View Full Version : Why HiFi Doesn't Work
Well, what's a wee peak or two between friends? :eyebrows:
Marco.
Well, what's a wee peak or two between friends? :eyebrows:
Marco.
or weak pee :lol:
alfie2902
03-10-2009, 22:43
Hi Marco,
using the 8-foot Height into the formula gives a fundamental mode at 71 Hz (70.625Hz), with multiples at 142 Hz, 213 Hz, 284 Hz, etc.
But if we look at the formula
F = 1130 divided by 2 x D
Where F = frequency of the resonance mode (Hz)
1130 = speed of sound (1130 fps)
D = distance between 2 parallel walls (in Feet)
D = distance between 2 parallel walls will not apply fully to your room if it is an "odd shape" i.e. not parallel walls. Sloped ceiling/walls I beleive tend to scatter mode effects & seems to be why there as been lots said about asymmetrical rooms.
A couple of pages of an over the top room & some lovely gear
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue3/maroom.htm
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue3/maroom2.htm
Hi Alfie,
Even more interesting! No, the room is definitely asymmetrical :)
Perhaps that's one of the reasons why things sounds so good?
From your first link:
Paul Weitzel’s stunning Tube Research amplifiers provide extraordinarily beautiful power (800 Watts per channel of pure class A!) for Winston’s room.
BLOODY HELL - they look like seriously awesome amps!!! And that guy has got a mega vinyl collection.........major respect :smoking:
Marco.
alfie2902
03-10-2009, 23:04
I bet he's got a bloody Mega electricity bill aswell :lolsign:
A couple of pages of an over the top room & some lovely gear
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue3/maroom.htm
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue3/maroom2.htm
Holy sh!t - both the before and after systems are totally amazing to look at, and clearly a very focused individual if the ceiling even slopes toward the listener for maxim acoustic effect! Just mind blowing that anyone would have the time, let alone the money or be motivated to put in the effort to create such a singular environment. Do you know what though - with a lot of this, I just wonder how much time these type of people spend listening to the system, rather than the music...?
How nice to have the wherewithall to be able to do this project but I have to say that, if I had, I doubt I'd spend it in this manner.
But, ...... each to his own, as they say.
Cheers,
The question of bass reproduction- we have truly crossed threads here- seems to occupy every one's mind and may be an over driven obsession with audiophiles. Anyway do those Avalons have 15" woofer? and has any one had any experience!
No doubt they are marketed by Absolute Sounds and no doubt they will be rated poorly here in UK? I am prediciting folks what opinions might be forthcoming.
I did hear the Avalons in a Heathrow Hi Fi show (2002). An old Indian man had wanted a CD of "Symphony Fantastique" played. I was not impressed by what the system produced-just my personal take.
Still waiting to see Steve's photo!
and by the way- some one ought to take up a dealership- distributor ship of Tannoys. There is going to be a demand.
Mind you Alfie's AVI AMD9s or (ADM9s) might beat the competention of these 15"ers flat. What then... Tannoy wallahs Eh!!
hifi_dave
04-10-2009, 09:27
The question of bass reproduction- we have truly crossed threads here- seems to occupy every one's mind and may be an over driven obsession with audiophiles. Anyway do those Avalons have 15" woofer? and has any one had any experience!
No doubt they are marketed by Absolute Sounds and no doubt they will be rated poorly here in UK? I am prediciting folks what opinions might be forthcoming.
I did hear the Avalons in a Heathrow Hi Fi show (2002). An old Indian man had wanted a CD of "Symphony Fantastique" played. I was not impressed by what the system produced-just my personal take.
The Avalons are marketed here by Audiofreaks and they have had good press from Hi-Fi Plus. They cost an arm and a leg or two and are not to my taste. FWIW.:scratch:
hifi_dave
04-10-2009, 09:29
Still waiting to see Steve's photo!
and by the way- some one ought to take up a dealership- distributor ship of Tannoys. There is going to be a demand.
Some of us did, years ago.:eyebrows:
hifi_dave
04-10-2009, 09:32
Mind you Alfie's AVI AMD9s or (ADM9s) might beat the competention of these 15"ers flat. What then... Tannoy wallahs Eh!!
I've heard that speaker here and it's OK but no Tannoy.
Some of us did, years ago.:eyebrows:
Dave (W);
I meant now. Some one has to start sourcing the drivers-and then organizing the cross overs etc...don't you think?
Some of us did, years ago.:eyebrows:
There's not much up our way, though, Dave...
Practical Hi-fi in Manchester used to do Tannoy, but I'm not sure that's the case now Audio T has taken them over.
There's definitely an opening available for a Tannoy Prestige dealer in the North West/Wirral/Merseyside/Manchester/Chester area. In fact, as far as Liverpool city centre is concerned there's bugger all there in terms of any kind of dealer!!
I've no idea why someone doesn't open up a proper high-end 2-channel audio shop there.
Marco.
hifi_dave
04-10-2009, 11:32
There's not much up our way, though, Dave...
Practical Hi-fi in Manchester used to do Tannoy, but I'm not sure that's the case now Audio T has taken them over.
There's definitely an opening available for a Tannoy Prestige dealer in the North West/Wirral/Merseyside/Manchester/Chester area. In fact, as far as Liverpool city centre is concerned there's bugger all there in terms of any kind of dealer!!
I've no idea why someone doesn't open up a proper high-end 2-channel audio shop there.
Marco.
It's too far for me to commute. What about you Marco ? :scratch:
LOL - maybe one day if I don't open a restaurant first! ;)
Marco.
alfie2902
04-10-2009, 12:07
Mind you Alfie's AVI AMD9s or (ADM9s) might beat the competention of these 15"ers flat. What then... Tannoy wallahs Eh!!
HaHa cool, Varun I don't think you should mention ADM9s & 15" Tannoys in the same breath. They're 2 very different things, one is a small standmount lifestyle solution that happens to sound surprisingly good & the other is a time tested 15" air shifter & probably up there with the best drivers ever made! Not everybodys cup of tea though, but one day i will try a pair in my room, more likely to be HPDs than golds though.
& the other is a time tested 15" air shifter & probably up there with the best drivers ever made!
Whilst attempting to remain as unbiased as possible, I'd fully concur with that statement :)
*But* they need to be put inside high quality (solid and inert) modern cabinets and used with the same in terms of crossovers before their full potential is realised, otherwise you're just 'playing at it'. When their full potential is so considerable it's a no-brainer to optimise them to the max, as far as I'm concerned.
The problem is, some people appear not to wish to 'devalue' vintage designs by carrying out the necessary modifications, which is fair enough I suppose (I know how the minds of diehard collectors work, especially the Japs) - but the question is, are you buying a pair of speakers to store as antiques or to use for hearing your favourite music at its absolute best?
My view is that because vintage Tannoys when fully modified are so blindingly spectacular at reproducing music (better than almost anything you can buy today) that you therefore simply see them as a 'final' pair of speakers and be done with it, thus removing any concern whatsoever about losing money on them if they were sold on.
Besides, you can easily retain the original crossovers and/or cabinets and keep them if they are ever sold, and simply use the modified 'bits' everyday until then.
There's also a lot of nonsense talked about 'spoiling the Tannoy magic', in terms of sound, if you change things from original. Well, from experience, I'd say that's only true if you consider a rather warm, woolly, rounded-off, 'fluffy' sound (in comparison) as representing 'Tannoy magic'! ;)
No, my fully upgraded/modified Lockwoods are utterly superb and staying with me for the foreseeable future. The Spendors lasted nearly 8 years - I think I can safely predict an even longer relationship with the Lockwoods :cool:
Marco.
There's not much up our way, though, Dave...
Practical Hi-fi in Manchester used to do Tannoy, but I'm not sure that's the case now Audio T has taken them over................In fact, as far as Liverpool city centre is concerned there's bugger all there in terms of any kind of dealer!!
I've no idea why someone doesn't open up a proper high-end 2-channel audio shop there.
Marco.
Absolutely right Marco,
A shocking lack of dealership in Liverpool. There is a shop in Crosby (Liverpool) wich is reasonably well stocked and (at least one salesman who knows analogue) with a sister shop in Southport and then you have Doug Brady in Warrington.
I do believe that from what we have been hearing all units (15" or even 12") have to be corralled and made the best of. The modern cross over would be essential also with all the modern amps and such like to the sound justice.
That guy with the huge valve amps must have a, more money than sense and b, a serious self-image problem, needing a mega HiFi to gain respect from audio wannabees..
Sorry, but I'm no longer impressed by gear freaks - I bet that system is so refined all the life has gone out of the music reproduced, as often happens with these setups...
ADM9's and Tannoys? I thought these ridiculous comparisons had burned out a year or so ago. Both concepts are valid, but are like comparing a Smart car to a tricked out Bentley....
There was a purpose behind inserting the ADM9s in the post. I agree Dave (DSJR) that fellow who built what looks like a mausoleum is a nut case with no idea what music appreciation is all about.
Anyway-was it not you who wanted ADM9s?
And Marco-what are the dimensions of the Lockwoods that you have?
That guy with the huge valve amps must have a, more money than sense and b, a serious self-image problem, needing a mega HiFi to gain respect from audio wannabees..
It was the sychophantic write-ups that got me vomming and the guy apparently co-wrote the second article at least. He's probably got a standing order at his local Richer Sounds ( :lolsign: ) for two of everything they get in that's more expensive than his current kit, and the guy who wrote the articles with him 'moonlights' as the shop manager perhaps.
Cheers,
Hi Varun,
And Marco-what are the dimensions of the Lockwoods that you have?
44" high x 28" wide x 18" deep, and about 50kg each - nice and compact :eyebrows:
There is a shop in Crosby (Liverpool) wich is reasonably well stocked and (at least one salesman who knows analogue)...
What's the shop called and what is the address - got a link to a website or anything? :)
Yep, there are bugger all what I would call 'interesting' dealers - i.e. ones who are big into valves, vinyl and 'proper' speakers, up north - all the action (as per usual with most things) happens 'down south'... We're treated as bloody second-class citizens. Don't get me started! :steam:
Marco.
Hi Marco,
It seems P&A Audio do not have a website. I like the shop and it is where I bought the CD player TEAC at £99. Alan is the seniour salesman who uses a Garrard with his own plinth and the top Ortofon cartridge. He is knowledgeable. Here are the details: They are not High-High end but deal with a great deal of very good stuff. I suppose the bulk of profit for any shop lies in AudioVisual now a days.
Almost next to Merchant Taylor's school- you know what I mean.
Address:
98 Liverpool Road, Crosby, Liverpool, L23 5TG, UK
Telephone:
work0151-924 7287
Noted, Varun :)
I wasn't aware of P&A Audio at all... I'll have a looksee next time I'm in the 'Pool, which is usually once a month or so to top up on our asian food supplies at Mattas and the Chinese supermarkets. We should hook up sometime for a few beers :cool:
Next you'll be telling me there are some good record shops tucked away somewhere that sell new vinyl other than Probe, or good second-hand ones other than Hairy Records and Oxfam ;)
Marco.
I shop at Mattas as well from time to time. Yes it will be nice to meet up; but sorry to disappoint you- I do not drink any more. Stopped 2 years ago although I may have a glass every now and then.
The shop for me is Henry Bohn's book shop in London Road. Massive collection of nearly all classical, boxes and boxes all over the place (three floors)-he can't find time to sort them out. All at £1 per LP. There are some Jazz and also pop and rock but not many and you have to go and look and search.
Do not think much of the Oxfam shop in town centre but the small one in Crosby has a good/choosy vinyl selection-rather pricey and they do not do credit cards-unlike all Oxfam shops I know.
The shop I like to visit is in the Bus Station complex in Plymouth. Can be expensive-but usually reasonable.
Hi Varun,
PM me your number and I'll bell you next time I'm planning a trip. It's more often than not on a weekday, so not sure if you'll be free.
What Del and I usually do is go for a long, lazy lunch at our favourite traditional restaurant in Chinatown, do our food shopping at Mattas and the Chinese supermarkets, and then Del goes off into the centre to look at clothes while I browse the record shops - it's a rather pleasant day out :smoking:
If you think it's worth it (bearing in mind Classical is not my first love) then I'll give Henry Bohn's a go :)
Marco.
Hey Varun,
I OUGHT to have ADM9's for domestic compatibility, but I'm on a vintage kick and thoroughly enjoying it (Christ, I had a hammering from JC Brum of all people not long ago for frequenting sites like this, fraternising with the antiquated-gear minded posters and using "Legacy" gear - I can't bloody win :()
By the way, AV makes dealers no money at all as it's supposed to be high sales volume/little profit per box and the few that seem to be doing well (I cite Rayleigh HiFi in Colchester as one possible candidate and now the two "Audio File" stores are back together again under one owner, I suspect they're the same) survive by encouraging sales of £20K+ custom-install home-theatre systems based on Linn and similar gear.
I think the mid-market audio market is now dominated by second hand gear. There is so much good and serviceable used stuff around now and as things haven't really moved on in twenty to thirty years, I suspect the mid-market people (Arcam, Roksan etc) are suffering more than a little. maybe Naim too, although the profit margins on their stuff is huge for the manufacturer (no way can that DAC of their's justify a £2K price tag based on what's inside - more like £750 tops...).
The tragedy is that many genuine HiFi shops appear to be run as a sideline for semi-retired enthusiasts, so sporadic is the business. Such a shame IMO.
(Christ, I had a hammering from JC Brum of all people not long ago for frequenting sites like this, fraternising with the antiquated-gear minded posters and using "Legacy" gear - I can't bloody win )
Jeezuz, what are you doing worrying about what that old balloon thinks!! :lol: :wanker:
Marco.
Steve Toy
04-10-2009, 16:10
There is actually little money to be made in 2 channel hi-fi these days. AV is where the money is.
Hence why in my next business venture I'll probably open up a restaurant with Del. There's plenty of money in that if you do it right ;)
Marco.
P.S The Cassoulet is defo on for your next visit.
If you do it right, food is one thing left to make a profitable business from. Our local tescos and Morrisons are ALWAYS busy and noone asks you for a discount or online price-match..........
alfie2902
04-10-2009, 17:50
I'm not sure what it is about some of the people on this forum, but without most of you having any knowledge about Winston Ma (The guy with the fancy room & system) some of you are already coming to some sort of conclusion about the man & his system! :scratch:
Winston Ma is a very well respected Audiophile across the pond & an expert in very well recorded & produced Audiophile recordings. He is the President of First Impression Music http://www.firstimpressionmusic.com/ & also Golden String record label too. The man strives to produce the very best of Audiophile recordings & therefore needs a system of very high quality & resolution to help with his high quality work!
But according to some here, he spends more time listening to his system than music! He's a gear freak with a serious self-image problem! Has to much money & doesn't Know how to spend it, other than on 2 of everything from ritcher sounds! How the fuck you manage to glean this info from 2 links about his room & system is beyond me!
Its often claimed that this is an open minded forum where people make judgements from experiance!
The guy might well be a complete cnut! with a shity sterile system with no clue about music! But at least find out about the guy or his products before starting a character assassination!
:steam: Rant over, carry on chaps, as you were
anthonyTD
04-10-2009, 18:22
I'm not sure what it is about some of the people on this forum, but without most of you having any knowledge about Winston Ma (The guy with the fancy room & system) some of you are already coming to some sort of conclusion about the man & his system! :scratch:
Winston Ma is a very well respected Audiophile across the pond & an expert in very well recorded & produced Audiophile recordings. He is the President of First Impression Music http://www.firstimpressionmusic.com/ & also Golden String record label too. The man strives to produce the very best of Audiophile recordings & therefore needs a system of very high quality & resolution to help with his high quality work!
But according to some here, he spends more time listening to his system than music! He's a gear freak with a serious self-image problem! Has to much money & doesn't Know how to spend it, other than on 2 of everything from ritcher sounds! How the fuck you manage to glean this info from 2 links about his room & system is beyond me!
Its often claimed that this is an open minded forum where people make judgements from experiance!
The guy might well be a complete cnut! with a shity sterile system with no clue about music! But at least find out about the guy or his products before starting a character assassination!
:steam: Rant over, carry on chaps, as you were
hi alfie,
i know where your coming from and tend to agree, after looking at the links it would seem that this guy has gone to a lot of trouble to make a unique one off system and room combination that obviously works for him.
that surely has to be admired not mocked!
regards,anthony,TD...
Hi Alfie,
I agree that we should not be running people down like we did or I did but let me explain my point.
1st: no amount of money will ever achieve the live sound.
2nd: if he knows what he is doing then sure he would have found out what will achieve the best results.
3rd: having done so-he would have had all the time in the world to enjoy his huge vinyl selection.
Instead we- in no time find out that the system has been completely changed with a turn table which looks like it belonged to Peter Pan.
Tell you what I think: That gentleman with heaps of money has no time to listen to music. I bet it is one track of this and half a track of that and then time for another change.
To me it suggests a deeply unsettled person- restless, looking for a break in something which is not coming what ever that may be.
Presumptions are the mother of all mistakes
Spectral Morn
04-10-2009, 19:24
I'm not sure what it is about some of the people on this forum, but without most of you having any knowledge about Winston Ma (The guy with the fancy room & system) some of you are already coming to some sort of conclusion about the man & his system! :scratch:
Winston Ma is a very well respected Audiophile across the pond & an expert in very well recorded & produced Audiophile recordings. He is the President of First Impression Music http://www.firstimpressionmusic.com/ & also Golden String record label too. The man strives to produce the very best of Audiophile recordings & therefore needs a system of very high quality & resolution to help with his high quality work!
But according to some here, he spends more time listening to his system than music! He's a gear freak with a serious self-image problem! Has to much money & doesn't Know how to spend it, other than on 2 of everything from ritcher sounds! How the fuck you manage to glean this info from 2 links about his room & system is beyond me!
Its often claimed that this is an open minded forum where people make judgements from experiance!
The guy might well be a complete cnut! with a shity sterile system with no clue about music! But at least find out about the guy or his products before starting a character assassination!
:steam: Rant over, carry on chaps, as you were
Your right to have a rant.
Frankly there are times when Dave DSJR has not got a bloody clue what he is talking about and the reason for your rant is one of those times IMHO.
I would love to hear and see this gentleman's system and rummage through his records etc. The type of people DSJR talks about tend not to have any record collection at all.
This guy has Marantz Project T mono blocks WOW...I would love to see or hear these legendary amps. He has a Wadia CDP know them well, stunning IMHO/E. He has a fantastic TT from a lady designer from Holland...would love to hear that TT. Simon of Musicology in Brighton did have one of those TT's..may still do...lucky guy.
One thing that really pisses me off is the uneducated i.e those who have no personal experience of products, systems or music slagging off stuff. If you have heard it and don't like it fine..you have a right to say so. Is some high end gear over priced crap.. YES, but it is not all like that and to brand it all that way is stupid and frankly if you know nothing about...well just a waste of words.
Rant over.
Regards D S D L
Spectral Morn
04-10-2009, 19:33
Hi Alfie,
I agree that we should not be running people down like we did or I did but let me explain my point.
1st: no amount of money will ever achieve the live sound.
2nd: if he knows what he is doing then sure he would have found out what will achieve the best results.
3rd: having done so-he would have had all the time in the world to enjoy his huge vinyl selection.
Instead we- in no time find out that the system has been completely changed with a turn table which looks like it belonged to Peter Pan.
Tell you what I think: That gentleman with heaps of money has no time to listen to music. I bet it is one track of this and half a track of that and then time for another change.
To me it suggests a deeply unsettled person- restless, looking for a break in something which is not coming what ever that may be.
Varun
How do you know. You presume a lot. Perhaps it is the green spirit typing here. If he wants to make upgrades and can afford it then go for it. Many on this forum upgrade when opportunities arise. If a set of Marantz Project T amps came my way I would jump at them....however I can't afford such things..but I can dream.
His system looks excellent IMHO. What it costs is irrelevant.
Attacking this gentleman in this way is dreadful. If you know him and its true fair enough if not wind your neck in.
Hi Guys,
Let's give peace a chance :) .
Most of the criticism was aimed, IMHO, not at Mr Ma's taste in music or music gear but at his relentless throwing of money trying to reach a goal that most of us believe to be unachievable, namely audio Nirvana.
There was nothing in the two articles to suggest that what he was actually building was a tool to allow him to do his very demanding job to the best of his ability and the 'gist' of the articles, IMHO, would leave anyone not having previously heard of Mr. Ma to assume that he was just a very rich man pursuing the ultimate audiophile equivalent of one-upmanship.
Having said that, I do wonder how much of his LP and CD collection he has actually listened to - it just reinforced the idea that it was all one-upmanship, again IMHO.
Cheers,
Hi Neil,
Glad to hear you opened up after such a silence. I appreciate how you admire good products. I will take DSJR's side though as I feel that we are talking of two different aspects of music "REPRODUCTION".
One is 'money is no object' and the second is 'how far can you go on refining it'.
The line has to be drawn somewhere and that lines drawing comes from an experience of what is in the music. I speak from my long experience of listening to classic concerts. Even if this fellow spends 10 times more-he will not even remotely simulate the sound of live orchestra.
Not a question of well made items- it is a question of musical enjoyment.. big difference I would say. Then there is the big issue of what this forum is all about. As for his spending money-why not. The man who runs a wine shop in Totnes in Devon once told me that some one walked in wanting to buy a bottle of wine-the best he had and walked out with a £1000 bottle under his arm. He was sent by a well known local footballer but nothing specific had been stated or asked for.
To me it suggests a deeply unsettled person- restless, looking for a break in something which is not coming what ever that may be.
That's nothing more than a rich asumption. Equally I/we could assume you have an envy problem!
Of course, what many of us fail to recognise is that, depending on age we have collections of recorded music which, if we started listening to systematically working from the beginning towards the end, there is not enough time left in our life to hear the whole lot......and still we collect more. Is that not a pointless exercise?
and DSJR speaks from his long experience of 'master tapes' and 'tricks' included in making things sound better than they really are or more importantly should be. Beyond a limit it becomes Make Believe -Cloud Cuckoo Land world.
Spectral Morn
04-10-2009, 19:45
Hi Guys,
Let's give peace a chance :) .
Most of the criticism was aimed, IMHO, not at Mr Ma's taste in music or music gear but at his relentless throwing of money trying to reach a goal that most of us believe to be unachievable, namely audio Nirvana.
There was nothing in the two articles to suggest that what he was actually building a tool to allow him to do his very demanding job to the best of his ability and the 'gist' of the articles, IMHO, would leave anyone not having previously heard of Mr. Ma to assume that he was just a very rich man pursuing the ultimate audiophile equivalent of one-upmanship.
Having said that, I do wonder how much of his LP and CD collection he has actually listened to - it just reinforced the idea that it was all one-upmanship, again IMHO.
Cheers,
You know I was about to type out a reply to all this but I can't be bothered. There are narrow minds here..of that there is no doubt and a bias against the high-end in total.
:(
Some of us may see it in their fields my friend. Envy my word far from it. It is known as observation- no assumption here.
Collectors are different- they welcome to do what they like.
alfie2902
04-10-2009, 19:48
Hi Alfie,
I agree that we should not be running people down like we did or I did but let me explain my point.
1st: no amount of money will ever achieve the live sound.
2nd: if he knows what he is doing then sure he would have found out what will achieve the best results.
3rd: having done so-he would have had all the time in the world to enjoy his huge vinyl selection.
Instead we- in no time find out that the system has been completely changed with a turn table which looks like it belonged to Peter Pan.
Tell you what I think: That gentleman with heaps of money has no time to listen to music. I bet it is one track of this and half a track of that and then time for another change.
To me it suggests a deeply unsettled person- restless, looking for a break in something which is not coming what ever that may be.
Varun did you read my post?
Winstone Ma works in the production of very high quility Audiophile recording of course he only listens to one & a half tracks while he is doing this. The rest is done in neverneverland from where he got his peter pan TT from which just happens to be a La Luce C.S. Centoventi which is a world class turntable http://www.stereophile.com/turntables/1098spot/ try reading about something for a change. You never know you may just learn something!!:doh:
And just because i post 2 links together doesn't mean there is no time scale between him changing gear. I believe his room was built over 4 years ago so the links could be of a similar age :confused: i.e. it could be at any point over a 4 year period that he swapped his amps & speakers.
Spectral Morn
04-10-2009, 19:49
and DSJR speaks from his long experience of 'master tapes' and 'tricks' included in making things sound better than they really are or more importantly should be. Beyond a limit it becomes Make Believe -Cloud Cuckoo Land world.
And I speak/type from 20+ years experience in the audio trade, where by I have heard many things that Dave types about that he has not heard and neither have you so how can you slag them off or those who have such systems.
I really can't be bothered with AOS tonight.
Frankly there are times when Dave DSJR has not got a bloody clue what he is talking about and the reason for your rant is one of those times IMHO.
I do have a bloody clue Neil and that is that there's no need at all to go to these lengths to get a good sound at home - period :steam:. Come down off your high horse why don't you?
The guy obviously has a huge disposeable income and is chasing a rainbow's end he'll NEVER fulfil in a hundred lives..
Sorry, I tend to follow the pro way. Systems like that shown are big boys toys, nothing more. Thirty years in my naivety I may have felt differently...
I'm too tired for this...
Gentlemen;
I think time to quiten down. Every one is an expert of course. So all is well so long as it is taken well- feelings need to simmer down a bit.
I am surprised that we did not have the same reaction for criticisms aimed at Linn and such like.
Neil- I do believe you have misunderstood us...
No harm in such a debate though-so long as
..... relentless throwing of money trying to reach a goal that most of us believe to be unachievable, namely audio Nirvana.
You know I was about to type out a reply to all this but I can't be bothered. There are narrow minds here..of that there is no doubt and a bias against the high-end in total.
:(
Hang abaht Neil,
I was trying to pour oil on troubled waters here - don't expect that response for my troubles. Did you get round to reading the bit afterwards where I referred to Mr Ma building a 'tool' to allow him to do his very difficult job better. Surely you can see that changes how I (and probably others) would look at this expenditure. Spending vast sums of money when the law of diminishing returns has been left miles behind is difficult to sympathise with, whilst an artisan spending money on improving his ability to practice his craft is much easier to sympathise with.
Cheers,
Spectral Morn
04-10-2009, 20:00
I do have a bloody clue Neil and that is that there's no need at all to go to these lengths to get a good sound at home - period :steam:. Come down off your high horse why don't you?
The guy obviously has a huge disposeable income and is chasing a rainbow's end he'll NEVER fulfil in a hundred lives..
Sorry, I tend to follow the pro way. Systems like that shown are big boys toys, nothing more. Thirty years in my naivety I may have felt differently...
I'm too tired for this...
I can't be bothered.... DSJR's opinion is of course the only valid one, and his experiences the only valid ones.
anthonyTD
04-10-2009, 20:08
The guy obviously has a huge disposeable income and is chasing a rainbow's end he'll NEVER fulfil in a hundred lives..
maybe!! but the fact that he continues to strive to fulfill his idea of nirvana surely has to be admired.:confused::scratch::)
A...
I blame all this on the hot curry people were discussing on one of the abstract subjects. Far too much red cheeli in the atmosphere.
Anthony,
Lascivious greed and wanton lust take one in the direction opposite to Niravana.. that is the rainbow's end DSJR is talking about and not the entire journey- he ain't gonna make it.
Guys,
Let's all take a chill pill...
I know where Dave DSJR (and perhaps also Varun) is coming from; I suspect however that they didn't read enough into the provenance of this particular gentleman...
Certainly my view is that Mr Ma is someone who deserves respect rather than ridicule. I believe that he is one 'serious cookie' in terms of audio, much like some people here are only with a slightly different take on 'SPPV' and perhaps also a bigger wallet! ;)
I have little doubt that his hi-fi motives are impeccable and that he is also a genuine (and rather serious) music lover. I know what Japanese audiophiles are like - they're not clueless badge snobs like some so-called 'audiophiles' are in the UK; they actually deserve the title! Mr Ma reminds me a little of Ricardo Franassovici of Absolute Sounds with perhaps somewhat more scruples - well I guess that Mr Ma is in a slightly different position :)
Anyway, guys, I'd like to think that on AoS we acknowledge and respect people who strive for excellence for all the right reasons, rather than allowing the envious 'green-eyed monster' to cloud our better judgement...
Let's be positive, people!! :cool:
Marco.
I can't be bothered.... DSJR's opinion is of course the only valid one, and his experiences the only valid ones.
We are encouraged on here to express an opinion. I expressed mine, that's all. And I do change my opinions and enjoy learning new things, don't you?
I can't help being so pragmatic, but I've met a few lower caste people a little like this before and so many of them have lost sight of the fact that we're *reproducing* via a very flawed medium, a *facsimile* of the original recording. For considerably less, I bet he'd have got a wonderful result in his fancy room with either marco's system, your main one or even (heaven forbid) a full blown ATC or PMC active one - ATC have some very fancy and expensive 150's that would do the job beautifully and I understand they sold all the first batch they made and as for the awsome PMC BB5 setup i heard briefly once... Sorry Neil, I don't go weak at the knees at the sight of two HUGE trays laden with banks of glowing glass - 800W Class A. Old age and life experience makes me count the cost of running such items, the heat generated by all those valves, the distortion generated by all those devices and his overall "carbon footprint." Nonsensical on an audio enthusiast site I know, but important to me, if not anyone else.
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q8/DSJR_photos/el150slp.jpg
By the way, the bass units in the above are 15" diameter. I don't have a clue if they sound any good at all, or even better than the standard 150A, but they do cost over £20K and that marks them as a valid "top end" alternative.
P.S. I thought one thing about the site was to debunk audiophile "foo." I don't post on subjects I know nothing about, unless it's to ask advice from the "experts" there.
So there :ner:
If there are any ATCs I'd love to hear it's the EL150 SLPs - and in Burr Walnut they look gorgeous! :)
Marco.
The point I was very clumsily trying to make earlier is that those ATC's would cost you nigh on 10 pairs of your Lockwoods, or five pairs of Lockwoods with decent sympathetic amps...
Apologies all. I'm so into my retro kick it tends to get the better of me. C'mon Neil, it's only stereo - a mostly male hobby...
I know exactly where you're coming from, Dave. However, on the other subject, I think Varun and you have completely misjudged Mr Ma and are definitely wrong on this occasion.
Sorry dude... I'm with Alfie, Neil, Greg and Anthony.
Oh, and much as I like those ATCs there's still no way I'd swap them for my Lockwoods - no way José! :)
Marco.
I'm not sure what it is about some of the people on this forum, but without most of you having any knowledge about Winston Ma (The guy with the fancy room & system) some of you are already coming to some sort of conclusion about the man & his system! :scratch:
Winston Ma is a very well respected Audiophile across the pond & an expert in very well recorded & produced Audiophile recordings. He is the President of First Impression Music http://www.firstimpressionmusic.com/ & also Golden String record label too. The man strives to produce the very best of Audiophile recordings & therefore needs a system of very high quality & resolution to help with his high quality work!
But according to some here, he spends more time listening to his system than music! He's a gear freak with a serious self-image problem! Has to much money & doesn't Know how to spend it, other than on 2 of everything from ritcher sounds! How the fuck you manage to glean this info from 2 links about his room & system is beyond me!
Its often claimed that this is an open minded forum where people make judgements from experiance!
The guy might well be a complete cnut! with a shity sterile system with no clue about music! But at least find out about the guy or his products before starting a character assassination!
:steam: Rant over, carry on chaps, as you were
Oh dear, I fear my post may have been the start of all of this:
Holy sh!t - both the before and after systems are totally amazing to look at, and clearly a very focused individual if the ceiling even slopes toward the listener for maxim acoustic effect! Just mind blowing that anyone would have the time, let alone the money or be motivated to put in the effort to create such a singular environment. Do you know what though - with a lot of this, I just wonder how much time these type of people spend listening to the system, rather than the music...?
I did not research what this chap does for a living, or his provenance (sorry, l just don't have the time) but to a degree, the fact that he is a record producer, it suprises me even more that his entire reference system should change, in what appears to be a very short space of time.
And just because i post 2 links together doesn't mean there is no time scale between him changing gear. I believe his room was built over 4 years ago so the links could be of a similar age :confused: i.e. it could be at any point over a 4 year period that he swapped his amps & speakers.
Sorry Alfie, but I made the assumption based on the fact that the 2 links referenced the same issue ("POSITIVE FEEDBACK ONLINE - ISSUE 3") and the second piece stated "As companion piece to the interview/photo series that we’ve been doing with Winston Ma, Winston was kind enough to send along some updated photos containing his current components and their configuration."
I made the logical jump to a conclusion that a "companion piece" would have been relatively contemporary - and not 4 years apart (I now stand corrected, thank you, though still confused at the use of the phrase "companion" for such a relatively large time shift).
alfie2902
05-10-2009, 00:39
Hi Alex,
We come here to read, learn, share our experiences and debate. I didn't mention any names in my rant :o as i don't like things to get personal. I just felt one or two of the comments were unfair & unfounded. I wanted to point out that sometimes people make strong comment on things they have very little background knowledge of.
Your assumption based on the fact that the 2 links referenced the same issue3 seems to be correct. But from the first link "Positive Feedback Online has been sharing an extended interview that Rick Gardner and I conducted with Winston a while back (see Issues 1 and 2 of PFO). As an adjunct article, I’d like to share some photographs and dimensional specifics of Winston’s extraordinary effort, so that our readers understand more of what he has done." So my 4 years was misleading but wasn't intended to be! It still leaves a timescale in which he upgraded his amps & speakers that is unkown though.
Sorry if anything i wrote offended you Alex (or anyone else for that matter) it was never my intension! :)
Regards alfie
Sorry if anything i wrote offended you Alex (or anyone else for that matter) it was never my intension! :)
It takes a lot more than that to offend me Alfie! Healthy debate is what it is about!
Still going on,
Marco,
I have no problems one way or the other-rather amused by all the heat under the collar. The issues for me are quite different-purely confined to sound reproduction-and the judgement there of.. nothing about personalities or persons.
There would be quite a few people like Mr Ma around-all the good wishes to them.
Marco- you are the champion of the cause.
Rob Sinden
05-10-2009, 08:34
Marco - I thought you might find this interesting as the guy seems top have the same speakers as you in a very similar sized room and ended up using Tact Eq to improve the systems performance.
http://www.the-missing-link.net/Art_Audio.htm
That's very interesting Rob, so thanks for posting the link :)
The Westminsters, though, are about half the size again of my Lockwoods and about three times the weight - they are *true* behemoths in every sense of the word!!! :eyebrows:
Don't forget too, that room isn't anything like mine in terms of structure or shape... I feel that the asymmetrical nature of my room is significant and changes the rules somewhat, as outlined earlier by Alfie.
That's not to say though that there aren't issues to be 'fixed' in terms of what DSP can do (I'm sure there are, and these will be determined when you visit), but simply that every situation must be judged in its individual context.
Varun,
Thanks for the compliment! I do strive for excellence and share Mr Ma's basic principles with audio, if not quite his 'working budget' ;)
I think some of us definitely misjudged him.
I've no idea how Mr Ma's system performs, but I'm sure it does sound excellent, as experience tells me Japanese audiophiles truly go the extra mile when indulging their passions in life, and do so in an extremely informed and knowledgeable way. Like I said, they're a different breed entirely from some of the dogmatic, brand-biased, and clueless badge snobs here in the UK, chasing an unattainable goal.
For me though, part of the fun is producing awesome results with hi-fi without spending the cost of a very large house... This is why I predominantly go down the vintage/modification route, as it is undoubtedly for me where the highest sound-per-pound lies in audio. The Lockwoods are a valid case in point - they sound like a £10k pair of speakers, but only cost £3.5k! :cool:
Marco.
Thanks Marco,
I tend not to get personal in any debate and it is indeed unfortunate that any discussion may result in being seen as a personal affront. There are regional issues as well in the way some one approaches a subject - Mr Ma's far eastern origin makes him see things very differently. The sharp rise in the price of premium French wine is the case in point.
I was reminded of a friend of mine who retired last year and lives in a huge mansion on the Devon coast with rambling hilly acreage of land around. He is a very good pianist as well as an organist and now spends travelling around being invited to play organ in churches etc. He also built an organ in his own dinning room and has an upright Steinway and a 9 foot Bluthner.
After listening to my system a few years ago he went and bought the cheapest Project turntable. He considers Richter, the late Russian pianist the greatest so recently I gave him a couple of my DG pressings of Richter. He was recently telling me that he is simply overjoyed listening to Richter playing Rachmaninov 3-sounds great on his cheapo Project.
Now his system is the cheapest Japanses receiver and home made speakers made 20 years ago which are built into the cupboards etc.
This example just shows how some one who knows the music can appreciate it with a very basic minimal investment in Hi Fi gear and obtain great pleasure from it.. or Niravana if you will.
Dave (DSJR);
Are ATC's made in UK? I thought they were and if so they will be the most expensive British Speakers.
How much do Mr Ma's Avalon's might cost-can one ask? To me the Jamo 999s mentioned by Rob also looked very impressive.
ATC's are still made in the Stroud area as far as I am aware and PMC are made in Luton these days, I understand.
In my usual way, I vociferously questioned the look and driver layout of these 150's, as the "proper" version places the drivers much closer together. i suppose the market that bought these has much larger rooms, where the listener would sit several metres away. the standard 150's would only be two or three metres away tops in a monitoring environment.
I really do think that DSP could be very useful, but only once the worst of the room problems are sorted by traditional means first. Just my current view which isn't set in stone.
I really do think that DSP could be very useful, but only once the worst of the room problems are sorted by traditional means first.
I'd concur with that view, unless Rob can prove differently to me ;)
I'd also add that one must also have a decent, properly set-up, system in the room to start with in order to have a basis of quality 'ingredients' worth further enhancing. A so-so spaghetti bolognaise will always be a so-so spaghetti bolognaise no matter how fancy a plate it's presented on...
Marco.
Rob Sinden
05-10-2009, 15:33
I would have said that in a good room with a well set up system, room correction would usually only benefit the bass frequencies as standing waves are inevitable and this is the only practical, high resolution method of correcting the peaks that I am aware of.
I think if more people tried measuring their system they would be alarmed to see how un even the in room response was and could then decide if they wanted to hear what their systems would sound like with these big peaks - often playing 3/4/5 times louder than they should - reduced.
What has surprised me is that in normal living rooms without any treatment etc. often the imaging and tonal balance is also changed. I know everyone is likely to freak out at this comment and suggest this is precisely why you shouldnt use it, but in every case where I have been aware of the changes higher up the frequency response the change has been a significant and obvious benefit.
Imaging has become more solid and often changed to a more central position and acoustic instruments simply sound far more lifelike.
As I say I know people will regard this as a negative rather than a positive as it is chaging the signal. However, to my ears and those that I have done dems with, the change has always been a benefit as the room has clearly introduced errors which the correction is reducing.
One thing I would strongly advice anyone who is interested in Room Correction of is the need to hear it in 3 or 4 rooms before passing judgement. Because it is designed to reduce room effects by it's very nature it will do something very different from room. Often the obvious thing is the removal of boomy bass which people may have become used to and regard as normal, with identical equipment in another room it will obviously be restoring bass.
As I sell room correction I will obviously be regarded with some suspiscion but I think it is one of the most powerful tools around and something that people would be fascinated by if they tried.
Incidentally, I have only ever heard a system with ATC's one and it was in a superb recording studio in West London. The system sounded excellent however it was definitely tiring to listen to. The engineer said "I know there a 5db peak (can't remeber where but somewhere between 1k and 10k) which I presume would account for it sounding bright and tiring.
To me, now I simply cannot think of a good reason for not wanting to measure your systems response if high fidelity is what your goal is.
Although
Hi Rob,
I thought you were phoning me today.... Did you read my PM? :)
Marco.
maybe!! but the fact that he continues to strive to fulfill his idea of nirvana surely has to be admired.:confused::scratch::)
A...
He's doomed to fail of course, but as long as it's his money, I don't personally mind. Good of me, eh?
Spectral Morn
05-10-2009, 19:41
He's doomed to fail of course, but as long as it's his money, I don't personally mind. Good of me, eh?
And you know that because you have a similar room, similar taste in music and have gone through the same products he has ? If not how can you say that..."doomed to failure".
We all work with what we have, what we can get and what we can afford. Is there a point where improvements become smaller Yes of course there is. But to say even at that point or beyond it those improvements are not worth the money can and only should be claimed by those who have been there (have any of you explored that level of products ? I suspect not). In the case of the gentleman you have all been attacking (and sorry but that is what you have been doing and based only on prejudice/bias towards his use of money or hatred of the high end. Not one of you have said " I tried those items and they weren't as good as X or Y" Why because none of you have) he has reached a level whereby he is exploring improvements and differences at his level of products...who is not to say that those experiences are not valid and worth doing.
I have explored some of the items he has tried (in my own system at home and in controlled environments elsewhere), such as the Wadia CDP he has, and the next level above that as well, and are there differences to cheaper CDP's. Well yes there are, sorry to contradict the delusion than cheap is better than dearer( I will fully acknowledge here, that the Beresford Dac I tried once came close to some items I own, but it wasn't better), but this is IMHO/E an exception to the rule and I found this DAC to be very fussy about the quality of transport used and connecting cable. Use one type of transport poor results use another and better...my best result was with a £3000 Audiomeca Mephisto 2.
There is a higher level to play with and no amount of jealousy, or bias...can alter the fact that if you can afford its there to be tried.
So there you go, gather your pitch forks and torches and come to the DSDL castle to drag me out and burn me. I have tried a lot of high end gear and if I had the money I would play with and try it. However in my case my listening room would prevent me hearing much benefit especially with bigger more full range speakers (which just wont work). While my speakers are excellent I suspect that once I would go over a certain level of source, amp I would probably not hear enough to warrant the expense. If you use low resolution gear then you hit that brick wall of not hearing improvements much quicker than you will if you are using very transparent items. I have been here by the way...oh yes. I tried high end kit and what I thought was an excellent set up just would not let me here what was better. It was not until I had beter more transparent items that i heard what I was missing.
If you are happy where you are thats fine, but don't attack others who have the desire passion and cash to explore the high peaks of the mountain. Oh yes for those who say ..but DIY is the way. Fine, but take your designs, time ,components, packaging warranty etc and build time and then cost them for retail sale (through traditional shops and/or distribution) and see how much they are then.
Every approach to this hobby is valid IMHO so slagging someone of for their approach when not one of you have heard, tried or have intimate knowledge of the gear this guy has tried, should frankly, keep your fingers of the keys and have a long hard think before typing such self opinionated vile. If you have an opinion based on direct experience then comment, if not do what I do type nothing....all this IMHO/E.
Oh yes...a few said about references how can he do X or Y without a reference.....so a reference can't change when a better set up or item is found....so static is best.......wise up.
Regards D S D L
Now who'd have thought that a couple of articles about a rich eastern gentleman living in Ameica and spending a relatively small amount of his disposable income on his hobby/passion of listening to music would have provoked a post of this magnitude?
Just a thought :) .
Cheers
Spectral Morn
05-10-2009, 19:54
Now who'd have thought that a couple of articles about a rich eastern gentleman living in Ameica and spending a relatively small amount of his disposable income on his hobby/passion of listening to music would have provoked a post of this magnitude?
Just a thought :) .
Cheers
I was way to angry last night to have constructively tackled some of the crap (imho) I read. I refrained from typing what I wanted to say then...all the better to as it would have done me no favours.
Regards D S D L
Pardon me, I don't see (clearly) the connection between the thread's subject [why hifi doesn't work] and the venerable M. Ma...
Have I missed something ? Mr Ma's system sounded awful without a room treatment and/or digital correction ?:scratch:
Spectral Morn
05-10-2009, 19:59
Pardon me, I don't see (clearly) the connection between the thread's subject [why hifi doesn't work] and the venerable M. Ma...
Have I missed something ? Mr Ma's system sounded awful without a room treatment and/or digital correction ?:scratch:
Its called thread drift, something which happens on AOS quite a lot and usually we are the richer for it, however sadly in the case of the attack on Mr Ma that has not been the case. Narrow/prejudiced minds have crept out of their tiny closets.
Maybe now we can get back on topic.
Regards D S D L
Narrow/prejudiced minds have crept out of their tiny closets.
Regards D S D L
Nah then Nei, that's a bit harsh, innit? I was one who mildly criticised the spending of so much money for so little return (relative to the outlay) and my mind ain't tiny and it ain't in no closet, IMHO, so :ner::ner::ner: .
Cheers,
...spending of so much money for so little return...
Davey baby, I don't think anyone other than those who've heard Mr Ma's system are in a position to judge the level of "return" ;)
Marco.
Spectral Morn
05-10-2009, 20:14
Davey baby, I don't think anyone other than those who've heard Mr Ma's system are in a position to judge the level of "return" ;)
Marco.
:exactly:
Regards D S D L
Davey baby, I don't think anyone other than those who've heard Mr Ma's system are in a position to judge the level of "return" ;)
Marco.
Marco sonny, I've got to disagree with you (now there's a novelty ;) ).
Only Mr Ma can judge whether he's got an acceptable level of 'return' 'cos only he knows what he's spent. What it boils down to is what proportion of his disposable income he's spent on it and what else he might have spent the money on. Anyone else who doesn't have that amount of disposable income, no matter how many times theyve heard it, can not judge the level of 'return'.
Just my (different ;) ) opinion.
Cheers,
Spectral Morn
05-10-2009, 20:34
Marco sonny, I've got to disagree with you (now there's a novelty ;) ).
Only Mr Ma can judge whether he's got an acceptable level of 'return' 'cos only he knows what he's spent. What it boils down to is what proportion of his disposable income he's spent on it and what else he might have spent the money on. Anyone else who doesn't have that amount of disposable income, no matter how many times theyve heard it, can not judge the level of 'return'.
Just my (different ;) ) opinion.
Cheers,
And its okay to have ago at him for that. Frankly Dave its none of your business what he spends on what just as its none of my business what you spend on what.
What I can say and with respect you can't (and that is my point), is I have heard what this kind of gear can do (and not at shows) in known situations i.e my own system at home and I can tell you quite firmly that no matter how good you think your system is and how happy you are with it you can't even begin to imagine how good that type of system is. Take your imaging uereka moment and multiply that by hundreds of percent. I know that sounds arrogant, but there is no easy way to say it. You have much further to go on your journey Dave and I can assure you that your current audio state can be bettered. Sorry but thats a fact.
Lets say that your point of reference is limited at the present time and can in time be broadened. At that point having heard what that type of set up can do...make a decision then if you would or would not funds permitting have it. At that point your opinion has validity as it can be qualified. This goes for other ill-informed opinion expressed about Mr Ma and his system.
Regards D S D L
And you know that because you have a similar room, similar taste in music and have gone through the same products he has ? If not how can you say that..."doomed to failure".
All attempts at perfection are doomed to failure because perfection is not achievable in this life; there'll always be .005% of improvement to be obtained, at whatever cost. For some, that quest (in whichever field) is what it's all about. For me, I'm lazy and easily pleased, and the pursuit of audio nirvana looks like a lot of hard work and a lot of 'investment' I can't afford.
Only Mr Ma can judge whether he's got an acceptable level of 'return' 'cos only he knows what he's spent...
What it boils down to is what proportion of his disposable income he's spent on it and what else he might have spent the money on. Anyone else who doesn't have that amount of disposable income, no matter how many times theyve heard it, can not judge the level of 'return'.
I don't completely disagree, Dave, but that doesn't change the fact that anyone who's heard Mr Ma's system (and knows something about hi-fi and music) is in a position to judge whether the many thousands of pounds he's invested in his system have paid off...
You don't have to know the *exact* amount he's spent in order to do that. I can make an educated guess from looking at some of the equipment he's got, as I suspect others like Neil can :)
If he invited me over to hear his system, I'd certainly tell him whether I thought he'd spent his money wisely or not!
As an aside, as for disposible income, I could probably match what Mr Ma has spent on his system, but I might have to sell one of the houses I own for rental first to release the capital ;)
That's not what my system building methodology is about, though!
Marco.
Marco,
Can I ask you to think of it like this, and see if your firm opinion becomes any less firm?
I don't know and don't want to know how much you've spent on your system but I gather from many posts that you are more than satisfied with it. You are also a great advocate of the principles of SSPV (?) and the relatively early starting point of the law of diminishing returns. If you really believe that spending 10 or even maybe 100 times more than your current system cost would be justified by the improvement over what is already a brilliant set up, I would be very surprised. It's very easy to say "Yes" when you know the situation ain't gonna arise any time soon, but could you do it and still subscribe to the above two principles.
Cheers,
I'm not sure what you want me say, Dave...
Yes, I'm absolutely delighted with my system and have no intention of changing it completely anytime soon - if ever.
Yes, I believe implicitly in the concept of 'SPPV' and will always build my system rigidly adopting that principle.
Would I, if I were offered, swap my exisiting system for Mr Ma's without hearing it first? NO!
Would I ever conclusively judge anyone or their system, no matter what they've spent on it, without hearing it first? NO, MOST DEFINITELY NOT - EVER.
Is that any clearer now, muchacho? :)
Marco.
Buenos Nochas Amigo,
I think that we are drifting away from the original bru-ha-ha. My criticism was less about how good Sr Ma's system sounds - I'm sure it must sound bloody wonderful, no question - but rather what he has spent on it. I still maintain, in terms of real money, it cannot possibly be justfied in terms of SSPV or the law of diminishing returns - end of story, no room for debate, IMHO.
Whether it can be justified in terms of Sr Ma's dispoable income, only Sr Ma can say for sure. I'm fairly certain his answer would be yes to the second question and I would believe him. I'm equally certain that his answer to the first question would also be yes, but I'm less certain that I'd believe him ;) .
Anyway, it's all hypothetical - nowt to do wi' either on us :) .
Hasta la vista.
I still maintain, in terms of real money, it cannot possibly be justfied in terms of SSPV or the law of diminishing returns - end of story, no room for debate, IMHO.
In terms of Mr Ma's system, SPPV doesn't come into it. I've no idea whether he considers such a notion important or not.
With respect, Dave, you don't have the knowledge or experience of the type of equipment Mr Ma uses to analyse it on any level.
It's entirely possible that I could hear his system and think "f*ck me this is quite simply the best system I've ever heard!" and conclude that my own (extremely capable) system was but a mere toy in comparison; in which case how would that square with your notion of what is represented by the laws of diminishing returns? ;)
Here's another one to ponder... How far away would you say your system at home is from reproducing JMJ's Oxygene on your Techy compared to how you heard it reproduced on mine through Steve's huge horns and the rest of the system at Owston?
As Neil says, you've got a LONG LONG way to go on your journey before you are in a position to judge with any authority the level of 'return' available from these types of systems.
Marco.
This debate doesn't seem that different how some people spend money on cars. How about someone who buys a Ferrari vs someone else who buys an Evo Turbo do-da or whatever. You might also say that there are loads of £25k to £40k cars that give perfectly good enough performance such that you'll never need to want a Ferrari.
I would want a Ferrari and I suppose I could find the money to buy one if I tried hard enough but I don't want one that much. If I could buy a Ferrari out of petty cash it would be a different matter.
Oh yes for those who say ..but DIY is the way. Fine, but take your designs, time ,components, packaging warranty etc and build time and then cost them for retail sale (through traditional shops and/or distribution) and see how much they are then.Regards D S D L
That is exactly the point of DIY. I got into DIY simply because I got a taste for high end sound but simply could not afford that sound over the counter. Doing it DIY made it affordable and furthermore, I had the benefit of adjustment which allowed tuning of the system to meet my needs and get that so called accurate sound. Actually that should read as balanced and satisfacory sound.........probably as accurate as possible within my listening environment which makes me very happy. Yes, very happy indeed.
My humble opinion.........if you are seriously into your sound and you don't get into DIY, you're a sucker with more money than economical sense. However, each to there own. Some have nightmares just thinking about switching on a soldering iron. It's not difficult to learn you know :doh:
Spectral Morn
05-10-2009, 21:44
That is exactly the point of DIY. I got into DIY simply because I got a taste for high end sound but simply could not afford that sound over the counter. Doing it DIY made it affordable and furthermore, I had the benefit of adjustment which allowed tuning of the system to meet my needs and get that so called accurate sound. Actually that should read as balanced and satisfacory sound.........probably as accurate as possible within my listening environment which makes me very happy. Yes, very happy indeed.
My humble opinion.........if you are seriously into your sound and you don't get into DIY, you're a sucker with more money then economical sense. However, each to there own. Some have nightmares just thinking about switching on a soldering iron. It's not difficult to learn you know :doh:
Hi Greg
Very fair point.
Regards D S D L
Hi Greg,
I completely agree with your points on D.I.Y, apart from this:
My humble opinion.........if you are seriously into your sound and you don't get into DIY, you're a sucker with more money than economical sense.
I'm afraid that some people just aren't interested in the practical side of D.I.Y, and that certainly doesn't make them "a sucker"!
Me? I wholeheartedly embrace the benefits of D.I.Y, but I'd rather pay someone else to wield the soldering iron on my behalf, and thus end up with the same result...
I can then spend my time instead rediscovering my music collection and enjoying the fruits of their labour: a win-win, amigo. As they say, 'don't work hard, work smart'! ;)
This is what I've done with every component in my system apart from my Copper amp. The only reason that hasn't been modified is because it was a 'maxed-out' design from the beginning.
Marco.
Hi Greg,
I completely agree with your points on D.I.Y, apart from this:
I'm afraid that some people just aren't interested in the practical side of D.I.Y, and that certainly doesn't make them "a sucker"!
Me? I wholeheartedly embrace the benefits of D.I.Y, but I'd rather pay someone else to wield the soldering iron and thus end up with the same result...
I can then spend my time instead enjoying the fruits of their labour: a win-win, amigo ;)
Marco.
You have a funny idea of 'DIY'!!! :D
Plus some of us (ie me) are so cack-handed that DIY plus electricity = A&E.
In terms of Mr Ma's system, SPPV doesn't come into it. I've no idea whether he considers such a notion important or not. It's not whether he considers it to be important or not that we are discussing, can I remind you - it's whether I, and others, think it's important.
With respect, Dave, you don't have the knowledge or experience of the type of equipment Mr Ma uses to analyse it on any level. With equal respect, Marco, that response is beginning to sound a bit like the Emperors clothes - I can't see it 'cos it don't exist, you can see it 'cos you want to see it. I don't need need knowledge or experience of the type of equipment Mr Ma uses to have a valid opinion on it's SSPV - I only need to know that it cost probably more than most peoples houses cost and probably enough to feed half of sub-Saharan Africa for a day.
It's entirely possible that I could hear his system and think "f*ck me" this is quite simply the best system I've ever heard, It might be entirely possible and I would hope and expect that that is exactly what you would think and conclude that my own (extremely capable) system was but a mere toy in comparison; ,but highly unlikely, be honest, unless your system is not as good as you keep saying it is (BTW, I don't doubt it is very good, excellent even, which is why I doubt it could be bettered by enough to justify what Mr. Ma has spent). in which case how would that square with your notion of what is represented by the laws of diminishing returns? ;) The law of diminishing returns kicks in fairly low in the level of expenditure and becomes more apparent the higher up the level of expenditure you go, that's a 'no brainer' IMHO.
Marco.
I think this exchange would be better if it were closed 'cos we are both firm in our opinions and unlikely to 'convert' each other.
Cheers,
Dave,
I'm sorry mate, but I'm afraid in this instance you're (mostly) talking nonsense.
I think this exchange would be better if it were closed 'cos we are both firm in our opinions and unlikely to 'convert' each other.
Yes, once you've answered the other questions I asked you earlier ;)
See my last two paragraphs on post #339.
Marco.
You have a funny idea of 'DIY'!!!
Indeed, Mikey. It's called the 'maximum benefit, minimal effort' approach! :lol: :lolsign:
Marco.
Wossat, then? :scratch:
Marco.
Wossat, then? :scratch:
Marco.
Somebody Else Do It ;)
LOL - it's too late and I've had too much vino! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Dave,
I'm sorry mate, but I'm afraid in this instance you're (mostly) talking nonsense.
Hi Marco,
You may have the last word on what gets posted but not on what's nonsense - just because my opinion is different from your's doesn't make it nonsense necessarily so :ner:
Yes, once you've answered the other questions I asked you earlier ;)
See my last two sentences on post #339.
Marco.
Here's another one to ponder... How far away would you say your system at home is from reproducing JMJ's Oxygene on your Techy compared to how you heard it reproduced on mine through Steve's huge horns and the rest of the system at Owston?
First question: was this added by editing after first posting 'cos I didn't see it whilst I was composing my response otherwise it would have been answered thus:
The question isn't really valid or appropriate as Owston was not set up to demonstrate anybody's system at it's best. But to answer it I would repeat what I posted after attending Eggborough - check back - I heard nothing at Eggborough that made me in anyway dissatisfied with my kit at home - this was pre-Techie. There was some excellent sounding kit at Eggborough but, having discussed costs and effort involved, nothing that made me want to go out and emulate it. A large part of that may well have been the crap venue. At Owston, yes definitely JMJ sounded bloody good on the kit there but not so much better that I felt dissatisfied with my kit. That again may be in some large part due to the acoustics of the venue, and possibly in some part to my cloth ears - not much I can do about that :) .
Hi Neil,
Frankly Dave its none of your business what he spends on what just as its none of my business what you spend on what.
What I can say and with respect you can't (and that is my point), is I have heard what this kind of gear can do (and not at shows) in known situations i.e my own system at home and I can tell you quite firmly that no matter how good you think your system is and how happy you are with it you can't even begin to imagine how good that type of system is.
Sorry, I was that engrossed in trying to respond to Marco's posts that I never even noticed your's.
My assessment of this is that the discussion between we three is getting off topic. I have never expressed any doubts about the excellence of Mr Ma's set up, rather the reverse. The closest I've come to that is to say that I'm not sure that I would have spent my money in the same way and I backed off even further when one poster advised what Mr Ma did for a living and I could see more point in his expenditure.
I have criticised, am criticising and will continue to criticise the SSPV and the abysmal flouting of the law of diminishing returns. No one needs to be a Master of Audiology to criticise expenditure on fancy hi-fi like no one needs to be a Master of Wine to criticise expenditure on wine - the laws of SSPV, diminishing returns (and the Emperor's clothes principle) apply similarly IMHO.
So let's get this straight: Mr Ma can spend his money on what he wants - no problem. Mr Ma's kit is wonderful - no problem. I am entitled to express an opinion on the SSPV aspect of that expenditure without that opinion being belittled, denigrated and exagerated into something it was not.
And with that, Good Night!!
Hi Dave,
First question: was this added by editing after first posting...
Yes, my apologies.
...'cos I didn't see it whilst I was composing my response otherwise it would have been answered thus:
The question isn't really valid or appropriate as Owston was not set up to demonstrate anybody's system at it's best.
It is perfectly valid because what I'm demonstrating is your slightly flawed perception of 'the laws of diminishing returns', by using the huge gulf in performance between what you're used to with your entry-level system at home and system's like Mr Ma's or the one you heard at Owston, to illustrate that point.
I'm sorry, Dave, but I don't buy that your "cloth ears" couldn't conclusively and undisputably detect what is likely to be, quite frankly, a massive difference when comparing your system at home to what you heard with the system I'm referring to at Owston. The huge difference in type and quality of the respective speakers alone, aside from anything else, would render that difference impossible not to detect.
Furthermore, in reference to our two Techies, to compound things further, I distinctly remember you saying that when you got home from Owston and played JMJ, one of them (I forget exactly what language you used - I'll pull it from the Owston thread later) was 'considerably better' than the other, but you wouldn't say which, so not only do we have the significant difference between the respective speakers, but also between both T/Ts - and that's even before we get to amps and phono stages!! So, come on, let's get real.
The point I'm making, aside from highlighting that your "cloth ears" are perhaps not as 'cloth-like' as you like to make out, is that 'the laws of diminishing returns' between the performance of the Owston system and yours, and even Mr Ma's system and mine, are a little different in reality to how you are calculating them.
I am entitled to express an opinion on the SSPV aspect of that expenditure...
Unfortunately, I'm afraid you're not. Allow me to remind you what 'SPPV' stands for: SOUND-per-pound value.
How can you offer an opinion on the SOUND aspect of Mr Ma's system, in order to evaluate the 'PPV' part of the equation, when you haven't heard his system???
The fact is, there is a crucial part of the 'SPPV' equation missing for it to be accurately assessed: namely, you've got no idea what his system sounds like to start with, therefore you have no basis from which to form an accurate judgement of how much 'value', in terms of sound, equates to what Mr Ma has spent - in fact you don't even know how much he has spent either, so I'm afraid, as they say, 'the game's a bogey'! :eyebrows:
I'd also like to pick up on this you wrote earlier:
Only Mr Ma can judge whether he's got an acceptable level of 'return' 'cos only he knows what he's spent...
What it boils down to is what proportion of his disposable income he's spent on it and what else he might have spent the money on. Anyone else who doesn't have that amount of disposable income, no matter how many times theyve heard it, can not judge the level of 'return'.
That rules you out completely then, so therefore why do you insist on feeling qualified to judge the level of his "return"??? :ner: ;)
Marco.
Rob Sinden
06-10-2009, 04:08
Hi Guys
Have we done with the wisdom and value of Mr Ma’s system? In some cases he seems to have had a complete slagging off simply for spending a lot of money on hifi which seems inappropriate to me.
Anyhow, what is does illustrate nicely to me is how certain most people are that their approach to audio reproduction is the correct one, or at least the one most likely to give them the results they are after.
I feel that I have raised some issues that haven’t been properly addressed yet, so I’d like to raise them again to gain a broad mix of your views.
My thoughts are that given that we’re all using pretty good kit here, the thing that will give the greatest improvement in sound quality and presumably satisfaction is trying to address the weakest link in the chain. For me as I’m sure you already have good kit, the weakest link will be the acoustics of your listening room.
Variations of more than 10db are typically created by most listening rooms, which is a huge amount. I’m sure any other component that varied this much would be regarded as faulty. Why then is my insistence that in some way, shape or form, the rooms acoustic are the thing that must be addressed if you are really serious about achieving optimal sound quality?
The two responses I have had so far are “my room is already pretty good “and that it’s not that big an issue because “I’ve matched my speakers to my room”, both of which are highly flawed arguments given that we are in pursuit of true high fidelity.
With regard to you already having a good room, you probably only regard it as good because you haven’t had the chance to hear a really good room. I have on my travels within the industry heard many excellent rooms and in my opinion these highly designed rooms make far more of a difference to sound quality that changes between similarly priced components.
My belief in the importance of the room has led me to build an (almost) money no object listening room to test and demonstrate systems in. This room sounds superb and does make it clear how much systems are typically compromised by the environments they are used in. What is interesting however is that even in this optimal room, room correction still provides significant improvements in sound quality. As such I think saying you already have a good room simply isn’t valid in the context of the levels of fidelity we are all discussing here.
With regard to matching your speakers to your room, the reason I think this argument is flawed is that the measured in room response of a system will look like a profile of the Himalayas. As I don’t think for a moment that the speakers you use will have a response like an inverted profile of these mountain I do not see how any speakers can ever be truly matched to the specific errors your room creates.
I do not see room correction as a cure all and I’m damn sure that people on this Forum are not about to rush out and start buying these systems, however I cannot see a logical argument for the fact that the room rather than the equipment used is by far the weakest link in a good quality system and as such should be the area enthusiasts spend more time and effort trying to fix. What are your thoughts?
As such wouldn’t measuring your systems in room response be a logical first step?
Hi Rob,
It was nice speaking to you on the phone yesterday :)
Your argument is valid, no doubt, but one significant thing that came out of our conversation yesterday is that you're mostly used to dealing with people who in general:
a) Don't own particularly exceptional equipment.
b) Don't have a clue how to set it up optimally, and indeed haven't, particularly in terms of where to place speakers in the room relative to the system and how to match speakers properly to their chosen amplifier.
c) And/or the above have a room which requires major acoustic treatment due to b), and the fact that they have given almost no consideration whatsoever to using the natural acoustics of their room to their advantage.
Given that, thankfully, I don't come into any of the above categories, let's see how effective your room treatment is in my system. I'll then report the results on the forum, and we'll take it forward from there. It's very easy for you to obtain excellent results from your products when you have a platform of the above conditions to work from, and in return people paying significant sums of money for your efforts. It's rather akin to taking candy from a baby.
We'll see what happens when the operating conditions you're given from the start are a little more optimised than you're used to - that'll be a *real* test for the efficacy of your room treatment methods!
Until then, all the 'tit-for-tat' from both sides is pretty much meaningless froth, because no-one here (as far as I'm aware) knows what your room treatment is capable of, and most importantly, likewise, you are in the same position with regard to both the systems and rooms of the (mostly) very experienced and knowledgeable enthusiasts here.
The fact is, Rob, we can all theorise until the cows come home. The proof of the pudding is in the listening, not (necessarily) in the measuring, simply because all that matters at the end of the day is what type of sound is preferable to the listener/potential customer, regardless of whether that sound is deemed as more 'accurate' or not by your room measurement apparatus.
*THAT* is the crux of the matter here. You cannot logically argue against this.
Unless anyone else has something further to add on the subject I suggest that we're done for now until the test has been carried out. The fact is, I have nothing to lose and everything to gain from this exercise. I'm not sure that the same could be said for you... ;)
I look forward to your visit :cool:
Marco.
Hi Marco,
If I may butt in- most of what is being discussed is "circular arguement" and in no way can the strands be judged as "you are wrong matey". Only that it will keep the circular arguement going. Joe has a point, Greg has a point so does Clive and I see nothing wrong with what DaveK is saying.
Oxygene or any other Pop/Rock record and also classical will have a limited scope for how far the sound reproduction can be (flogged) improved-surely there has to be an end to this quest for better sound. That was the point both DSJR and I were making. This judgement that the next bigger speaker in the line (such as the ATC at £26,300) will be better than say B&W 800D at £13,000-is not something I would want to get involved in.
Reminds of the man in my old South London Dealership who kept on bobbing his head and neck forward popping his eyes at me- to draw my attention that I should have said "Wow" to sound. Remember I have said this before- I was listening to a £60,000 system of CD and amplification. I heard nothing in the sound to make me show appreciation.
I am sure the supporters of the Linn Naim camp will get equally angry about my objection to the cost of that 60,000 gear. If some one thinks that is the best sounding kit in the world and pays for it-was hardly the point. Good luck to them. One of my colleagues a half Italian owns a B&W 3L sports car. He likes driving fast but also gets caught by Police and loses his licence. He is a great chap all the same. Then there are rich Landowners who drive 4 wheelers and others living in semis and terraced houses driving the same.
No one is going to walk up to them and call names.
Surely there would be people who spent far more than Mr Ma- again good luck to them.
Marco those people deserve a toast with your most expensive wine- !!Hear Hear keep the 2 channel industry going!!! DIY is DEAD
The point being that I listen to Music and NOT Hi FI.
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 08:30
The behaviour of some posters here towards our Japanese music lover remind me of the experiment where a big shiny silver dish was left in the Savannah to see what some monkeys would make of it.
Its the same primeval mechanism at work here. I was hopeful that all AOS members were at least a little more civilised than that.
The Grand Wazoo
06-10-2009, 08:31
One problem I see with your approach to us here, Rob is that many of us spend a significant proportion of our time listening to analogue sources.
So let's look at the hypothetical world you'd (I'm sure) love to see, where we all buy into your philosophy, stump up some cash and have our rooms transformed into 'perfect listening environments'.
You are making the bold statement that hi-fi doesn't work because we put it into poor environments. Are you saying that this will change our listening preferences? Given the choice of good analogue systems in a poor room or good digital systems in an optimised room, the logical conclusion of your argument is that we will all abandon our turntables & replace our vinyl with CD's.....because our analogue hi-fi doesn't work.
Sorry, I don't buy it. But as before I'd be perfectly open to be proven wrong.
You keep using this term 'accurate' - we keep asking you 'accurate to what' & I don't think that has yet been properly addressed.
The point being that I listen to Music and NOT Hi FI.
Indeed, Varun, as do others and I who are part of this discussion :)
Unfortunately, I don't have the time at the moment to go through your last (lengthy) post in detail, however this bit requires addressing:
Oxygene or any other Pop/Rock record and also classical will have a limited scope for how far the sound reproduction can be (flogged) improved-surely there has to be an end to this quest for better sound.
I completely agree! However, it is a separate issue to what I outlined earlier to Dave K. I am also in agreement with Joe, Greg (mostly, as I've said) and Clive.
Right, I'm off to do some work for a change! :eyebrows:
Marco.
P.S Given your correct assertion regarding Oxygene, and other music of its type, perhaps Dave should start using a new test record? ;)
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 08:36
Varun, that old conker hey!
The rest of us listen to test tones or the Densen de-mag disc all day lol
Hi Steve Toy,
The main issue is "point of reference" to compare a piece of music with. The answer is simple for me. Live classical music is my yardstick and master tapes for DSJR and also a realization that I can not have a live orchestra in my house.
I think that should suffice for the moment- don't you think.
Before things become any more personal- it was about time to close this thread.
Maybe now if the time to remind ourselves of how a reasonably carefully setup room measures with no room correction:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e359/cmeakins/DF.jpg
The room dimensions mean that room modes are a little worse than may be typical but having measured a few friends' systems I found that it's not that untypical.
Then we have corrected bass. I've never seen an in room response anywhere near as good as this without room correction / treatment.
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e359/cmeakins/DS.jpg
That suckout at a little over 125Hz needs sorting but such cancellations are a pig to fix.
Most timely Clive,
Return to the subject. May I please ask about your room size and if you sit in a strict equilateral position? Meaning if you changed the listening position would it also act as a bit of room correction?
PS: I am down with flu hence rather frequent involevement. I have left a number of academic discussion groups (not forums) to concentrate on my work of writing papers.
anthonyTD
06-10-2009, 09:41
hi all,
well it would seem that we have all been side tracked off the original thread by one of the main problems some people have with "how far do you go" for what as an individual you class as sufficient to acheive what you set out to do, ie; mr MA. i fear its not about the money aspect of things for this character but a true desire to build a system that he truly believes is the best he can build in order to re-produce music the way he believes it should be re-produced, whats wrong with that:confused: isnt that what we are all striving to do anyway!
lets try and get back onto the subject here guys, rob would like to demonstrate his wares so lets allow him to do so.
regards,anthony,TD...
hifi_dave
06-10-2009, 09:48
I don't know much about 'room correction' especially of the digital kind as I have never encountered the need for it, so if I'm wrong, I'm certain someone will correct me.:eyebrows:
I believe the room correction gizmo acts like an electronic graphic equalizer and reduces the amplitude of room resonances and/or boosts frequencies which are down in level. This provides a flatter frequency response but cannot make up for the inadequacies of a poor system. So a naff system will still sound naff but flatter. I believe.:scratch:
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 09:49
Points of reference - all music should reveal more of itself in a better system. Systems that are tailored towards a particular music genre are likely to give that genre the least justice.
Tailoring is nothing more than caricaturing which is hardly going to make for a horizon-broadening listening experience.
If you wish to test a system a variety of music should be used that includes both the familiar and unfamiliar as well as recordings of music that you have previously struggled to follow. If challenging music makes more sense then the system is doing something right.
If the system makes you tap your feet or get up and dance, make your hairs stand up or put a jump in your throat (depending on type of music of course) it is doing something right.
If the system keeps you up all night spinning disc after disc of different genres it is doing something right.
If you find yourself listening through whole tracks without skipping to the next track as you would have done previously the system is doing something right.
Good hi-fi stirs the passions. It does not just tick boxes.
Most timely Clive,
Return to the subject. May I please ask about your room size and if you sit in a strict equilateral position? Meaning if you changed the listening position would it also act as a bit of room correction?
Hi Varun,
My room is 15ft wide, 18ft long, 7ft 3ins high. It's in my cellar, hence the low height. The problems with this room are that the height is close to half the width which means that the room modes for these dimensions will double up at some points.
The centres of the speakers are 100 ins apart, my ears are 104 ins from the drivers - so close to equilateral. Yes the bass levels vary if I move forwards / backwards, indeed I move listening position depending on mood.
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 09:55
Dave, I agree with your above post. I fear that Rob is putting all of his eggs in one basket with his approach. Holism is the key.
I don't know much about 'room correction' especially of the digital kind as I have never encountered the need for it, so if I'm wrong, I'm certain someone will correct me.:eyebrows:
I believe the room correction gizmo acts like an electronic graphic equalizer and reduces the amplitude of room resonances and/or boosts frequencies which are down in level. This provides a flatter frequency response but cannot make up for the inadequacies of a poor system. So a naff system will still sound naff but flatter. I believe.:scratch:
Dave,
I use a parametric equalizer implemented with DSP which is a sophisticated graphic equalizer, it's much more tailorable.
If you came across a room with a 10db to 15db peak, which means that some albums sound atrocious you could use bandwidth limited speakers or change speaker and listening positions etc but in the end laws of physics dictate the occurrence of room modes. These can be ameliorated by the use of soft furnishings, bass traps, DSP etc once the best speaker / listening position is found. But you know this and I'm sure you do most of this when setting up systems and rooms. DSP simply takes such setup a step futher. It's not perfect and it has to be used in conjunction with good setup in the first place.
Yes, DSP can control peaks, suckouts are much harder as these are cancellations, 2 x zero is still zero so doubling power where you have a suckout isn't helpful. Speaker positioning is the better tool for suckouts.
Edit: one thing I'd like to clarify, I'm not pushing room correction for the mid-range, just the bass. But I do want to hear Rob's system....however it I expect it will differ a lot from my SET mid-range.
hifi_dave
06-10-2009, 10:04
Dave, I agree with your above post. I fear that Rob is putting all of his eggs in one basket with his approach. Holism is the key.
Oh good, I'm glad I wasn't talking complete cobblers.
Very good sized room Clive- I would say ideal in a way to accommodate large speakers as you have done.
The width I would say is crucial here- please see my posting in the "BASS REPRODUCTION" thread about Alvin Gold's room dimension. I would love to have a room like yours as a dedicated listening room.
The point I was making Steve (Toy) that I rarely think of upgrades now-I was forced to make a change as after moving here to L'pool I found the Slingshot was too tight in length- risk of accidental damage. That was the reason I joined-normally I may come across discussions on forums but stay well clear.
I have benefited from joining the forum and Mike Homar in particular has been a tremendous help.
Can I please be counted out on all these discussions relating to someones Hi FI equipement. Much misunderstanding and confusion has already occured and now I see personal insults being pelted out.
Hi Dave,
I'd also like to pick up on this you wrote earlier: .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..............................
That rules you out completely then, so therefore why do you insist on feeling qualified to judge the level of his "return"??? :ner: ;)
Marco.
Hi Marco,
I do concede that at first glance I appeared to have argued myself into a cul-de-sac with that one, but only at first glance :) . It doesn't really alter the gist of my argument, which is, IMHO, the sort of expenditure that we are talking about cannot possibly comply with the law of diminishing returns - it's not a question of knowledge or experience it's a matter of common sense IMHO.
You complained earlier about me not answering your (missing :scratch: ) question - what about you answering mine regarding qualifications necessary before being able to offer an opinion on any subject?
Anyway, to repeat: -
I think this exchange would be better if it were closed 'cos we are both firm in our opinions and unlikely to 'convert' each other.
You may answer this or not, as you see fit, but I for one will post no more on the subject for the reason stated above (unless I get another demeaning and belittling response) - I defer to Rob and his thread subject, but I suspect he's gonna have as hard a job as I in converting you to his point of view.
Cheers,
HighFidelityGuy
06-10-2009, 10:57
One problem I see with your approach to us here, Rob is that many of us spend a significant proportion of our time listening to analogue sources.
So let's look at the hypothetical world you'd (I'm sure) love to see, where we all buy into your philosophy, stump up some cash and have our rooms transformed into 'perfect listening environments'.
You are making the bold statement that Hi-Fi doesn't work because we put it into poor environments. Are you saying that this will change our listening preferences? Given the choice of good analogue systems in a poor room or good digital systems in an optimised room, the logical conclusion of your argument is that we will all abandon our turntables & replace our vinyl with CD's.....because our analogue Hi-Fi doesn't work.
Sorry, I don't buy it. But as before I'd be perfectly open to be proven wrong.
You keep using this term 'accurate' - we keep asking you 'accurate to what' & I don't think that has yet been properly addressed.
A little rant will follow, this isn't aimed entirely at you Chris. :)
I don't believe Rob has said anywhere that he thinks his digital sources are better than analogue sources from a musicality point of view. He just said that his systems use digital throughout because it provides a lower noise floor and makes system optimization and room correction easier. There is no reason why room treatment and correction can't be used in a system that has an analogue source, or valve amps, or any type of speaker available. There's also no reason why it wouldn't be possible to build a system that sounds more musical (or whatever) than Rob's top end system by changing some of the components for better ones. It sounds like Rob mainly supplies complete systems to people that want (and can afford) a system to be supplied and installed with the minimal effort on their part that sounds very good. We're talking very busy entrepreneurs and such like that don't have time to spend hundreds of hours researching, testing and fine tuning their Hi-Fi. They just want a very good sounding system fast.
I can understand that many of us are much more interested in the research, testing and tuning stages and have time to do this. Therefore we are likely to look down on someone who has no interest in these areas and think things like "If I had as much money as them I'd build a much better system". I'm sure you could and that's fair enough but it's irrelevant.
Rob has not come here to say his sources, amps, speakers etc are better than anybody else's. He hasn't claimed that at any point other than to say they work well in his systems and make his customers happy. Rob came here to talk about room treatment and more specifically room correction in general. As I've already said, these principals can be applied to any room and any Hi-Fi or home cinema system. I don't see how anyone can say that they know that their system will sound worse with these principles applied until they have heard it for themselves in their system, in their room.
I'm sure that some people will think the changes are beneficial, while others will dislike them. Everyones ears are different and just because a graph says the system sounds better doesn't mean the owner of said system will agree. However you won't know until you try and I simply can't understand why anyone would completely dismiss a product that could improve their system without trying it first. :scratch:
Also, there seems to be a lot of animosity due to the fact that Rob's systems are quite expensive and Mr Ma has spent a lot on his system. I understand that we're in a recession and so seeing people buying or selling expensive gear can be depressing. However, I would imagine that a large portion of Rob's fee is for installation and setup costs. There are cheaper room treatment and correction products that are available. So there's plenty of scope for DIY in this area, just as there is in other areas of Hi-Fi. So this shouldn't be seen as something that only people with more money than sense buy. It should simply be seen as another tool that's available in the creation of your Hi-Fi or home cinema system.
Rob is just trying to bring the availability of these products to our attention and demonstrate that they can provide an improvement. He's not trying to steal our wives. ;)
I don't think. :eek:
anthonyTD
06-10-2009, 11:04
Very good sized room Clive- I would say ideal in a way to accommodate large speakers as you have done.
The width I would say is crucial here- please see my posting in the "BASS REPRODUCTION" thread about Alvin Gold's room dimension. I would love to have a room like yours as a dedicated listening room.
The point I was making Steve (Toy) that I rarely think of upgrades now-I was forced to make a change as after moving here to L'pool I found the Slingshot was too tight in length- risk of accidental damage. That was the reason I joined-normally I may come across discussions on forums but stay well clear.
I have benefited from joining the forum and Mike Homar in particular has been a tremendous help.
Can I please be counted out on all these discussions relating to someones Hi FI equipement. Much misunderstanding and confusion has already occured and now I see personal insults being pelted out.
hi varun,
personal insults do not and will not be tolerated here on AOS, so if you feel you have been the subject of such,,, then i for one would like to assure you that it was not the intention of the forum as a whole, i must admit that discusions regularly get heated here, and it gets real close to the bone sometimes, :eyebrows:but the day this forum allows its members the right to undermine or deliberately "bully" others into submision with their one sided take on a discusion is the day i for one will walk away!:(
regards,anthony,TD...
The Grand Wazoo
06-10-2009, 11:17
Dave (Hi-fi Guy),
Understood that what you say is addressed at others as well as me, but in response.....
I don't have a problem with the cost of anything - if someone chooses to justify a higher (or lower) budget on what is (let's face it) a luxury item than me, then that is entirely their decision. Like everyone else I have my own view on where the line comes between cost and value - this line is different for everyone depending on their own perpective.
Physical treatment of a room is one thing that we can all understand and play with as we see fit - it works for analogue & digital sytems.
What is being proposed as a means of making my 'hi-fi work properly' requires my analogue sources to be digitised. To me, that would be a step too far. I have a fundamental problem with digital music, though I do use it to a certain degree & have invested in a relatively expensive CD player.
I'll say again what I said earlier - Rob may have missed the post because it appeared at the end of a page while there were severl people posting (or he may have something better to do with his time).
You are making the bold statement that Hi-Fi doesn't work because we put it into poor environments. Are you saying that this will change our listening preferences? Given the choice of good analogue systems in a poor room or good digital systems in an optimised room, the logical conclusion of your argument is that we will all abandon our turntables & replace our vinyl with CD's.....because our analogue Hi-Fi doesn't work.
And this question still stands:
You keep using this term 'accurate' - we keep asking you 'accurate to what' & I don't think that has yet been properly addressed.
anthonyTD
06-10-2009, 11:21
Dave (Hi-fi Guy),
Understood that what you say is addressed at others as well as me, but in response.....
I don't have a problem with the cost of anything - if someone chooses to justify a higher (or lower) budget on what is (let's face it) a luxury item than me, then that is entirely their decision. Like everyone else I have my own view on where the line comes between cost and value - this line is different for everyone depending on their own perpective.
Physical treatment of a room is one thing that we can all understand and play with as we see fit - it works for analogue & digital sytems.
What is being proposed as a means of making my 'hi-fi work properly' requires my analogue sources to be digitised. To me, that would be a step too far. I have a fundamental problem with digital music, though I do use it to a certain degree & have invested in a relatively expensive CD player.
I'll say again what I said earlier - Rob may have missed the post because it appeared at the end of a page while there were severl people posting (or he may have something better to do with his time).
And this question still stands:
from what i gather there are systems where the correction gets done between the main prea-amp and power amp, if thats the case then it dosent realy matter what source technology your using.
A...
hi varun,
personal insults do not and will not be tolerated here on AOS, so if you feel you have been the subject of such,,, then i for one would like to assure you that it was not the intention of the forum as a whole, i must admit that discusions regularly get heated here, and it gets real close to the bone sometimes, :eyebrows:but the day this forum allows its members the right to undermine or deliberately "bully" others into submision with their one sided take on a discusion is the day i for one will walk away!:(
regards,anthony,TD...
Spot on, Anthony. To my knowledge, there have been no "personal insults" exchanged here, and if there are any they will be removed. Perhaps Varun could highlight where he feels the personal insults have occurred? There's a world of difference between heated debate and invective.
Anyway, I'm busy just now and will add further to the recent posts later.
Marco.
Many thanks Anthony,
I am used to extremely heated debates on academic discussion groups to which you can only join if approved by the moderators. I have left most of them mainly to protect my time. which I consider precious-the older I get.
I spend a lot of time writing papers- and at the moment have had a number of them rejected because of prevailing biases against South Asia anthropology and archaeology and hence Ancient History (My overdriving interest-hobby) althugh I write papers in my medicine related field as well- in fact should be finishing one off for submission. I am in close touch with leading figures in these fields- mostly American Professors.
As I scientifically minded person I must ask the question: How did you reach that conclusion or decision? I am afraid a lot of what is written in Hi Fi magazines falls well short of some of the minimum requirements for an adequate answer. The problem is that raising such a question with 'hobbyists' is taken as a personal threat to their identity.
There are some very knowledgeable people on this forum and I would single out DSJR as one. We often have diametrically opposed views but even then I respect his experience and knowledge enormously-which I do not have and so can not challenge it.
The Grand Wazoo
06-10-2009, 11:36
........ if thats the case then it dosent realy matter what source technology your using.
A...
Well, it doesn't really matter as long as that 'correction' doesn't involve A to D converters & the consequent ejection of the newborn with the personal hygiene solution.
HighFidelityGuy
06-10-2009, 11:39
Dave (Hi-fi Guy),
Understood that what you say is addressed at others as well as me, but in response.....
I don't have a problem with the cost of anything - if someone chooses to justify a higher (or lower) budget on what is (let's face it) a luxury item than me, then that is entirely their decision. Like everyone else I have my own view on where the line comes between cost and value - this line is different for everyone depending on their own perpective.
Physical treatment of a room is one thing that we can all understand and play with as we see fit - it works for analogue & digital sytems.
What is being proposed as a means of making my 'hi-fi work properly' requires my analogue sources to be digitised. To me, that would be a step too far. I have a fundamental problem with digital music, though I do use it to a certain degree & have invested in a relatively expensive CD player.
I'll say again what I said earlier - Rob may have missed the post because it appeared at the end of a page while there were severl people posting (or he may have something better to do with his time).
And this question still stands: You keep using this term 'accurate' - we keep asking you 'accurate to what' & I don't think that has yet been properly addressed.
from what i gather there are systems where the correction gets done between the main prea-amp and power amp, if thats the case then it dosent realy matter what source technology your using.
A...
I think Chris understands that the correction can be done with any system, he mainly doesn't like the idea of digitizing the signal from his analogue source as he feels subtleties will be lost in the sampling process. I can fully understand this and this is something I would be worried about. However, I don't think you should dismiss something until you have tried it as the benefits may outweigh the down sides. Of course they may not but at least you'll know for sure. :)
Chris, hopefully Rob will answer your question but to give you an idea, the aim of room correction is usually to achieve a flat frequency response. However, you don't have to use it for that. You can use it to achieve a frequency response that sounds good to you. :)
Hi Marco,
Do not mind insults - who on earth am I -I have to ask. In Buddha's philosophy (I am not a Buddhist) 'Ego' or I 'self' is the root cause of all problems.
I suggest we drop this subject all together. No purpose making it drag on and rturn to 'room' correction. Clive has done the right thing to shift the focus.
Anyway-your room Marco is like Clive's room isn't it?
I would say one thing though-email or online communication has a huge potential of being misinterpreted. This is what we have seen
anthonyTD
06-10-2009, 11:45
Many thanks Anthony,
I am used to extremely heated debates on academic discussion groups to which you can only join if approved by the moderators. I have left most of them mainly to protect my time. which I consider precious-the older I get.
I spend a lot of time writing papers- and at the moment have had a number of them rejected because of prevailing biases against South Asia anthropology and archaeology and hence Ancient History (My overdriving interest-hobby) althugh I write papers in my medicine related field as well- in fact should be finishing one off for submission. I am in close touch with leading figures in these fields- mostly American Professors.
As I scientifically minded person I must ask the question: How did you reach that conclusion or decision? I am afraid a lot of what is written in Hi Fi magazines falls well short of some of the minimum requirements for an adequate answer. The problem is that raising such a question with 'hobbyists' is taken as a personal threat to their identity.
There are some very knowledgeable people on this forum and I would single out DSJR as one. We often have diametrically opposed views but even then I respect his experience and knowledge enormously-which I do not have and so can not challenge it.
hi varum,
thats one of the great things about a good forum like this one, there are a lot of very knowlegable and helpfull people here, and most are here for just that, " to help" and i am sure in your chosen profesion you will be all too familier with people chalenging your expertise, which by the way sounds very interesting indeed!
regards,anthony,TD...
[Blush]
When I owned my ATC100A's, they were in a room far too small for them - 10' by around 12 - 13' as I recall. In the listening seat there was a large response peak at 125Kz, which ATC's calibration plots of these speakers (when made and re-tested a couple of years later) didn't show, so it had to be the room.
I bought a JVC 10 band equaliser, but almost had to use it in secret, as the "verbals" I got from my "HiFi" mates was incredible. I was able to play King crimson's "Thrack" with some semblance of the RAH concert I attended in '94 with some degree of realism though (well down 125Hz and a slow rise below 60Hz to 10db up at 20 - 30Hz) :)
Interestingly, sitting a little further back and to one side, this bass node wasn't there at all and I remember sitting in this position a lot to listen, whisky or wine in hand, the inhibitions flowing away.....
Today in my lunch break at home, I'm playing Siousxie's JuJu. not as loud as I'd like, but I can easily hear into the mix and I'm sure I'm noticing things in the musicianship (which is very good IMO) and "layering" of the music mix I'd not given full notice of before. Wonderful stuff for me anyway.
Varun, I missed the bit about "Oxygene," but "accurate and enjoyable" of electronic instruments like synths is a matter all it's own. It's still important to be able to dip in and out of a mix without too much effort and the one thing about JMJ is that he was able to layer the musical strands and sounds with ease. The second side of "Equinox" is still something that needs a big system with proper BASS EXTENSION to do it full justice..
Hi Dave,
Rob has not come here to say his sources, amps, speakers etc are better than anybody else's. He hasn't claimed that at any point other than to say they work well in his systems and make his customers happy. Rob came here to talk about room treatment and more specifically room correction in general. As I've already said, these principals can be applied to any room and any Hi-Fi or home cinema system. I don't see how anyone can say that they know that their system will sound worse with these principles applied until they have heard it for themselves in their system, in their room.
That's precisely why I've invited Rob round to my place, so can we just see what happens there before we get any further enrenched in the efficacy of not of his room treatment? :)
Cheers! :cool:
Marco.
HighFidelityGuy
06-10-2009, 11:52
Well, it doesn't really matter as long as that 'correction' doesn't involve A to D converters & the consequent ejection of the newborn with the personal hygiene solution.
I guessed this was your concern. :) Unfortunately all proper room correction has to be done in the digital domain, so if you have an analogue source then ADC will be required and this will inevitably cause some subtleties to be lost. :(
As I said though, you may find the room correction improves the sound of your system so much that you don't notice the slight loss of detail. Also, all good DSP system will use very high end ADC's and DAC's that are at least 24bit 96KHz. So any losses will be extremely minimal. So I would have though it's still worth a try, especially if you can get a free demonstration by borrowing some kit. :)
The Grand Wazoo
06-10-2009, 11:54
I think Chris understands that the correction can be done with any system, he mainly doesn't like the idea of digitizing the signal from his analogue source as he feels subtleties will be lost in the sampling process. I can fully understand this and this is something I would be worried about.
You nailed it Dave!
However, I don't think you should dismiss something until you have tried it as the benefits may outweigh the down sides. Of course they may not but at least you'll know for sure.
I dismiss nothing - I haven't been able to do that since I proved to myself the differences that can be made to a complex audio system by simply changing a single resistor for another of the same value.
Chris, hopefully Rob will answer your question but to give you an idea, the aim of room correction is usually to achieve a flat frequency response. However, you don't have to use it for that. You can use it to achieve a frequency response that sounds good to you.
The aim is understood but the value of it is not, because of all of the previously cited examples of room influence on the source recording. Hence my question 'accurate to what?'
HighFidelityGuy
06-10-2009, 12:00
It sounds like we're all singing from the same hymn sheet then, which is excellent. I look forward to hearing about Marco's experience with this. It should prove interesting. :)
Has a date been set for the demo yet?
hi varum,
thats one of the great things about a good forum like this one, ......... your chosen profesion you will be all too familier with people chalenging your expertise, which by the way sounds very interesting indeed!
regards,anthony,TD...
Hi Anthony,
Of course-but the issues are easily handled.. by scientific evidence.. if not no contest as in a meeting one is not supposed to say "Because I think so". As a seniour member of the unit here- I encourage the juniours to be able to question-challenge but not fight-absolutely no need for it. I can assure you I can be very hard on 'fluff' in academic meetings-but outside the meeting room we are all friends.
As for personalities clashing- it is well known that two experts in a field would often not speak to each other..no science in it -all EGO.
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 12:11
Dave it is not about fixed entrenched points of view. It is about learning.
If Rob goes to Marco's they will both learn something that could quite probably result in
a) Marco hearing even more musical info through his system
and
b) Rob seeing DSP for what it is - one of a number of useful tools in extracting more music from a disc.
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 12:14
hi varun,
personal insults do not and will not be tolerated here on AOS, so if you feel you have been the subject of such,,, then i for one would like to assure you that it was not the intention of the forum as a whole, i must admit that discusions regularly get heated here, and it gets real close to the bone sometimes, :eyebrows:but the day this forum allows its members the right to undermine or deliberately "bully" others into submision with their one sided take on a discusion is the day i for one will walk away!:(
regards,anthony,TD...
It hasn't happened yet Anthony and the admin/mod team are here to ensure it doesn't happen. You are empowered too in this capacity.
I think some folks do confuse heated debate and getting personal. They are too different things. Nobody has got personal as of yet.
[Blush]
When I owned my ATC100A's, they were in a room far too small for them - 10' by around 12 - 13' as I recall. In the listening seat there was a large response peak at 125Kz, which ATC's calibration plots of these speakers (when made and re-tested a couple of years later) didn't show, so it had to be the room.
.....Varun, I missed the bit about "Oxygene," but "accurate and enjoyable" of electronic instruments like synths is a matter all it's own. It's still important to be able to dip in and out of a mix without too much effort and the one thing about JMJ is that he was able to layer the musical strands and sounds with ease. The second side of "Equinox" is still something that needs a big system with proper BASS EXTENSION to do it full justice..
Hi Dave,
Of course that will be so-Oxegene was only listed because Marco had mentioned it. I started off with Kraftwerk and Yes and such like but music tastes have moved in a different direction. In this context- I keep my opinions to myself and discuss them with friends who listen to similar music. Jazz was a very late acquired taste and has grown on me. For instance one of my surgeon friends in NZ was Jazz fanatic and then my friend here in Devon a classical man with huge fund of knowledge. I discuss different things with each of them. Always to learn and get new ideas. My son and daughter both have different likings and their tastes will change no doubt as they get older. Natural progression is the normal way.
Hi Varun,
Hi Marco,
Do not mind insults - who on earth am I -I have to ask. In Buddha's philosophy (I am not a Buddhist) 'Ego' or I 'self' is the root cause of all problems.
I suggest we drop this subject all together. No purpose making it drag on and rturn to 'room' correction. Clive has done the right thing to shift the focus.
Anyway-your room Marco is like Clive's room isn't it?
I would say one thing though-email or online communication has a huge potential of being misinterpreted. This is what we have seen
First of all, we're all big boys here and thick-skinned enough to be able to take part in robust debate without mistaking the most robust parts of it for "personal insults". I understand where you were coming from, but I've seen this sort of accusation wrongly applied before in heated, but perfectly polite, discussions. It's somewhat a bugbear of mine because it stifles the valid exchange of information, so let's leave it at that for everyone's sake (as you have correctly done) and move on :)
To answer your question, which I've highlighted, no, Clive's room is very different from mine, certainly in terms of structure and shape. I don't have a bay window (a crucial difference), for starters. What made you think they were similar?
Clive up until recently (with his DSP experiments) had significant problems with bass in his room, which of course he has now corrected. I've never had such problems in my room, so it's debatable whether any form of DSP would have the same overall positive effect. Clive's graphs, although very nice to look at, are therefore meaningless in the context of my room and system.
Like I said, though, we'll soon see what happens when Rob comes round!
The fact is, if he is able to successfully demonstrate that my system can unquestionably and fundamentally be improved (using my subjective judgement criteria for analysis), without adversely affecting the musical presentation I value from my system, from the effect of plugging one of his 'boxes' in-line with my preamp, then I'll buy said 'box' from him - no question. It would otherwise be ludicrous not to.
However, if the opposite happens, then at least I can say I've tried it but unfortunately it was ineffectual in my circumstances. It's all to do with learning experiences. Believe it or not, I have the gumption to admit when I'm wrong as well as profess when I think I'm right.
Therefore I remain as open-minded about this as ever. We'll see what happens. I'll say it again one last time - the proof of the pudding is in the listening, *nothing else*... :cool:
Marco.
Only dimensions Marco
I was talking about- length and width. I know your room is asymmetrical.
I was talking about- length and width.
Yes, Varun, but those aren't the only parameters/dimensions to take into consideration.
You are not comparing like with like.
Of course-but the issues are easily handled.. by scientific evidence...
The problem is that audio is a much more subjective beast than the specialties you deal with in your working environment. Therefore, solely "scientific evidence" is rarely enough to settle an argument/debate in relation to 'hi-fi', simply because not everything that needs to be measured can currently be measured - i.e. there are things we can genuinely hear with audio but yet not 'prove' scientifically. In life, as well as with audio, things are not always black or white.
Marco.
As for personal insults- I did not say it was aimed at me- but at some one. I do not wish to offer examples but the tone .. I meant.. hardly exchange of useful information. There was another example of some one calling Decca collectors "Apeshit".
Not really a civilized manner of conversation.. but then some one having raised this attribute already.. and you know. It does not matter who is the focus but I do believe and you may say 'mind your business' that that Mr Ma scenario should have been axed long time ago.
NO REPLY REQUIRED- PLEASE
Hi Varun (and this also applies to Dave K),
You both use the tactic of attempting to get the last word in by ending posts stating that there is no need to reply.
What makes you think you have a right to the last word on any given subject?
I'll decide whether there is a further need to reply to something I consider relevant or not, no-one else.
However, on this occasion I'll respect your wishes (and those of Dave K earlier), but please don't use this tactic again.
Cheers! :)
Marco.
Getting back to the thread topic...
Dave (HFG),
I think Chris understands that the correction can be done with any system, he mainly doesn't like the idea of digitizing the signal from his analogue source as he feels subtleties will be lost in the sampling process. I can fully understand this and this is something I would be worried about.
I'm also completely with Chris, and share his above concerns. However, like you correctly say, the overall benefits may outweigh any slight negatives.
I await to be educated accordingly :)
Marco.
HighFidelityGuy
06-10-2009, 13:57
Hi Marco,
That's definitely a very valid concern as obviously anything that you add into the signal path will have a negative affect to some degree. Whether or not the benefits outweigh the negatives will always be dependant on each individual system, the room it's in and the requirements of the listener. It's not something that will work for everyone.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts after the demonstration. I certainly think it will be an interesting challenge for Rob based on your particular room and system, as it sounds like your not his typical type of customer. I'm sure you'll both learn a lot. :)
Hi Dave,
I certainly think it will be an interesting challenge for Rob based on your particular room and system, as it sounds like your not his typical type of customer. I'm sure you'll both learn a lot.
I'm sure we will, if Rob comes - he's gone distinctly quiet on the matter... You're right, too, I'm most certainly not his typical type of customer; nor do I have the typical type of system or room he's used to dealing with ;)
However, challenges are all part of the spice of life, eh? :)
Marco.
Chippy_boy
06-10-2009, 15:02
The problem with Rob's argument is that it assumes that flat frequecy response = better, period.
But this is not necessarily the case. There are many factors that contribute to how realistic a hifi can sound, but the flatness of the frequency response curve is only one of them, and imho its less important that some other attributes.
Some of the best sound I have ever heard comes from small speakers with pitifully rolled off bass response that would fail miserably from the point of view of linearity of response.
The problem with Rob's argument is that it assumes that flat frequecy response = better, period.
But this is not necessarily the case. There are many factors that contribute to how realistic a hifi can sound, but the flatness of the frequency response curve is only one of them, and imho its less important that some other attributes.
Some of the best sound I have ever heard comes from small speakers with pitifully rolled off bass response that would fail miserably from the point of view of linearity of response.
Often removing a lot of bass does give a fabulous mid but cleaning up the bass can do this too. I don't want to digitize my mid-range so I just use room correction on the bass but this does require a speaker setup that uses a bass amplifier - Marco's Tannoys can't be operated this way, I fear that what he'll loose in the mid-range will be too obvious.
anthonyTD
06-10-2009, 15:24
The problem with Rob's argument is that it assumes that flat frequecy response = better, period.
But this is not necessarily the case. There are many factors that contribute to how realistic a hifi can sound, but the flatness of the frequency response curve is only one of them, and imho its less important that some other attributes.
Some of the best sound I have ever heard comes from small speakers with pitifully rolled off bass response that would fail miserably from the point of view of linearity of response.
very good points!:)
A...
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 15:39
A flat response for both components and speaker/room interaction seems to be the holy grail for all round-earthers/objectivists.
I agree that it certainly helps in pursuit of faithful-to-the-source reproduction but it is not the be-all-and-end-all by any means.
Richard Dunn once said (and I have a lot of respect for the guy as an audio designer) that he has three power amplifiers that all measure identically but have different size of power supplies. They sound different.
The pursuit of excellence in audio is mainly about increasing resolution and this is achieved by increasing dynamic contrast to give both smaller, more subtle info i.e. inflection in voices and instruments, the varying intensity with which notes or percussion instruments are struck giving us the sense of rhythmic pattern as well as sheer out-and-out thwack from, say, kick-drums, snares and the grunt for bass guitar etc. A flat response is not what gives us the necessary dynamic capability to make the recorded series of sometimes quite dramatic events really come to life and be perceived as real music.
For that you need fast rise times, a low noise floor and bloody good power supplies at all stages of the audio reproduction chain.
I have begun to realise in recent months though that life-like dynamics is too much for certain folk. For them a more pipe n' slippers presentation is what they crave for or they'll be needing a lie down afterwards... :lol:
I am beginning to think one or two of the pipe n' slippers brigade are right here under our noses.
I currently use digital room correction, but I also want to dabble with some passive treatments............your advice would be great.
With thanks in advance.
Steve Toy
06-10-2009, 15:50
Do you want balls or pipe n' slippers though?
Oh and while we're at it can you pop over to the welcome area and make yourself known. :) We generally prefer folks to come in through the front door ;)
Indeed.
Steve (68), please use the existing theads in the Welcome area as a template for what is required - basic location details and an outline of your current system would be a good start :)
Marco.
Do you want balls or pipe n' slippers though?
Both, as appropriate to the music.
The aim is understood but the value of it is not, because of all of the previously cited examples of room influence on the source recording. Hence my question 'accurate to what?'
i started writing a post on this very subject t'other day, but got distracted and never finished it. But the nub of it was, if subjectivism rules, then each individual can be the only judge of what 'works' for them, and attempts at 'accuracy' are somewhat beside the point. if I put together a system that's very accurate, but which I find uninteresting, I'll end up doing something other than listening to music.
Moreover, saying that someone 'must acknowledge' that system A is better than system B is just plain daft.
HighFidelityGuy
06-10-2009, 19:12
I've just been reading up on some of the room correction solutions Rob sells and I noticed that the Rives Audio PARC products are fully analogue in their signal processing. So I'd like to retract my previous statement about all room correction being digital. I didn't realise anyone still made high end analogue EQ's any more. The downside seems to be that these units only have 3 bands of EQ per channel which seems quite limiting to me for their price but I'm sure they work well.
i started writing a post on this very subject t'other day, but got distracted and never finished it. But the nub of it was, if subjectivism rules, then each individual can be the only judge of what 'works' for them, and attempts at 'accuracy' are somewhat beside the point. if I put together a system that's very accurate, but which I find uninteresting, I'll end up doing something other than listening to music.
Moreover, saying that someone 'must acknowledge' that system A is better than system B is just plain daft.
Bingo! Absolutely! I think you've got that completely right. Most of this discussion is quite alot of bollocks really. The subjectivity of the topic in relation to the needs of the idividual in their personal setting is what counts. Regardless of other opinion, what works for the individual is right for them. Clearly all the options on the choice of kit and then how to tune beit the DIY approach favoured by me, the expensive constant component swapping that goes on over the counter for others or the attention to room furnishings or even Rob's solutions can be all part of the mix. Regardless, when you sit down, spin a disc, all that matters is that you feel satisfied with your sound.
There is no clear answer to all this particularly as live music always sounds different depending on the venue it is played in. At home their is a constant to measure by and if you've worked to get that constant as good as possible for you and you are happy, what more is there to it?
Joe, where abouts in Bristol are you? PM me if you're interested in hooking up.
Regards,
Greg
I just read Joe's post and was about to reply and spotted that Greg had said it for me! http://www.theartofsound.net/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif
It's interesting that Rob Sinden hasn't reappeared since this morning... Perhaps he's just been busy? :scratch:
Also Steve 68 has yet to start a thread in the Welcome room despite being politely asked to do so.
We suspect that Steve is in some way connected to Rob and has been sent here by him to 'defend' the benefits of room correction in a rather dubious manner. If you examine Steve's posts to date there's a definite whiff of a shill about them.
We sincerely hope we're wrong about this and are waiting for Rob (and Steve) to clarify.
Marco.
Greg
I agree with everything you have said and Joe.
What is so important is the DIY meets we have allow folks to hear others kit and evaluate there kit and change it for no money eg DTB and Phil, building and being in total control of their amps and speakers and the insight they have about changing the sound of a valve amp-speaker combo.
On the other hand Magazines form doubts about ones hearing and upgraditis takes over I suppose its their job to make you feel insecure.
But if you have no insight into how simple it is to build and cant use a soldering iron or saw Forums like this one, are they any other, are a God send by allowing the trusted trade to be part of it.
So what I'm saying is there are 'debates' on HI-fi Forums we dont get on DIY Forums beause we are too busy, I find them entertaining but they tell me more about the posters than the subject and as someone said they are only words ontinternet:lol:
Dont let your guard down!!
And to add I knew the insallation and room designer for Mark Levinson in Chicago and that was in the 80's I was with him when he spent £4000.00+SHIPPING on Quad speakers more than my mortgage at the time.
.
.
Rob Sinden
07-10-2009, 08:27
Hi All
I’ve wasn’t posting yesterday as I was in London seeing more people with lots of money. Bastards! And yes you are right this is exactly my sort of typical customer and fortunately there seems to be lots of them about right now – let’s hope it’s a sign that the economy is on the bounce…
Anyhow, I think we may be in danger of flogging a dead horse on this subject. Now it’s time to put it to the test.
From the sort of systems most of you own, I never expected you guys to use Lyngdorf Room Correction products. If I had an analogue system with valves etc. or was using legacy products I’m sure I wouldn’t add something like this in the chain either.
I’ve enjoyed getting your different points of view on this subject and arguing mine. I still believe that the weakest link in most good audio systems is the room which is why I’ve built an exceptional listening room to show what a difference can be achieved when the same care is taken with the space as the equipment used.
I hope if anyone is interested in hearing the room as much as the systems we sell they’ll get in touch for a visit. I might typically sell really expensive systems but this is also my hobby and I like sharing it with anyone who has a love of music or film.
If you want to stay analogue then there are other devices that you could use (which I don’t sell) like this from Rives which you may find interesting. http://www.rivesaudio.com/PARC/PARCframe.html
I am unlikely to have too much time to put into Forums for a while as work has gotten really busy but I remember reading a report in a pro magazine years ago where they tested 3 different types of EQ devices in a studio on top quality monitors with 3 recording engineers as judges. The result was that every system was judged better that the system without the EQ.
I do intend to go and see Marco sometime but the product I would need to take is something I don’t stock so I’ll have to try and borrow. That combined with the 4/5 hour drive will mean it’ll have to wait until things calm down here. Hopefully he might be able to come here one day on his travels around the country.
If anyone is closer to me in Newbury or in the South East then we can arrange a home dem anytime which I’m sure would make for an interesting thread on the Forum. Please give me a call if you are up for it. I want to do this but presently time is scarce.
One thing I would like to repeat is that room correction does something very different in every room and so if you are looking to judge it’s affects it is much better to listen somewhere where it can be heard in several different systems and acoustic spaces.
Here we have 6 systems with room correction on in 4 different spaces which I think would make a judgement call as to its effectiveness much more valid.
Enjoy your music.
Rob
Hi Rob,
I do intend to go and see Marco sometime but the product I would need to take is something I don’t stock so I’ll have to try and borrow. That combined with the 4/5 hour drive will mean it’ll have to wait until things calm down here. Hopefully he might be able to come here one day on his travels around the country.
Thanks for the update. Please do let me know when you can pop up with said necessary 'product' because if it works (as I want it to) you'll have an easy sale! So keep in touch :)
Btw, is 'Steve68' a friend or colleague of yours?
Once you've visited me, I will reciprocate and pop down to your place where I'm sure I'll find the experience both illuminating and educational. Quite simply, as you will appreciate, I must hear the effect of room treatment first in my own system to see if it's something that would interest me further.
I wish you all the best and hope you continue raking it in - I have no problem whatsoever with people making lots of money; I'm familiar with this concept myself as a fellow businessman ;)
Laters,
Marco.
Hi Will,
But if you have no insight into how simple it is to build and cant use a soldering iron or saw Forums like this one, are they any other, are a God send by allowing the trusted trade to be part of it.
Could you explain what you mean? I'm confused, especially with the bit in bold :scratch:
I agree with you 100% regarding D.I.Y, but it depends how your mind works. I'm just not into the practical side of it, and never will be, but admire others like you who are, and the skill and dedication that is involved.
In my situation, the modification route is the best way as I can judiciously select what I consider represents the best commercial equipment (usually of the vintage variety, as we both know it generally has the best core 'ingredients' to work with in terms of potential modification), and then update/upgrade key components within the circuit (with the help of someone else's soldering iron ;)) and end up with a truly superb piece of kit.
It's a satisfactory 'halfway house' for me between what you guys do and avoiding the pitfalls of using solely a dealer or assembling a system from second-hand Ebay purchases, like most people do - and it brings very good results, too.
Btw, when you say:
So what I'm saying is there are 'debates' on HI-fi Forums we dont get on DIY Forums beause we are too busy...
Is that too busy listening to music or too busy 'tinkering'? :lolsign:
I really enjoyed the last Owston meet, particularly hearing your excellent Garrard again! What was most satisfying for me apart from enjoying listening to the impressive results from some of the equipment and systems demonstrated, was hearing my own kit perform very well against it. That makes the modifications I've had carried out to my gear very worthwhile. You guys set a high standard, so I can't think of a better benchmark to use! :smoking:
Anyway, there are many ways to 'skin a cat' with hi-fi. The D.I.Y route is one very valid option, but there are others too. As they say, 'you pays your money and takes your choice'. The reality is that the D.I.Y route will never be a universal panacea for everyone.
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
07-10-2009, 10:14
As a very contented Lyngdorf user, albeit without Room Perfect (RP), I am a little troubled at the tone of some of the remarks posted in this thread. This is supposed to be a broad church, as it were, and a good-natured hobby. Why cannot everyone here treat others in the way that they'd care to be treated themselves? Can we all not be open-minded and nice to each other? Why all of this curt challenging? Courteous inquiry is one thing - bolshy interrogation is quite another.
I'm glad that Marco intends to visit Rob to hear the Lyngdorf room correction systems for himself - that's as good a bottom line as could be asked for and I hope that he finds the experience instructive. My Lyngdorf gear is a generation too old for RP, but I have experienced RP and know what it can achieve. I have also met the designer of RP, who incidentally designed the bass management system in the B&O Dalek speakers, before moving to Lyngdorf. The RP system goes way beyond the B&O application, and is rather different from other room correction systems - see the full explanation at http://www.lyngdorf.com/downloads/product_descriptions/roomperfect_productdescription_english.pdf .
Peter Lyngdorf once said (IIRC) that with RP, he was aiming for 95% of the true performance for 95% of the users. He realises that aiming for perfection for all is simply chasing rainbows, so RP represents a pragmatic approach, which means a rather good, and consistent, performance in most domestic situations without having to put up with audiophile interior design horrors. As with any population and the distribution curve that goes with it, some will never like what RP does, but the majority will. How often to any of us audiophiles achieve 95% of the performance with our gear?
It's no surprise that some do not like what RP does, but most of the comments on forums such as this come from folks who have never experienced it, and are not therefore qualified to comment to any great degree. The opinions expressed simply represent prejudices in many cases. Similarly, the obsession with 'digital' - I feed my record player into a 24/96 ADC in the Lyngdorf amp, and cannot fault the result, so I know from personal experience that well implemented digital systems can be very good indeed. There's digital, and digital, of course, but generalities do not help. I know from talking to Alex Nitikin that he finds all things digital abhorrent, and many will agree with him, but I'm with the 95% of people, 95% of the time school of thought! I ditched valves for Lyndorf digital!
Sorry that this turned into a rambling sermon, but as a qualified acoustician I do know a thing or two about room acoustics, and what is possible to achieve. For most of us, lacking the resources to build a Roy Gregory style listening room, digital room correction systems can get us pretty much most of the way there without incurring a whopping bill. That does not mean conventional acoustic treatments are unnecessary, nor that you don't need to pay reasonable attention to system setup like good mains, effective equipment support etc.
Peace!
Hi Shuggs,
Good post :)
I think the problem was Rob's earlier insistence (his later posts mellowed somewhat) that room correction was the latest 'great thing' and his rather touting it as a 'universal panacea for everything audio'. That got some people's backs up a little, especially as the 'wounds' are still healing for many after the onslaught of the AVI marketing machine throughout every forum in the land!
Some of Rob's earlier contributions read more like an advertorial, as opposed to a gentle introduction into the possible benefits of his products, and this approach was always liable to grate somewhat, particularly as AoS is a specialised audio forum populated mainly by experienced, diehard enthusiasts, many of whom of a 'valves & vinyl' bent who'd no sooner 'infect' their precious analogue equipment with digital 'toys' than chuck their cat or dog out the window ;)
In saying that, most are also very open-minded and will always entertain the notion that nothing is 'perfect' - *but* at the same time new concepts/products have to be demonstrated to people in their own environment before any credibility is attached to them. This is precisely why I have invited Rob to my place and why I will then reciprocate and check out his facilities.
For me, audio is a continual learning curve, so it's imperative that new approaches are tested and embraced accordingly if they are proven to outperform or enhance (in the areas that matter to us) existing methods and/or chosen equipment. I never form conclusive opinions on anything in hi-fi without experiencing whatever is necessary first! :cool:
Marco.
Hmmm, so we are now nine pages down and it's all gone quiet after Marco's last post. Seems to me this will be another classic 'nothing will ever happen' situation. Rob, having made a commitment to visit Marco is already making excuses about time, energy, available equipment and travel distance. He's already wimping out big style. There's a suprise! From what he says he clearly has shed loads of ignorant people with lots of money who he can exploit for a good return. Being business minded, he probably makes no consideration to ethics in such circumstances. Yep, thick people with money.......I'll suck 'em all in, thank you very much,......fill up my wallet.....take a look at my Wad! (apologies to Harry Enfield).
Yep, the last post from Rob said it all to me. In this business, happy to exploit the rich ignorant, absolutely no need for any understanding of sound truth and in consequence, no proper interest in engaging with true audiophools.
Believe me, no trial will happen at Marco's pad and therefore, Marco will not visit Newbury.
9 pages.....what a waste of time and energy!
Perhaps too, Marco could visit Shuggies and listen to his system.
It will give Marco a chance to listen to a happy end user of dsp equipment in his own home, without the usual dealer proliferation.
Ammonite Audio
08-10-2009, 05:38
Perhaps too, Marco could visit Shuggies and listen to his system.
It will give Marco a chance to listen to a happy end user of dsp equipment in his own home, without the usual dealer proliferation.
He's very welcome, as he knows, and we will have a bit of a Technics bake-off in due course; however I do not use the DSP facility on my Lyngdorf amp, preferring to run it in bypass mode. The onboard DSP is not the same thing as RP, of course.
Good morning Marco,
I have posted my system, in the welcome section...i'm sure it's in the right place.
I am not here to defend anyone.....thought I was joining in on the conversations, for what its worth i am currently unemployed, hav been for 9 months and thought this would help pass the time whilst I am seeking employment.....i can see that I was wrong and am not welcome to have a view...........perhaps you can employ me to interogate everybody on your site...to learn more about their backgrounds...........or if anyone else is in the market for staff?
Rob if you are reading this..............can I have a pay rise!!!!
Steve Toy
08-10-2009, 08:46
Steve, we like a more human presence here that's all. Interrogations as you put it would only detract from the friendly vibe we have worked quite hard to create.
In the absence of some personal info (and we do not ask for anything intimate or that which could compromise the security of your identity) you could be any old troll or another existing member with more than one account.
Ok, nothing is foolproof but those holding multiple accounts (for example) would need a both a good imagination and an incredible memory. They usually trip themselves up...
Rightly or wrongly 4 posts on the same topic in the wake of a new prolific poster holding controversial views and concurring with those views without any intro sets off a few alarms.
I hope you understand. I hope also you can embrace the spirit and ethos of this place and enjoy being a part of it.
hifi_dave
08-10-2009, 08:46
Hmmm, so we are now nine pages down and it's all gone quiet after Marco's last post. Seems to me this will be another classic 'nothing will ever happen' situation. Rob, having made a commitment to visit Marco is already making excuses about time, energy, available equipment and travel distance. He's already wimping out big style. There's a suprise! From what he says he clearly has shed loads of ignorant people with lots of money who he can exploit for a good return. Being business minded, he probably makes no consideration to ethics in such circumstances. Yep, thick people with money.......I'll suck 'em all in, thank you very much,......fill up my wallet.....take a look at my Wad! (apologies to Harry Enfield).
Yep, the last post from Rob said it all to me. In this business, happy to exploit the rich ignorant, absolutely no need for any understanding of sound truth and in consequence, no proper interest in engaging with true audiophools.
Believe me, no trial will happen at Marco's pad and therefore, Marco will not visit Newbury.
9 pages.....what a waste of time and energy!
A similar thing happened on another Forum where 3 or 4 threads started as questions about room correction etc. They ran for a few pages and then the original poster (Rob) disappeared. It's simply a 'marketing' ploy and should have been in the trade section as an advert to 'come and listen to my room correction system'.
As David Price said, 'it's straight out of the A*I book of marketing'....:lolsign:
I think you may be right, Dave, but we're a bit too 'thick-skinned' to fall for that bollocks! ;)
Greg I suspect is also spot on, although the offer to visit me with his 'stuff' is still there for Rob, should he choose to accept it. He has my phone number.
Steve68,
My apologies. Steve Toy has I would hope already explained things :)
I would just add that AoS is not a 'faceless' Internet message board. This is a community of real people, and as such we ask that new members provide us with some basic information about themselves to strengthen that sense of community.
I trust that you can appreciate this.
So where are you from? :cool:
Marco.
I have posted my system, in the welcome section...i'm sure it's in the right place.
Actually, I've just checked in the Welcome section and in The Gallery and can't see it...
Where exactly have you posted it, Steve? You need to start a separate thread :)
Marco.
The Grand Wazoo
08-10-2009, 14:09
I might just take Rob up on his offer of a demonstration & I would urge you all to do so too.
His website features a very generous offer which I don't think he mentioned in any of his posts:
We are so confident that we can demonstrate a better sounding, better value system than any alternative that you are considering we’ll give you £100 in HMV vouchers if you don’t agree.
Haha... I'll definitely hold him to that! :lolsign:
Marco.
HighFidelityGuy
08-10-2009, 14:29
It's a shame it's an HMV voucher. That'll only get you a couple of CD's. ;)
Rob Sinden
08-10-2009, 19:51
Hello HiFi Dave
What brought you to the conclusion that all wealthy people are thick?
I think this comment speaks volumes about your open mindedness.
While clients are travelling here and spending 6 figure sums on hifi and home cinemas I’d rather stay here that buying a new product that I have no call for and undertaking a 10 hour round trip to do a dem that might result in a £2k sale.
I have a shoot out for members of Pink Fish Forum to come to on Monday and I’ve no doubt the people who visit this event will report back to other members after they have been able to hear 6 different corrected systems in 4 very different acoustic spaces.
Perhaps if you are quiet you should look at new technologies that would improve what you can offer your clients rather than slagging off other peoples systems before you have heard them?
Criticising systems that you have not even heard is as intelligent as your comment about all wealthy people being thick.
Hi Rob,
What about those vouchers, then? Got plenty of them reserved? :eyebrows: ;)
Marco.
P.S Can you link to where Dave has used the language "all wealthy people are thick"? I can't find it...
Some people don't NEED to increase their business overmuch and let's face it, a goodly proportion of truly wealthy people tend to visit live concerts rather than mess around with audio systems. It's with the "enthusiasts" with lots of money that the nuttiness starts. I was told some months ago that my original employer, in its latest incarnation, was doing rather well all things considered, as the "strata of society" this business now courts, doesn't suffer financially the way old farts like me are at present.
Good luck to 'em..
The Grand Wazoo
08-10-2009, 20:13
Rob,
As you are now back & contributing to this thread again (though not any others as has been suggested it might be polite to do) could I ask you to address the points & questions I made at post 360 please (& there is a little subsequent discussion on my points).
Thank you.
Cheers
Hi Rob,
You've messed up here. You are accusing hifi_Dave of making the comments which are actually mine. Furthermore you've completely misread and misinterpreted what I said. Where did I say all rich people were thick? I spoke about rich people in ignorance or thick people with money. There is a significant difference from your incorrect transposition of what I said.
My observation remains that you probably gain your income by exploiting people who do not understand all things hi-fi/audio/home cinema and they can simply afford it. No doubt in their ignorance, they get sucked in by your marketing and sales waffle and being able to easily afford it all, just sign the cheque. Even after you've installed their new very expensive system, they'll still remain clueless on how it compares to anything else on the market. Probably they don't actually care.
I've not heard one of your systems. Having read 9 pages here I don't need to. I'm witnessing you back peddle out of commitments you have made when it is probable you are now realising you are dealing here with folk who know a thing or two about the topic in question. I am no fool and coming from an investigative occupational background, I recognise your thinly veiled marketing for exactly what it is. As said, you'll continue to exploit the ignorant rich and probably make a fine living. That's not a crime. It's for you to consider the ethics of what you do.
Regards,
Greg
coming from an investigative occupational background...
I've never heard it called that before! :lolsign:
Sorry, Greg, I had to chuckle ;)
Marco.
anthonyTD
08-10-2009, 20:37
Hi All
I’ve wasn’t posting yesterday as I was in London seeing more people with lots of money. Bastards! And yes you are right this is exactly my sort of typical customer and fortunately there seems to be lots of them about right now – let’s hope it’s a sign that the economy is on the bounce…
Anyhow, I think we may be in danger of flogging a dead horse on this subject. Now it’s time to put it to the test.
From the sort of systems most of you own, I never expected you guys to use Lyngdorf Room Correction products. If I had an analogue system with valves etc. or was using legacy products I’m sure I wouldn’t add something like this in the chain either.
I’ve enjoyed getting your different points of view on this subject and arguing mine. I still believe that the weakest link in most good audio systems is the room which is why I’ve built an exceptional listening room to show what a difference can be achieved when the same care is taken with the space as the equipment used.
I hope if anyone is interested in hearing the room as much as the systems we sell they’ll get in touch for a visit. I might typically sell really expensive systems but this is also my hobby and I like sharing it with anyone who has a love of music or film.
If you want to stay analogue then there are other devices that you could use (which I don’t sell) like this from Rives which you may find interesting. http://www.rivesaudio.com/PARC/PARCframe.html
I am unlikely to have too much time to put into Forums for a while as work has gotten really busy but I remember reading a report in a pro magazine years ago where they tested 3 different types of EQ devices in a studio on top quality monitors with 3 recording engineers as judges. The result was that every system was judged better that the system without the EQ.
I do intend to go and see Marco sometime but the product I would need to take is something I don’t stock so I’ll have to try and borrow. That combined with the 4/5 hour drive will mean it’ll have to wait until things calm down here. Hopefully he might be able to come here one day on his travels around the country.
If anyone is closer to me in Newbury or in the South East then we can arrange a home dem anytime which I’m sure would make for an interesting thread on the Forum. Please give me a call if you are up for it. I want to do this but presently time is scarce.
One thing I would like to repeat is that room correction does something very different in every room and so if you are looking to judge it’s affects it is much better to listen somewhere where it can be heard in several different systems and acoustic spaces.
Here we have 6 systems with room correction on in 4 different spaces which I think would make a judgement call as to its effectiveness much more valid.
Enjoy your music.
Rob
hi rob,
its no wonder people here get the "wrong impresion" of you and your supposed caring nature towards true music lovers and hi fi enthusiasts alike!
for me, and i suspect many others here,,,greg has hit the nail squarely on the head with his asumptions, its your conscience mate and if you can live with earning your living that way, well, good luck i am sure you will be very rich [in money terms at least] again,,,good luck with that.
A...
Rob Sinden
08-10-2009, 21:48
Hi
I did not approach this Forum but was invited to give my opinions by Marco a few weeks ago, which I have done. I’m sorry you find these opinions so challenging.
As I’ve said I do not expect to find business on these Forums but had enjoyed sharing my views. Obviously the people here are enthusiast or in the trade, neither of which are my target audience.
I’m not clear what you take issue with, that the room makes a huge difference or that it’s generally not treated or dealt with at all by most dealer, but unfortunately both of these statements are true.
I believe the people being exploited are the ones who have spent a lot of money on hifi systems that are woefully inaccurate. I’ve come across plenty of these in the past when I have been installing surround systems. Often I’ve been asked why the surround system sounds so much better than their stereo?
The answer I believe is that the people who have sold them the equipment know lots about hifi and nothing about how sound interacts with a room. They believe that if the kit is good there’s no need to do anything with the room which is utter nonsense if your goal is accurate sound reproduction. (I don’t think acousticians are wasting their time are they?) But ignoring the problem of room acoustics means you can keep profiting with perpetual upgrades - which is great business for dealers –while not having to address the room – something dealers haven’t found a way of profiting from.
(By accurate I mean a system that reproduces what is on the recording without adding or taking anything away.)
The fact that the room is the weakest link in many high end hifi systems is common knowledge and is easy to measure which explains why the area of room treatment, design and correction is unusual in being such a growth area of the market.
If you want to dismiss something, that is measurably better before you have heard it, that’s so much the better for me as more and more people are aware that good kit is not enough and are looking for something a bit more advanced that a really good, CD/amp/speaker.
Personally I know there’s a lot wrong with most hifi systems and remain interested in anything that can help improve their quality and consistency. As most rooms aren’t going to be acoustically treated some form of correction to the system to match the room seems like the only logical alternative.
Why don’t you keep ignoring the problem while I’ll keep wrestling with it and we’ll see how much success we’ve both had the same time next year?
hifi_dave
08-10-2009, 21:57
Rob Sinden,
You're talking about accuracy. Would you point out where I said 'wealthy people are thick'.
I believe an apology is due from you.
Rob Sinden
08-10-2009, 22:01
I was wrong, I apologise.
That has been inferred a couple of times, if it wasnt by you I'm sorry.
anthonyTD
08-10-2009, 22:08
Hi
I did not approach this Forum but was invited to give my opinions by Marco a few weeks ago, which I have done. I’m sorry you find these opinions so challenging.
As I’ve said I do not expect to find business on these Forums but had enjoyed sharing my views. Obviously the people here are enthusiast or in the trade, neither of which are my target audience.
I’m not clear what you take issue with, that the room makes a huge difference or that it’s generally not treated or dealt with at all by most dealer, but unfortunately both of these statements are true.
I believe the people being exploited are the ones who have spent a lot of money on hifi systems that are woefully inaccurate. I’ve come across plenty of these in the past when I have been installing surround systems. Often I’ve been asked why the surround system sounds so much better than their stereo?
The answer I believe is that the people who have sold them the equipment know lots about hifi and nothing about how sound interacts with a room. They believe that if the kit is good there’s no need to do anything with the room which is utter nonsense if your goal is accurate sound reproduction. (I don’t think acousticians are wasting their time are they?) But ignoring the problem of room acoustics means you can keep profiting with perpetual upgrades - which is great business for dealers –while not having to address the room – something dealers haven’t found a way of profiting from.
(By accurate I mean a system that reproduces what is on the recording without adding or taking anything away.)
The fact that the room is the weakest link in many high end hifi systems is common knowledge and is easy to measure which explains why the area of room treatment, design and correction is unusual in being such a growth area of the market.
If you want to dismiss something, that is measurably better before you have heard it, that’s so much the better for me as more and more people are aware that good kit is not enough and are looking for something a bit more advanced that a really good, CD/amp/speaker.
Personally I know there’s a lot wrong with most hifi systems and remain interested in anything that can help improve their quality and consistency. As most rooms aren’t going to be acoustically treated some form of correction to the system to match the room seems like the only logical alternative.
Why don’t you keep ignoring the problem while I’ll keep wrestling with it and we’ll see how much success we’ve both had the same time next year?
hi rob,
if this last post of yours was aimed at me then i would like to remind you of one of my earlier posts on this thread, the one where i explained that i have experienced room correction at the heathrow show in 2004, on my own equipment!!!:scratch: i also stated that i thought it did a good job, but for me personaly i felt it made everything sound somewhat artificial, and stifled!
that was my opinion, lots of people loved the sound in that room though.
i have never said nor do i recal anyone else here stating that some form of room correction is not needed with most systems, what i said was i prefer to tackle the issues physicaly,,, not by stuffing another load of electronics into the signal path and potentialy introducing another kind of situation to sort out. may i also remind you that the only thread you have contributed to here on AOS is this one, why??? i am sure a guy of your experience would have much to say on many of the other threads regularly discussed on this forum.
rob, your either here to participate on the whole, or your here to drum up business, if its the latter, thats fine, but you will need to peddle your wares in the trade section like any other genuine trade member.
regards,anthony,TD...
Hi Rob,
I'm sure others will have plenty to say with regard to your last (long) post, so I'll leave that to them.
All I would point out is don't get too bogged down with what is "measurably better" with hi-fi, that's all. It's a rather 'ambiguous' statement which sometimes doesn't mean much in real terms, and often doesn't tell the full story.
For example, what exactly does "better" mean in the context you've used above? Is it your "better" or my "better", or your aunty Betty's "better"? Hi-fi is a largely subjective beast.
You might come round to mine with your 'box thingy', insert it in-line with my system, and my room is thus "measurably better" - yet I may think the sound is worse, to my ears, for a variety of reasons.
Who is 'right' in that instance? Your box or me??
Do you see my point? ;)
Marco.
Rob Sinden
08-10-2009, 22:22
I've answered this before. There are 2 areas that interest me about which I feel I have something to add, these are surround sound which isnt addressed here and room acoustics.
As this thread has been so well responded to - the limited time I've had recently has meant I've had no time to discuss anything else even if there was something I wanted to raise or share.
As I've also just said, I'm not here to try and drum up business. My typical client is not an enthusiast. I was here enjoying the banter and thought that some people were genuinely interest in my different perspective. If after sharing my views, as invited, in a civiled way, people are getting upset, would you rather I wasn't around?
Steve Toy
08-10-2009, 22:25
Rob you are most welcome here. In any case I have already banned someone this year.
Hi Rob,
Could you answer my last post, please? :)
Marco.
anthonyTD
08-10-2009, 22:28
I've answered this before. There are 2 areas that interest me about which I feel I have something to add, these are surround sound which isnt addressed here and room acoustics.
As this thread has been so well responded to - the limited time I've had recently has meant I've had no time to discuss anything else even if there was something I wanted to raise or share.
As I've also just said, I'm not here to try and drum up business. My typical client is not an enthusiast. I was here enjoying the banter and thought that some people were genuinely interest in my different perspective. If after sharing my views, as invited, in a civiled way, people are getting upset, would you rather I wasn't around?
you being around is not the issue rob, your most welcome here, but if your going to be taken seriously as a genuine member then you have to be seen to be participating in more than just a thread that seems to be aimed at you trying to convert and educate people who have been around a long time and therefore know a thing or two about how to create hi fi systems that work.
A...
The Grand Wazoo
08-10-2009, 22:32
Anthony,
I think that post may have been aimed at me, but it's not clear is it?
Anyway I will not contribute to this thead any more, as I don't want to perpetuate Rob's tactics, other than to say this directly to Rob. I have re-read every word in this thread & my conclusion is as follows:
You have no agenda other than to sell your goods - that would be fine if you had made that clear in the first instance, & done so in the appropriate place.
You have an appalling attitude towards your customers. I have managed high turnover retail enterprises in the past & if I was to catch one of my staff calling my customers 'bastards' because they are fortunate enough to possess a bit of cash, then I would kick their arses all the way to the Job Centre.
You have an 'interesting' way with your prospective customers (i.e. us) in that you tell us our systems are pretty much crap as they've been hobbled by the rooms we put them in. I know that the first lesson in marketing is to point out a problem & then to provide the cure, but your manner has actually been pretty insulting to some people here.
I may have given you the impression that I am completely against the principles that you are trying to sell, but this is wrong. I am extremely interested in the concept and would love to learn more. But you my friend, have no chance of making a dent in my wallet - not that that will bother you as you can prey on the 'bastards' with real money.
Others have wished you luck in your business. I'm sorry, but I don't.
Hi Chris,
I may be wrong, but I think Rob's earlier use of "bastards" was meant in an ironic sense. I'll explain if necessary, or perhaps Rob will.
Read it again and see what you think :)
Marco,
The Grand Wazoo
08-10-2009, 22:45
Marco,
I read it & re-read it several times.
I don't care if irony was intended or not - he said it in a public way that can be read by anybody.
Some of the people who read it may be his customers. How would you feel if you'd just given this man a cheque for tens of thousands of pounds & you read in a globally accessible format that he thought you were a bastard - even if he was trying to be ironic?
Sorry, but personally, I've had enough of this nonsense.
anthonyTD
08-10-2009, 22:50
Anthony,
I think that post may have been aimed at me, but it's not clear is it?
hi chris,
maybe,:confused: to be honest i'm passed caring, i have said about all i am going to on this subject tonight, but i am sure those who are able to read between the lines will know exactly whats going on here.
regards,anthony,TD...
I don't disagree with you guys... I think Rob has the tendency to answer the questions he wants to answer (or thinks he can answer) and avoids the others that are a little more difficult.
It was patently obvious from the beginning that Rob was advertising his wares here, and I asked him to reign it in a bit and make the topic of room correction more general and less of an advertorial for his company and products, but it always seems creep back to that...
If people would like this thread moved to the trade area instead now, I will do so.
Marco.
Steve Toy
08-10-2009, 23:36
No leave it where it is - under the microscope!
Well I think we'll take the views of the members (particularly our trade members) first on that...
Marco.
The Grand Wazoo
08-10-2009, 23:48
Yes, I think it's the trade guys who're most put out by all this.
However, as Steve implies, Rob is his own worst enemy - keep digging Rob!!
Hi Dave
Thanks for asking, it's from £2800 to £200,000 for the stereos. From £8k - £500k for surround systems.
I think what is more interesting is what is different about these systems compared to any alternatives which briefly is:
- they are digital throughout the electronics so no noise or colouration is added
Ouch!! Give me the lovely illuminated bottles and colouration. Lovely 'warm' sound to engulf me.
:violin:
they are digital throughout the electronics so no noise or colouration is added...
I suspect that statement could be quite easily challenged, too - and that's putting it mildly! ;)
Marco.
Anyway, believing that a part of a reproduction system may be "adding or removing" nothing, is strange...
What could be the actual use of such a part ? It's a mystery to me. :o
If any further proof were needed that RS is indeed his own worst enemy, you need only look at the GECKO (http://www.geckohomecinema.com/naim_hifi.asp?gclid=CLGs57n6sJ0CFUQA4wodGAONiA) website. This guy really could do with a few lessons in marketing ethics, for a start what does blatantly slagging other manufacturers' products say about the sort of customer who would be impressed by such cheap tricks?:(
Is that a cheap trick? It seems like he sees Naim as a major competitor, he's not said their systems are crap but it pointing out some aspects he feels his potential customers should think about.
I work for an enormous and highly successful company, we give and receive way tougher messages than those.
If he's selling to people who've made their own money in business then I believe they'll repsect a more direct approach. If he's dealing with people who have money not related to their intelligence....well they'll need a direct approach too to tell them what's what - even if you or I don't believe in the preaching.
Is that a cheap trick?
I work for an enormous and highly successful company, we give and receive way tougher messages than those.
If he's selling to people who've made their own money in business then I believe they'll repsect a more direct approach. If he's dealing with people who have money not related to their intelligence....well they'll need a direct approach too to tell them what's what - even if you or I don't believe in the preaching.
Seems pretty cheap to me. Much of what he says about Naim applies equally to 90%+ of hi-fi gear, so why mention Naim specifically?
Presumably your enormous and successful company checks with lawyers before giving its' tough messages, I would have though said lawyers would advise against, er, naming competitors so directly.
When it comes to his treatment of his customers, might it not be in his interest to neither peddle bullshit nor presume to patronise?;)
hifi_dave
10-10-2009, 12:38
He did all this on PFM before posting on AOS including rubbishing Naim even though IIRC he hadn't actually heard a good Naim system...:doh:
He did all this on PFM before posting on AOS including rubbishing Naim even though IIRC he hadn't actually heard a good Naim system...:doh:
There's a good Naim system now? - no I'm just kidding (before I get banned!) - I've never heard any Naim at all so all the love/hate stuff I am seeing posted means nothing to me.
Seriously I do not see what the issue is here - It does not seem to me that the product is being 'plugged' in any advantageous way. Here is someone saying 'Look, I sell room correction - have you tried it? if not come and have a listen and see what you think.' What is wrong with that? The bloke simply does not deserve to get jumped on in this way - and IMHO this attitude is in danger of stifiling discussion on this forum in general - which defeats the whole purpose of a forum, does it not?
Martin
Hi Martin,
I know where you're coming from, but I think some of the statements Rob has made have been directly responsible for the response he's got. Besides, he's a big boy, so I'm sure he can handle it :)
Marco.
Primalsea
10-10-2009, 17:13
Off course you can try room correction for yourself if you have Windows Vista or Windows 7.
All you need is a small capsule mic with good freq response like a Panasonic WM61 which can be bought from ebay for a few quid.
I tried it today and it actually worked for me, got rid of all those slightly boomy, fuzz bits when the room modes got excited. Of course I play all my digital music on my Media PC which is optimised for music. Along with my DAC 64 with its 4 second buffer it works well. However it not go so well for others but I suggest you give it a go just for fun and it will only cost you a few pounds for a mic.
Mick Parry
10-10-2009, 17:18
Chaps
Most modern hifi sounds good, it is rare for something to sound bad unless some old bodger has got his hands on it.
The only caveat is big speakers are essentiall for really good music. Small speakers kill music whereas big speaker fill the room and make you think you are sitting in front of the band.
Regards
Mick
Seems pretty cheap to me. Much of what he says about Naim applies equally to 90%+ of hi-fi gear, so why mention Naim specifically?
Presumably your enormous and successful company checks with lawyers before giving its' tough messages, I would have though said lawyers would advise against, er, naming competitors so directly.
When it comes to his treatment of his customers, might it not be in his interest to neither peddle bullshit nor presume to patronise?;)
Ralph, why did you edit out the part of my quote that at least partially answers your question about why Naim?
It seems like he sees Naim as a major competitor, he's not said their systems are crap but it pointing out some aspects he feels his potential customers should think about.
For whatever reason he sees Naim as competition, probably due to the sorts of places where they advertise. I'd have thought Linn would be a competitor too.
BTW, we do name our competitors directly as they do with us and yes careful legal advice is taken. UK law was changed some years back specifically to allow you to name your competitors in this type of situation.
Off course you can try room correction for yourself if you have Windows Vista or Windows 7.
Room correction aside, let's hope Windows 7 is better than Vista. It could hardly be worse.
Primalsea
10-10-2009, 18:42
OT but......
Vista is pretty good really and Windows 7 appears to be Vista with all the cpu hogging crap that you dont want or need turned off. The problem with Vista is that its not good out of the box and you need a modicom of knowledge to get it to run fast. Once is does its great. I've used all sorts of OS from Dos, Windows 95, 98, 2000, ME, XP, Vista, 7, Mac os8, os9, OSX and Vista & 7 are pretty much the best I think.
It's precisely that modicum of knowledge that I lack! I knew XP pretty well but Vista I've never got to grips with.
The DAC64 is excellent, of course.
Clive said
....I'd have thought Linn would be a competitor too.
Wonder why he didn't mention Linn then, possibly because they would be less likely to let it pass:confused:?
Care to comment on peddling b/s and patronising his customers? Personally, judging from the tone of his posts here and elsewhere I wouldn't buy anything from him under any circumstances and anyway times being what they are I'll have to pass on the helicopter booking, the old helipad's had to be dug up and turned into a veggie plot...:lol:
Chippy_boy
14-10-2009, 15:05
I haven't read all of this thread but it strikes me some of the issues being debated here cut to the core of what "hifi" is really all about.
I hope my post doesn't get lost in the noise, but imho "hifi" is a very misleading term because "fidelity" is objectively measureable, whereas "what sounds nice" is much more ethereal.
It is perfectly possible to measure the performance of one piece of kit and say that compared to another piece of kit, it offers higher "fidelity", i.e. a more accurate representation of the original sound. But that does NOT mean it will automatically sound better.
I offer a strange but very relevant illustration. The "Aphex Aural Exciter" is a device first made prevalent in the 1970's by various studios and artists like Fleetwood Mac, Paul McCartney, Alan Parsons. What the device did (and still does today) is to *add* distortion to the sound, but bizarrely the resultant output sounds *better* than the original source.
Less "fidelity" (compared to the original) sounds better than higher "fidelity".
Given that is the case, it's not surprising that people like the sound of turntables and valve amps perhaps more than (say) CD's or SACD's. Hifi buffs are in the pursuit of a pleasing sound, not necessarily an accurate one.
HighFidelityGuy
14-10-2009, 15:16
I haven't read all of this thread but it strikes me some of the issues being debated here cut to the core of what "hifi" is really all about.
I hope my post doesn't get lost in the noise, but imho "hifi" is a very misleading term because "fidelity" is objectively measureable, whereas "what sounds nice" is much more ethereal.
It is perfectly possible to measure the performance of one piece of kit and say that compared to another piece of kit, it offers higher "fidelity", i.e. a more accurate representation of the original sound. But that does NOT mean it will automatically sound better.
I offer a strange but very relevant illustration. The "Aphex Aural Exciter" is a device first made prevalent in the 1970's by various studios and artists like Fleetwood Mac, Paul McCartney, Alan Parsons. What the device did (and still does today) is to *add* distortion to the sound, but bizarrely the resultant output sounds *better* than the original source.
Less "fidelity" (compared to the original) sounds better than higher "fidelity".
Given that is the case, it's not surprising that people like the sound of turntables and valve amps perhaps more than (say) CD's or SACD's. Hifi buffs are in the pursuit of a pleasing sound, not necessarily an accurate one.
That's very true. One man's clear and detailed is another man's clinical and lifeless and vice versa. There's no single rule that works for everyone, it's all about getting the balance right between all the elements. You've just got to keep trying different techniques until you find the balance that works with your ears.
I've not heard of the Aphex Aural Exciter before but if it introduces only 2nd order harmonic distortion, that is understandable. Many valve amps have this kind of distortion and valveheads have realised for years that this type of distortion is pleasing to the ear. It doesn't however stop current valve amp builders particularly designers within the DIY community from seeking to build valve amps with as low distortion as possible.
I remember that one reason the best valve amps worked despite high distortion is point-to-point wiring for many, coupled with attention to "star-earthing," amongst other things which were ignored by early ss designs. The cumulative effect of these little points/low or local feedback etc. helps keep the distortion in "time" with the music signal, rather than smearing it all over.
I had another epiphany last night at our local high school. I can now state that in my opinion, NO HiFi works, unless you are using 12" bass units AT LEAST and that Marco needs to upgrade to the newer Tannoys with TWO 15" bass drivers to stand any chance at all - oh, and forget vinyl replay too.... I'll explain later :)
I remember that one reason the best valve amps worked despite high distortion is point-to-point wiring for many, coupled with attention to "star-earthing," amongst other things which were ignored by early ss designs. The cumulative effect of these little points/low or local feedback etc. helps keep the distortion in "time" with the music signal, rather than smearing it all over.
I had another epiphany last night at our local high school. I can now state that in my opinion, NO HiFi works, unless you are using 12" bass units AT LEAST and that Marco needs to upgrade to the newer Tannoys with TWO 15" bass drivers to stand any chance at all - oh, and forget vinyl replay too.... I'll explain later :)
I agree strongly about the importance of earthing but it's not necessarily star earthing on valve amps, it's often busbar.
Yes for bass cone size is where it's at!
hifi_dave
15-10-2009, 08:55
But, but, I thought squitty little active computer speakers with teensy, weensy LF drivers were all the go now....:scratch:
STOP DAVE............
With a couple of their subs to go with them, they may just do a reasonable job, but as I haven't heard them, I cannot comment further.
What I was trying to say (clumsily as usual) is that it was "open evening" at the high school our son will be attending from next September. They have a fantastic music dept and some of the students were only too keen to show off what they were doing. I heard two different drum kits last night, in different acoustics.
The first drum-kit, in a practice room, was raw, with snappy snares and almost harsh, crashing cymbals. The impact at close range was incredible and it brought back memories of the once regular jazz gigs I attended.
The second drum-kit was as part of a group playing post-punk derived stuff. This was in a recording space and I was able to appreciate the impact again (a more refined player/kit) and then go into the "control-room" to hear the playback on some active Behringer "Truth" 2031A, a bargain for the price IMO.
The thing is, Neil's "interrogation/assessment" caused me to once again double back and re-affirm why I spent 30+ years in the HiFi industry (as I did courtesy of Marco some months back), but my experiences last night re-confirmed WHY I loved the bigger active ATC's so much - their "rude" impact and dry bass being very close indeed to the live drumming I heard last night. I suspect the big old Tannoys, once tamed, would do the same and with less power, but it once again caused me to think of that far eastern "guru" who spent so much money and put so much effort into, what, a pale facsimile of the "real thing" not helped by the compression and bandwidth limiting imposed by the recording, and the playback medium itself.
Nuff said on the above, I'll stick to me vintage Dansette-like stereo for now.....;)
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 14:22
I've not heard of the Aphex Aural Exciter before but if it introduces only 2nd order harmonic distortion, that is understandable. Many valve amps have this kind of distortion and valveheads have realised for years that this type of distortion is pleasing to the ear. It doesn't however stop current valve amp builders particularly designers within the DIY community from seeking to build valve amps with as low distortion as possible.
The Aphex thing does much more than that.
But really that's not the point. The point is that *accurate* doesn't necessarily sound better than *inaccurate*.
That being the case, it makes all attempts to measure THD, frequency response linearity etc all pretty worthless. Basically the whole industry is barking up the wrong tree chasing this "fidelity" thing. We should be trying to understand *why* certain things sound good, bottle it and build it into the design of hifi components.
I am not saying that "fidelity" has to go completely out of the window. I am sure you need a certain level of capability as a base starting point otherwise it's going to sound rubbish whatever you do. But beyond that point, spending £50,000 on a power amp (say) in the quest for something ethereal and elusive is just plain daft. It's going to be pretty much pot luck as to whether it delivers that je ne sais quoi or not. Because nobody has bothered to work out what it is yet!
The point is that *accurate* doesn't necessarily sound better than *inaccurate*.
Indeed.
That's because that particular form of "accurate" may actually, in reality, not be more "accurate" than the "inaccurate" version of the true "accurate" ;)
Define "accurate" in the context of audio: what's more 'correct', your "accurate", my "accurate", your aunt's "accurate", or "accurate" to some flawed scientific notion of "accurate"?......
Personally, I really hate the term "accurate" when applied to hi-fi, as often it's so inaccurate!!
Marco.
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 14:40
Indeed.
That's because that particular form of "accurate" may actually, in reality, not be more "accurate" than the "inaccurate" version of the true "accurate" ;)
Define "accurate" in the context of audio - what's more 'correct', your "accurate" or my "accurate", your aunt's "accurate", or "accurate" to some flawed scientific notion of "accurate"?......
Personally, I really hate the term "accurate" when applied to hi-fi, as often it's so inaccurate!!
Marco.
I disagree somewhat with this. In my view accurate is an objective thing. We have the original (man in room playing violin or whatever) and we have various copies - different hifis trying to reproduce the same sounds. Some are more accurate than others, *objectively* speaking.
But my point is that the most accurate ones don't necessary sound the best. They may sound more like the original violin. But people won't necessarily prefer that sound. The whole AOS fraterny is chasing what sounds nice, not what's "accurate". The whole mass-market hifi industry is chasing "accurate" (with low THD and flat frequency response etc) and mistakenly believes this will automatically sound best. It won't.
I disagree somewhat with this. In my view accurate is an objective thing. We have the original (man in room playing violin or whatever) and we have various copies - different hifis trying to reproduce the same sounds. Some are more accurate than others, *objectively* speaking.
Disagree away, Chippy, but I contend that what I wrote in my last post is nearer the real truth than what you're suggesting!
How can you know what is *genuinely* "accurate" unless you heard the original sound and know it intimately enough to use as an unquestionably accurate benchmark?
You say that accuracy is an objective thing... Well, tell me what your objective judgement criteria are in terms of ascertaining in what way one hi-fi system is truly more "accurate" than another - in a musical sense?
Some are more accurate than others, *objectively* speaking.
Why, exactly? Because some piece of test apparatus says so? If only audio were that simple!
The whole AOS fraterny is chasing what sounds nice, not what's "accurate".
I'm afraid that's simplistic thinking at best, and arrogant bullshit at worst! Who exactly are you to judge such a thing???
Marco.
Beechwoods
15-10-2009, 15:43
:gig:
100 people in that room; 100 opinions on what the band sounded like.
Even in a recording scenario the monitors in the mixing studio may sound different to those in the mastering studio - and not necessarily by design. Dave DSJR may have experience of that!
I don't think there's a definitive truth except at the point the artist signs off the mix, and even then I'd wager few are as fastidious as say Dave Gilmour in reviewing the test masters on decent gear in decent conditions :)
Dave G used ATC's at one time (active 50's I think), although times change obviously...
If you know your monitors, you can hear "through" them very well, so if a track was mixed on huge JBL's of the old school and mastered using B&W801's it may not matter as long as the engineers concerned knew what their monitors were doing, if you see what I mean. It's only if the mastering engineer tinkers around with the original recording intentionally that you may have trouble.
My mate Chris, early on in his mastering career, who doesn't like any contempory music, mastered for CD some of Marianne Faithful's early Decca recordings. he set the eq to sound good on 801's and when he got his free gratis disc home it sounded terribly toppy. This was the last time he eq'd anything unless he absolutely had to.
I have the original "HitchHiker's Guide to The Galaxy" CD box-set and when I first bought it, I had a couple of 2nd generation master copies (Studer-Studer direct dub) and a properly aligned Revox B77 to play them on. The CD's sounded colder and "sharper" to my ears, not because CD is inferior (IMO) but because the BBC recordings of this era seem to be slightly "dry" and the CD mastering engineer eq'd the top to make it livelier (IMO).
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 16:01
Marco, I believe you may be confused about what I mean. This is bordering on philosophical, but it's taken my bloody ages to type it, so please do me the courtesy of considering and reflecting on it before just disagreeing again.
Please allow me to address the points you raise:
How can you know what is *genuinely* "accurate" unless you heard the original sound and know it intimately enough to use as an unquestionably accurate benchmark?
I respectfully suggest you are confusing knowing about something (and hearing it, measuring it etc) with whether it exists or not. Consider a scenario: A man walks into a room, picks up a sax and plays it. A sound is produced. That sound is what it is. It doesn't matter who heard it or who measured it, or how it was measured. The sound produced is what it is. Or was what it was. That's the reference point. It's like asking someone to throw a dice and look at the number. It doesn't matter what the number is, nor whether anyone else saw it or could measure it accurately. The number exists. In my example the number is the specific man, in a specific room, with a specific instrument on a specific day. That's the sound.
You say that accuracy is an objective thing... Well, tell me what your objective judgement criteria are in terms of ascertaining in what way one hi-fi system is truly more "accurate" than another - in a musical sense?
Accuracy isn't subjective. There's nothing "in a musical sense" about accuracy. Let's go back to our reference point above. Now we introduce a bunch of different hifis all trying to reproduce our original sound - whatever it was. Some do so better than others. I say this as a statement of fact, not as a matter of opinion. Without hearing the original, nor hearing all the hifis, nor measuring anything, I can objectively say that a reference sample existed and some copies exist and some of the copies are closer to the original than others. I don't need to see, hear nor measure anything to know this is true. Back to the dice. The man threw a 6 and we have 3 hifi dice that play a 4, a 2 and a 5. One of them is closer, but we don't need to see any of the dice to know that this is true. (Of course it could be a draw - my analogy runs out at that point.)
I'm afraid that's simplistic thinking at best, and arrogant bullshit at worst! Who exactly are you to judge such a thing???
You see you missed my point. I am not being simplistic nor arrogant. When we audition hifi components, we play music for which we never heard the reference point. We didn't hear the man play the sax in the first place. We might have been to concerts and heard saxophones. So all we have to go on is our brains memory of "this is what I think I remember a saxophone sounded like". But we don't have anything objective to measure against.
Therefore - and this is the key point - necessarily our only option is to go for what sounds best. We can't compare anything to the original because we didn't experience or measure the original. So there is no alternative but to go on what we prefer. That was all I was saying, and I hope you can see there is no arrogance about it. It's merely a statement of fact.
But I hope you can see, this may or may not be the version that is actually closest to the original. Remarkably, the Aphex Aural Exciter (and there are many other things that demonstrate the same) shows that we can take a sound; distort it; and end up with a new sound that people think sounds nearer to the original. But in reality it's further away.
100 people in that room; 100 opinions on what the band sounded like.
Even in a recording scenario the monitors in the mixing studio may sound different to those in the mastering studio - and not necessarily by design.
Indeed.
I think Chippy's one of these people who let measurements and "objective" things rule their heads far too much! ;)
In fact, he sounds a bit like Ashley James... Perhaps they are related?
He also needs to learn that he's in no position whatsoever to judge people in terms of their hi-fi aspirations, or otherwise, but that's an old story with him.
Marco.
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 16:20
Indeed.
I think Chippy's one of these people who let measurements and "objective" things rule their heads far too much! ;)
In fact, he sounds a bit like Ashley James... Perhaps they are related?
He also needs to learn that he's in no position whatsoever to judge people in terms of their hi-fi aspirations, or otherwise, but that's an old story with him.
Marco.
Clearly you missed the line "please do me the courtesy of considering and reflecting on it before just disagreeing again."
You say "He also need to learn..." etc. I would say "you also need to read and think before instantly disagreeing". That's an old story with you Marco.
So all we have to go on is our brains memory of "this is what I think I remember a saxophone sounded like". But we don't have anything objective to measure against.
Sorry to interfere, but I was thinking whether (in the same way like your "dice" example), some of the "we" are objectively nearer than others to the reference point ? ;)
If so, who could they be ?
Chippy,
We're going round in circles with this, and at the moment I don't have time to go into the minutiae of your last post.
However, you made a statement earlier of:
The whole AOS fraterny is chasing what sounds nice, not what's "accurate".
I take exception to that, because you haven't got a clue what my version of "accurate" is!
Since, as you've correctly said, none of us can ever really know what the genuine accurate sound is, all we can go on is our own version of "accurate", based on our respective levels of experience of hearing real instruments and voices.
You're making the mistake of presuming that I'm seeking some form of euphonic coloration, or to quote you, something that: "sounds nice", rather than something which I think sounds true to my version of 'accurate'.
Do you see the difference?
Also, why are you singling out the "AOS fraternity" in terms of the point you're making? What other "fraternity" do you know who is better able to judge 'true accuracy', whatever that may be!
Marco.
Clearly you missed the line "please do me the courtesy of considering and reflecting on it before just disagreeing again."
You say "He also need to learn..." etc. I would say "you also need to read and think before instantly disagreeing". That's an old story with you Marco.
Actually, I typed that reply before seeing your last post! So you may wish to retract that statement...
And just how well do you know me in order to say it's "the same old story"? You only joined here a few months back.
Be honest here, because I've always been rather suspicious of you since you refused to give your real name when joining, do we know each other from some forum in the past?
Marco.
Marco,
I believe Chippy's sentence of the "AOS fraternity" was only there to justify (and outline, as an opposition) the two sentences that followed it :
"The whole mass-market hifi industry is chasing "accurate" (with low THD and flat frequency response etc) and mistakenly believes this will automatically sound best. It won't."
That's how I understood it, at least.
I see where you're coming from. I think we're probably arguing over semantics.
Basically, what I'm saying is that I'm not looking for what "sounds nice" when I assemble a hi-fi system. Rightly or wrongly, that comes across as tailoring the sound in some way as to create a rose-tinted euphonic effect.
*THAT* is not what I'm about at all. I build my system to reproduce music based on the benchmark of what I consider as 'accurate', not necessarily what "sounds nice".
Do you see my point? :)
Marco.
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 16:44
Be honest here, because I've always been rather suspicious of you since you refused to give your real name when joining, do we know each other from some forum in the past?
Marco.
No - honestly we don't. But your comment tells me a lot. Since I joined here I have felt like you could start an argument in an empty room. Perhaps some history you have with someone else is steering you that way with my posts.
I get really p*ssed off - if I am completely honest - getting endless criticised by you for various inoccuous comments by me, which are universally made without malice and in good faith. What's even worse is you generally haven't even had the decency to actually read and reflect on them before doing so.
If you did read my long post above, you would see it explains how I am not being arrogant nor judgmental about anyone nor any views on this forum, in terms of what they are looking for in their hifis. I am merely pointing out that without an objective reference point any assessment of a hifi by anyone has to be subjective. We can only decide what sounds "good", not what is most accurate, because we have no reference against which to measure accuracy.
How anyone can be offended by such a comment is completely beyond me.
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 16:46
:gig:
100 people in that room; 100 opinions on what the band sounded like.
Even in a recording scenario the monitors in the mixing studio may sound different to those in the mastering studio - and not necessarily by design. Dave DSJR may have experience of that!
I don't think there's a definitive truth except at the point the artist signs off the mix, and even then I'd wager few are as fastidious as say Dave Gilmour in reviewing the test masters on decent gear in decent conditions :)
100 agreed.
Note: See Marco. You should try this "agreeing" lark. It's easy. You may even find you like it.
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 16:47
Marco,
I believe Chippy's sentence of the "AOS fraternity" was only there to justify (and outline, as an opposition) the two sentences that followed it :
"The whole mass-market hifi industry is chasing "accurate" (with low THD and flat frequency response etc) and mistakenly believes this will automatically sound best. It won't."
That's how I understood it, at least.
Thank you Themis. Precisely so.
Thank you Themis. Precisely so.
Chippy, without being overly -insisting,
I believe that you have to admit also, that your sentence..
"The whole AOS fraterny is chasing what sounds nice, not what's "accurate"."
is highly innacurate...
It is supposed to point out the opposition, but it remains innacurate. ;)
Chippy_boy
15-10-2009, 16:53
I see where you're coming from. I think we're probably arguing over semantics.
Basically, what I'm saying is that I'm not looking for what "sounds nice" when I assemble hi-fi system - rightly or wrongly, that comes across as tailoring the sound in some way to create a euphonic effect.
*THAT* is not what I'm about at all. I build my system to reproduce music based on the benchmark of what I consider as 'accurate', not necessarily what I consider "sounds nice".
Do you see my point? :)
Marco.
I see your point, but I don't think it's right. Because how do you determine accuracy? By prefering what sounds "good" (aka "nice") to what sounds bad. There's no other way is there. Your ears can't measure things and you have repeatedly stated that it's no use relying on measurements anyway.
So you might think your all about trying to build a system that you consider accurate, but in reality your mission is to build one that sounds nice. It may or may not be more or less accurate than the last one.
Chippy,
When you first joined here I had to pull you up for 'judging' people in terms of their approach with hi-fi. I can't remember right now what the incident was, but I'll look back later and find out, so perhaps that's why you remain 'on my radar' in that respect.
I am merely pointing out that without an objective reference point any assessment of a hifi by anyone has to be subjective.
I agree with that statement (and also the one you quoted from Beechy). The trouble is, I can't help feeling that you somehow think that your "objective reference point" is more 'objective' than that of anyone else here.
Anyway, I suggest that we leave it there, otherwise we'll be going round in circles all night.
Marco.
So you might think your all about trying to build a system that you consider accurate, but in reality your mission is to build one that sounds nice. It may or may not be more or less accurate than the last one.
I know what you mean, but no. I often choose equipment, cables, or whatever that reveal a more 'truthful' sound rather than what I think sounds 'nice'. I could cite numerous examples of this :)
Marco.
Anyway, I suggest that we leave it there, otherwise we'll be going round in circles all night.
Yep, moreover, it's "aperitif" time ! :cool:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.