View Full Version : Is 'What It Sounds Like' All That Matters'?
Plenty of technical discussions about h-fi on the interweb but you will always get someone who crops up to say something like:
'Did you listen to it?'
'What it sounds like is all that matters'
'I just use my ears'
And so forth.
What's more these statements will be made with a bemused/confused tone. As if it is obvious: If it sounds good it is good, why complicate what is so simple? The logic is straight-forward.
Or so you would think. However 'Just listening' has some major drawbacks when used as the sole method of evaluating a piece of equipment or even a format. If you don't, or are unable to put what you are hearing in context, you can end up making some wrong assumptions, and consequently make some poor buying decisions. Whilst it is always pretty clear-cut whether we like the sound we hear or we don't, making any further assumptions solely from that input can lead us down a garden path. Here are some examples where 'Just Listen' falls over:
1) Manufacturers don't always tell the truth, at least not the whole truth. You hear a component and like what it does, The maker says the reason their X sounds better is because they use Y technology in it. So you jump immediately to the conclusion that anything using Y technology will be good, that Y tech is ground breaking, a paradigm shift etc etc. Whereas in reality Y tech is just marketing babble and the reason that X component sounds good is simply that it is well engineered. 'Well engineered' is, depressingly, not a concept that marketing can sell in the modern age. Hence the need to emphasise the use of Y tech. Will all components using Y tech sound good? No. Only the well engineered ones.
2) Something could be broken or not performing optimally but you don't know this. You try X amp in your system, doesn't sound very good. You don't buy it and you tell everyone 'yeah, I tried X amp, it isn't up to much.' 6 months later you discover there was a fault with your speakers, or your cartridge was out of alignment, etc etc.
3) There is an incompatibility between X and the rest of your system. You don't know this because you didn't check out the spec first, you 'just listened'. Again you don't buy and if asked you tell people that X is not up to much. In reality it did not have enough gain for your amp, or it was underpowered for your speakers, etc etc
4) You 'just listened' but you didn't listen enough. A few audiophile recordings does not a summer make. Did you try every genre of music? Every time period from early 1960s simple recordings to modern, digital multi-tracks? Music with loads of deep bass? Music with close-miked female voices? If the equipment (especially loudspeakers) has a flaw you may need to listen to 40 or 50 different recordings before you notice it. Once you hear it on one recording you hear it on them all. Equipment is rejected, but at a great cost in time. (plus your 14 days to send it back has probably expired).
5) You can be the problem How much we enjoy listening to anything is dependant on our mood and a host of other factors we cannot always verify. Whereas I am personally of the opinion that 'expectation bias' and 'placebo effect' are totally overblown as excuses for why we perceive differences when there should technically be none, we still can't escape from the fact that if we listen to a good system in a good frame of mind the experience will be much more impactful than if we are listening when tired, depressed, have stuff on our minds, or when it is a chore and we would rather be doing something else.
You might have memories of a particular evening at a friends house, playing music all night, the sound was amazing. You mention it to a few people, maybe even think about replicating that system for yourself. Some months later, you go back for another listen, same system, same music, it sounds utterly prosaic. What has changed? Mains quality? Or you? Which is more likely?
'Just Listening' is just not enough.
As King Kenny Dalglish once said. "Maybe's aye, maybe's naw" :eyebrows:
I don't think you should try and overthink something you already like as it causes more problems and results in heartache.
As King Kenny Dalglish once said. "Maybe's aye, maybe's naw" :eyebrows:
I don't think you should try and overthink something you already like as it causes more problems and results in heartache.
Wise words indeed... "Overthinking" things can certainly negatively influence matters, just as much as under-thinking them.
I think you should always carry out some research on stuff before buying it, and not simply by reading the blurb from manufacturers either (or magazines), which has pitfalls, as Macca outlines, but also by finding out what people think who are already using the product you're thinking of buying, and then trying to get as many diverse opinions on it as possible.
The key thing, after doing that, with whatever the item is in question, and forming a positive conclusion on it or otherwise, is to trust your GUT INSTINCTS, and go with them, and not be put off by 'what science says', or specs or measurements, as very often it has little bearing on the results of real-world listening *in your own system*, which at the end of the day is all that matters.
Then, when whatever it is arrives for you to evaluate, listen to it carefully over a reasonable period of time, using familiar music as the arbiter, for judgement on its efficacy or otherwise, and in the final analysis, TRUST YOUR OWN EARS, no-one else's, even if some so-called 'facts', or the views of 'experts' appear to contradict what you're hearing.
Essentially, at the end of the day, HAVE FAITH IN YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT, and don't need your choices or decisions 'validating' by others. Have the gumption to make up your own mind, and if you're sure that you're right, stick with it, no matter what anyone else says!!
That's half the problem these days with hi-fi, as so many folk need led, like sheep, and TOLD what to do, by consulting their self-appointed 'guru', as they lack the confidence to think and judge things for themselves... :doh:
Marco.
I'm suggesting that the problem is under-thinking, not over-thinking. And that the problem is now at a point where it is hindering the production of quality audio equipment. So quite serious.
Yes, but as Grant says, overthinking things can be just as much of a problem as under-thinking them! ;)
For me, the bottom line (once all other avenues have been explored) is trusting your own ears and judgement. If they're any good, you won't go far wrong. Also, always be willing to learn from others, and never think that you know it all (because, quite simply, you won't) :)
Marco.
Even if you have bad ears and bad judgment you make a system that you like. What others think is irrelevant unless you are bothered by what others think.
Indeed, although as you correctly point out, "bad" or "good" is highly subjective... The key thing is to stick with what your idea is of "good", as long as YOU enjoy it, and bugger what anyone else thinks!
That said, it also pays to consider the views of those whose ears and experience you trust (for whatever valid reason), and never be so stubborn/dogmatic that your conclusions or opinions, on any subject, are immovable.
If necessary, always be willing and prepared to learn new things, or in some cases, reassess/re-evaluate what you *thought* you already knew...
Marco.
Interesting. I think one way to be safe is to make use of 30 day sale or return policies. A day in a showroom is not enough, neither is a home visit from a dealer. The one true measurement is your own long term listening enjoyment, which takes weeks at least.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The one true measurement is your own long term listening enjoyment, which takes weeks at least.
Ain't that the truth, bro! And ultimately, it's the only one that matters. It's also something that neither technical measurements/specs, nor 'scientific facts' can predict or dismiss.
Marco.
Mike Reed
29-01-2018, 20:05
I'd just add a couple of pointers which I use. (1) Does it grab your attention when you turn it on ? (2) Do you just sigh, sit back and enter into another world when you flick the mute switch, regardless of source (except TV)?
Twice a week, if those two parameters are met, all's right with the world. Because I don't trust my hearing (age related and well down on one aural channel) I invite younger ears in for a session on occasion. I am where I am because of critical audiophile local opinion, but it's been a long and interesting half-century plus journey.
MARCO, thanks for your comment on a thread t'other week. Only my wife ever logged me out but I've stayed passively engaged for quite a long time. Didn't know how to relay this directly, so apologies to o.p.
MARCO, thanks for your comment on a thread t'other week. Only my wife ever logged me out but I've stayed passively engaged for quite a long time. Didn't know how to relay this directly, so apologies to o.p.
No problem, Mike. Always good to see our founding members dropping in and contributing! You were one of the very first folk to join AoS, so stick around, as I always enjoy reading your contributions :cool:
Marco.
Yes. Next.
Really? You've never encountered any of the situations I described? Or you don't think that you have?
Really? You've never encountered any of the situations I described? Or you don't think that you have?
I have encountered many of them over the last 50 gears. That lifetime of good and bad experiences convinced me that it really is all about listening. My only caveat is that you should listen to a lot of alternatives.
When upgrading, here are my simple rules
1. Does it please me more than what I have already.
2. Am I prepared or able to pay for the improvement.
I have encountered many of them over the last 50 gears. That lifetime of good and bad experiences convinced me that it really is all about listening. My only caveat is that you should listen to a lot of alternatives.
When upgrading, here are my simple rules
1. Does it please me more than what I have already.
2. Am I prepared or able to pay for the improvement.
That's nothing I disagree with. My point is that we can draw the wrong conclusions about why we hear what we hear from just listening. And this has a knock on effect on the products themselves.
That's nothing I disagree with. My point is that we can draw the wrong conclusions about why we hear what we hear from just listening. And this has a knock on effect on the products themselves.
What's the alternative - magazine reviews, friends recommendations, reputation, favourite brand, flavour of the month on the forums, flashing lights. Buy on any of those and you're on the road to dissatisfaction.
What's the alternative - magazine reviews, friends recommendations, reputation, favourite brand, flavour of the month on the forums, flashing lights. Buy on any of those and you're on the road to dissatisfaction.
Well I might go with a friend's recommendation. But obviously none of the others. Clearly you can't audition every product available. or even a meaningful fraction of them. So your buying decision is not based on comparative listening, except to the extent you compare a handful of items to what you have already. And there is the danger of paying way over the odds for a sound quality you could have bought for much less, had you known why it sounded so good.
Primalsea
29-01-2018, 23:27
I think there is a lot of sense in what Martin says. “Just use your ears” is not a sentence that comes with any qualification, although the people that say such things often put those words as being as such. The amount of audiophiles who music choice is dictated purely by whether it sounds good on their system astounds me. People who like music and understand that not everything they like is recorded and produced well tend to have a more pragmatic view of what they want from their hifi.
Another thing to be careful of with gear is the ‘honeymoon period’. Some stuff wows for the day or week, but after a few weeks starts to grate a bit. Cue much box swapping and regret that you can’t find your original unit.
Many good points being made here, and I whole heartedly agree that listening should be your biggest influence.
But I also agree that there is more to it than that. If you popped into your local stereo shop and heard an amazing sound! This system set up in front of you sounds amazing! So! Are you going to buy that amp and put it in your system? Or perhaps the speakers? Or the source? How do you know which piece is responsible? Of course it’s all of them.
But you came shopping for an amp, so, you take the amp home, and your speakers are very different from the ones in the store, and your source, and it doesn’t do it for you. So back to the store it goes. It’s easy to say, “judge only gear in your own system”, but most of us do not have that option, most of us have to buy first. Possibly with the ability to return if you aren’t satisfied. But I don’t buy new, when I buy, it’s for keeps. So I have to know what I’m getting, is it compatible with my speakers? Have others who own my speakers endorsed the amp I’m looking at? Are there any magazine reviews from writers you trust? I confess that honest reviews are not as easy to come by as they used to be. My point is, you need a reasonable amount of confidence before you buy used.
But with that being true, once I got this amp home, it sounded good! I couldn’t hear anything wrong, it did everything right! I should have been happy! But I wasn’t. Somehow it did not pull me in, one record did not lead to a dozen more, I tried wires, and power filters, new sources, nothing changed. So, I took a big leap and bought another amp, one I had read many great things about, one that has been reviewed with my speakers, and wow! The difference was night and day! Now I listen all the time, nearly every day, it stands up to the test of time. There may be a dozen more amps out there that sound even better! But I’ll never hear them, I have no means to hear them. So, listening alone cannot pick me an amp. Or any other component. I have got to rely on other input first, to narrow the field, to get in the ballpark.
I’m pretty sure that any tubed amp that sounds awesome with the appropriate speakers would sound like crap on my speakers, unless they were 200 watt amps. There are many numbers we must observe before we decide what to bring home. There’s no need to spend any money on any gear that’s not even compatible, and of course unless you are listening in your own home, you can’t make those determinations by listening alone. To bring everything you’ve ever heard sound good into your living room just to see if it blows up is not sound logic. But when all is said and done, listening is the only thing that can make you happy.
Russell
Mike Reed
30-01-2018, 10:52
I disagree with some of the comments in previous posts; mainly about not researching the piece of kit one's interested in. If you primarily buy used, as I do, you'll have to take a bit of a punt. However, if you read everything on all sources at your disposal, whether mag. reviews, personal reviews or general feedback, you can reduce the risk factor considerably. If you then buy at a tradable price, your losses in the event of incompatibility can be minimal in tn the event of resale.
Only by listening to a piece of kit in your own familiar system surroundings over a reasonable time can you be sure. Conversely, of course, your ears may familiarise themselves over time; easy enough to revert to the original kit. That usually does the trick. It's folly, I believe, to sell something to achieve something else; that way lies regret.
Can't say I've ever bought something as a direct result of a shop or hifi show dem. The one time a decade or more ago that I took my CDP into a dealer dem. against a more modern version (both Meridian), I was totally underwhelmed. Six months later I took a punt on that same model and it was clearly superior to what I had. Not difficult to draw conclusions.
As cartridges are all but impossible to hear on dem. (not that would mean much anyway), I took a punt a couple of years back on a discounted new cart. simply on account of the many happy owners of its previous model on the forums over the years and Google experiences etc. The few mag. reviews were positive, too. Certainly the finest cart. I've had in any vinyl front end, usurping my Benz Ebony and K. Urushi (and a friend's Lyra Titan i upon his vist last November).
You've got to take a bit of a punt in this game, so it might as well be an educated one.
You've got to take a bit of a punt in this game, so it might as well be an educated one.
Precisely :thumbsup:
But... Said 'education' doesn't necessarily have to be based upon digesting reams of convoluted specs or measurements, especially if you don't properly understand them...
Marco.
RothwellAudio
30-01-2018, 11:17
Or so you would think. However 'Just listening' has some major drawbacks when used as the sole method of evaluating a piece of equipment or even a format. If you don't, or are unable to put what you are hearing in context, you can end up making some wrong assumptions, and consequently make some poor buying decisions. Whilst it is always pretty clear-cut whether we like the sound we hear or we don't, making any further assumptions solely from that input can lead us down a garden path.
I think you're absolutely correct Martin. It would be nice if everything was a perfectly compatible with everything else and a simple "plug and play" approach was always guaranteed to work - and in the wider world of ordinary consumer audio it probably is - but at the more esoteric end of the spectrum things aren't so simple. Take a valve pre-amp for example. Your mate may have a Brand X valve pre-amp and it sounds great so you think you'll buy a valve pre-amp too, but you buy Brand Y. You get a sound which is merely ok - nothing special at all - and so you conclude that Brand X is superior to Brand Y.
The truth turns out to be rather different: your mate's power amp is also valve and has a very high input impedance, whereas your power amp is a transistor jobby with a much lower input impedance. That means Brand Y doesn't perform well with your power amp, but Brand X wouldn't a fared any better in your system either, so claiming Brand Y to be inferior to Brand X is drawing a false conclusion.
Anyway, I think you're spot-on and "what it sounds like" can be very misleading.
George47
30-01-2018, 11:39
Lots of good points being made.
Certainly how it sounds in your system and to you is a key part. You are using it for reproducing music and if you are an organ aficionado then you will listen to different things to a chamber music fan or a Led Zep fan. It is your system.
Do your research to make sure it fits in your rack, it does not weigh a ton on your Ikea table, the power is sufficient etc. Once done, and a unique advantage of the web, is ask what people think. You will get a real cross section of views but you should get real people's view with possibly a few gems. Take some of the answers with a pinch of salt as they could come from people with a financial interest or fanboys. This is something paper based reviews can't easily do. Responses on reliability are helpful as you find out how the company deals with real people's complaints. Yes read the reviews but try to find someone aligned to your own views and avoid the 'everything is wonderful' person. NO not me.
For me, when I get a product home I will listen to a set of test tracks and if I then move to my normal music, I could be really liking it. I try to listen to the product for a few days and let it really get under my skin. I then re-insert the original and form a view. A/B comparisons are not that helpful as they highlight sound level and frequency response differences.
It is a music reproducer not a piece of test equipment. If the music induces a response then great. There is too much hifi out there and not enough stuff that allows the music to shine.
It is a music reproducer not a piece of test equipment. If the music induces a response then great. There is too much hifi out there and not enough stuff that allows the music to shine.
Never a truer word was said, George!! :clap: :thumbsup:
And many folks seem to forget that, and lose the plot... I completely agree with all three of your statements.
Marco.
George47
30-01-2018, 11:45
I think you're absolutely correct Martin. It would be nice if everything was a perfectly compatible with everything else and a simple "plug and play" approach was always guaranteed to work - and in the wider world of ordinary consumer audio it probably is - but at the more esoteric end of the spectrum things aren't so simple. Take a valve pre-amp for example. Your mate may have a Brand X valve pre-amp and it sounds great so you think you'll buy a valve pre-amp too, but you buy Brand Y. You get a sound which is merely ok - nothing special at all - and so you conclude that Brand X is superior to Brand Y.
The truth turns out to be rather different: your mate's power amp is also valve and has a very high input impedance, whereas your power amp is a transistor jobby with a much lower input impedance. That means Brand Y doesn't perform well with your power amp, but Brand X wouldn't a fared any better in your system either, so claiming Brand Y to be inferior to Brand X is drawing a false conclusion.
Anyway, I think you're spot-on and "what it sounds like" can be very misleading.
True but at the end of the day the valve preamp does not work well with your power amp and it is therefore not for you.
RothwellAudio
30-01-2018, 11:58
True but at the end of the day the valve preamp does not work well with your power amp and it is therefore not for you.
That approach might work for you but as a professional I need to know more - I need to know why something worked great in one context but failed to shine in another.
Besides, you're assuming that in my example the purchaser realised that the problem lay with the pre/power mis-match. I'm saying that the "it only matters what it sounds like" approach wouldn't lead anyone to that conclusion, rather they'd simply conclude that Brand Y is rubbish.
That approach might work for you but as a professional I need to know more...
Yup, if you're a designer or builder, different rules apply - but otherwise unless you *properly* understand measurements or specs, in their correct technical context, and know how to use that knowledge to your benefit, they're unlikely to be of much use, and so for most will simply confuse matters.
Also, the fact is, no matter how much you try to understand why what does what, at some point, when it comes to how things sound, you'll have to trust your own ears and judgment, and that's the main message I'd like to put across on this thread.
The more that folks learn to do that, and not simply rely on specs and measurements, or blindly copy those whom they feel are greater 'experts' then they are, the better it'll ultimately be for their musical enjoyment :)
Marco.
That approach might work for you but as a professional I need to know more - I need to know why something worked great in one context but failed to shine in another.
Besides, you're assuming that in my example the purchaser realised that the problem lay with the pre/power mis-match. I'm saying that the "it only matters what it sounds like" approach wouldn't lead anyone to that conclusion, rather they'd simply conclude that Brand Y is rubbish.
In a nutshell the point I was making. And this isn't about digesting 'reams of stats and measurements'. And it makes no difference whether your re professionally involved in hi-fi or not. You don't need a degree in electronic engineering, just a basic understanding of how it works.
For example few of us could repair our car's engine if it blew. But that doesn't mean we don't have a basic understanding of how an engine works. If someone told you that your engine worked because of a quantum effect then you would laugh at them since although you are not a mechanic you know enough about engines to know this is bollocks.
But when it comes to hi-fi too many seem not to care at all. They listen , they like, then they tell other people it sounds good because of the quantum effect, (since this is what the salesman told them) and other people believe them!
Soon manufacturers start making more products that claim to harness this technology. 6 months later no-one is making a product without quantum effect. Then quantum effect replaces good engineering because you don't need good engineering to make sales, you just need to put a quantum effect sticker on some bog standard bit of crap and it will fly out the door. And no real progress in audio engineering is made anymore.
In a nutshell the point I was making. And this isn't about digesting 'reams of stats and measurements'. And it makes no difference whether your re professionally involved in hi-fi or not. You don't need a degree in electronic engineering, just a basic understanding of how it works.
Absolutely, but what would you suggest as an example of the latter - how far do you go? Should one simply know how to use a multi-meter, read an oscilloscope, or perhaps understand a circuit diagram?
I have a basic understanding of how things work, but when discussions revolve around deciphering graphs or maths equations, and other forms of technical measurements, my eyes glaze over, as I have no interest in that whatsoever, nor do I believe it would be of much use to me, even if I did understand it, as a simple listener and music lover.
We've been here before, and you know that I've managed to build a very nice sounding system indeed, whilst having paid scant attention to understanding 'how it works';)
And as I've said before, you cannot force yourself to become interested in something that simply bores you to tears.... I'm a music lover, first and foremost. not a tech geek.
But when it comes to hi-fi too many seem not to care at all. They listen , they like, then they tell other people it sounds good because of the quantum effect, (since this is what the salesman told them) and other people believe them!
That may happen in some instances, among novices or the most gullible, but I don't see much evidence of it on specialist audio forums such as this.
Soon manufacturers start making more products that claim to harness this technology. 6 months later no-one is making a product without quantum effect. Then quantum effect replaces good engineering because you don't need good engineering to make sales, you just need to put a quantum effect sticker on some bog standard bit of crap and it will fly out the door. And no real progress in audio engineering is made anymore.
There are other more valid reasons, IMO, responsible for the above, such as a critical decline in discerning listeners (folk who genuinely care about sound quality). Therefore, manufacturers will simply cater for [often pander to] the demand - whatever that demand is - so if you want better engineered equipment, then find more people these days who care about sound quality, and crucially, are willing to pay for it!
The gradual (and continual) decline in standards, since the heyday of audio (hi-fi), is your biggest problem - and here I'm blaming the bulk of today's buyers, as much as anything else, and their lack of sonic discernment, thus giving manufacturers an easy cop-out, in terms of having to design equipment to the highest standard. That is the biggest reason for some of the crap or mediocrity being produced.
Some of what folks today consider as 'good' shocks me.... You could start with those who think 'good sound' emanates from headphones, connected to an iPhone, or who consider a 'soundbar' as an adequate speaker for use in a proper home-cinema system.
The lack of discernment these days runs deep, and if that's your benchmark for 'goodness', then when it comes to hi-fi, even the most mediocre equipment will impress you, so quite simply, commercial manufacturers now don't have to work very hard, or push any sonic boundaries, to sell their kit - and that 'disease', to an extent, has also infected today's so-called 'high-end' market, where all too often style triumphs over substance.
Therefore, look no further than that as largely being the reason for the decline in standards you're highlighting.
Marco.
Precisely [emoji106]
But... Said 'education' doesn't necessarily have to be based upon digesting reams of convoluted specs or measurements, especially if you don't properly understand them...
Marco.
Indeed, agree with both you and Mike. End of the day I had to take a punt with my DAC, and had amps I’d never heard on sale or return, or snapping up a pair of Royd RR3s on eBay within minutes of them coming up. I guess that it was my research, and not listening, that got me to my current gear choices. I certainly was not looking at THD or other measurements, just sentiment and subjective experiences around the gear. That I have kept them is because they give me what I want sonically.
That may happen in some instances, among novices or the most gullible, but I don't see much evidence of it on specialist audio forums such as this.
.
Regrettably not the case. And no, you don't need to be a double E. Just like you don't need to be a car mechanic to understand that your car does not work on some sort of quantum effect.
Take the flagship of fakery, 'Hi resolution digital'. You listen and yes, it does sound better! Obviously better! '
The reality is that it is better mastering, the 'hi resolution' part is total flim-flam. But how would you know this from just listening? Of course you wouldn't. However a little reading on the topic will reveal all. You don't need to be a mathematician or physicist to understand.
Sadly that particular set of emperor's new clothes worked so well it has only encouraged further nonsense to be produced, presumably because hi-fi enthusiasts have been identified as the most gullible, most unquestioning market segment on the planet.
Another example - 'jitter' induced distortion. Now this was a solved problem back in the 1970s. Even with those early Phillips and Sony players jitter distortion was way below any audible level. Yet countless products are marketed on the back of 'reducing jitter'. So you are reducing the level of something we cannot hear anyway. You try one, you listen. 'Sounds better! So that must mean that nasty jitter distortion I could hear before has been banished. This tech works and I'll pay for it!'
Forget the idea that the change in sound could be down to something else entirely. The marketing man says jitter reduction is the reason so that must be the reason. Even though it is impossible!
Of course if they said their jitter reduction unit changes the sound only by generating pleasing distortions, they wouldn't sell any.
This is the sort of dumb stuff I am railing against and I don't see that you need to be able to use an oscilloscope to understand any of it, anymore than you need to consult a forensic accountant before you undertsand that you are unlikely to be receiving $500K from a Nigerian Prince.
Fair enough, but I don't see any major evidence on here of what you're implying: essentially, forums such as this populated by 'hapless victims of technobabble'... Perhaps you could link me to what you're describing, so that we're dealing with real-world examples of such, rather than simply your (possibly biased) perception of matters?
In any case, what about the rest of my post, which you appear to have ignored, and the real reasons I believe why, to quote you: "no real progress in audio engineering is made anymore"? :)
Marco.
Mike Reed
30-01-2018, 15:16
Precisely :thumbsup:
But... Said 'education' doesn't necessarily have to be based upon digesting reams of convoluted specs or measurements, especially if you don't properly understand them...
Marco.
Echoed by Yomanze in a later post, and I agree because I'm a bit thick on electronic science and totally uninterested in anything digital beyond CD. However, I have a fair grounding on cart. outputs, eff. mass requirements and tonearm differences and compatibilities of same. This involves spec's and (sometimes) ambiguous measurements like the American and European output criteria for moving coil cart's. My eyes glaze over too, but if there's a need (and tidy sums are involved)..........
Everybody has their own criteria to buying hifi, and anything else for that matter, and these do change with experience and age. However, selecting a music transcription system does depend primarily on research, listening and approving; in that order, I'd say. The more of the first two rather determines the last, I'd guess !
B.t.w., how do you get an icon/smiley to go where you want it rather than at the heading? Showing my digital ignorance here but manage it elsewhere.
should go where the cursor is
Mike Reed
30-01-2018, 15:33
And no real progress in audio engineering is made anymore.
Hmmm ! Not sure about that one, Macca. There are some aspects, like cartridges, that seem to constantly evolve and improve (at a cost, of course), so micro-engineering seems to have been on an upward path. I rather feel this also applies to other aspects of the vinyl chain, if not vinyl itself. Haven't got a clue about digital but I do wonder if the non-tangible (i.e. streaming etc.) music of today is not a great advancement on, say, ten years ago.
In some areas, like amplification, I do wonder, though, purely from an s.q, standpoint. I'd say that speaker technology has advanced, too, but possibly more by the employment of new materials than revolutionary design.
Mike Reed
30-01-2018, 15:37
should go where the cursor is
As I thought. It'll be me, so I'll experiment a bit more:) Ah, maybe I'm using the wrong icons.
RothwellAudio
30-01-2018, 15:55
I'd say that speaker technology has advanced, too, but possibly more by the employment of new materials than revolutionary design.
Yes, I'd say new materials have offered opportunities for improvement, as has the availability of computerised measuring equipment. The latter may be a double-edged sword though. I wonder how many speakers are "designed" to satisfy the eye as it surveys the graphs rather than satisfy the ear as it listens to music.
In any case, what about the rest of my post, which you appear to have ignored, and the real reasons I believe why, to quote you: "no real progress in audio engineering is made anymore"? :)
Marco.
I think the reason you cite is a separate subject and worthy of a thread of its own. I'm not really sure if you are right or wrong there, I'd have to see what sort of case you could make to back up your assertions.
Obviously I'm not going to pick out specific instances from this site, or any other, this was a general rant and not aimed at any individuals.
Cop out! :ner:;)
:D
As for the other matter, "the case" I'd make to back up my assertions, is the behaviour of the general public, evidenced all around you, and their less than discerning buying habits - and unfortunately that's what influences the production of much of today's commercial hi-fi gear.
As a small example, how many of the folks you work with truly care about the sound quality of any audio equipment they use? In fact, how many even own what we would describe as proper audio equipment?
Marco.
Hmmm ! Not sure about that one, Macca. There are some aspects, like cartridges, that seem to constantly evolve and improve (at a cost, of course), so micro-engineering seems to have been on an upward path. I rather feel this also applies to other aspects of the vinyl chain, if not vinyl itself. Haven't got a clue about digital but I do wonder if the non-tangible (i.e. streaming etc.) music of today is not a great advancement on, say, ten years ago.
In some areas, like amplification, I do wonder, though, purely from an s.q, standpoint. I'd say that speaker technology has advanced, too, but possibly more by the employment of new materials than revolutionary design.
Agree on paper advances have been made in speakers, there is new tech that works very well, JBLs compression driver for example. Maybe I am skewed from reading this site but it does seem to me that most older enthusiasts tend to end up with big Tannoy DCs, Quad 57 or vintage JBLs as their final destination speakers. 50 year old tech and it still cuts the mustard. And we are talking people who could, within reason, buy any speakers they wanted. Cartridges I regret I know little about beyond I like Shures and Nagaokas. I've not read up on any advances made in that area.
Maybe I am skewed from reading this site but it does seem to me that most older enthusiasts tend to end up with big Tannoy DCs, Quad 57 or vintage JBLs as their final destination speakers. 50 year old tech and it still cuts the mustard. And we are talking people who could, within reason, buy any speakers they wanted.
I agree, and certainly come under the latter category. I don't think it's just this site, but if you read the likes of pfm, or any proper audio forum, here in the UK or abroad, you'll find many other discerning enthusiasts like me, who's ears tell them that the finest sound, not just with speakers, is achieved by combining the BEST of old and new technology.
Never underestimate that last bit, as the influence of the new [where REAL, and very advantageous, technological advances have been made] is just as important...
I assure you that if you heard my Tannoys before the crossovers were modified and upgraded with the BEST (there's that word again) modern components, you wouldn't have liked them anywhere near as much as you did when you heard them after said work had been done! ;)
Ditto my Sony CDP/DAC, ditto the Croft, etc, etc, after it was similarly modified. It's not just a case of buying any highly revered 'obsolete old tat', firing it up, and then expecting miracles.... Doesn't happen that way.
You have to know how to get the best out of it (by understanding its strengths and weaknesses), and most importantly identify where the most significant technological advances have been made, in terms of the 'new factor', then implement them in your system, to bring out the BEST bits of the vintage gear, thus achieving a successful marriage of the BEST of old and new technology :)
Oh, and the *only* way you can do that is by using your own ears and judgement. You will not find the answer from the readout on any test equipment!
Marco.
Didn't you replace you crossover components like for like? Just putting in up to spec replacements would make a big difference if the old components were substantially drifted or failing. maybe capacitor tech has advanced in leaps and bounds, I don't know but it doesn't seem likely to me. I know you have one of those Bybee devices in your DAC. I've no idea about that, having not heard the before and after. You have to remember I am a Doubting Thomas. You got to show me to convince me. I don't do faith.
Didn't you replace you crossover components like for like?
Like for like, in terms of electrical value, which was necessary in order for it to work properly, but not in terms of the quality of the components themselves.
The BEST of today's polypropylene capacitors, for example, are EONS superior to anything produced in the 1960s, when my speakers were made - and then you've got the resistors and inductors - heck even binding posts are different animals these days!
No, the crossovers were completely reworked, but in a way that was both sonically sympathetic (with the original Tannoy design and drivers themselves), and of course electrically correct :)
Just putting in up to spec replacements would make a big difference if the old components were substantially drifted or failing.
That's usually the case with 50-year old loudspeakers. Certainly, the original crossover components will be, at best, somewhat 'tired'.
...maybe capacitor tech has advanced in leaps and bounds, I don't know but it doesn't seem likely to me.
There's no maybe about it, mate. It's a fact. Ask anyone who builds or experiments with equipment, and isn't afraid to spend decent money on components. Almost every piece of kit I use has benefited in some way from the injection of the BEST new components.
I know you have one of those Bybee devices in your DAC. I've no idea about that, having not heard the before and after. You have to remember I am a Doubting Thomas. You got to show me to convince me. I don't do faith.
I have no problem with that whatsoever, but I think you know me well enough by now, and respect my idea of what's a good sound (as I've demonstrated it you numerous times with my kit), to know that I wouldn't have retained the (one) Bybee in the Sony DAC, in the most influential part of the signal path, if it didn't genuinely improve the sound.
Marco.
Well we are not in disagreement about mixing old and new or updating vintage equipment. But that has nothing to do with the subject of the thread.
Firebottle
30-01-2018, 18:41
maybe capacitor tech has advanced in leaps and bounds, I don't know but it doesn't seem likely to me.
You have to remember I am a Doubting Thomas.
Capacitor tech has come on in leaps and bound in recent years. Some of the manufacturers have put in some astounding R and D.
Doubting Thomas :ner:
Capacitor tech has come on in leaps and bound in recent years. Some of the manufacturers have put in some astounding R and D.
Doubting Thomas :ner:
Well I said I didn't know and now I do. :)
Well we are not in disagreement about mixing old and new or updating vintage equipment. But that has nothing to do with the subject of the thread.
No, but it's to do with what we're currently discussing, and you've just admitted to learning something new, which is always good! :)
Marco.
Hey I'm always learning and putting together the pieces of the jigsaw. Especially with hi-fi. That's why I don't understand why so many other enthusiasts have a blind spot when it comes to that and just want to dumb it down to 'trust your ears.' As Primalsea says, it is totally unqualified advice. I suppose it is the nature of the modern world that what is complex must be overly simplified and what is actually very simple must be dressed up in a load of bullshit to make it look complex.
That's why I don't understand why so many other enthusiasts have a blind spot when it comes to that and just want to dumb it down to 'trust your ears.'...
It's not a case of 'dumbing down', though. It's a fundamentally correct thing to do, in the final analysis. That last bit is important because, as others and you have said, it's not JUST about trusting your ears, and feck everything else. That simply won't work.
You have to do your research and read up on stuff, some of which may be technical - and be willing to experiment.
All I'm saying is that, once you've done all that, and are judging the results, ultimately you have to trust your ears - and *at that stage*, if you're convinced that whatever you're hearing is right, you should always trust your ears/instincts MORE than what currently accepted science and engineering says, if the latter appears to contradict what you're hearing, and crucially in the final analysis, have faith in your own judgement.
After all, currently accepted science and engineering may not be telling the full story in that instance, or being applied in the correct way. You may have discovered something new that as yet hasn't been tested for - or can hear something, the existence of which at present can't be proven by measurements or currently accepted science and engineering. It's not impossible!
Modern life so often leads us to shun our natural instincts, and rely on some form of technology instead, promoting lazy thinking - and I believe that can lead us into forming many wrong conclusions, and not just with hi-fi. We need to embrace our gut instincts more, and learn to trust our senses, *when* we consider there is good cause to.
In this instance, the mistake folk make is doing the opposite, and that can often lead them down the wrong path - and to a lifetime of endless (ultimately disappointing) box-swapping, desperately trying to correlate what they hear, with technical facts or measurements, when in this hobby of ours, that's not always possible.
Not everything in life, which is genuinely experienced, can be proven by currently accepted science and engineering, or carries with it a ready-made technical explanation. But you can waste a lot of time trying to find one; something you may never achieve, whilst life, and a whole load of fun and musical satisfaction you could've otherwise had with your system, passes you by...
However, I don't think we're so far apart in our respective stances... In any case, why change a winning formula, if an 'ears first' approach to system building has succeeded in rewarding you with a superb system? As they say, don't 'fix' what ain't broken! :)
Marco.
Mike Reed
30-01-2018, 19:59
Highlighting passages doesn't seem to work for me here, Marco, but your mention of some people 'buying by measurement' reminds me that this was indeed the basis for purchase of (or drooling over) kit in the 60s and 70s; certainly the early s/s amplification but much else beside. The T.H.D., wow & flutter and whatever, ad nauseam, was the thing stuff was sold on.
Naïve, maybe, but fun regardless in those halcyon analogue days of R2R, cassette, quadraphonics...(mood has just changed; delete last one). Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Highlighting passages doesn't seem to work for me here, Marco...
Do you mean when trying to quote someone, Mike?
...but your mention of some people 'buying by measurement' reminds me that this was indeed the basis for purchase of (or drooling over) kit in the 60s and 70s; certainly the early s/s amplification but much else beside. The T.H.D., wow & flutter and whatever, ad nauseam, was the thing stuff was sold on.
Ah, the infamous 'spec wars' of the 70s... Ample proof, if any were needed, that 'buying by measurement' alone doesn't work, as some of the most musically anodyne sounding gear was coincidentally also that which had 'impeccable measurements'! :doh:
Marco.
George47
30-01-2018, 20:50
Highlighting passages doesn't seem to work for me here, Marco, but your mention of some people 'buying by measurement' reminds me that this was indeed the basis for purchase of (or drooling over) kit in the 60s and 70s; certainly the early s/s amplification but much else beside. The T.H.D., wow & flutter and whatever, ad nauseam, was the thing stuff was sold on.
Naïve, maybe, but fun regardless in those halcyon analogue days of R2R, cassette, quadraphonics...(mood has just changed; delete last one). Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Yes those measurements came from Wireless World where the idea came to look at THD, frequency response and noise (Williamson?). In those days the equipment did not do so well in those measurements so they were quoted over and over again. With advances in design and components these measurements have now become 'perfect' and inaudible. And what seems to have happened is the brilliant measuring components now sound awful, flat and boring.
Companies became fixated with them and did crazy things like increase the feedback to reduce the THD. Sure enough it worked but the components started to lose the good sound quality it had in the first place. If these measurements were critical for sound quality then all SS amps are now perfect and they should sound the same. But that is not the case. Despite that the marketing departments love them. Look the THD is getting lower and lower and the noise is beyond what can be reproduced.
I like the approach of Nelson Pass who is an expert designer of amps, he has some of the most advanced measuring equipment around but always listens to his amps before releasing them. Double blind tests, panel listening tests and listening himself. Oddly enough Audionote have some really fancy measuring equipment but use listening tests as well. So it is not a polarised argument as both should be important for manufacturers; measurements and listening.
For customers the emphasis is the other way round. No problem in people understanding what is going on and being able to make the right decisions or to help limit what is available to those components of interest to them. With a follow up listening test.
But most people do not have any idea of how audio cables work. It has little to do with electrons moving in cables.
I agree with you Marco about the public in general losing discernment in audio, and is indeed the case with so much else consumed. They are being led by corporate power using psychologists, accountants, and advertising people, because their lives are so fast paced that they have no spare capacity to do their own evaluations.
This is very sad, and is further compounded by music being also corporately produced rather than by individuals expressing their own emotions in art.
Look at the ubiquitous purchase of two veneered 'bricks' of speakers surrounding and next to a plastic cube of tuner CD player and amp, for £250.
These factors represent a cultural decline IMO, music now a commodity which accompanies everything, and the once heretical songs of youthful incisiveness are now 'papped' along with adverts for insurance, all original ethos now long lost.
The high end has resorted to 'jewellery' to be profitable, rather than really involved research into audio science and engineering.
It a very true that mass market music players have really gone down hill. The majority of people these days do not seem to have the same wants that we had 35 to 50 years ago. I recall several local stereo shops, where nice two channel systems could be had from Marantz, Technics, Sansui, etc, etc. it seemed everyone had at least a fairly competent system around. But today, the last few times I’ve visited someone else’s house, they had a Bluetooth box that they drove with their phones. Better than a clock radio, but not by much. To me all of these new Surround Sound receivers today sound awful, they all have op amp outputs with fudged wattage figures. I’m sure some of the better ones are fine, but the budget multichannel receiver is most uninspiring.
But that doesn’t mean that the high end has left us! It just cost a lot more, and is pursued by fewer people. It has become a more exclusive club. I am constantly shocked at the prices of new speakers, amongst other gear, like $30 grand is nothing! Surely right at the leading edge of high end, progress is being made, that hopefully will trickle down to affordable gear in a few years?
It is also true that major discoveries or product advancements in the name of higher fidelity are not seen much anymore. Ever since high end downloads supposed to upend CD quality, and SACD, etc, there hasn’t been anything new that is supposed to be better. I think that may be because we are skirting around the theoretical limits of human hearing? Can they make it better? Sure! But at what cost? And who will be able to hear it? To squeak out a bit more resolution for a few golden eared eccentrics?
But perhaps there are minor improvements being made all the time, that do add up. The better materials, the closer tolerances in components, new techniques in manufacturing, better sounding caps, etc. Big companies who specialize in real high end, are constantly trying to top their previous flagship models, and of course these new products are outrageously expensive! So, we wait a few years and buy them used, or wait for the new improvements to trickle down to more affordable units. And then wait a few years and by those used!
Russell
Mike Reed
31-01-2018, 08:09
The high end has resorted to 'jewellery' to be profitable, rather than really involving research into audio science and engineering.
True; things have changed in that respect, but so has much else. It got me wondering what was considered high end in, say, 1970 when I went to college. I bought a 401, SME 12" and V15 to go with my Leak (later Revox) pairing of amp. and tuner plus Tandberg and Revox R2Rs. I don't think I ever considered those as high end at the time, and can't really remember anything that much more esoteric, despite Japanese super-integrateds and stuff coming in.
HiFi was hifi, was affordable, was considered normal by any audiophile wanting a half decent system, and, stretching my rose-tinted memory, there really wasn't much on the market and most was British anyway. Yes, the Swiss TD124 was more expensive than the 401, but certainly not thought of as the high-end stuff is nowadays. The quadraphonic era of 1973 to 1976 approx. did usher in stuff costing well over a grand (Marantz oscilloscope receiver, e.g.) plus the expensive add-ons. At about that time, Japanese stuff was pretty well established in model ranges (Pioneer, e.g.) which could stretch the wallet a bit, but high end? Nope.
In the first period you mention Mike, I had similar equipment to you, perhaps not quite as good, but it was aspired to by most who wanted good sound, this promoted by that very creative artistic period, and it was then the high end, and affordable to those who worked to achieve ownership of it. I could not hear the difference then between I/P and O/P from my A77, and I regarded that sound as reference. My Tannoy Gold Lancaster 15s were the same as used in Abbey Road.
The eighties saw the concern with the City and money, and this I guess prompted the development of much more expensive Hi-Fi, and that period has opened the floodgates for consumer acquisition in all areas.
The really expensive stuff is not open to mass A/B comparison, but it would be interesting to see which if any of the £30k+ speakers really stood out as representing real progress.
I regard my acquisition of a second hand pair of speakers that cost £25k new, as obscene given my financial/social status.
I regard my acquisition of a second hand pair of speakers that cost £25k new, as obscene given my financial/social status.
Obscene? Really? You dropped on, good luck to you. Nothing obscene about that.
Mike Reed
31-01-2018, 15:07
Obscene? Really? You dropped on, good luck to you. Nothing obscene about that.
Nope. Avalons by any chance?. The rule for young children used to be 'obscene but not heard'. No parallel here. No idea about your social status, Martin, but I bet your financial status plummeted afterwards.:)
Nope. Avalons by any chance?. The rule for young children used to be 'obscene but not heard'. No parallel here. No idea about your social status, Martin, but I bet your financial status plummeted afterwards.:)
All of my statuses are too low to be measurable.
Obscene? Really? You dropped on, good luck to you. Nothing obscene about that.
Indeed. When my friends or people question the price it makes me think how obscene car buying, or designer gear, can get. [emoji3]
Music is a passion, daily listening enjoyment. How can you put a price on that? Be it cars, watches, computers, fishing, it all can get expensive.
I couldn't agree more Neil, a £3 watch will be virtually as accurate as a £10K one.
As for this current competitive SUV competition for style in ' Look how smart I am in my big sleek car with such slitty dark windows you can'e see me',yuch to the pretentious idiots, and women's handbags . . . .???
Music is also an art which offers social commentary, and insights into feelings about life, and when the music is concordant with the words it can be so powerful and stimulating.
Men have their gadgets, women have their shoes and handbags. Probably best to let sleeping dogs lie there.
Men have their gadgets, women have their shoes and handbags. Probably best to let sleeping dogs lie there.
some of us have both:eyebrows:
It's rather stereotypical, and not a little sexist too, to lump all women into the category of vacuous 'clothes freaks', as if they lacked the capacity to be interested in anything else...
I can assure you that Del has many other interests/passions, and stuff to spend money on, than just shoes or handbags! ;)
Marco.
It's rather stereotypical, and not a little sexist too, to lump all women into the category of vacuous 'clothes freaks',
What's wrong with being sexy?
What's wrong with being sexy?
Or going to 11?
It's such a fine line between clever and stupid.
RothwellAudio
01-02-2018, 14:10
It's rather stereotypical, and not a little sexist too, to lump all women into the category of vacuous 'clothes freaks', as if they lacked the capacity to be interested anything else...
I wouldn't take it too seriously. Not all men are gadget geeks either. I think we all know that these generalisations are just that, despite a grain of truth, and I doubt any offence was intended.
Mike Reed
01-02-2018, 14:20
Men have their gadgets, women have their shoes and handbags. Probably best to let sleeping dogs lie there.
Bugger; had a feeling I'd gone wrong there. I hate gadgets (too thick to understand how they work) and my porch is awash with shoes. Imelda Marcos' spirit lives on in a transvestite Norwich suburb. Upon my many soles !
What's wrong with being sexy?
Lol - nothing! You can still be sexy though, without being so superficially (materialistically) or vainly minded. Personally, I'd never marry any woman who was 'high maintenance'. Dated plenty in the past, as sometimes they can be fun, but those aren't the marrying type... ;)
Marco.
I wouldn't take it too seriously. Not all men are gadget geeks either. I think we all know that these generalisations are just that, despite a grain of truth, and I doubt any offence was intended.
Lol, I'm not. Just wanted to make the point that not all women are preening, vacuous 'bimbos', with no interests outside of the latest contents of Cosmopolitan... :eyebrows:;)
Marco.
Primalsea
01-02-2018, 16:22
Why do I feel there is a black hole opening up infront of us here. There are some things that blokes shouldn’t discuss amongst themselves, even in earnest.
Why? It's all just harmless discussion (thread drift) - certainly nothing to take too seriously :)
I often can't help chuckling when blokes bring up the 'handbag and shoe' thing, in reference to their female partners, during hi-fi discussions, as if somehow it was a 'given' that's all women cared about! :lol:
Marco [dislikes superficial stereotyping with a passion].
VanDerGraaf
01-02-2018, 17:22
Why? It's all just harmless discussion (thread drift) - certainly nothing to take too seriously :)
I often can't help chuckling when blokes bring up the 'handbag and shoe' thing, in reference to their female partners, during hi-fi discussions, as if somehow it was a 'given' that's all women cared about! :lol:
Marco [dislikes superficial stereotyping with a passion].
The pair of Acoustic Research AR18 I've been given to try and fix up belong to an older female family member, apparently they were her pride and joy back in the day. Had no idea she had anything like that at home.
My GF is very accommodating towards my hifi love- she now even has a little setup of her own that I gave her consisting of Rega Ela speakers and a Mistral valve/ss hybrid. Says it made her fall in love with music again after a long period of disinterest.
You do read a hell of a lot of adverts for gear elsewhere with the "wife says they have to go" explanation- but maybe that's all it is- a very convenient explanation, that in some cases is not exactly truthful...
Ah Rohan, a man after my own heart! I'l come back to you on that later :eyebrows:
Marco.
Why? It's all just harmless discussion (thread drift) - certainly nothing to take too seriously :)
I often can't help chuckling when blokes bring up the 'handbag and shoe' thing, in reference to their female partners, during hi-fi discussions, as if somehow it was a 'given' that's all women cared about! :lol:
Marco [dislikes superficial stereotyping with a passion].
What I said was a generalisation, to be stereotyping I would have to make the comment with regards to an individual. e.g 'Del is a women so she must be interested in shoes and handbags' would be stereotyping.
Personally I have never had a lady friend who was interested in shoes, handbags, hairstyles or any of that. I've had the opportunity to go out with 'girly' girls many times but always shied away. Not sure why.
And as far as generalisations go, I'd suggest most women regard hi-fi equipment as 'gadgets'.
Wiuld think the vast majority would think it a man gadget. One that takes up too much room and time etc.
Firebottle
01-02-2018, 18:37
I've had the opportunity to go out with 'girly' girls many times but always shied away. Not sure why.
'.
Chicken? (only pulling your leg as I know you)
Thank goodness Shirley appreciates music and the quality of reproduction.
Chicken? (only pulling your leg as I know you)
Thank goodness Shirley appreciates music and the quality of reproduction.
Yes, my last and greatest girlfriend loved music and had no issue with the hi-fi and used it herself all the time. She was dead against television though, which was a major hurdle for me. I had to get her addicted slowly, like some sort of aversion therapy. Worked in the end.
No idea why I split up with her now, she was a total sweetheart and as fit as f***. Ruined me for other women.
Pieoftheday
01-02-2018, 19:09
[QUOTE=Marco;943292]Why? It's all just harmless discussion (thread drift) - certainly nothing to take too seriously :)
I often can't help chuckling when blokes bring up the 'handbag and shoe' thing, in reference to their female partners, during hi-fi discussions, as if somehow it was a 'given' that's all women cared about! :lol:
Marco [dislikes superficial stereotyping with a passion].[/QUOTE.oops don't know what appned there,!!
Personally I have never had a lady friend who was interested in shoes, handbags, hairstyles or any of that. I've had the opportunity to go out with 'girly' girls many times but always shied away. Not sure why.
And as far as generalisations go, I'd suggest most women regard hi-fi equipment as 'gadgets'.
I think most women are 'into' the stuff you mention. My point was that that isn't likely to be the ONLY thing they're into - if they have a brain and an education...
Del's actually quite girly, in terms of her overall demeanor and the clothes she wears. You'll almost never see her in trousers, and pretty much exclusively wears dresses, in pretty feminine colours, always plaits her hair, so it's curly (naturally long dark brown), etc, which she keeps immaculate, and doesn't really need to wear much make up, other than a bit of lippy [she hates the plastered 'orange' look, which seems fashionable at the moment:rolleyes:].
So of course she loves nice clothes, shoes, etc. But if you asked her what she was most 'into' or passionate about [in the same way I am about hi-fi, cars, music, etc) or what she would spend most money on, given the opportunity, handbags or shoes would be pretty low down on the list!! It'd more likely be gardening equipment/furniture, vintage cars, antiques or books ;)
I'd agree with you on the generalisation front, in terms of hi-fi, although as Del loves music, which we often listen to together, she also LOVES big speakers, as she's a bass freak:D
Marco.
My GF is very accommodating towards my hifi love- she now even has a little setup of her own that I gave her consisting of Rega Ela speakers and a Mistral valve/ss hybrid. Says it made her fall in love with music again after a long period of disinterest.
Respect! Now you see, you've got a partner that you share common interests with, which you enjoy TOGETHER. For me, that's what it's all about. Why on earth would you go out with someone (far less marry them) who hated the things you liked, and that you had little in common with?? :scratch:
Sometimes it seems the only things couples have in common these days, married or not, are the kids they've had together - and that's not enough to maintain a long-term and happy relationship, if otherwise they're polar opposites.
You do read a hell of a lot of adverts for gear elsewhere with the "wife says they have to go" explanation- but maybe that's all it is- a very convenient explanation, that in some cases is not exactly truthful...
I know, and every time I read that it creases me up! :lol:
Why would "wife'" be the sole self-appointed decision maker over something that might not even be her property? Worse, if she truly cared for you, she wouldn't try and FORCE you into selling something you love and are passionate about, for what is often a trivial reason.
No, like you say, something is seriously amiss, and it's not just the fact that there are too many subservient little doormats out there, posing as 'men'... :hmm:
Marco.
Mike Reed
01-02-2018, 22:04
I s'pose I should be gratified that my Taiwanese wife often joins me on the sofa, regardless, it seems, of what I'm playing. Her ears are excellent and immediately acknowledged the musical superiority of, say, my E.A.R. 509s over my 135s; took me a few months of swapping ! She had no trouble identifying the same in my 2905s over my ProAc Response Fours. Again. it took me many months. She has no knowledge or history of music and actually prefers quiet.
I'm a bit nonplussed, though, when she sometimes sits there doing her computer coding lessons on her laptop when the room is filled with Fairport or Led Zepp. or whatever. I can listen to music or do things; never both (except for driving, but that's different !). The difference between focus for her part and a few glasses of pinot noir for mine, possibly.
My ex wife never cared about shoes or purses, in fact she ran around barefoot for the most part. But she understood that the stereo was my thing! She never tried to tell me what to do with my stereo, except turn it down on occasion. And like Mike’s wife she had a great ear! I always took her with me when I went stereo shopping, if I wasn’t sure if I was hearing something she could be sure, obviously she could hear better than I could. And yes she enjoyed the music, when we returned from a party at a friend’s house she would say, “the music sucked over there!”, her ears spoiled at home. I gave her a pair of 6 inch heels one year for Christmas and she said, “I can’t walk in these!”, to which I replied, “You won’t get far anyway!”. Ah to be young again.
Russell
True; things have changed in that respect, but so has much else. It got me wondering what was considered high end in, say, 1970 when I went to college. I bought a 401, SME 12" and V15 to go with my Leak (later Revox) pairing of amp. and tuner plus Tandberg and Revox R2Rs. I don't think I ever considered those as high end at the time, and can't really remember anything that much more esoteric, despite Japanese super-integrateds and stuff coming in.
HiFi was hifi, was affordable, was considered normal by any audiophile wanting a half decent system, and, stretching my rose-tinted memory, there really wasn't much on the market and most was British anyway. Yes, the Swiss TD124 was more expensive than the 401, but certainly not thought of as the high-end stuff is nowadays. The quadraphonic era of 1973 to 1976 approx. did usher in stuff costing well over a grand (Marantz oscilloscope receiver, e.g.) plus the expensive add-ons. At about that time, Japanese stuff was pretty well established in model ranges (Pioneer, e.g.) which could stretch the wallet a bit, but high end? Nope.
I recall the 70’s quite well, when I too assembled my first stereo. A 25 watt Technics receiver, AKL speakers (junk), and a nice ADC turntable. Back then, the High End was old guys who pulled the tube amps out of an old console to drive a pair of Klipsch horns.
It seems to me that the high end as we know it began with the Nakamichi amps and preamps. SAE was there, many names popping up, but I do recall the Nakamichi PA7 was it? Being the first I ever saw. Then Threshold popped up, the modern high end exploded onto the scene. Now, maybe they existed before my time? But those are the first brands I remember that were “cost no object”, offerings. Of course that’s not true, I’m sure they worked to a price point, but you catch my meaning. And I’m also sure it looked somewhat different from across the pond than it did in the states?
Russell
In these cases the women are not enthusiasts, they just enjoy music. So they can give an unencumbered opinion. You get too deep into thjs hobby and you can end up not being able to see the wood for the trees.
In these cases the women are not enthusiasts, they just enjoy music. So they can give an unencumbered opinion. You get too deep into thjs hobby and you can end up not being able to see the wood for the trees.
Funny, my daughter and her husband have the same dynamic. He’s a stereo nut, but she really enjoys the music. She would rather let him sweat out the details, as long as they have a nice system in the house.
Russell
Mike Reed
03-02-2018, 15:24
I recall the 70’s, when I too assembled my first stereo.
It seems to me that the high end as we know it began with the Nakamichi amps and preamps. ......... and I’m also sure it looked somewhat different from across the pond than it did in the states?
Russell
You say 'I too', but I'd been going for 6 years by 1970. My eureka moment was when my friend and I went over in 1964/5 to buy a Jason valved integrated in a Maida Vale flat. The chap put the 'Grand March' from 'Aida' on his t/t (with Ortofon arm, I remember), playing through Wharfedale W3 (their biggest) speakers. We were both gobsmacked.
I think the American stuff (ARC, Krell, etc.) might have been at the forefront of so-called 'high-end'. Having said that, the Revox amp., tuner and A77 I had cost a pretty penny; looked pretty, too !
'High-end' long ago become part of the hifi lexicon, but I wonder (a) when it was coined and by whom, and (b) which products initiated this ostensibly sound valuing system. Was it simply based upon a price threshold or actual performance; or both?
Not sure who actually coined the phrase "high end", but it used to mean the better, and more expensive, of the high fidelity gear available. It is said that Mark Levinson exemplified the 'high end' in offering "cost no object" products.
walpurgis
03-02-2018, 23:41
My recollection is that the term found favour in the later eighties.
I think it is generally attributed to Harry Pearson from The Absolute Sound magazine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Pearson_(audio_critic)
Mike Reed
04-02-2018, 09:18
Not sure who actually coined the phrase "high end", but it used to mean the better, and more expensive, of the high fidelity gear available. It is said that Mark Levinson exemplified the 'high end' in offering "cost no object" products.
Ah, yes, couldn't bring the marque to mind. Mark Levison, the American Naim (as I read in a mag. once). You may well be right, as may Martin, ascribing the term to Harry Pearson. I think the Americans had a lot more 'esoteric' stuff (with concomitant prices, esp. over here) than us, or even Europe. Possibly the onset of CDs in 1982 had the effect of reviving hifi generally, ultimately giving analogue kit (esp. vinyl front ends) a design boost and later revival.
As I bought an LP12 and started on that band-wagon in 1982, I was well behind the curve; took me nearly 20 more years to embrace the format. I'm not sure if it's largely the well established big brands that have gone 'ultra' high-end, like Naim, going from circa £40K 552/500 to £130K+ Statements or smaller companies concentrating above a price level (e.g. Vitus). Obviously there's a market, but there may well be a lot more high-end money out there nowadays with musical 'notes'.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.