"If you don't have a $200k [speaker]..."

[microstrip]

Without the double negative: I am able to relax and concentrate when listening to digital.

Thanks - I misread it, I was not using my reading glasses!

 

[bonzo75]

How can great recordings of even poor performances not be useful in judging systems

I am saying they are not useful because they have less inflections, for example, player glosses over violin notes. There is less counterpointing in orchestra, less layering of different sections of orchestra while performing (a good conductor does this better and it shows on a good recording in a good system)

 

[bonzo75]

By "amateur tapes" what do you mean?

Jonathan Horwich's tapes are, I believe, recorded close in room. The sound quality is stunning, even if you do not care for the performances. Because of the sound quality I can use these tapes to judge systems according to the criteria I care about, namely emotional engagement and suspension of disbelief. I can use these tapes for that purpose precisely because of their sound quality.

i am not interested. I don’t disagree sound is good, I don’t like close in room ambience and I would rather listen to good performances recorded on vinyl.

Even on vinyl, while decca has better sound than RCA and DGG, when RCA and DGG get it right, I find far more realism in a Chicago, Vienna and Berlin performance than say the LOSR type orchestras that Ansermet recorded frequently on for decca

 

[Ron Resnick]

I would be careful with such statement. IMO it drives loudspeaker choice, not preference - two very different things.

For example, for rock my preference goes to JBL DD66000 or German Physics Gaudi, but as I listen little to rock I choose other type of speakers.

I think you're agreeing generally with my philosophy.

The way I think about it, since you listen to little rock, rock is not your musical genre preference.

 

[bonzo75]

I agree music choice drives loudspeaker preference but not without associated components. My first choice for classical, jazz and blues is vyger red sparrow Thomas Mayer with 46 amp, and pnoe with AER BD4/5. Same for Bill. Very strait jacketed. Needs great recordings.

my second choice for the above is a dual FLH which is by far the first choice for classic rock as well. Also this plays well with a variety of gear including digital. Does well with good and bad recordings.
If only auditioned with average records this is better than 1, drops to two with great recordings. For acoustic music that is

 

[Al M.]

my second choice for the above is a dual FLH which is by far the first choice for classic rock as well. Also this plays well with a variety of gear including digital.

But for digital you only need a soundbar, no?

 

[bonzo75]

But for digital you only need a soundbar, no?

only for. yes. but it always vinyl, and digital too

 

[bonzo75]

But for digital you only need a soundbar, no?

i found one guy who pays serious attention to what I write

 

[microstrip]

I think you're agreeing generally with my philosophy.

The way I think about it, since you listen to little rock, rock is not your musical genre preference.

Yes, currently rock can be considered my very focused nostalgic occasional preference ...

 

[morricab]

i am not interested. I don’t disagree sound is good, I don’t like close in room ambience and I would rather listen to good performances recorded on vinyl.

Even on vinyl, while decca has better sound than RCA and DGG, when RCA and DGG get it right, I find far more realism in a Chicago, Vienna and Berlin performance than say the LOSR type orchestras that Ansermet recorded frequently on for decca

Who cares what records you like? The point, again, is that they aren't the only ones useful for judging sound quality. Most high quality recordings, irrespective of the performance, can be useful.

 

[DasguteOhr]

I doubt anyone likes speakers that are not good at voices. But midrange is easiest to get right. Electrostats, ribbons, old tannoys, various horns, some cones, all do voices well. Sure some don’t either. Beryllium horn drivers sound quite like electrostats with voices, with more nuance.

But doing voices well does not necessarily mean they can also do other things well, which require more cross frequency integration. Voice is just the starting, basic

It depends on how high your demands are. For me, the best midrange is a quad esl 57. I don't know of any horn or other loudspeaker principle in the world that reproduces voices so naturally. never aggressive with a body that gives you goosebumps unless the recording is botched. i find voices to be a very difficult part because it is so broadband in frequency.
Exsample

P.S
even bad news on the radio sounds better with it

 

[Lagonda]

i found one guy who pays serious attention to what I write

Yes he is looking for ammunition !

 

[PeterA]

IMO this only shows your previous system was poor or contrary to usual, your hearing is improving with age.

It shows a lot more to me. I enjoyed my old system very much after I removed the corrupting accessories and improved the set up. The new system simply sounds better to me. I disagree with Ron's proclamation that music genre drives speaker choice. Perhaps it did for him, but not for me.

The last time I had my hearing checked, two years ago, it was the same as it was years earlier, at least according to their limited testing range based on speech recognition. No, my hearing is not improving, but my values have changed, and I am a more careful listener with a keener focus and understanding of my reference.

You and others can not seem to accept that some people actually do hear more information from all recordings on a system with horns, including with amplified rock music. Also, there are alternatives to the mainstream HIEND industry and people can discover those and prefer them. The latest and greatest advocated in glossy magazines, behind long lines at shows, and defended freely here, is not the only choice.

My system choice was based on a full range of music genres, and I used that range when auditioning the components and during set up and fine tuning.

 

[bonzo75]

It depends on how high your demands are. For me, the best midrange is a quad esl 57. I don't know of any horn or other loudspeaker principle in the world that reproduces voices so naturally. never aggressive with a body that gives you goosebumps unless the recording is botched. i find voices to be a very difficult part because it is so broadband in frequency.
Exsample

P.S
even bad news on the radio sounds better with it

they are excellent at other things too

this is in Dallas. Stacked 57s made by EMIA, EMIA electronics, Allnic 5000 phono. Plasma tweeters

 

[Lagonda]

they are better at other things too

this is in Dallas. Stacked 57s made my EMIA, EMIA electronics, Allnic 5000 phono. Plasma tweeters

Are those added super-tweeters ?

 

[bonzo75]

Are those added super-tweeters ?

yes

 

[PeterA]

I would be careful with such statement. IMO it drives loudspeaker choice, not preference - two very different things.

For example, for rock my preference goes to JBL DD66000 or German Physics Gaudi, but as I listen little to rock I choose other type of speakers.

This is where we differ. I want my system (not just speakers) to sound good on all the music I play, and also music I do not. Friends come over with their records of stuff I do not like. It still sounds good to me and more importantly to them.

 

[PeterA]

No; I am not unable to relax and concentrate when listening to digital.

Quite a statement. I appreciate your candor.

 

[DasguteOhr]

they are better at other things too

this is in Dallas. Stacked 57s made my EMIA, EMIA electronics, Allnic 5000 phono. Plasma tweeters

If you want go deep add two ripol sub perless sls 2×12" per side. Works pretty fine deep and fast.80hz 24db crossover point -3db 25hz




Or 4 ae 15" woofer

 

[bonzo75]

If you want go deep add two ripol sub perless sls 2×12" per side. Works pretty fine deep and fast.80hz 24db

View attachment 115230


Or 4 ae 15" woofer
View attachment 115231