Nice system described in Wired

Two things about this post: i) HK gear did nothing for you. That doesn't make it bad gear. Personally, I rate the work of Sean Olive highly and like what they've done myself. So shoot me.

And ii) your second sentence is a really cheap shot, nothing more, nothing less. You worked at Harman, whoop. I worked at Rolls-Royce and helped put aircraft engines together. I think my highs go up a few notches more than yours. About five or six miles roughly speaking...but so what?

 

Yeah, sure as all of us on this or any other forum take a shot of their employment credentials and post them. Sure. But does that make you any more of an authority on what you talk about? When it comes down to "I don't like HK gear because....it did nothing for me", well, you know, this isn't something you can lay at the door of some three year tertiary qualification requiring a 25,000 word dissertation does it? Yes?

I can't stand the mob rule mentality; it leaves a sour taste in my mouth. You don't like what the KT says, fine. I think my response to that is "deal with it". But not in the way you're doing. That's cheap and makes you look bad and, I suspect, most of us are better than that at the heart of it.

 

When you're dictating the "how it is" as statement-of-fact, when it's really statement-of-opinion, than I suspect that's what gets to people. And you're writing style doesn't help; you adopt a mantra - first it was the "golden age" thing. Then it was the "properly treated room" mantra. Then it was the ongoing and misplaced car analogy, and now, with your last sentence, it's the harping on to KT about going to listen to an expensive system.

Why don't you go and do the Matrix Audio blind test? Let us know how you get on will you?

 

If I open up my phono pre, I can see it is made of inexpensive parts. These parts perform very well, however, in the context of the circuit. I have a prototype that uses even cheaper parts than the final production, but the parts are more stable but not available in quantities and steady supply. They are what the designer would have preferred for all the units, not because of some cost savings, but because of the consistent performance. It is the function of the design, in the end, that has value.

I know there are exceptions to this. Op amps are inexpensive, and I don’t like the way they sound, generally. I stay away from designs that use them if possible.

 

Daz, That was my point about the hi-end and online. You cannot find stuff like Audio Research, conrad-johnson, VTL, Lamm, Wilson Audio and other high-end names that I cannot think of right now for several reasons: The expense (people will not spend that kind of money unless they can see, touch and listen before they buy), the low volume sales of these brands (most online operations prefer high volume sales) and these brands want to control retail prices so that the brand "value" is not cheapened. The problem of course is there are few and fewer B&M dealers so unless you live near a major population center (i.e. a big city) you cannot easily find this kind of gear.

 

I'd pay a little more if they were to deliver a bunch of options to my home and let me test drive and swap stuff around in home before buying. Assuming I had big bucks to spend of course. Going from store to store and trying to listen in store is pretty hard and there really aren't too many left and I have had some awful experiences. I think high end audio needs to create some type of better customer experience.

 

Oh for the days when shops had multiple rooms divided out by budget with multiple, well arranged set ups so you could A/B compare.

 

exactly those days appear to be gone, some don't even have more than one dedicated listening room and you can't even demo all the lines they sell. So why not an in home trial instead, saves them big rent they could just have a crappy warehouse somewhere, and the customer would get to demo all they want on their time in their own home. If I was a high end customer I would pay extra for that type of concierge service. I don't know maybe logistically it wouldn't work.

 

I asked this time around, but the 60lb shipping weight was too heavy for the seller to ship for a demo. So, I bought used at a good price, thinking I could sell if I didn’t like. Still, I would have liked to compare some others. It seems many people are forced to work this way, and you often hear regrets expressed for having sold some particular piece of gear.

 

What's that saying to the effect that you can't have "cheap, fast and excellent,' only two out of three?
Finding a dealer who can supply a wide range of gear, allow home trial, is available for those panic moments when you need audio 911, takes trade-ins and ups, etc. is usually not going to be cheap. On the other hand, there are plenty of dealers, who, despite the mark-up, still suck. A good dealer can be a godsend.

 

Agreed, but only to an extent. Although shopping online has been around for a while, I think that right now we are in the midst of dramatic change in consumer habits. This doesn't just mean that people buy online and B&M stores slowly die, although that's part of it. It is also a realignment of how people shop: how they research products, whether they choose to shop globally or support local, a whole bunch of things.

Right now, we can see how this change is affecting audio gear, with the rise of quality, independent gear - usually in the more budget range: Schiit, Grant Fidelity, that kind of thing. Products that you cannot buy from a store, that rely on good internet reviews and buzz to sell.

I think that this change will in fact slowly move up the scale. Obviously, cutting out the middleman is a good business model, if enough sales can be made without dealerships. The brands you mentioned are pretty good examples of brands that should be able to transition to mostly online sales, as they have the name and the reputation. Sure, uber high end speakers present shipping difficulties - but the amount they cost should be able to absorb that easily enough. And, with a 30 day return policy - very common in this kind of sale - you do get to see, touch and hear before you buy. In your own home, at your leisure.

So yes, I think that in the not too distant future, most fairly high end sales will be online. In a lot of ways, this is great for the consumer. Home auditioning. No sales pitch. Choose products that you are interested in, not ones that you are being pushed towards. And given the nature of online communities like this, the wealth of knowledge and information about gear is likely to increase. I mean, it's a pretty much solitary hobby - so most audiophiles already do their knowledge sharing and chatting online anyway.

 

Steve great anecdotes, and sounds quite interesting, for real!

I think the issue many have in the forum, is not with someone with your expertise, but more along the lines of "ordinary self proclaimed audiophiles" making claims, that have NOT subjected themselves to blind testing in any way, and tell anecdotes about changing things and getting "huge" differences in sound.

As you described your experiences, about how subtle the difference was, but also very real, and backed up by blind testing him also, it comes off as quite honest sounding and believable.

But when someone (( NOT YOU IN PARTICULAR)) changes a speaker cable, and has absolute knowledge of it being changed, and no ability to blind test themselves, and hears a monumental change to the sound, it completely lacks the credibility of your story.

Like I have said all along. Im sure some cables in some situations do make differences, but when one reads a story about a life altering sound change.........human nature is to question the anecdote as it simply comes off as sounding.....

Im not so sure, some think others are "imagining things" as you say, but more closer to saying, the stories sound a bit questionable in how they are worded, and lack some credibility as far as the listener making absolutely zero attempt to rule out any expectations, not being a well trained listener with a track record of being able to distinguish subtle changes in sound.

 

I think when you are a careful listener in the context of a system you know very well, these small changes are obvious. How any one person expresses what they hear is a whole other matter.

What is telling about the story is how Steve had to explain what to listen for.

Often my wife, unprompted, will ask if something has changed. She never asks when something has not changed. Most recently, it was changing out a bit of internal signal-path wiring inside our amp. She knew nothing about the mod, but noticed an increase in detail.

 

One of the better UK stores I had a demo in had good staff. They helped me choose speakers with some interesting misdirection:

"I can't hear any difference"
"Listen again to where the acoustic guitar comes in on the right"
"Uh-oh. On speaker 2, the bass actually stops (the player dampens the note) and there's a gap between that and the guitar!"
"Right. Speaker 1 is more resonant and has less control"

Know your recordings, and listen to them on different systems if you can.

 

-----------------------------------
I think in Art Dudley's case that over the years he has had a chance to live with many, many systems and changed out hundreds of pieces of gear. Those experiences have allowed him to finally define what SOUND he prefers over all others. I don't think that is anything other than what most of us want. As a musician I do think AD comes from a different place than other reviewers.

If one is on a gear quest, I think that is wrong headed. The music is the destination and the gear the road to get there. I know there is so much gear out there that is better than mine, but I have had speakers in my home that were $10K and $15K a pair and although they were different in some ways I could not say that they were head and shoulders better than my ancient AR-58's that do not come from spectacular genetic code.

The AR-58's are an improvement on the basic design of the AR-3A which is well respected. I do think that speakers are the most important component, but the rest matters as well after the speaker issues are settled. As some one improves their gear to a high degree I do think that then wire can make a difference. In my systems, not so much. Andrew Jones inexpensive speaker designs have proven that good does not have to cost that much and can be afforded by anyone with a job and who cares about sound quality.

 

At the risk of alienating our formidable host, by definition, the old Quad (aka Quad 57) would be a winner. It had the uncanny ability to reproduce the human voice without any trace of boxiness, glare or overt coloration. Unfortunately, it had no low bass, it couldn't play loud and it was beamy (narrow sweet spot). I stil have mine, moldering in the basement, in desperate need of rehab. A stacked pair would be the bomb.

 

Can you recommend a good commercial recording of the spoken voice that one can use to audition speakers?

 

Can you imagine what will be going through the mind of the average hifi salesman after he presses play (& I should say no criticism intended of the suggestion to use such a recording).

 

Any number of audio books on CD will do. The likelihood is the speaker will be up close to the mike when it's done. Given as many are going to be trained in public speaking, you should get some half decent intonation thrown in for good measure! Or choose some good speech radio if you have FM. Cover off a range of types. Not all are going to be what you typically listen to, or will be put together in a purpose built test facility. Work round a few.

 

Of course, I should have remembered that disc. I'll be auditioning speakers at a local recording studio for some mixing sessions. I'll grab one of these and try it out. Thanks!

 

Dont forget! Test CD1 has Ralph

"Ralph's voice on the StereophileTest CD is there just as a lark, but, other than successfully identifying in no uncertain fashion your left and right channels, it turned out to be an excellent test signal for midrange loudness capability (footnote 1). I couldn't figure out why no loudspeaker could come close to duplicating the live sound of Ralph—he would graciously chime in with howls identical to the test signal whenever we played the Test CD bark repeatedly on a good enough system—until J. Gordon Holt noted that Ralph's live bark hit 108dB measured at a distance of 6'. Neither home loudspeakers nor home amplifiers feel very comfortable producing 108dB in the midrange."