CES 2011: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

[MylesBAstor]

Amir we can and have discussed room treatment before. Room treatment is just another type of filter. Inevitably a fitter soaks up both intended and and unintended content. Many don't use it because they think it robs the of its liveliness.

The point is could Robert Harley and Amir, et al listen to the same room and equipment and arrived at equally valid yet opposite opinions.

To suggest that Robert Harley must be wrong because the room was untreated just does not hold water. Indeed on many occasions exhibitors have made a point of using no audiophile accessories and got excellent sound from the hotel room. OTOH speaker manufacturers lament that, despite thier best efforts, they worry because they have no idea what kind of room thier customers will be using.

Hey Greg:

Riddle me this

How does room treatment correct for a +/- 10 dB dip within a 4 Hz region? I've measured this in the past with some speakers, esp. dipoles, using some RTA Gen Rad equipment with calibrated mike, below 300 Hz.

And let's talk about the non-linearities inherent with room treatment too. IMHO, the cure is often worse than the disease.

 

[rblnr]

All this time, there were a couple of guys occupying the love seat. You know the type. Sitting there looking serious and absolutely stiff as if deep in thought or appreciation. Kind of like seeing a guy at modern art museum starring at a blank canvas with you not knowing if he is pretending to understand it or not .

Just as an FYI, I think the guy sitting in the front love seat in the picture (which I don't know how to copy/paste here, it's on p.2) is John Stronczer, designer of the Bel Canto gear. So just in this particular case, it's a guy who understands it.

 

[Gregadd]

Hey Greg:

Riddle me this

How does room treatment correct for a +/- 10 dB dip within a 4 Hz region? I've measured this in the past with some speakers, esp. dipoles, using some RTA Gen Rad equipment with calibrated mike, below 300 Hz.

And let's talk about the non-linearities inherent with room treatment too. IMHO, the cure is often worse than the disease.

I don't know how to cure that.

 

[amirm]

Amir we can and have discussed room treatment before. Room treatment is just another type of filter. Inevitably a fitter soaks up both intended and and unintended content. Many don't use it because they think it robs the of its liveliness.

I am not debating the merits of room treatment. I am asking this: does that speaker have a flat/transparent response in that room? The answer must be no. Because otherwise, the anechoic chamber response would be wrong. And the response would also be wrong in my room because it doesn't look like that hotel suite. If so, then the reviewer's statement is wrong. I am not trying to say how you fix that anomaly on that if the anomaly exists, the reviewer statement can't possibly be true.

The point is could Robert Harley and Amir, et al listen to the same room and equipment and arrived at equally valid yet opposite opinions.

I am not contrasting my opinion vs his. I am making a logical point that it is impossible for that room to have no effect on sound. And if it has any effect, it couldn't have been transparent.

To suggest that Robert Harley must be wrong because the room was untreated just does not hold water. Indeed on many occasions exhibitors have made a point of using no audiophile accessories and got excellent sound from the hotel room. OTOH speaker manufacturers lament that, despite thier best efforts, they worry because they have no idea what kind of room thier customers will be using.

I am not interested in anecdotal evidence that something sounded "excellent." That is not the claim that was made. The claim was that the sound was as if he was in the live venue. I like to understand on what basis that is true. You can persuade me by showing me some science that says the response of the room was zero. Or measurements of the same.

 

[microstrip]

You can persuade me by showing me some science that says the response of the room was zero. Or measurements of the same.

Amir,

I am sure that someone can design a pair of headphones that will fulfill your specific measurements.

But I am also sure that the sound will not be as if he was in the live venue.

 

[RBFC]

Wouldn't a wise manufacturer choose program material that performed as well as possible in a given room when exhibiting? Perhaps the room-related flaws were minimized by the music selections in play.

Lee

 

[Gregadd]

I am not debating the merits of room treatment. I am asking this: does that speaker have a flat/transparent response in that room? The answer must be no. Because otherwise, the anechoic chamber response would be wrong. And the response would also be wrong in my room because it doesn't look like that hotel suite. If so, then the reviewer's statement is wrong. I am not trying to say how you fix that anomaly on that if the anomaly exists, the reviewer statement can't possibly be true.

Ok Ethan , I mean Amir. No I can't give you science as to what in room frequency respone that speaker had. As far as I know neither I, you ,nor Robert Harley measured it. Indeed not only is my evidence anecdotal, it's second hand. I think it would be a good educated guess that the room had some effect on the frequencey reponse. While FR is effected by the room by definiton transparency is a function of the speaker. That is, does it act like a window pane passing through what signal that applied to its terminals. As a past owner of the ML CLS in an untreated room, I have evaluated it's transparency.
To me then flat frequency resone in an anechoic chamber has no real value for the audiophile. While it is an essential design tool, I don't thinak anyone would design thier listentning room as an anecoic chamber.
In fact I am sure you have seen this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMCuMiz18Rw by Dave Wilson regarding the design of the Sophia. He tried to match the Sophia to what might actually be happening in his customers' listenig room.


I am not contrasting my opinion vs his. I am making a logical point that it is impossible for that room to have no effect on sound. And if it has any effect, it couldn't have been transparent.
I agree that room had some effect. The question is what effect. Many variables exist. Because you were not there when Mr. Harley performed his evaluation, you can't be sure what they are. A I stated before Mr. Harley may have listened to different music under different conditions. He may have engaged in some hyperbole.

I am not interested in anecdotal evidence that something sounded "excellent." That is not the claim that was made. The claim was that the sound was as if he was in the live venue. I like to understand on what basis that is true. You can persuade me by showing me some science that says the response of the room was zero. Or measurements of the same.

I have been down that road on this forum before when I stated my reference was real music. I know of no scientific test that will prove reproduced sound is the same as the live event. (To date I have heard no system that recreates the live event.) Do you konw of one that prove's it is not. I make the reverse challenge to you. I have also stated that flat frequency response certainly does not guarantee a perfect reproduction of the live event.

Lastly I don't know how I worked up one of the nicest guys, if not the nicest and most knowledgeble guy on this forum. Sigh.

 

[Gregadd]

Wouldn't a wise manufacturer choose program material that performed as well as possible in a given room when exhibiting? Perhaps the room-related flaws were minimized by the music selections in play.

Lee

You'd think. They can take a lesson from Roger and Angela of Sandersoundsystems.

 

[vinylphilemag]

I then went to the Wilson/LAMM room in question. It was full room with many people there standing beyond the seating available. I grabbed an empty chair (the blue one) here:

Hey, I recognise that slaphead in the middle chair behind the love seat: it's me!

 

[amirm]

Oh, here I thought I could get away from all of you while at CES!!!

Seriously, we should have all gotten together and toured the place. That way, we could have seen if we agree with each other's views or not!

Let's do that for RMAF.

 

[Gregadd]

What Robert Harley said:

...But the system that gets my vote for Best Sound was the Wilson Alexandria X-2 driven by the Lamm ML3 Signature power amplifiers, LL1 Signature preamp, LP2 phonostage, da Vinci AAS Gabriel turntable with a da Vinci Grand Reference Grandezza tonearm and Grand Reference Grandezza cartridge. The digital front end included the NeoDio NR22T transport and NR22D DAC. Cables were Kubala-Sosna’s top-of-the-line Elation Series, and the racks were from Critical Mass Systems. I’ve heard the X-2 quite a number of times (and lived with a pair for 18 months), but I’ve never experienced anything like what I heard in Las Vegas. The system simply didn’t sound like hi-fi. The immediacy of the music was palpable, the expression laid bare with seemingly no electronics or speakers between me and the musicians. On a sonic basis, the soundstage was enormous when called for (Peter McGrath’s recording of Handel’s Messiah, for example) but became intimate and properly scaled on solo voice. This was one of the best systems I’ve heard at any show. It was also signfiicantly better in every way compared to the sound in my previous room...]

Robert Harleys listening preference,room, and equipment.http://www.avguide.com/forums/robert-harleys-reviewer-background

 

[c1ferrari]

Oh, here I thought I could get away from all of you while at CES!!!

Seriously, we should have all gotten together and toured the place. That way, we could have seen if we agree with each other's views or not!

Let's do that for RMAF.

That sounds like a splendid suggestion, Amir.

 

[mep]

Amir-Somewhere in your show coverage you talked about hearing a R2R deck that was playing back a tape made from a CD. Did you get to hear the CD played before the tape was made or just the tape knowing it was made from a CD? You seemed to be very impressed by what you heard. Has this motivated you to rethink the possibilities of how good analog (even it was sourced from digital) can sound?

 

[amirm]

It was in J-Corder booth. And no, we did not hear the original. So the statement at absolute should be taken with a grain of salt. That said, my brother was with me who absolutely is not into high-end audio and until that point kept wondering if I had lost my mind by constantly bringing up the idea of having a R2R in our showroom. After that demonstration, he no longer had any doubts . They dynamics and resolution was absolutely top notch. If they had not told me it was tape, I would have accepted it as a CD. This was on a Technics deck by the way. Don't recall if it was modded or not.

And yes, it absolutely upped my opinion of tapes. It took me back to 1970s when I used to lust after them as the best sound possible. The sound was better than the CD spec comparison seems to portray. Again, this is a subjective evaluation of only hearing the copy.

 

[rbbert]

J-Corder's business is modding Technics decks...

 

[microstrip]

They dynamics and resolution was absolutely top notch. If they had not told me it was tape, I would have accepted it as a CD.

It was not better than CD?

 

[amirm]

It was not better than CD?

I am saying that if someone said I was listening to a CD, I would have accepted it as such.

 

[amirm]

J-Corder's business is modding Technics decks...

I am under the impression that the core of their business is refurbishing the decks. If you want for example other electronics for the head pre-amp, folks use solutions by others. This is what I meant by not being mod'ed.

 

[marty]

What Robert Harley said:

...But the system that gets my vote for Best Sound was the Wilson Alexandria X-2 driven by the Lamm ML3 Signature power amplifiers, LL1 Signature preamp, LP2 phonostage, da Vinci AAS Gabriel turntable with a da Vinci Grand Reference Grandezza tonearm and Grand Reference Grandezza cartridge. The digital front end included the NeoDio NR22T transport and NR22D DAC. Cables were Kubala-Sosna’s top-of-the-line Elation Series, and the racks were from Critical Mass Systems. I’ve heard the X-2 quite a number of times (and lived with a pair for 18 months), but I’ve never experienced anything like what I heard in Las Vegas. The system simply didn’t sound like hi-fi. The immediacy of the music was palpable, the expression laid bare with seemingly no electronics or speakers between me and the musicians. On a sonic basis, the soundstage was enormous when called for (Peter McGrath’s recording of Handel’s Messiah, for example) but became intimate and properly scaled on solo voice. This was one of the best systems I’ve heard at any show. It was also signfiicantly better in every way compared to the sound in my previous room...]

I don't want to disparage Rob Harley, who I know has earned the respect of many if not all of us. But wouldn't you love to see some of the "heavy weights" go into a demo blindfolded and then tell us what they heard without knowing the price of what they heard?

 

[rbbert]

I am under the impression that the core of their business is refurbishing the decks. If you want for example other electronics for the head pre-amp, folks use solutions by others. This is what I meant by not being mod'ed.

http://www.j-corder.com/

Seems to me that building custom decks based on the Technics 1500 chassis is "modding"; they're certainly a far cry from stock or refurbished. In fact, I don't see any mention of just "refurbishing", although I imagine that service is available.