many of you, including Marco, who are, for the historical reasons I have touched on above, still convinced that all-analogue is somehow inherently superior. Nevertheless, I stand by it.
At the end of the day its horses for courses. Everyone wants to hear what they interporate as the the sound they like. You are more likely to achieve it using one of the older dacs or older cdps if using the internal one. Any decent transport will do imo although the better you can get your hands on the great. I find the old pioneer 717 as good as any.
Gordon Steadman
22-10-2014, 13:32
I don't think either format is inherently superior. Analogue sound varies too much between decks/arms/cartridges and CD is too limited in bandwidth to be called superior. The differences between digital machines seems to be somewhat less to my ears. I am quite happy with my Pioneer stable platter machine.
I thoroughly enjoy both formats as both give me a perfectly reasonable version of the truth. There seems far more variation between the records/CDs than the difference between formats.
The argument is almost a boring as the Mac/PC version. Who the hell cares as long as you get enjoyment from your system? Why must everyone try and persuade others that their way is best? Its only best for them.
Now Marco's system is interesting because it uses valve amps that don't sound warm and cuddly nor does the amplification hamstring the sound of CD. Although we didnlt compare the same albums on CD and vinyl I did feel quite certain that the system's overall performance was markedly better with CD.
Lol… I thought you said it was close between the two - now we’ve moved onto CD being “markedly better” ;)
I’m intrigued at how the above remark sits with the observation you made earlier:
In any case onto vinyl and a spin on the uber-Technics kicking off with Eric Clapton - Unplugged. It actually took me a while to distinguish that this was vinyl we were now listening to and not the CD player.
So if it took you a while to distinguish that you were listening to the T/T, not the CD player, how can the latter be “markedly better”? :hmm:
I’m curious now, so in what way would you say that, for example, the Alice in Chains we enjoyed on CD, sounded “markedly better” than the Eric Clapton Unplugged we enjoyed on vinyl? I’ve used those as examples because both are live, superbly produced, albums.
Whether that is because I listen for different things or have different parameters for what I consider to be quality reproduction I don't know. Obviously that view will not fit with the narrative of many of you, including Marco, who are, for the historical reasons I have touched on above, still convinced that all-analogue is somehow inherently superior. Nevertheless, I stand by it.
I definitely don’t want to turn this thread into another tedious analogue vs. digital/vinyl vs. CD debate, so we’ll nip that in the bud right now. However, needless to say I fundamentally disagree with what you’re saying, and for very good reasons (none of which are “historical”), which I’ll demonstrate on your next visit.
Whether you’ll agree with me then or not doesn’t matter, but at least you’ll be able to understand properly where I’m coming from, which isn’t really possible on an Internet forum :)
Marco.
The whole thing came about because the manufacturers needed to find a way to sell CD players to the flat earth crowd. They had rejected the format as it stood so in came 'Bitstream' to give a 'more analogue’ sound…
Except it didn’t (if you mean analogue done well, not badly), and if you were using one of the better multi-bit players then (say, the Sony I have now, one of the better Arcam Alphas, Micromegas, or the likes of the original Naim CDi/CDS), all of which were largely devoid of what was wrong with the majority of multi-bit players in those days.
Therefore, multi-bit (done well) was actually more analogue sounding than bitstream, which in reality simply made Redbook CD sound soft, in order to pacify T/T users in those days who found CD sounded too ‘hard’ or bright, in comparison with their turntables.
Central to the ‘analogue sound’ of multi-bit, and I keep saying this, was the judicious implementation of TDA 1541 (Double Crown) DAC chips.
For me, *that* is the key to the addictive and musically accurate ‘analogue sound’ in question, and why when properly implemented (which unfortunately isn’t cheap), no modern DAC chips I’ve heard, musically, outperform them. The absolute best ones may offer slightly more resolution (and measure better), but to my ears, at the expense of an overly ‘hi-fi’-type of sound, which isn’t a true representation of how real instruments and voices actually sound.
In terms of the market dictating ‘what was best’, rather than fundamentally what *was* actually technically best, one can draw parallels here with Betamax versus VHS.
Unquestionably, the former was the superior system (in terms of performance), but market forces dictated that VHS was the format which would be invested in and backed up by the Japanese majors, so that’s what was then marketed to consumers as ‘best’ or ‘the thing to have’, even though it wasn't - and so it was in the digital audio world with multi-bit and bitstream...
Now Marco's system is interesting because it uses valve amps that don't sound warm and cuddly nor does the amplification hamstring the sound of CD.
Indeed, and neither automatically does an active preamp, which since mine, as you’ve said, is one of the best systems you’ve heard, pretty much negates your argument that passive preamps are ’the way to go'. Especially given that, at our bake-off at Jason’s, the Croft was voted by all of us as markedly better than your NVA passive - and that was in conjunction with an NVA power amp ;)
Next time you pop over, bring your passive preamp with you, and we’ll compare it with the Croft in my system, and see what happens. Quite simply, it comes down to the usual two most important things in audio: a) synergy and b) how well a particular format or technology has been implemented.
That is why absolutist thinking, of any description (passives are better than active preamps/valves are better than solid-state, digital is better than analogue, etc), is a rather stupid mindset to have, as you’re sure not to learn anything new that might actually be beneficial to your enjoyment of listening to music! Quite simply, closed-mindedness hampers real progress.
The reality is, which is ‘best' is all down to implementation, and most importantly, the preferences of the listener.
:exactly:
Marco.
Some more conclusions being jumped to. This isn't about analog vs digital, so anyone who doesn't understand that is probably best not posting on this thread since I don't want to get into discussions here about 'limited bandwith' (wtf?) and so forth.
Marco you take my quote totally out of context about not being able to distinguish analogue from digital when we switched to the record player. if you look back you will see I was referring to the lack of clicks and pops, not to overall sound quality.
Also what we percieve as big differences a civilian might not perceive at all or pervceive only as a very slight difference. There was little difference in presentation betwen the record deck and the CD player, surprisingly little. But enough for me to express a preference.
Now I wasn't arguing for passive pre-amps per se, indeed I didn't mention them at all. My hypotheseis (and that is all it is) is some active pre-amps hamstring digital. Not all of them. I already knew that Marco's did not because I heard it before, as he points out, although I don't know why since it is not relevant to anything I have said. The counter argument being presented seems to be that it is due to the configuration of the DAC and the chips used. based on my own experience I would suggest that those are red herrings.
I spend a lot of time reading up on this sort of thing and conducting my own experiments. I'm not just pulling shit out of a hat here.
Marco you take my quote totally out of context about not being able to distinguish analogue from digital when we switched to the record player. if you look back you will see I was referring to the lack of clicks and pops, not to overall sound quality.
Ok, I accept that (although I didn’t deliberately take your quote out of context, but rather didn’t understand that you were purely referring to a lack of surface noise). Later, however, you go on to describe the sound of my ‘uber-Techy’, as ‘positively forensic’, or words to that effect (I haven’t gone back to see the exact words you used).
So what’s more ‘forensic’ about the sound/musical delivery of the CDP than the turntable? :)
Also what we percieve as big differences a civilian might not perceive at all or pervceive only as a very slight difference. There was little difference in presentation betwen the record deck and the CD player, surprisingly little. But enough for me to express a preference.
I totally agree, but you seem unable to describe what it was about the CDP you preferred…. I only want to know because I’m curious and value your opinion. I’m not interrogating you or threatening to spank your botty because we might disagree, so spit it out! :ner:
Now I wasn't arguing for passive pre-amps per se, indeed I didn't mention them at all. My hypotheseis (and that is all it is) is some active pre-amps hamstring digital. Not all of them.
Cool. I’m glad we've cleared that up, as mistakenly our not, you were giving the impression that passive preamps acted as some form of universal audio panacea.
The counter argument being presented seems to be that it is due to the configuration of the DAC and the chips used. based on my own experience I would suggest that those are red herrings.
Based on my contrary experience, I disagree. For me, the proof of the pudding in audio is always in the listening, so let’s test that hypothesis in either your system or mine, and perhaps one of us will be in for a revelation? ;)
I spend a lot of time reading up on this sort of thing and conducting my own experiments. I'm not just pulling shit out of a hat here.
Ditto with me. You’ve no idea the time I spent researching why the best multi-bit DACs were capable of showing what Redbook CD was truly capable of, much more so than bitstream.
Why do you think I went down the road I did with the Sony, i.e. buying such an old player and DAC in the first place (as opposed to something newer and supposedly ‘better'), and furthermore spent just as much money on modifying it as I did on buying it in the first place?
It certainly wasn’t because I was just pulling shit out of a hat, or wanted to take a walk down memory lane……
Marco.
Hello, is there anyone in there…. Have you gone all shy, Martin, or what? ;)
Marco.
Later, however, you go on to describe the sound of my ‘uber-Techy’, as ‘positively forensic’, or words to that effect (I haven’t gone back to see the exact words you used).
'Forensic' indeed, but in the context of turntables/vinyl replay. Not in a universal context.
So what’s more ‘forensic’ about the sound/musical delivery of the CDP than the turntable?
I appreciate the lower noise floor and the lower distortion of digital done properly. I know it doesn't bother a lot of people but it does me.
you seem unable to describe what it was about the CDP you preferred…. I only want to know because I’m curious and value your opinion.
As I say I prefer digital done properly to vinyl. For me, with my serious head on, hi-fi is about reproducing the recording as closely as possible. You can't do that with vinyl no matter how much money you spend, the technical flaws are too apparant. With my not serious head on it's about the music and I can listen to music I like and still enjoy it on pretty much anything. I've heard plenty of systems where the TT was more enjoyable to listen to than the CD. Yours I would say I enjoyed both equally. Perhaps that opinion might change when we do some back to back album comparisons.
, as mistakenly our not, you were giving the impression that passive preamps acted as some form of universal audio panacea.
I think that implemented with some consideration and intelligence they acheive a high end sound for not a lot of money. Anyone who doubts that is always welcome to come over and have a listen to my set up.
You’ve no idea the time I spent researching why the best multi-bit DACs were capable of showing what Redbook CD was truly capable of, much more so than bitstream. Why do you think I went down the road I did with the Sony, i.e. buying such an old player and DAC in the first place (as opposed to something newer and supposedly ‘better'), and furthermore spent just as much money on modifying it as I did on buying it in the first place?
No-one is questioning that you take this stuff seriously, Marco. You do run a hi-fi site after all. I was more pointing out that I put a fair bit of time and effort into these things as well (although nothing like as much money ;) )
Ok, dude, no worries… I’m about to have my lunch, so will respond later. However just to quickly clear something up that was troubling me about the Frank Sinatra album ‘Live at the Sands’ we listened to on vinyl.
You were going on about it being digitally remastered. I think you misread the album cover, which in fact says ‘Original Master Recording’. It’s this that I’ve got, and what you listened to:
http://snvinyl.co.uk/Frank-Sinatra-Live-At-The-Sands-180g-2LP-Ltd-Ed
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/u7xIRM.jpg
It’s a stunning sounding (limited edition) recording on 180g vinyl, produced from the original master tapes (using a process created by Tim de Paravicini), and therefore all-analogue.
Maybe that’s why you liked it so much? Lol! :eyebrows:
Observe the bits in bold:
Mobile Fidelity has half-speed mastered this exquisite analog set from the original analog master tapes, originally recorded by engineer Lowell Frank. Clear, big, and sumptuous, Sinatra at the Sands now resonates with previously unheard details, transparency, imaging, projection, smoothness, and dimensionality. Capturing a human voice remains the most difficult recording task. Suffice it to say that this 2LP set will join the ranks of the very best recordings you own.
And interestingly, in reference to your earlier comments about Sinatra’s voice:
"Mastered from the original analog tapes by Rob Loverde, the Mofi vinyl is more dynamic, carries a richer tonal palette, and removes a layer of grain from Sinatra's voice that can be heard on the original Reprise.
Anyway, chat later.
Marco.
icehockeyboy
23-10-2014, 12:23
What pics? Y'all know what Marco's system looks like, Big cabs, crazy little door, stacks of Mana... we didn't take a picture of the curry, either.
Why didn't you take pictures of the curry? 😥
Mr Kipling
23-10-2014, 12:47
I disagree, No CD player has 'digital character' although I grant you there can be quite considerable differences in presentation between different cd players or DACS. By quite considerable I mean to an enthusiast. A civilian is likely not to notice most of the time.
The whole thing came about because the manufacturers needed to find a way to sell CD players to the flat earth crowd. They had rejected the format as it stood so in came 'Bitstream' to give a 'more analogue' sound but it was all complete bollox. The flat earthers (and I was one) only gave in to digital in the end because record shops stopped selling vinyl so if they wanted to buy new music they had no choice. Not to worry though as by then you could buy CD players with tube output stages, add on boxes that ran the signal through tubes, or what the hell you could just buy some warm and cuddly sounding valve amps and soften it all up that way. Is it really a surprise that the valve revival happened at exactly the same time as new releases on vinyl started to dry up?
Now Marco's system is interesting because it uses valve amps that don't sound warm and cuddly nor does the amplification hamstring the sound of CD. Although we didnlt compare the same albums on CD and vinyl I did feel quite certain that the system's overall performance was markedly better with CD. Whether that is because I listen for different things or have different parameters for what I consider to be quality reproduction I don't know. Obviously that view will not fit with the narrative of many of you, including Marco, who are, for the historical reasons I have touched on above, still convinced that all-analogue is somehow inherently superior. Nevertheless, I stand by it.
If my memory isn't deluding me, the reason bitstream came about was due to cost. It was a cheaper way of doing the processing. I don't really think the boffins in white coats in Eindhoven would have been taking too much notice of what a section of audiophiles in the UK thought.
Why didn't you take pictures of the curry? ��
It didn't last long enough to be photographed....
Mr Kipling
23-10-2014, 12:53
Ok, dude, no worries… I’m about to have my lunch, so will respond later. However just to quickly clear something up that was troubling me about the Frank Sinatra album ‘Live at the Sands’ we listened to on vinyl.
You were going on about it being digitally remastered. I think you misread the album cover, which in fact says ‘Original Master Recording’. It’s this that I’ve got, and what you listened to:
http://snvinyl.co.uk/Frank-Sinatra-Live-At-The-Sands-180g-2LP-Ltd-Ed
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/u7xIRM.jpg
It’s a stunning sounding (limited edition) recording on 180g vinyl, produced from the original master tapes (using a process created by Tim de Paravicini), and therefore all-analogue.
Maybe that’s why you liked it so much? Lol! :eyebrows:
Observe the bits in bold:
And interestingly, in reference to your earlier comments about Sinatra’s voice:
Anyway, chat later.
Marco.
Think I'll go for the £6.99 cd on eBay.
If my memory isn't deluding me, the reason bitstream came about was due to cost. It was a cheaper way of doing the processing. I don't really think the boffins in white coats in Eindhoven would have been taking too much notice of what a section of audiophiles in the UK thought.
That may be but it was certainly marketed in the UK as 'analogue sounding digital' and pretty much all the magazines at the time took the view that it was better than multibit in terms of sounding 'more natural'. The message to flat earthers was 'Hey! It's okay now to get a CD player! (And a lot of them did if only so they could write in to say how piss-poor it was compared to their LP12).
Think I'll go for the £6.99 cd on eBay.
Lol… Needless to say, I didn’t pay £275 for mine. I bought my vinyl copy from Diverse Vinyl, at one of the hi-fi shows a few years ago Think it was about £60. Shows you how prices rise! :eek:
Maybe because it was a limited run….
Marco.
You were going on about it being digitally remastered. I think you misread the album cover, which in fact says ‘Original Master Recording’. It’s this that I’ve got, and what you listened to:
Marco.
Right, looks like I am wrong about that then - although are you assuming from the words 'analog' all over it that it was not re-mastered digitally? Probabaly it wasn't since they tend to plaster 'digitally re-mastered' all over them like 'turbo' stickers or go faster stripes. But don't forget that pesky A2D/D2A convertor in the cutting lathe....it's not so easy to find a truly analogue vinyl record that was produced after about 1978.
Better get the original then:eyebrows:
I appreciate the lower noise floor and the lower distortion of digital done properly. I know it doesn't bother a lot of people but it does me.
That may be the case, and you’re entitled to that opinion, but considering that the noise floor was extremely low to almost non-existent, as you stated earlier, I think you’re clutching at straws a little. When you bring your CD copy round next time, we’ll compare it with my version on vinyl and you can point out to me where the added distortion is on the vinyl copy... ;)
As I say I prefer digital done properly to vinyl. For me, with my serious head on, hi-fi is about reproducing the recording as closely as possible. You can't do that with vinyl no matter how much money you spend, the technical flaws are too apparant.
Oh dear, we’re not going down that ‘technical flaws’/measurements bollocks line of attack, are we? You know what I think of that pish! :doh:
Namely that measurements, in audio, don’t tell the FULL STORY. You should know that by now - either that or you’ve still got a lot to learn about vinyl/analogue replay when it’s performing at its maximum capability.
Tell you what we’ll do next time, since we’ll be listening downstairs on the Celestions… We’ll do some blind testing between the vinyl and CD version of the Sinatra album, where you’ll be sat downstairs, and upstairs you won’t know whether I’ve put on the CD or the record.
How’s that? And you can also explain to me where this supposed distortion is with the vinyl copy, compared with the CD...
No-one is questioning that you take this stuff seriously, Marco. You do run a hi-fi site after all. I was more pointing out that I put a fair bit of time and effort into these things as well...
Oh, I don’t doubt that, but then so have I… Trouble is, as our opinions on this matter are almost diametrically opposed, only one of us can be right (in terms of the ‘accuracy’ argument), or shall we just agree to disagree here and let ‘the proof of the pudding’ speak next time you’re round at mine? :)
Marco.
But don't forget that pesky A2D/D2A convertor in the cutting lathe....it's not so easy to find a truly analogue vinyl record that was produced after about 1978.
Not relevant, as it was done on a vintage cutting lathe, Neumann, I think.
Marco.
Mr Kipling
23-10-2014, 13:57
That may be but it was certainly marketed in the UK as 'analogue sounding digital' and pretty much all the magazines at the time took the view that it was better than multibit in terms of sounding 'more natural'. The message to flat earthers was 'Hey! It's okay now to get a CD player! (And a lot of them did if only so they could write in to say how piss-poor it was compared to their LP12).
As you say bitstream was marketed as "analogue-sounding". Whether or not this was down to good fortune, I don't know. Not sure if Philips first used it in the 870. I remember Meridian first used it in the 206, of which there were three versions, if I remember right. And I think Philips' 900 range was their first to use it. I had the 930. I liked the look of the 900 series as there was a touch of the Dan Dares about it. And yes it did sound smooth and nasty-less. Scott Walker sounded very nice, I'll give it that, but it just sounded too pedestrian; play rock and I started to nod-off.
That may be the case, and you’re entitled to that opinion, but considering that the noise floor was extremely low to almost non-existent, as you stated earlier, I think you’re clutching at straws a little.
Pops and crackles have nothing to do with the noise floor. Noise floor is entirely different to a damaged or dirty record.
Oh dear, we’re not going down that ‘technical flaws’/measurements bollocks line of attack, are we? You know what I think of that pish!
Namely that measurements, in audio, don’t tell the FULL STORY. You should know that by now - either that or you’ve still got a lot to learn about vinyl/analogue replay when its performing at its maximum capability.
Unfortunately measuring is the only way to determine which format is more accurate. Listening will only tell us which format we prefer. The same applies to the hi-fi system as it does to the format. I know you think you can tell which is more accurate just by listening, but you can't.
Tell you what we’ll do next time, since we’ll be listening downstairs on the Celestions… We’ll do some blind testing between the vinyl and CD version of the Sinatra album, where you’ll be sat downstairs, and upstairs you won’t know whether I’ve put on the CD or the record.
How’s that? And you can also explain to me where this supposed distortion is with the vinyl copy, compared with the CD...
Okay we'll do that. We already have a long list of 'things to do' though ;)
Oh, I don’t doubt that, but then so have I… Trouble is, as our opinions on this matter are almost diametrically opposed, only one of us can be right (in terms of the ‘accuracy’ argument),
Yep - I'm right and CD is more accurate and the mathametics say so. Your argument is that some vinyl recordings sound subjectively more 'real' than their digital counterparts therfore vinyl is more accurate regardless of the mathematics. So I can't be objectively wrong but I'm happy to be proven to be *subjectively* wrong. ;)
Hi Martin,
Pops and crackles have nothing to do with the noise floor. Noise floor is entirely different to a damaged or dirty record.
Well, they’re certainly part of the audible noise floor. The area you’re referring to is rather harder to audibly ascertain and identify.
Unfortunately measuring is the only way to determine which format is more accurate. Listening will only tell us which format we prefer. The same applies to the hi-fi system as it does to the format. I know you think you can tell which is more accurate just by listening, but you can’t.
The problem is that there are many aspects of audio our ears can genuinely detect, yet we currently can’t measure, which is why I said earlier (quite correctly) that measurements only tell part of the story. Unfortunately, you're using that part of the story to support your argument, thus claiming it as ‘definitive proof’ that you're right, when it can’t be such, because the story is incomplete.
With hi-fi, I prefer using the words ‘realistic’ or ‘lifelike’, than ‘accurate’, as I believe that they’re more relevant to the end user of audio equipment, and music lover, and easier to define.
For example, from years of experience listening to live acoustic music (and being exposed to that sound), I have a pretty good idea of how a piano or an acoustic guitar is supposed to sound - and *that* is what I use as the benchmark from which to judge the ability of my system to recreate it, not some flawed and incomplete mathematics or measurement data.
Okay we'll do that. We already have a long list of 'things to do’ though...
Excellent, but you’ll have to point out in my system where you perceive the audible added distortion and higher noise-floor with vinyl exists, over that of CD, as well as guess correctly every time which track I play is on CD, and which one is on vinyl, explaining in the process why the CD version has greater fidelity, before I’ll be suitably ‘educated’ as to the objectively claimed sonic superiority of CD over vinyl, in the context of my system.
The point I’m making here is that said higher noise-floor or distortion with vinyl is only relevant to me if it’s within the bounds of audibility...
Yep - I'm right and CD is more accurate and the mathametics say so. Your argument is that some vinyl recordings sound subjectively more 'real' than their digital counterparts therfore vinyl is more accurate regardless of the mathematics. So I can't be objectively wrong but I'm happy to be proven to be *subjectively* wrong. ;)
Lol - very good! Trouble is, you can’t judge musical realism with mathematics [i.e. how faithfully my system, or any system, is able to reproduce the sound of real instruments and voices]; it’s simply too blunt an instrument. That's like trying to assess the quality of a fine burgundy wine, simply by using a hydrometer.
Marco.
] Unfortunately, you're using that part of the story to support your argument, thus claiming it as ‘definitive proof’ that you're right, when it can’t be such, because the story is incomplete.
With hi-fi, I prefer using the words ‘realistic’ or ‘lifelike’, than ‘accurate’, as I believe that they’re more relevant to the end user of audio equipment, and music lover, and easier to define.
Excellent, but you’ll have to point out in my system where you perceive the audible added distortion and higher noise-floor with vinyl exists, over that of CD, as well as guess correctly every time which track I play is on CD, and which one is on vinyl, explaining in the process why the CD version has greater fidelity, before I’ll be suitably ‘educated’ as to the objectively claimed sonic superiority of CD over vinyl, in the context of my system.
Marco.
Why have I got to do all this? I'm not trying to convince you of anything. All I said was that I preferred CD to vinyl on your system. You prefer vinyl, you think it sounds more realistic, well that's fine by me. Im not interested in changing your opinion, I don't really understand why you are so keen to change mine.
That’s not the point, mate. In this instance, it's not about opinions or preferences. You’re making factual statements about CD/digital’s supposed greater ‘accuracy’, based on ‘mathematics’. Therefore, I’m simply seeking audible proof of those facts.
What I’m asking you to do, therefore, is to demonstrate the audibility of that greater ‘accuracy', within the context of a working hi-fi system (mine), where two high-quality CD and vinyl sources exist, playing recorded music on both formats.
If you can’t do that, and thus neither of us can hear, in the real world, where this claimed greater sonic ‘accuracy’ exists, then for me it is totally irrelevant. My argument is, quite simply, if you can’t hear it then why concern yourself with it??
Personal preferences, as to which is perceived as best (between CD and vinyl) is another matter. As far as that’s concerned, I would always respect your opinion even if it differs from mine, but that’s a very different matter from the issue I’m addressing above :)
Marco.
c'mon guys you're feeding the trolls.. you're both right I guess
why not just think of that delicious curry :) I off for lunch ! Bon appétit !
My Les Paul Supreme plugged straight into my Cornford Harlequin tells me both vinyl and CD are a bit shite:D
Not sure how I can deliver the 'audible proof' you are demanding. I could say 'listen, hear that?' and you could say 'nope'. Where would that get us?
Happy to have a go at distingushing vinyl from CD blind, though. I can't see that as being too hard to do.
anthonyTD
24-10-2014, 10:29
Aye! :)
My Les Paul Supreme plugged straight into my Cornford Harlequin tells me both vinyl and CD are a bit shite:D
If we all liked the same thing it would make life simpler for equipment designers, mind you audiophools being what they are, we'd probably just end up arguing over the holistic influence the colour and shape of our various equipment enclosures were imparting on the sound... :lol:
Not sure how I can deliver the 'audible proof' you are demanding. I could say 'listen, hear that?' and you could say 'nope'. Where would that get us?
Nowhere useful - and that’s exactly the point! If you have to try *so* hard to hear something, then why worry about it??
Therefore, this ‘mathematics automatically dictates that digital is better’ is bollocks, if that supposed fact is inaudible to the listener in their system.
And if you can’t clearly hear (beyond dispute) that difference in a detailed and transparent system like mine (or others of its ilk), where two high-quality analogue and digital sources exist, then chances are that the claimed sonic superiority of digital is minimal at best, if indeed it exists at all. Therefore, all we’re left with is listener preference.
*That*, muchacho, is my point.
Happy to have a go at distingushing vinyl from CD blind, though. I can't see that as being too hard to do.
Well, we’ll see, as I’ll be using the most pristine, quietest pressings I’ve got on vinyl, so clicks and pops won’t be an issue Furthermore, the run-in grooves won’t be played (obviously), and there will only be a 20 second, or so, snapshot of each track played on either format.
Also, most importantly, if we get bored we can go to the pub next door instead and get pished! :drunk:
Marco.
I listen better when I'm drunk...
You’re also more ‘willing’, darling… :lol: :eyebrows:
;)
Marco.
I listen better when I'm drunk...
:eek::lol::stalks:
Mr Kipling
24-10-2014, 11:57
Well, two obvious places where vinyl can lose on accuracy are the R.I.A.A. filtering in the phono stage, which can be less than accurate and am arm's VTA. Even if you knew the VTA of every record, how feasible would it be to adjust the arm for every record you wanted to play? And what of cartridges with their peaks and resonances? Arms too. In mathematical terms cd surely has to be more accurate.
But if those differences don’t translate into audibly obvious ones in a system, to two experienced listeners, when a top-notch CDP is compared to a top-notch turntable (as is the case here), then I’d suggest that they're largely irrelevant - and also go some way to proving that when digital and analogue sources are performing at the top of their respective games, there’s little to separate them sonically.
Therefore, bugger what the maths says (in terms of supplying an irrefutable answer). Clearly, there is a bit more to it than that…..
:exactly:
Marco.
The Barbarian
24-10-2014, 13:16
You guys just think too hard about things
:D
I wouldn’t disagree with that, but I guess it’s in our DNA! ;)
Marco.
To be fair tiny airborne vibrations are absorbed into the casework of a CDP thus inducing micro-resonances which can be transferred into the laser assembly thus causing the logic circuitry to continually adjust the focussing distance, ergo causing a slight loss of focus in the sound. If I were more technically adept I'd write a better explanation but I'm sure you all get the gist ;)
I just think that with hi-fi some folk fixate unnecessarily on things that ultimately don’t really matter :)
Marco.
I just think that with hi-fi some folk fixate unnecessarily on things that ultimately don’t really matter :)
Marco.
Personally I don't give a f*ck about this sort of thing myself, just pointing out that one can get really anal about this sh*t with very little effort. There are a myriad reasons why I no longer use a TT for example, however to explain them all would bore the pants off people so I don't bother... :D
I just think that with hi-fi some folk fixate unnecessarily on things that ultimately don’t really matter :)
Marco.
I agree that there are more important things to consider than ultimate fidelity to the master tape.
As to thinking too hard about things - I like to think about the things that interest me and I don't see anything wrong with that. Admittedly, mostly that's Lindsay Lohan but occasionally it's hi-fi :)
Personally I don't give a f*ck about this sort of thing myself, just pointing out that one can get really anal about this sort of sh*t with very little effort.
Absolutely, and I wouldn’t even have gone down this road had Martin not made some definitive statements about the claimed ‘sonic superiority’ of CD (due to ‘mathematics’), which I thought deserved some scrutiny.
Now you know why, in hi-fi, I pay scant attention to measurements ;)
Marco.
The Barbarian
24-10-2014, 13:43
Dave:
You cannot throw a Turntable away, something is not right, at present my TT sounds superb. I miles prefer it to any of the 9 CD Player si presently own.
I agree that there are more important things to consider than ultimate fidelity to the master tape.
I was thinking more of fretting about the maths, when da maths, baby, she no tell da whole truth….. Answer: unless you’re a designer of audio equipment, worry not about the maths and just concentrate on building a system that, for you, makes music sound like music.
Yes? :)
Marco.
The Barbarian
24-10-2014, 13:52
+1
Mr Kipling
24-10-2014, 13:53
Well, as everything is a compromise, does it not show how even the compromises in each system are, or can be?
Without going into too much detail here André there are sound reasons why sir, both from a practical standpoint as well as from the POV of SQ. At the end of the day I find that the impracticalities of using a TT due to my specific circumstances over-shadow my enjoyment of music played via this medium. Couple that with the superior SQ available from the digital side of my setup and it's a no-brainer for me really, I simply enjoy music more when listening via a digital medium.
brian2957
24-10-2014, 14:05
Agreed . I find my digital system , when tailored to my taste , is as good as I'm likely to ever need .
The Barbarian
24-10-2014, 14:13
For years i always played Prog Rock LP's, was never ever happy with the SQ from my TT. in the early to mid 90's i moved to a different music that was available in 12'' singles only, the transformation was staggering, my TT was utterly transformed. Here again in 2014 gob smacked when re visiting those 12'' singles. The moral of my story is my turntables were never bad in the first place they were excellent, the LP that were bad.
:eyebrows:
If i have to stick with these 12'' Singles as a primary i will, {i have hundreds anyway} CD also enhanced SQ i just cannot live with.
I was thinking more of fretting about the maths, when da maths, baby, she no tell da whole truth….. Answer: unless you’re a designer of audio equipment, worry not about the maths and just concentrate on building a system that, for you, makes music sound like music.
Yes? :)
Marco.
No! :) Too much woolly thinking in subjective hi-fi for my liking. ' makes music sound like music'. What does that actually mean? I understand the sentiment but as practical advice it's not a massive amount of use.
I think there are two very simple ways to geta system that, for you, makes music sound like music:
1) Go to a dealer and buy your system from him. Yes you'll maybe pay a premium but you will get what you wanted off the bat with no messing about.
2) Hear someone elses system that you like and just copy it, money and availability permitting.
Or you can do what I do which is spend decades messing about with all sorts of kit and cables, different rooms, and so on, loads of hassle, lots of money spent, lots of redundant kit lying around. Okay so you learn a bit on the way but it's an awful lot of trouble to go to just to get a decent sound system.
brian2957
24-10-2014, 15:23
I understand what you're saying Martin but this has been my hobby for over 30 years . Where's the fun in an instant system . I've always enjoyed changing things around and discovering new things which work in my system , particularly cables :)
The Barbarian
24-10-2014, 15:24
Why do you lot always ignore my posts?
:steam:
brian2957
24-10-2014, 15:29
Sorry Andre , but I haven't had a turntable for 25 years or so now and have forgotten about the pleasures involved . Therefore I don't tend to contribute to threads or posts regarding this medium since I know bugger all about it :) Interesting though . Why do you think 12 singles are superior to LPs ?
Ali Tait
24-10-2014, 15:32
For years i always played Prog Rock LP's, was never ever happy with the SQ from my TT. in the early to mid 90's i moved to a different music that was available in 12'' singles only, the transformation was staggering, my TT was utterly transformed. Here again in 2014 gob smacked when re visiting those 12'' singles. The moral of my story is my turntables were never bad in the first place they were excellent, the LP that were bad.
:eyebrows:
If i have to stick with these 12'' Singles as a primary i will, {i have hundreds anyway} CD also enhanced SQ i just cannot live with.
Agreed mate, 12" ers or 45rpm albums can sound stunning, given a decent recording in the first place.
brian2957
24-10-2014, 15:35
Any theories as to why this should be guys . Incidentally you coming tomorrow Ali ?
If its mastered from a 45 rpm then you can get more info in there. I have a couple of 33rpm mastered from 45rpm and sonically they are to me superior.
brian2957
24-10-2014, 15:56
Are you coming tomorrow Grant , I wouldn't mind hearing these ( you too Ali )
I understand what you're saying Martin but this has been my hobby for over 30 years . Where's the fun in an instant system . I've always enjoyed changing things around and discovering new things which work in my system , particularly cables :)
Yeah I'm the same. I was playing devil's advocate.
I agree about the 45 rpm stuff, I've got a dozen or so of 12 inch singles that sound devestatingly good. Couldn't play them for twenty years cos my deck only did 33 rpm.
Are you coming tomorrow Grant , I wouldn't mind hearing these ( you too Ali )
yep, I am at moment unless fate takes a hand. I,ll look them out Brian.;)
brian2957
24-10-2014, 16:01
Aye I just knew that you were an intrepid explorer of all things hifi Martin :)
brian2957
24-10-2014, 16:01
yep, I am at moment unless fate takes a hand. I,ll look them out Brian.;)
Thanks Grant hopefully see you tomorrow mate.
Are you coming tomorrow Grant , I wouldn't mind hearing these ( you too Ali )
yep, I am at moment unless fate takes a hand. I,ll look them out Brian.;)
Should be able to find it; just look for the big tall thing:eyebrows:
brian2957
24-10-2014, 16:03
Thing(s) mate , there's quite a few of them in the immediate vicinity . Have you got any phone numbers in case you get lost :lol:
Ali Tait
24-10-2014, 16:14
Aye, I'll be along, with some vinyl and a couple other bits.
brian2957
24-10-2014, 16:16
Anything from an old Soviet submarine ? :lol:
Yeah, I saw that in the picture online. all the same hight too. The lift better work lol. Yes, Gary has my number and I have his. Hopefully google maps will get me there ok. If you see a silver Ford looking lost, wave the battle flag of N Virginia out the window:eyebrows:
brian2957
24-10-2014, 16:20
Hah ! Haven't got a flag but I'll try and wave something small out the window :eyebrows: May get arrested though :lol:
Mr Kipling
24-10-2014, 16:21
12" Singles.
They're the boys… They're the boys…
45rpm allows greater information. The typical playing time of one side of an lp is only about 20 minutes to get reasonable sound quality. Compilation albums play longer but the sound quality suffers. When you listen to one you should find that both bass and dynamics aren't the same as a normal lp simply because the cutter-head has to be limited when cutting to squash-in the extra tracks. You can't have something for nothing.
Ali Tait
24-10-2014, 17:07
Anything from an old Soviet submarine ? :lol:
Can bring some GM70's if you like. :-)
Just an Alchemist Class A amp, and my two box phono stage, wanna compare to the updated stage Gaz has.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.