Please name the audio breakthroughs that have been made by "high end" manufacturers, then broadly adapted by consumer audio.
Tim
Tim
Does the "high end" drive the progress of consumer audio?
- Thread starter Phelonious Ponk
- Start date
I'll get you started Tim, with three different kinds of 'driving' other products:
Quad ESL- still a reference for speaker manufacturers. Not that they are replicating the design or circuit, but it is so revealing in the midrange, I think many speaker designers keep a pair on hand. First released in 1957.
Audio Research tube equipment- close to the lone holdout in 1973-74. Hugely influential in preaching the gospel on tube sound. Today, many, many modest amps and preamps use tubes. Did ARC 'invent' tubes? No of course not, were they a 'driver' in the sense that they influenced other companies? I would say yes.
Asynchronous usb- I'm not much into digital playback, but didn't dcs really promote this? And isn't it now something you find on little cheap DACs as well?
That ought to get the ball rolling.
Quad ESL- still a reference for speaker manufacturers. Not that they are replicating the design or circuit, but it is so revealing in the midrange, I think many speaker designers keep a pair on hand. First released in 1957.
Audio Research tube equipment- close to the lone holdout in 1973-74. Hugely influential in preaching the gospel on tube sound. Today, many, many modest amps and preamps use tubes. Did ARC 'invent' tubes? No of course not, were they a 'driver' in the sense that they influenced other companies? I would say yes.
Asynchronous usb- I'm not much into digital playback, but didn't dcs really promote this? And isn't it now something you find on little cheap DACs as well?
That ought to get the ball rolling.
I am not sure Tim, they do have an intersection of interests but it is rather thin.
What defines a "high end" manufacturer?
Sony and Phillips developed the CD in their research labs, but I am guessing you would rank them mass-market, not high-end?
Is Carver mass-market or high-end? Audyssey?
The number of what most of us would consider "high-end" is probably small, and whilst innovations have come out of them, I am not sure how many have been widely applied due to patents and cost. Determining how much influence they have had could be hard to define...
Sony and Phillips developed the CD in their research labs, but I am guessing you would rank them mass-market, not high-end?
Is Carver mass-market or high-end? Audyssey?
The number of what most of us would consider "high-end" is probably small, and whilst innovations have come out of them, I am not sure how many have been widely applied due to patents and cost. Determining how much influence they have had could be hard to define...
I'll get you started Tim, with three different kinds of 'driving' other products:
Quad ESL- still a reference for speaker manufacturers. Not that they are replicating the design or circuit, but it is so revealing in the midrange, I think many speaker designers keep a pair on hand. First released in 1957.
Audio Research tube equipment- close to the lone holdout in 1973-74. Hugely influential in preaching the gospel on tube sound. Today, many, many modest amps and preamps use tubes. Did ARC 'invent' tubes? No of course not, were they a 'driver' in the sense that they influenced other companies? I would say yes.
Asynchronous usb- I'm not much into digital playback, but didn't dcs really promote this? And isn't it now something you find on little cheap DACs as well?
That ought to get the ball rolling.
I think the first two is the high-end driving itself. The broad consumer electronics market has abandoned tubes and never adopted electrostatic panels.
I have no idea who invented asynchronous USB, but it's implementation has definitely been high end and the price has dropped like a rock. But I really don't think there's much of a mainstream CE market for DACs outside of the devices they're converting from/to at all. I wouldn't expect it to have much influence outside of the audiophile market. But I could be wrong....
Tim
It's all a tone control. It is just that some are adjustable and others are not.
To avoid the crassness of putting a price point on it, let's call it products designed to appeal to audiophiles, from the most expensive, to bang-for-the-buck. From a DCS Scarlatti to a CA MagicDac.
I think just about anybody would call those companies "mass-market."
I'd personally place Carver in audiophile territory - at the more affordable end of high-end. Audyssey who makes surround sound processors? Mainstream and pro markets.
I think I broadened the definition sufficiently above, and if we can identify their innovations, it should be hard to trace their influence.
Tim
Yes, the absence of tone controls definitely belongs to the high end. I'm not sure of the defeat button. I have a midfi HK integrated from 1972 with semi-parametric eq and a defeat button. This when a lot of more expensive hifi gear still had tone controls. I consider the ability to quickly and easily defeat good tone controls a benefit, if not an innovation. The elimination of them altogether is pretty dubious, in my view. YMMV. But I'm definitely willing to give that one to the high-end. Now, how much influence did it have? Did the late 70s and 80s see a lot of midfi receivers, integrateds and preamps without tone controls? Is this an example of innovation in the high-end driving development in the mainstream?
Tim
Sorry, Tim, are you referring to 'consumer electronics' as the lowest common denominator? When you say that consumer audio has dropped tubes, I see tubes on stuff that is very inexpensive, coming out of China, and yes it is promoted for its sound quality, but it is relatively inexpensive, like $150 phono stages and modest power amps well under $1,000. As to the Quads, as I said, it wasn't about emulating the design, it was using it as a reference. And, on the usb thing, I guess we are back to what you define as 'consumer' audio- the low cost DACs I'm referring to are relatively cheap-, ie, under $500. What kind of equipment are you talking about? This stuff is equipment that folks can buy from places like Amazon, or probably at big box stores these days.
I think the real question is has high end audio increased the value added aspect of consumer electronics? Probably not because value has gone down in high end. Only technology has given value added in consumer electronics. When I speak of value I am refering to the price paid vs performance given,and we all no where that has been headed for some time,straight down.
Asynchronous USB is simply part of the USB Audio Class 1 standard (1998), no "high end" involved here.
It has been used by by EMU, TASCAM in pro audio interfaces.
It was Wavelength Gordon Rankin who promoted this interface for "high end" DACs and Charles Hansen QB9 made it salonfähig in the audiophile world.
Only if you consider the equipment used by the overwhelming majority of music lover "lowest common denominator." But I'm not talking about products clearly aimed at the audiophile market.
I've seen that as well, but I think those just represent affordable executions of tube designs. Is there any innovation that is trickling down to the masses here, or just "bang for the buck" implementations of beloved audiophile technology?
I'll let others judge the price/performance ratio of the high end. While 2-channel systems designed specifically for listening to music through speakers have lost most of their percentage of the market, and the dominance of the MP3 has arguably lowered media quality, the quality of playback technology in the mainstream has, IMO, steadily and pretty dramatically increased throughout the SS/digital era. But while that may be your question, Roger, it's not mine. Mine is simple and inspired by comments in the "rubbish" thread -- have innovations in the high end driven progress in the mainstream, and if so, what innovations and what has their mainstream impact been?
Tim
Last edited:
Just a couple more to start
exotic tweeter materials, whether something like beryllium or B&W's Diamond, as well as the increasing number of ribbons
HDCD, which before the advent of SACD and DVD-A was adopted widely, and might still be in wider use if it hadn't been acquired by Microsoft
and how do you count things like Harmon's acquisition of Infinity, Mark Levinson, etc. For that matter, there was a time in the '60's and '70's when Harmon Kardon itself was almost considered a niche, high-end manufacturer.
Infinity in its earlier days was the first company to bring a working Class D power amp to market, and they are pretty universal in car audio these days
I know there are more, that's just off the top of my head
exotic tweeter materials, whether something like beryllium or B&W's Diamond, as well as the increasing number of ribbons
HDCD, which before the advent of SACD and DVD-A was adopted widely, and might still be in wider use if it hadn't been acquired by Microsoft
and how do you count things like Harmon's acquisition of Infinity, Mark Levinson, etc. For that matter, there was a time in the '60's and '70's when Harmon Kardon itself was almost considered a niche, high-end manufacturer.
Infinity in its earlier days was the first company to bring a working Class D power amp to market, and they are pretty universal in car audio these days
I know there are more, that's just off the top of my head
I'll take that as a no...asynchronous USB is not an innovation of the high end. It seems like such a good solution, Vincent. Any idea why it took the high-end so long to adopt it?
Tim
Infinity - first working Class D amplifier demo'ed at CES 1977. Continuously in use and evolved in all the bass amplifiers since the mid-80's for Infinity, and then Genesis from 1991.
Now broadly adopted by everyone. Just look inside your cellphone.
I will re-post some sentences I posted in another thread, they fit better here.
Perhaps if we would first debate on what were the real improvements we would arrive somewhere.
IMHO, the great improvement in audio has been in a successive removing of the euphoric layers, keeping the musicality of sound reproduction. Most of the time, accurate sound resulted in a dry, non involving sound. We have today great equipment that manages to have a good balance between accurate and musical. High-end took a major part in this task.
The debate is not easy. Proper research should be carried reading or listening to existing recorded documentation and analyzing it . Unhappily all existing records are a mix of technical achievements and marketing and it is not easy to separate what was cause and what was consequence. And remember that may consumer brands, such as Sony, Pioneer, Denon and Onkyo, had high-end lines in their mother-land, that were not exported to foreign markets - the audio world does not end at the US border. They use this lines to develop many concepts that later entered consumer electronics.
Perhaps if we would first debate on what were the real improvements we would arrive somewhere.
IMHO, the great improvement in audio has been in a successive removing of the euphoric layers, keeping the musicality of sound reproduction. Most of the time, accurate sound resulted in a dry, non involving sound. We have today great equipment that manages to have a good balance between accurate and musical. High-end took a major part in this task.
The debate is not easy. Proper research should be carried reading or listening to existing recorded documentation and analyzing it . Unhappily all existing records are a mix of technical achievements and marketing and it is not easy to separate what was cause and what was consequence. And remember that may consumer brands, such as Sony, Pioneer, Denon and Onkyo, had high-end lines in their mother-land, that were not exported to foreign markets - the audio world does not end at the US border. They use this lines to develop many concepts that later entered consumer electronics.
While their best products were certainly high end, in 1977, Infinity was very much a mainstream consumer audio company. Not at all the kind of boutique company we now refer to as "high end," but this one is close enough.
One.
Tim
Tim, simply because you don't know something doesn't mean it's not true. All three of my proposed innovations count under your original conditions, even though you gave Gary credit for one of them
BTW, the Infinity class D amp was very definitely aimed at the high-end market, and at that time Infinity was still definitely a boutique manufacturer, owned by Arnie Nudell and just barely moved out of his garage. They had yet to produce the first IRS, the direct predecessor of Gary's current flagship speakers.
B&W and TAD have patents for the diamond tweeter and the beryllium deposition process respectively.
As I posted, those three came off the top of my head. I'm quite sure the members here will come up with several more.
BTW, the Infinity class D amp was very definitely aimed at the high-end market, and at that time Infinity was still definitely a boutique manufacturer, owned by Arnie Nudell and just barely moved out of his garage. They had yet to produce the first IRS, the direct predecessor of Gary's current flagship speakers.
B&W and TAD have patents for the diamond tweeter and the beryllium deposition process respectively.
As I posted, those three came off the top of my head. I'm quite sure the members here will come up with several more.
Similar threads
Members online
- Argonaut
- hopkins
- Bobvin
- Seismion
- andromedaaudio
- RCanelas
- P2C4S
- christensenleif@msn.com
- analogsa
- TST
- bonzo75
- Wjhen
- lscangus
- Raker24
- BillK
- cjfrbw
- Stefan
- Lucas Domansky LDMS
- rocco1113
- Nuforce
- tubes59
- rt662
- Phantom-Audio
- thekong
- chaccone
- QuantumWave
- Limsp
- abeidrov
- Hiroshi
- whistleraudio
- emergency
- Spirit Crusher
- Abolive
- best
- digit_linn
- ton77
- DW101
- dennis h
- Erik-Alexander
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |