Which companies have the deepest roots in science of audio?

amirm · Dec 12, 2010

When I look at companies, two come to mind which seem to really push the science of audio:

1. Harman group (Revel, Mark Levinson, JBL Synthesis, etc). Having had the pleasure of touring their R&D facilities and factory, and being friends with Kevin Voecks over the years, I am always impressed by the science and objectivity that goes into their designs. And of course, they have the budget and resources to go after it the right way.

2. Meridian. I remember meeting Bob Stewart nearly 28 years ago when he was touring with his first CD player (modified Philips top loader). Even then, there was a commitment to understanding the science, putting up graphs on oversampling DACs and such. While smaller and with fewer resources than Harman, they still push the art of combining scientific principals and auditory ramifications.

Do you agree with this list and which other companies would you add to it?

Note: my company is a dealer for Harman products.

Phelonious Ponk · Dec 12, 2010

You could plunge lower into the Harman line-up and still see the benefits. An HK integrated and a pair of Infinity speakers will out-perform, by every objective measure, many "high-end" systems.

Tim

mep · Dec 12, 2010

Tim-Can you write a compliment without attaching a put-down to it?

JackD201 · Dec 12, 2010

Top of mind, I would add Nagra and its parent Kudelski Group.

From the pacific side, I wouldn't count Sony out just yet. The SS-M9ED was a mean design, if inefficient. It did show that the capability is there. In the meantime, Pioneer is making strong statements with TAD and for decades Denon has been making exotic stuff available only to the Japanese market and leaving sister company Marantz to meander up market a bit. I think these three companies have the chops but probably find the high end market too small.

The Japanese scene is filled with former Luxman engineers (Technical Brain, BaLabo and many more). That has got to say something about Luxman as well. I heard one of their smaller integrateds lately and it was very good.

Johnny Vinyl · Dec 12, 2010

Here's an oddball selection, but only because they aren't playing in the high-end game....Philips!

John

flez007 · Dec 12, 2010

I was a naim-fan for many years (i even used that moniker for years somewhere else), and they had a deep foundation on design, research and sensible implementation of their lab work. I also learned that Boulder follows that route with great success.

Phelonious Ponk · Dec 13, 2010

mep said:
Tim-Can you write a compliment without attaching a put-down to it?

No put-down intended. Acknowledging that Harman's dedication to research yields results, even at very reasonable prices, that exceed the performance of systems considered by many to be among the best, is simple praise.

Tim

Gregadd · Dec 14, 2010

My vote could go to many. To Name a few David Berning, Atma-sphere, Audio Research... Despite all the criticism most high end products represent sound engineering. Tweaks notwithstanding.

microstrip · Dec 14, 2010

Phelonious Ponk said:
You could plunge lower into the Harman line-up and still see the benefits. An HK integrated and a pair of Infinity speakers will out-perform, by every objective measure, many "high-end" systems.
Tim

Tim,
Would the objective measures of this HK integrated also out-perform the Mark Levinson integrated amplifier?

Disclaimer: my living room home theater system (the most stable system in my house) is by HK.

Phelonious Ponk · Dec 14, 2010

microstrip said:
Tim,
Would the objective measures of this HK integrated also out-perform the Mark Levinson integrated amplifier?

Disclaimer: my living room home theater system (the most stable system in my house) is by HK.

Read carefully:

You could plunge lower into the Harman line-up and still see the benefits. An HK integrated and a pair of Infinity speakers will out-perform, by every objective measure, many "high-end" systems.

No mention of Mark Levinson. No claim that an HK integrated will out-perform any "high-end" system, but many "high-end" systems. To out-perform many high-end systems, you'll have many to choose from. Understanding that there are many audiophiles who prefer the sound of equipment that doesn't measure objectively well, start with comparing the HK integrated to almost any tube amp, the Infinity speakers to almost any horns. Again, measurements be damned, you may prefer the sound of the tubes and horns, that's not the issue in a discussion of companies deeply rooted in the science of audio. Measurement is. And there's no need to stop with tubes and horns. Many high-end DACs derive their difference from colored analog output stages. By the numbers, I suspect the DACs built in to HK AV receivers are better. Many speakers - high, middle and otherwise - get their characteristic sound from a mid-bass hump for the illusion of bass extension, a high frequency boost for air and "detail," and/or an upper midrange dip for "warmth." None of that is hard for a science-oriented company like Harman to better by the numbers or, through careful measurement and consumer research, even better by psychoacoustic effect. Viewed objectively, audio isn't that different from other consumer technology industries; resources are critical, and Harman has them.

Disclaimer: My main listening system comes from a very small British company that has nothing close to the resources of Harman and it both measures and sounds very good.

Tim

microstrip · Dec 14, 2010

Phelonious Ponk said:
Read carefully:
Tim

Tim,
Please read carefully my question - it was very objective, no second intentions:

I was referring only to amplifiers. And since the thread is about science in audio, I was thinking about two products of Harman - the 10 years old Mark Levinson ML 383 and the Harman integrated equivalent to illustrate it. Will the more recent outperform, by every objective measure, the product benefiting of ten years development of audio science?

Phelonious Ponk · Dec 14, 2010

microstrip said:
Tim,
Please read carefully my question - it was very objective, no second intentions:

I was referring only to amplifiers. And since the thread is about science in audio, I was thinking about two products of Harman - the 10 years old Mark Levinson ML 383 and the Harman integrated equivalent to illustrate it. Will the more recent outperform, by every objective measure, the product benefiting of ten years development of audio science?

Cool. I'll give you a very direct answer then; I don't know. I'll bet Sean does.

Tim

Gregadd · Dec 14, 2010

HK 990 is remarkable not only in its specs but also its price. The question may be more in the marketing approach. Take Spectral for example that claims to engaged in years of research before bringing a product to market. They engage in a more traditional marketing approach.

caesar · Dec 14, 2010

I don't know if it's just me, but every high end audio designer that talks about using "scientific design methods" and has a "holier than thou" attitude about it, makes very cold and sterile sounding gear. It sounds mechanical and robotic. The new Meridian CD player is an exception. This is my opinion, of course.

Phelonious Ponk · Dec 14, 2010

caesar said:
I don't know if it's just me, but every high end audio designer that talks about using "scientific design methods" and has a "holier than thou" attitude about it, makes very cold and sterile sounding gear. It sounds mechanical and robotic. The new Meridian CD player is an exception. This is my opinion, of course.

In all likelihood, Caesar, this simply means that you prefer the sound of equipment that colors the signal in a way you find pleasant. And if you find it pleasant, more power to you. Enjoy the music.

Tim

JackD201 · Dec 14, 2010

microstrip said:
Tim,
Please read carefully my question - it was very objective, no second intentions:

I was referring only to amplifiers. And since the thread is about science in audio, I was thinking about two products of Harman - the 10 years old Mark Levinson ML 383 and the Harman integrated equivalent to illustrate it. Will the more recent outperform, by every objective measure, the product benefiting of ten years development of audio science?

Maybe not but looking at the spec sheets of the 383 vs the HK990 they are not too far apart. What is telling is that the 990 sells for a third of the price with much more functionality. As to which sounds better.............

caesar · Dec 14, 2010

Phelonious Ponk said:
In all likelihood, Caesar, this simply means that you prefer the sound of equipment that colors the signal in a way you find pleasant. And if you find it pleasant, more power to you. Enjoy the music.

Tim

Not sure what you mean by "colors", but I find that the guys who claim to be "scientists" don't know how to make their gear convey emotions; their gear sounds robotic and mechanical. I used to own Martin Logan Ascents a while back. I heard a presentation by Roger Sanders who claimed he had the "ultimate amps" with "unlimited power" to run electrostats. I got his amps for a free trial to run my Ascents. And his amps did better than some small tube amps I had on hand, but not really better than some other lesser Bryston SS amps I own. But when I plugged in an audiophile amp with much less power (Ayre V1) than his amp, his "ultimate amp" sounded like a dull, sterile, mechanical robot. Maybe the Ayre could not play as loud as the Sanders amp, but I felt emotionally uplifted listening to the Ayre. I never put his amps back in and sent them back. I am sure some audiophile who did not compare his amps to another alternative bought his spiel and is "happy" using them.

You enjoy the music as well. This is a hobby.

RUR · Dec 15, 2010

caesar said:
....I heard a presentation by Roger Sanders who claimed he had the "ultimate amps" with "unlimited power" to run electrostats. I got his amps for a free trial to run my Ascents. And his amps did better than some small tube amps I had on hand, but not really better than some other lesser Bryston SS amps I own. But when I plugged in an audiophile amp with much less power (Ayre V1) than his amp, his "ultimate amp" sounded like a dull, sterile, mechanical robot. Maybe the Ayre could not play as loud as the Sanders amp, but I felt emotionally uplifted listening to the Ayre. I never put his amps back in and sent them back. I am sure some audiophile who did not compare his amps to another alternative bought his spiel and is "happy" using them.

An experiment I'll personally be conducting with Summits beginning Friday. I've heard Roger's amps described as being neutral, but never as dull or sterile. At some point in the next few weeks, I'll post my experiences.

caesar · Dec 15, 2010

RUR said:
An experiment I'll personally be conducting with Summits beginning Friday. I've heard Roger's amps described as being neutral, but never as dull or sterile. At some point in the next few weeks, I'll post my experiences.

What amps will you be comparing them to? If you compare them to a moderately expensive Ayre or something with a lot of power like Conrad Johnson Premier 350, it is a no contest. Like I said, what was designed by a self-proclaimed "scientist" vs. a "con artist" like Charles Hansen or Conrad/ Johnson will sound lean, hard, and sterile.

Phelonious Ponk · Dec 15, 2010

caesar said:
Not sure what you mean by "colors", but I find that the guys who claim to be "scientists" don't know how to make their gear convey emotions; their gear sounds robotic and mechanical. I used to own Martin Logan Ascents a while back. I heard a presentation by Roger Sanders who claimed he had the "ultimate amps" with "unlimited power" to run electrostats. I got his amps for a free trial to run my Ascents. And his amps did better than some small tube amps I had on hand, but not really better than some other lesser Bryston SS amps I own. But when I plugged in an audiophile amp with much less power (Ayre V1) than his amp, his "ultimate amp" sounded like a dull, sterile, mechanical robot. Maybe the Ayre could not play as loud as the Sanders amp, but I felt emotionally uplifted listening to the Ayre. I never put his amps back in and sent them back. I am sure some audiophile who did not compare his amps to another alternative bought his spiel and is "happy" using them.

You enjoy the music as well. This is a hobby.

I haven't heard the Ayre and can't speak to it directly, but what I mean by coloration is a deliberate alteration of the frequency response of a component from more accurate reproduction of the recording to something else. The most common seems to be a gentle roll off of highs or a slight dip in the upper mids to create what is often called "warmth." There is, of course, nothing wrong with it if it helps you enjoy your recordings more, but I think it would be very productive for the hobby if we could deal with it directly, in terms of the frequencies altered and by how much, instead of in language that is completely subjective, not to mention competitive -- "warm" vs "cold," "musical" vs "robotic." If we dealt with it more directly, uncovering what pleases us, and repeating the experience would be much easier. But we seem to be invested in the mystery on so many levels that it is unlikely that will happen at the high end.

Tim

Which companies have the deepest roots in science of audio?

Banned

New Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

WBF Founding Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Member Sponsor

New Member

WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

New Member

VIP/Donor

New Member

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Similar threads