The Truth about Whats Best Forum

[microstrip]

It is refreshing to see an audiophile prioritizing the room. The best gear does not nearly sound as good as it could and should if the room is not right.

Surely some rooms are not right and need fixing. But IMHO we should buy the equipment that fits and sounds good in the room, not the force the room aiding treatments to accept the speakers, for example.

While I have to live with the room that I have, I still try to improve it as much as possible, even though I am slower with that endeavor than I could be (and I have nobody to blame but myself).

I went through several listening rooms in several houses. For me the most significant aspect is still room size. I am not sure that my future space (around 60 m2) will be able to accept the XLF, due to its vaulted ceilings.

 

[microstrip]

(...) If a component was designed for the way we hear ... other than some high frequency loss, our ears don't change.

Tim,

Our preferences change with time and most of it, the understanding of stereo and its boundaries enlarged with time.

Particularly for those who do not live in a diet of selected music predating the digital phase of stereo, stereo has evolved a lot. Most people listen and valuate amplified or complex music, not just the typical music coming from acoustic instruments currently involved in 99% of the debates of WBF.

 

[Lagonda]

Surely some rooms are not right and need fixing. But IMHO we should buy the equipment that fits and sounds good in the room, not the force the room aiding treatments to accept the speakers, for example.



I went through several listening rooms in several houses. For me the most significant aspect is still room size. I am not sure that my future space (around 60 m2) will be able to accept the XLF, due to its vaulted ceilings.

There is equipment sounding good in a room, and then there is sounding REALLY good, something you will rarely get by rolling in a new caster with the latest crop of gear you just purchased because the price was right and you had to try it ! It takes patience and a lot of experimentation to get it REALLY right, kind of what it takes to get a cartridge aligned. You cant just measure and forget, you have to do a lot of listening, and adjusting too !

 

[microstrip]

There is equipment sounding good in a room, and then there is sounding REALLY good, something you will rarely get by rolling in a new caster with the latest crop of gear you just purchased because the price was right and you had to try it ! I takes patience and a lot of experimentation to get it REALLY right, kind of what it take to get a cartridge aligned. You cant just measure and forge, you have to do a lot of listening, and adjusting too !

It is where we disagree - if we select with care after we properly position the speakers most of what we do is tuning for preference, not dramatically improving anything. Cartridge alignment is simple if you choose a simple system or do it with the proper measurements, the same way people do with tape.

As many others, I appreciate tweaks and enjoy them in my system. They are part of the evolution and the fun. But I could easily live without them as many others choose to do. In this hobby we never know what we will do tomorrow!

 

[Lagonda]

It is where we disagree - if we select with care after we properly position the speakers most of what we do is tuning for preference, not dramatically improving anything. Cartridge alignment is simple if you choose a simple system or do it with the proper measurements, the same way people do with tape.

As many others, I appreciate tweaks and enjoy them in my system. They are part of the evolution and the fun. But I could easily live without them as many others choose to do. In this hobby we never know what we will do tomorrow!

One mans tweaking is another mans optimizing ! I personally don't consider spending months on speaker positioning and crossover tuning a tweak, that last centimeters or 1/10 of a mm on a dial sometimes makes a difference that most new gear purchases will not get you.

 

[microstrip]

One mans tweaking is another mans optimizing ! I personally don't consider spending months on speaker positioning and crossover tuning a tweak, that last centimeters or 1/10 of a mm on a dial sometimes makes a difference that most new gear purchases will not get you.

Well, we only need crossover tuning if we want to have it. Even so, the JLAudio with the CR1 is simple to tune if you do it properly - the auto tuning is really effective, phase is easy. We just have to fiddle with the damping, that is critical. IMHO if 0.1 mm makes such a large difference we have an excessively sensitive system or a large imagination - do you also control the humidity and temperature to +/- 1%?

 

[Lagonda]

Well, we only need crossover tuning if we want to have it. Even so, the JLAudio with the CR1 is simple to tune if you do it properly - the auto tuning is really effective, phase is easy. We just have to fiddle with the damping, that is critical. IMHO if 0.1 mm makes such a large difference we have an excessively sensitive system or a large imagination - do you also control the humidity and temperature to +/- 1%?

It all depends on your crossover point and the ability of your hearing of course ! Auto tuning will get you in the ballpark, the rest is done with patience and your ears, preferably over many session, as you hearing will adjust to even a wrong setting in the bass after relative short time. Next day with fresh ears you will often hear if it is not perfect, contrary to what you heard the day before ! Some people are just not very sensitive to phase problems, but with a crossover point of 100HZ and a fourth order filter like i prefer, there is only one perfect setting, and it takes experimentation and time to find it, but when you do everything falls into place.

 

[DaveC]

Silver oxide is electrically conductive still...unlike most other oxides...and in a low oxygen environment like in a Teflon sheath it will take a long time to significantly oxidize.

Ok, so this is propaganda put out by cable co's that sell cables with air dielectrics. I've mentioned this a few times already, I'm surprised you haven't seen my posts on this.

The corrosion products of silver are NOT all silver oxide, silver sulfide is actually the most common.

The teflon sheath is NOT a low-oxygen environment unless you flush it with an inert gas and seal the ends, the issue is sealing the ends is not trivial, it's extremely difficult. So the teflon sheath some cable co's use is almost assuredly NOT sealed and the wire will corrode regardless.

EDIT: I have built a test cable with teflon sheaths filled with inert gas. It's very good, but sealing the ends is not something I want to guarantee long-term in a product like a cable that sees a lot of handling.

We spend a lot of effort on finding the best sounding dielectrics... IMO pure cotton is best but you really need something that excludes oxygen and extruded teflon that forms a seal around the wire is best. Corrosion products of silver are not best.

IMO cable co's that sell air dielectric cables are either morally bankrupt or simply don't know better, neither option is good news. Also, 4N silver is not very good, IME 99% of folks find UPOCC copper to be superior.

 

[DaveC]

... other than some high frequency loss, our ears don't change.

This is not true. Hearing sensitivity vs frequency can change. With some folks the loss of general high frequency sensitivity is accompanied by a greater sensitivity to certain smaller ranges of high frequencies, usually around the 10 kHz range. This can cause issues with being sensitive to various high frequency artifacts and is a primary reason why some people are more sensitive to high frequency artifacts from metal domes, ribbons, etc.

 

[tima]

Maybe, maybe not, but irrelevant to my post.

 

[tima]

Our preferences change with time and most of it, the understanding of stereo and its boundaries enlarged with time.

Particularly for those who do not live in a diet of selected music predating the digital phase of stereo, stereo has evolved a lot. Most people listen and valuate amplified or complex music, not just the typical music coming from acoustic instruments currently involved in 99% of the debates of WBF.

Yes, some people's preferences may change with time. I've always enjoyed acoustic music and classical composers but know my preferences in music changed from what I listened to in my teen years to where I am now. What I value in stereo reproduction has evolved. I can't speak for what or how most people listen to or how they evaluate stereo equpment.

Not sure why you focus on music from acoustic instruments. The point of my post - that manufacturers who base their designs on how people hear don't need multiple iterations - was not genre specific.

 

[bonzo75]

Most people listen and valuate amplified or complex music, not just the typical music coming from acoustic instruments currently involved in 99% of the debates of WBF.

Acoustic orchestral is the most complex, not the amplified typical music involved in 99% of those audiophiles who don't listen to music but were taught by their dealers to listen to cuddly female vocals in a 3d bubble, boom boom beats.

Particularly for those who do not live in a diet of selected music predating the digital phase of stereo, stereo has evolved a lot.

Those who chose to also listen to music that predated stereo, chose it after they started on stereo and stereo recordings, because they realised these particular recordings sound better on any system. The way you wrote your sentence, it seems these people started listening in the age before stereo, and did not evolve since then as equipment and recordings passed them by. That is incorrect and based on your lack of experience with those recordings.

 

[bonzo75]

Surely some rooms are not right and need fixing. But IMHO we should buy the equipment that fits and sounds good in the room, not the force the room aiding treatments to accept the speakers, for example.



I went through several listening rooms in several houses. For me the most significant aspect is still room size. I am not sure that my future space (around 60 m2) will be able to accept the XLF, due to its vaulted ceilings.

I agree to this. The speaker has to fit the room. If there is a mismatch, treating the room is just managing the bad, sometimes it gets worse, sometimes less bad.

While proportion of room matters, the bigger rooms sound better than the smaller ones (not proportionately, but a certain size is required).

 

[tima]

Acoustic orchestral is the most complex

This is my view as well. Forty to seventy musicians playing a multitude of instruments with different pitch, timbre and dynamics with 10-25 different lines in a score - together, all under a single clock, the conductor. Throw in a 40-100 member choir now and then. Helps you appreciate the genius of good conducting and different interpretations. This is not a knock on other kinds of music (quartets. - complexity does not equal enjoyment.

I've heard some soundtracks that mix electronic with acoustic and have multiple layers of depth, sometimes with exotic australian (etc) instruments. Such can at first blush sound complex. And maybe there is complexity in putting the parts together. It can be enjoyable but who knows what it's supposed to sound like when reproduced.

 

[microstrip]

Acoustic orchestral is the most complex, not the amplified typical music involved in 99% of those audiophiles who don't listen to music but were taught by their dealers to listen to cuddly female vocals in a 3d bubble, boom boom beats.

You managed to change what I write - I addressed acoustic and/or complex music as separate entities.

Those who chose to also listen to music that predated stereo, chose it after they started on stereo and stereo recordings, because they realised these particular recordings sound better on any system. The way you wrote your sentence, it seems these people started listening in the age before stereo, and did not evolve since then as equipment and recordings passed them by. That is incorrect and based on your lack of experience with those recordings.

Your nasty fertile imagination and the usual "it seems" , trying personnel fight. Sorry, I am not interested. My only point is that we need a broad view to analyze stereo evolution along the last forty years.

 

[bonzo75]

You managed to change what I write - I addressed acoustic and/or complex music as separate entities.



Your nasty fertile imagination and the usual "it seems" , trying personnel fight. Sorry, I am not interested. My only point is that we need a broad view to analyze stereo evolution along the last forty years.

No, yours is nasty dismissing those who listen to old recordings

 

[Bobvin]

Holy crap fellas, this thread already had a title that was misleading, when the focus was on an article about rich guys and their spending, but you’ve taken it off the rails headed for the cliff...

 

[Lagonda]

Holy crap fellas, this thread already had a title that was misleading, when the focus was on an article about rich guys and their spending, but you’ve taken it off the rails headed for the cliff...

You should be happy with that development Bob ! Focus on rich guys and frivolous spending with limited sound improvement can never be good for audio dealers !

 

[asindc]

I agree with Doug that audio components should not be selected solely on the basis of price. Spending a lot of money on the trendiest and most advertised high-end audio components definitely does not guarantee good sound. Assembling a system comprised of the components of status-symbol brands definitely does not guarantee good sound.

Some of my favorite high-end audio systems cost only a fraction of the cost of much more expensive systems I personally did not care for.

But if somebody wants to drop a lot of money on status symbol audio jewelry and does not care about the sound quality per dollar why would any onlooker care? I think it is nonsense to impose one's personal values and preferences on another person's decisions, and suggest that the second person made a mistake or was foolish or imprudent to spend his/her money however he/she wishes.

Once I understand someone's musical genre preferences and subjective sonic preferences and room situation I am confident that I can assemble a great-sounding system by selecting from the top-of-the-line components of companies whose products I know well. Then the questions relate to value for sound quality, cost/benefit analysis and diminishing returns -- personal questions wholly dependent on one's pocketbook and personal preferences and idiosyncratic answers to these questions.

I think that generally I could put together a better system choosing from companies' more expensive products than from those companies' less expensive products. I do think that sound quality generally is somewhat positively correlated with price.

I think most manufacturers would concede that their top-of-the-line product -- which may cost several times more than their least expensive product -- may achieve only a relatively modest linear improvement in overall sound quality (diminishing returns). For example, Lampizator aficionados can estimate for us how much better is the Pacific at US$27,000 than is the Baltic3 at US$6,600. Is the Pacific 400% better than the Baltic3? Is it anybody's business other than the person writing the check if an audiophile chooses to purchase a company's top-of-the-line product even if to achieve only a subtle improvement in sound quality?

But why is this thread titled "The Truth About What's Best Forum"?

Has anyone else noticed that the original poster has not posted in this thread since?

 

[Big Dog RJ]

The usual suspects always like to derail things...
But that's OK I guess, it's all part of the fun just as long as no one gets stabbed!

Non hifi related, today at my work place, there was a scuffle between one of our security guards and a chap who actually paid for his items. Security guard thought that the chap wanted to walk out and all hell broke loose... several swings and puches at the end one person was nearly stabbed. All ended well, both apologised and shook hands, and I cancelled the police call out.

Now, this goes to show two things:
1. These two guys need to relaaax...
2. They're clearly NOT enjoying the music.

So may I'm assuming here that based on the various responses above, plus slight agitations... that you're all clearly not suffering from the above two issues...

Cheers maties, oh! and do enjoy those fine tunes!
Woof, RJ