John-Have you heard the Emotiva amps? I wouldn't buy them just because they are cheap. I would want to make sure I could live with their sound.
I did. I' m prone to overstatement sometimes myself. The statement I over-reacted to --
Yes we can agree that the resolution of a component can "filter out" emotional impact, if that component is so dysfunctional that it is incapable of communicating the emotional message. In the context of what we discuss here daily, though, it is not a relevant point, IMO. There are great differences in fidelity between the systems discussed here, but I'm confident that, in a receptive mood, I coud get the same emotions from music played on frank's HTIB that I'd get from Steve's Lamms and Wilson's. Your emotional responses may, indeed, vary, I' m afraid.
Tim
Emotive offers a 30-day, no questions return/refund policy. You only risk the cost of return shipping. And John, I wouldn't assume they don't compare to the big boys in the audio market. Their direct sales model, minimal marketing, simple physical design and straightforward engineering approach are all things that can very effectively eliminated unnecessary costs. I suspect $2500 worth of Emotiva is a lot more than $2500 in the world of the "big boys." And I know what I hear -- yes Mark, I've heard them -- very low noise, very clear, precise mids, excellent bass control, and that "sense of effortlessness" all of us overhead freaks long for. I've heard the XPA-1s with an Emotive pre. I liked 'em. Almost as good as active .
Tim
Tim-I'm glad to know that you have heard them and are recommending them based on what you have heard.
Mark - I get the sense that despite your answer you are not convinced of Tim's response or my thoughts on what I've heard.
Not true at all John. I have not heard the Emotiva amps and therefore I have no idea how they sound so I'm in no position to recommend them or not recommend them. It would be foolish either way without having heard them. And if Tim tells me he has heard them and is basing his recommendation on what he has heard, I believe him. And if you choose to buy them and have a 30 day money back guarantee, you can't lose. At the end of the day, all that matters is what you think.
Again from F.Toole. I am sure that , at less, you will appreciate the part about bias :
The origin of emotion in a listener is the art itself—the music or movie—and not the audio hardware. It is inconceivable that a consumer could feel an emotional attachment to a midrange loudspeaker driver, yet without good ones, listening experiences will be diminished. Since the true nature of the original sound cannot be known to listeners, one cannot say “it sounds as it should.” But listeners routinely volunteer opinions on scales that are variations of like-dislike, which frequently have a component of emotion.
Descriptors like pleasantness and preference must therefore be considered as ranking in importance with accuracy and fidelity. This may seem like a dangerous path to take, risking the corruption of all that is revered in the purity of an original live performance. Fortunately, it turns out that when given the opportunity to judge without bias, human listeners are excellent detectors of artifacts and distortions; they are remarkably trustworthy guardians of what is good. Having only a vague concept of what might be correct, listeners recognize what is wrong. An absence of problems becomes a measure of excellence. By the end of this book, we will see that technical excellence turns out to be a high correlate of both perceived accuracy and emotional gratification, and most of us can recognize it when we hear it.
Yeah agree and it leads on to some deep food for thought as you mention with how good does the system have to be do reproduce this (also with the complexity that emotion will have varying levels and conditioning-memory-etc).Good post, orb. On toole -i perhaps our views of things like pleasant and preferred are colored by the variety of our experiences.
Toole's experience is with listeners in volume matched, blind, controlled listening, and as he and Shawn have both said, most people prefer more accurate reproduction under these conditions. My experience is in a retail showroom where many people seem to sincerely prefer, for what reasons I do not know, booming bass and sizzling treble, and on some (not here) audiophile forums where subjectivism rules with an iron hand and the notion that enough clean headroom into speakers with relatively even response both on and off axis might present a more faithful representation of the recording than a 3 watt valve amp into a pair of beaming, glaring horns, is not only summarily rejected, but often met with something bordering on violence.
On the question of preferred chords, I know it well. I prefer, for example, the open g major, played in the first position, with, an added D on the B string at the third fret. It doesn't change the chord fundamentally, as there is already a D in the chord in that position, but it adds a second, an octive higher and right next to the E, giving the chord a harmonic chime I really like. This is the very essence if nuance. The question is how much system nuance does it take to hear it? More than a transistor radio, less than an iPod with a decent pair of earbuds. Nothing that defines the difference between the most expensive and the most humble systems we discuss here in WBF.
Just looking for a bit of perspective.
Tim
(...) Toole's experience is with listeners in volume matched, blind, controlled listening, and as he and Shawn have both said, most people prefer more accurate reproduction under these conditions. (...)
On the question of preferred chords, I know it well. I prefer, for example, the open g major, played in the first position, with, an added D on the B string at the third fret. It doesn't change the chord fundamentally, as there is already a D in the chord in that position, but it adds a second, an octive higher and right next to the E, giving the chord a harmonic chime I really like.
The experiments carried by the Harman group were carried in the demanding and rigorous conditions needed for mass audio development, but IMHO most of them can not be extrapolated to the high-end audiophile world.
Consider their listening tests comparing speakers. AFAIK, they developed a fantastic mechanical system that quickly places speakers in their room for quick comparison, always exactly in the same place for every speaker and using always the same ancillaries. My limited experience is that every audiophile speaker has an optimal place in a room where it will show its best - non optimized placement can kill the the sound of a speaker. And I would not choose the same system to drive SoundLabs, Sonus Faber or Wilsons.
We can learn a lot form their papers, but it is not possible to make "cut and paste" of their conclusions for individual cases without considering the limitations imposed by the "controlled conditions".
Missed that the first time 'round! I am indeed flattered, Tim ...There are great differences in fidelity between the systems discussed here, but I'm confident that, in a receptive mood, I coud get the same emotions from music played on frank's HTIB that I'd get from Steve's Lamms and Wilson's
Sorry to go OT, but this brings up an interesting point. Dynamic drivers need to be heavily conditioned, loosening up their suspensions with a solid workout, before any critical assessment can be made. At least in my experience: one of the reasons why panel speakers always make a good initial impression, I suspect -- there's nothing to "warm up". So how does this factor get handled in this situation; or does no-one worry about such things ...Consider their listening tests comparing speakers. AFAIK, they developed a fantastic mechanical system that quickly places speakers in their room for quick comparison, always exactly in the same place for every speaker and using always the same ancillaries. My limited experience is that every audiophile speaker has an optimal place in a room where it will show its best - non optimized placement can kill the the sound of a speaker. And I would not choose the same system to drive SoundLabs, Sonus Faber or Wilsons.
Sorry to go OT, but this brings up an interesting point. Dynamic drivers need to heavily conditioned, loosening up their suspensions with a solid workout, before any critical assessment can be made. At least in my experience: one of the reasons why panel speakers always make a good initial impression, I suspect -- there's nothing to "warm up". So how does this factor get handled in this situation; or does no-one worry about such things ...
Frank
Hi John!
I don't know what you budget or space requirements are but go tube!
Consider the Antique Sound Labs for integrated tube amps. Their Hurricane power amp won Best of from The Absolute Sound and other products with similar topology have had positive reviews, if that means anything.
I bought an ASL (I had looked at a Vincent amp a couple of years ago but the distributor in Quebec said I had to get the Vincent amp from the States) using KT 88 tubes with 5/15 watts (triode/pentode switch) driving 93db efficient speakers. You can use the pentode setting when you want volume for rock. Tube watts seem to play louder than equivalent solid state watts so your milage may very. The ASL amp is on about 5-10 hours a day and there were no issues aside from the source selector knob slipping loose. Fixed by tightening it's screw.
An audition may be possible at the Canadian distributor in Waterloo.
Prima Luna is available locally and should be on your short list.
Just take your time, make sure you know EXACTLY what your requirements are. When you know what you really want there won't be much to choose from.
Have fun choosing!
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |