Audiophile Fundamentalism

BlueFox · Jul 26, 2014

Champ04 said:
The quote in the OP that is attributed to Phil Jackson (KEF) is actually a quote from Robert Harley. Robert weighed in on this subject just the other day.
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/from-the-editor-its-all-good/

That being said, I think Robert if full of crap on this.

Have to disagree. I think it is a well written, cogent piece. He is talking about people who are entrenched in their belief that their choice of gear is the only correct way to play music. He is saying people can enjoy music no matter the underlying technology. I agree with that. Currently my two channel system is inop due to my breaking the speakers. So, I have been using my HT system for music the last two weeks, and thoroughly enjoying it.

Champ04 · Jul 26, 2014

BlueFox said:
Have to disagree. I think it is a well written, cogent piece. He is talking about people who are entrenched in their belief that their choice of gear is the only correct way to play music. He is saying people can enjoy music no matter the underlying technology. I agree with that. Currently my two channel system is inop due to my breaking the speakers. So, I have been using my HT system for music the last two weeks, and thoroughly enjoying it.

I can't disagree with your statement. I guess it's all in how you read his article.
For what it's worth, I've always maintained that if I like the music being played I'm going to like it on a crappy karaoke system just as much.

asiufy · Jul 27, 2014

dallasjustice said:
Has anyone tried a genuinely new technology in their system? What was your experience like?

There is very little truly new technology in 2-ch audio, no?
Everything these days seem to revolve around implementation. Different implementations, or variations of old implementations.
Pass Labs presented at this year's Newport Beach show with a limited production (3 pairs only) of an amp based on 80s VFETs.
Even DSP and room correction isn't new, but I understand recent implementations of it have improved considerably, most likely due to the increased computing power of modern devices.
I'm curious about the Siltech SAGA thing, though, as that seems like a genuinely new technology.

alexandre

dallasjustice · Jul 27, 2014

Champ04 said:
The quote in the OP that is attributed to Phil Jackson (KEF) is actually a quote from Robert Harley. Robert weighed in on this subject just the other day.
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/from-the-editor-its-all-good/

That being said, I think Robert if full of crap on this.

The first offense is in labeling people as fundamentalist to begin with. As if this isn't inflammatory. The second problem is to claim that this "obviates the need for critical thinking". Quite the contrary. I've been part of this hobby for multiple decades. My systems were disjointed at best, always trying to find that perfect "balance" that was so easily disrupted by changing any singular piece. Many of those years was spent wandering around aimlessly by believing (at least in part) all the BS that's spouted from marketing departments. It wasn't until I BEGAN CRITICALLY THINKING about all of it that I started to find true satisfaction. By contemplating the thing that gave me enjoyment, understanding the technology behind it, applying the same process to other equipment, and so on I eventually assembled a system that I find imminently satisfying. Every single piece works in unison because they are all based on the same theoretical ideals. My system is cohesive and it's final performance is greater than the sum of it's parts precisely because I applied critical thinking into assembling it.

Systems that others enjoy now often leave me flat. Try as I might to enjoy them I can't get past the fact that they are, fundamentally, boring to me now. I'm not deciding that I CAN'T enjoy them. I don't first look at the technical aspects of a system that is new to me and decide whether or not I'll like it. I listen first. But precisely because of years of critical thinking I can now often predict the existence of certain technological and design parameters being present in a system due to what I hear.
If someone else likes it, good for them. But I'd rather listen to my system where things actually sound real.

Robert Harley ends his piece by reiterating the title. "It's all good."
How exactly can someone claim a higher degree of critical thinking only then to claim that everything is good?!

This is precisely the thing that is causing J. Gordon Holt to turn in his grave. Long past are the days where many used critical thinking in an attempt to achieve actual fidelity. Now, with "It's ALL good", we may as well just shop at Best Buy.

Thanks for the correct attribution. A friend emailed me the quote and encouraged me to start this thread.

. Of course, he didn't post any comments here. I guess he figured better me than him. I don't mind the heat. At this point, most everyone here knows where I stand.

dallasjustice · Jul 27, 2014

The debate between DSD and PCM is one of the most ridiculous audiophile debates. Just pick whichever one you think sounds best with your DAC and your system. For me, DSD MUST be converted to PCM because I use DSP. Of course, I decided long ago that any difference between the 2 is totally irrelevant when compared with the real improvements DSP offers. That's just my perspective. If someone hears it differently, good for them.

As far as Mr. Harley's commentary, I do think it's a little odd that DSD is considered to be a "new" technology. It's been around for a long time. It's advantages and disadvantages are well known.

microstrip · Jul 27, 2014

rbbert said:
The J Modular cabinet was essentially a big bass enclosure on the bottom and an open framework on top; one added the various mid/tweet/supertweet modules and attached them with brackets, which were "movable". Similar to the first WAMM, but with framework on the outside rather than a central pole.

I should add that each speaker was custom built; there were probably no two alike.

Thanks - my curiosity was just if there was any reference in the manuals, reviews or advertisement of the 70's that the units position should be adjusted for time alignement.

Revel Salon 2 · Jul 27, 2014

that's a legitimate question?

rbbert · Jul 27, 2014

microstrip said:
Thanks - my curiosity was just if there was any reference in the manuals, reviews or advertisement of the 70's that the units position should be adjusted for time alignement.

You didn't get a manual with the Fulton J's. You got a visit with Robert to help set them up, and unlimited help from him afterwards (if you could manage to get a hold of him.)

microstrip · Jul 27, 2014

rbbert said:
You didn't get a manual with the Fulton J's. You got a visit with Robert to help set them up, and unlimited help from him afterwards (if you could manage to get a hold of him.)

Thanks - I understand now why the Fulton site is almost empty. A pity we can not have more facts and details about his great achievements. I hope that people who have more knowledge on the subject can help.

microstrip · Jul 27, 2014

My wishes were fulfilled faster than I could expect - a friendly WBF reader just sent me a link to the Fulton J Modular owners manual ="http://akdatabase.com/AKview/albums/userpics/10007/Fulton J Modular Owners Manual.pdf"] and a great thread on them at AudioKarma http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=453283. Thanks Leo!

RogerD · Jul 27, 2014

microstrip said:
My wishes were fulfilled faster than I could expect - a friendly WBF reader just sent me a link to the Fulton J Modular owners manual ="http://akdatabase.com/AKview/albums/userpics/10007/Fulton J Modular Owners Manual.pdf"] and a great thread on them at AudioKarma http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=453283. Thanks Leo!

Thanks! I have never seen the J manual. I never knew that my FMI 100's use 2 starter relays. One of Fulton's last speakers made was the Little Maestro,for a small speaker they weigh 15lbs and are a 2 way and the imaging is exceptional.

rbbert · Jul 27, 2014

I can't get your link for the manual to work? In any case, awesome! Those pics on audiokarma look just the way I remember; I'd like to see if the manual discusses moving the mid and tweeter assemblies back and forth inside that upper enclosure, as I remember Bob Fulton doing with the J's I would listen to in San Diego.

RogerD · Jul 27, 2014

rbbert said:
I can't get your link for the manual to work? In any case, awesome! Those pics on audiokarma look just the way I remember; I'd like to see if the manual discusses moving the mid and tweeter assemblies back and forth inside that upper enclosure, as I remember Bob Fulton doing with the J's I would listen to in San Diego.

Robert see if this works.....

http://akdatabase.com/AKview/albums/userpics/10007/Fulton J Modular Owners Manual.pdf

MRJAZZ · Jul 27, 2014

microstrip said:
Thanks - I understand now why the Fulton site is almost empty. A pity we can not have more facts and details about his great achievements. I hope that people who have more knowledge on the subject can help.

The Fulton J's were indeed a very interesting speaker . I was fortunate to have a pair back in the day. They along with my version of the MLevinson HQD were some of my fondest memories of the GOLDEN AGE of audio.

rbbert · Jul 27, 2014

RogerD said:
Robert see if this works.....

http://akdatabase.com/AKview/albums/userpics/10007/Fulton J Modular Owners Manual.pdf

Yes, thank you!

rbbert · Jul 27, 2014

MRJAZZ said:
The Fulton J's were indeed a very interesting speaker . I was fortunate to have a pair back in the day. They along with my version of the MLevinson HQD were some of my fondest memories of the GOLDEN AGE of audio.

I thought your speakers at THE Show Newport had a lot of potential, but the room precluded any good evaluations, unfortunately.

MRJAZZ · Jul 27, 2014

rbbert said:
I thought your speakers at THE Show Newport had a lot of potential, but the room precluded any good evaluations, unfortunately.

THANK YOU for the input. Yes concur the room did present issues. We normally use the length of the room at this show, (the speakers positioned on the short wall and facing the longest direction ) but decided to try the other direction. While we did have some good sound at times, there were just to many issues. Next year the venue will be at a different location. Will be interesting to see what we can accomplish there.

CHEERS......T

Atmasphere · Jul 28, 2014

I had Fulton Js and later Premieres. The J is what got me into high end audio as well. My first OTLs were driving the J modulars.

RogerD · Jul 28, 2014

Atmasphere said:
I had Fulton Js and later Premieres. The J is what got me into high end audio as well. My first OTLs were driving the J modulars.

Hello Ralph,

How would you compare the two speakers?

Atmasphere · Jul 28, 2014

BTW in case anyone is wondering Fulton was as much a fundamentalist as I have seen. I lived in the same town and spent some time with him had Bob Fredere, and later with Fred Devere.

To me the stat version was less efficient and harder to set up. The Premiere, which was an evolution of the J modular, seemed easier to drive, had better bass extension, and seemed to image a little better.

Of his full-range speakers, I liked the one he made just before he died suddenly the best. This one used the 'Oval Window' concept, which could play an octave below the cutoff of the woofer drivers, allowing him to use an array of smaller (faster) woofers. I have a recording, Canto General, which I had made in the 1980s; that last speaker played exceptional bass relative to the prior speakers, rendering the bass drum in the recording with great ease. It was also easier to drive. The Oval Window was apparently a modified Helmholtz resonator.

Audiophile Fundamentalism

Member Sponsor

Member

Industry Expert/VIP Donor

Member Sponsor

Member Sponsor

VIP/Donor

New Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Industry Expert

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert

Industry Expert

VIP/Donor

Industry Expert

Similar threads