What are you looking for in a very high end system? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 180Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 10:24 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
What are you looking for in a very high end system?

Hi, I am still quite new in hifi. I want to hear from people what in the high end system what are you looking for ( in the sound of cause) that make you willing to pay over say $30K for a system vs some mid fi. What do you hear that you cannot find in the mid level systems?


The reason I ask is I found out me and my friend are looking for completely different thing in a system. I am looking for the sound that surround me, like using headphone where I feel I am in the middle of music with more echo. But my friend looks for separation like he want to hear the singer standing in one position, other instruments in different positions. This is only me and my friend. I want to hear from you guys that have high end system to tell me what is important for you.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-28-2018 at 11:43 AM.
alan0354 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 10:56 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,339
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2355 Post(s)
Liked: 2211
I don't let "friends" suggest what I should hear, like, or purchase.
My money... my room.... my personal tastes... my rules.
markrubin, EM3, bluewizard and 5 others like this.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #3 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 11:37 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
I don't let "friends" suggest what I should hear, like, or purchase.
My money... my room.... my personal tastes... my rules.

Of cause, but what are you looking for? I am trying to understand what make people pick the highend system.

I particularly want to understand what is important to every individual, no technical, no theory, no blind test or any, just why they pick this speaker/amp over the other.......In another word, what make you tick to pay this kind of money.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-28-2018 at 11:41 AM.
alan0354 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 11:52 AM
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
Hi, I am still quite new in hifi. I want to hear from people what in the high end system what are you looking for ( in the sound of cause) that make you willing to pay over say $30K for a system vs some mid fi. What do you hear that you cannot find in the mid level systems?
Did you me "of course"?

What is mid level system?
Quote:
The reason I ask is I found out me and my friend are looking for completely different thing in a system. I am looking for the sound that surround me, like using headphone where I feel I am in the middle of music with more echo. But my friend looks for separation like he want to hear the singer standing in one position, other instruments in different positions.
Those have a lot to do with the way it's recorded.
Quote:
This is only me and my friend. I want to hear from you guys that have high end system to tell me what is important for you.
Are you trying to discuss high end system or very high end system?
psyberlogy is offline  
post #5 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 12:04 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by psyberlogy View Post
Did you me "of course"?

What is mid level system?
Those have a lot to do with the way it's recorded.
Are you trying to discuss high end system or very high end system?

I want to know what people find the high end system special ( sound wise).



Like, "I hear something like this that I cannot hear in the other systems".

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #6 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 12:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,339
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2355 Post(s)
Liked: 2211
This is nonsense.
Price does not denote or dictate what is low fi/end, mid fi/end, or high fi/end.


I hope this troll bait gets closed.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #7 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 12:12 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,170
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2800 Post(s)
Liked: 2717
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
Hi, I am still quite new in hifi. I want to hear from people that has high end system what are you looking for ( in the sound of cause) that make you willing to pay over say $30K for a system vs some mid fi. You do you hear that you cannot find in the mid level systems?


The reason I ask is I found out me and my friend are looking for completely different thing in a system. I am looking for the sound that surround me, like using headphone where I feel I am in the middle of music with more echo.

Well, you're in luck. Any number of AV receivers can be had for relatively cheap, that will process your music to surround you like that. With added "echo" if you want! . You can use your surround speakers (if you have them) or even just two speakers where some AV receivers can process the signal to sound like it's surrounding you.

But I bet you are aware of this, in which case I would go on to ask: Given your stated goal, if your solution isn't surround sound/processing of some sort, why isn't that your solution?


Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
But my friend looks for separation like he want to hear the singer standing in one position, other instruments in different positions. This is only me and my friend. I want to hear from you guys that have high end system to tell me what is important for you.
There are many different aspects of reproduced music that I love. But in terms of the aspects that I've been willing to spend more money to get:

1. Timbral nuance and beauty.

One of the first things I notice about real instruments, say when I play my acoustic guitar or I listen to someone else playing, is the harmonic richness and complexity. There just seems so much to luxuriate in, even in a single strummed cord, on a nice acoustic guitar. The same goes for a real piano. Or a sax. Or someone with a good singing voice.

I rarely find that characteristic in "cheap" gear. Though "cheap" is misleading because it isn't necessarily about how much something costs, but rather how well it's designed or implemented and if it's up to the task of better sound. But if we are talking about, say, the average car audio sound, or the type of sound I often hear from fairly cheap systems in a "non-audiophile's" house, I'm first conscious of how the reproduced sound is blanched of timbral complexity - everything sounds electronic, plastic, artificial. On a good high end system, I get more (not all, but more) of that real-life beauty being translated through the system - guitars have sparkly strings on glowing wooden bodies, voices that are rich, softer, more organically convincing, reed instruments sounding authentic, etc.

A system that can produce lower distortion and/or a sense of more timbral accuracy and beauty also, I find, serves every type of music. I'm also an electronic music fanatic (and used to play keyboards myself), and a wider tonal pallets enriches electronic music as well. (In fact, I always noticed that, just like acoustic instruments, the richness of electronic instruments like keyboard sounds tend to be quite diminished in complexity and accuracy on record, vs when you hear the direct sound played yourself).

2. A good high end speaker system is very low in the type of colorations that cue the ear "this is just sound coming from a speaker." In a successful high end speaker, the sound of a voice or instrument is more natural sounding and believable because it both seems to "float free" of the speakers themselves, and also does not sound like a "speaker" - e.g. no boxy colorations on the voice, no frequency bulges to make them sound like aliens rather than people.

This tends to go hand in hand with soundstaging and imaging, which, while behind the timbral quality in my criteria, is nonetheless a big part of what I enjoy from my system. It's like a magic show for my ears every time I sit down. There are speakers in the room, but sound doesn't really seem to come from them. Rather, brand new sonic landscapes just "appear" before me, from track to track. Some intimate, some cavernous, everything in between. It's sort of like a teleportation device of sorts that not only just has me listening to music but which "puts me there" in a brand new space to explore, sonically.

I tend to immersive sonic experience, so I tend to have my speakers fairly close, hovering around 7 feet. Too close and the sound can get a bit too headphone like in the sense that the sound can become more ghostly. Too far, the sound becomes lively, dense and dynamic...but loses immersion. I try to find the balance I like.

I personally like dense, palpable, focused imaging vs the more washy "wall of sound" that some others may prefer. Imaging that focuses the performers and instrumental sounds well tend to make the sound sources seem more "solid" to me, like there really is an instrument moving the air in the room right in front of me. This I find connects me more to the music than a more ghostly wash of sound, where I could be listening as if not in the same room. It's similar to what good dynamics do for sound.

3. Dynamics, control, giving me the "musical message." Now, the "musical message," what the musicians are doing, is something that I can get from almost any system - my car, my iphone, whatever. But a good system for me just pushes this further. So I like bass to be focused and punchy, so if a kick drum is played it has that familiar sense of direct orientation and punch, vs some wash of bass. I like cymbals, piano keys, percussion, whatever, when played enthusiastically to sound solid, precise, lively...not blurred away or inordinately softened. If the music is fun...it's got to be fun to listen to.

Anyway, those are off the top of my head. I may have missed some things but...I hope that's of interest.
alan0354 and Scotth3886 like this.
R Harkness is offline  
post #8 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 12:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,768
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3767 Post(s)
Liked: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
no technical, no theory, no blind test or any
These are the criteria I use, so I can't give you any feedback. Listening to a speaker is the absolute last thing on my list in picking speakers, and it is the aspect where I'm most skeptical.
neo_2009 likes this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #9 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 12:48 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Well, you're in luck. Any number of AV receivers can be had for relatively cheap, that will process your music to surround you like that. With added "echo" if you want! . You can use your surround speakers (if you have them) or even just two speakers where some AV receivers can process the signal to sound like it's surrounding you.

But I bet you are aware of this, in which case I would go on to ask: Given your stated goal, if your solution isn't surround sound/processing of some sort, why isn't that your solution?


There are many different aspects of reproduced music that I love. But in terms of the aspects that I've been willing to spend more money to get:

1. Timbral nuance and beauty.

One of the first things I notice about real instruments, say when I play my acoustic guitar or I listen to someone else playing, is the harmonic richness and complexity. There just seems so much to luxuriate in, even in a single strummed cord, on a nice acoustic guitar. The same goes for a real piano. Or a sax. Or someone with a good singing voice.

I rarely find that characteristic in "cheap" gear. Though "cheap" is misleading because it isn't necessarily about how much something costs, but rather how well it's designed or implemented and if it's up to the task of better sound. But if we are talking about, say, the average car audio sound, or the type of sound I often hear from fairly cheap systems in a "non-audiophile's" house, I'm first conscious of how the reproduced sound is blanched of timbral complexity - everything sounds electronic, plastic, artificial. On a good high end system, I get more (not all, but more) of that real-life beauty being translated through the system - guitars have sparkly strings on glowing wooden bodies, voices that are rich, softer, more organically convincing, reed instruments sounding authentic, etc.

A system that can produce lower distortion and/or a sense of more timbral accuracy and beauty also, I find, serves every type of music. I'm also an electronic music fanatic (and used to play keyboards myself), and a wider tonal pallets enriches electronic music as well. (In fact, I always noticed that, just like acoustic instruments, the richness of electronic instruments like keyboard sounds tend to be quite diminished in complexity and accuracy on record, vs when you hear the direct sound played yourself).

2. A good high end speaker system is very low in the type of colorations that cue the ear "this is just sound coming from a speaker." In a successful high end speaker, the sound of a voice or instrument is more natural sounding and believable because it both seems to "float free" of the speakers themselves, and also does not sound like a "speaker" - e.g. no boxy colorations on the voice, no frequency bulges to make them sound like aliens rather than people.

This tends to go hand in hand with soundstaging and imaging, which, while behind the timbral quality in my criteria, is nonetheless a big part of what I enjoy from my system. It's like a magic show for my ears every time I sit down. There are speakers in the room, but sound doesn't really seem to come from them. Rather, brand new sonic landscapes just "appear" before me, from track to track. Some intimate, some cavernous, everything in between. It's sort of like a teleportation device of sorts that not only just has me listening to music but which "puts me there" in a brand new space to explore, sonically.

I tend to immersive sonic experience, so I tend to have my speakers fairly close, hovering around 7 feet. Too close and the sound can get a bit too headphone like in the sense that the sound can become more ghostly. Too far, the sound becomes lively, dense and dynamic...but loses immersion. I try to find the balance I like.

I personally like dense, palpable, focused imaging vs the more washy "wall of sound" that some others may prefer. Imaging that focuses the performers and instrumental sounds well tend to make the sound sources seem more "solid" to me, like there really is an instrument moving the air in the room right in front of me. This I find connects me more to the music than a more ghostly wash of sound, where I could be listening as if not in the same room. It's similar to what good dynamics do for sound.

3. Dynamics, control, giving me the "musical message." Now, the "musical message," what the musicians are doing, is something that I can get from almost any system - my car, my iphone, whatever. But a good system for me just pushes this further. So I like bass to be focused and punchy, so if a kick drum is played it has that familiar sense of direct orientation and punch, vs some wash of bass. I like cymbals, piano keys, percussion, whatever, when played enthusiastically to sound solid, precise, lively...not blurred away or inordinately softened. If the music is fun...it's got to be fun to listen to.

Anyway, those are off the top of my head. I may have missed some things but...I hope that's of interest.

Thanks Rich for the detail reply. This is what I am looking for. I want to hear different people's opinions, what are they looking for. I have to read it over again.

I do like how headphone give me the feel that I am immersed into the music, but headphones don't give the dynamics of the big system.


I actually don't like AV 5.1. I had it, I took it down. The surround sound is too artificial to me. I go back to 2.1 even for watching tv. I find 2.1 sound more real and have better natural surrounding sound.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-28-2018 at 01:01 PM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #10 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 12:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
These are the criteria I use, so I can't give you any feedback. Listening to a speaker is the absolute last thing on my list in picking speakers, and it is the aspect where I'm most skeptical.

How do you pick your speakers?

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #11 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 01:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PrimeTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lower California
Posts: 3,258
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 802 Post(s)
Liked: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
These are the criteria I use, so I can't give you any feedback. Listening to a speaker is the absolute last thing on my list in picking speakers, and it is the aspect where I'm most skeptical.

So....You don't trust your ears?
PrimeTime is offline  
post #12 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 01:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,768
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3767 Post(s)
Liked: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrimeTime View Post
So....You don't trust your ears?
Sure I do, just not as much as I trust measurements.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #13 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,768
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3767 Post(s)
Liked: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
How do you pick your speakers?
Primarily with measurements and evaluation of design choices. Then, if it passes that criteria, I would listen to it just to make sure I don't hear anything surprising. Listening to a speaker is important, but less important than measurements IMO.

Let's put it this way, if I had to make a choice, I would buy a speaker blindly using just measurements(if I had the measurements I wanted) before I would buy a speaker with just my ears and eyes.

But both is best.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #14 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 01:30 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,339
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2355 Post(s)
Liked: 2211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Let's put it this way, if I had to make a choice, I would buy a speaker blindly using just measurements(if I had the measurements I wanted) before I would buy a speaker with just my ears and eyes..
Wow.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #15 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 02:30 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Sure I do, just not as much as I trust measurements.

I don't know how to measure speakers, I know how to measure amps to the Nth degree. I post this thread because I don't think technical measurements tell me everything. What are you looking for with the amps?

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #16 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 02:36 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,170
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2800 Post(s)
Liked: 2717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Primarily with measurements and evaluation of design choices. Then, if it passes that criteria, I would listen to it just to make sure I don't hear anything surprising. Listening to a speaker is important, but less important than measurements IMO.

Let's put it this way, if I had to make a choice, I would buy a speaker blindly using just measurements(if I had the measurements I wanted) before I would buy a speaker with just my ears and eyes.

But both is best.

Wow that's...interesting. Could you explain the logic there?

I understand the importance of measurements. The better measurements we have, the more we can correlate them with what we can expect to hear, the more valuable are the measurements.

Floyd Toole has for instance probably gone as far as anyone in investigating this correlation, though even he has emphasized that, though we have a good sense of which measurements predict a statistically reliable level of listener preference....our ability to measure and correlate a number of possible distortions to audibility remains woefully incomplete.

This means that, although a greater understanding of measurements can help predict LIKELY listener responses, given the goal of listening to speakers as the end point, it's actually listening tests that are most important in establishing the success of a speaker. Which is why listening tests played such an important role in his research. And it was surprises born of listening tests that actually motivated Prof Toole to start trying to correlate measurements to listener preference IIRC. So proper listening tests are really paramount even from the scientific perspective.

Further, even IF Floyd Toole-type measurements predict a statistical majority will prefer speaker design A over B, that doesn't tell you if you are within that statistical majority and you may well prefer speaker B...which neither you nor Floyd Tool could know until you did a blind LISTENING test.

But the point is, I wonder what function you have for your speakers? Is it as a form of lab instrument? If so, going on measurements, for the least distortion, most neutral would seem to make sense. All you are concerned about is the output matching the input as accurately as possible, and measurements can detect levels of accuracy or inaccuracy that we can't even hear.

But most people buy sound systems for listening pleasure. And if it's for listening pleasure, even *if* measurements can tend to predict what speakers you will prefer, why wouldn't your listening pleasure be the deciding factor? Given the lack of precision still left in statistical analysis correlating measurements to listener preference, and given the problem of still trying to understand the relationship of various distortion measurements to audibility/subjective effect, you listening would logically ALWAYS be the deciding factor.

But, again, this depends on whether you want a "lab tool" criteria for your speaker, or your main goal is what you actually enjoy listening to most.

If enjoying your system is paramount, it would be awfully strange if in a blind test you preferred to listen to speaker A...but nonetheless chose speaker B because it measured more accurately or whatever.


Personally, though I am all for speaker measurements increasing the science and predictability of loudspeaker design, and I like when a speaker measures "well," I've had too many instances of just loving the sound of some designs that have been derided as "wrong" or likely to suck based on "how one would properly design a speaker." There's no way I would sacrifice my own listening enjoyment to some alter of measurements. Why?
G-Rex, audiofan1, alan0354 and 2 others like this.

Last edited by R Harkness; 10-28-2018 at 02:39 PM.
R Harkness is offline  
post #17 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 03:01 PM
Member
 
adjutant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Primarily with measurements and evaluation of design choices. Then, if it passes that criteria, I would listen to it just to make sure I don't hear anything surprising. Listening to a speaker is important, but less important than measurements IMO.

Let's put it this way, if I had to make a choice, I would buy a speaker blindly using just measurements(if I had the measurements I wanted) before I would buy a speaker with just my ears and eyes.

But both is best.
Wow! thats nuts. Im not judging, Im just saying nuts, because objective measurements would be the last on my list.
My subjective listening experience, aesthetics (an extremely close second), then measurements would be my weighted criteria.

Im sure alot of guys would give me grief for placing looks that high on the list. In fact, I would probably opt for the better looking speakers if they were just marginally worse than another pair
Scotth3886 likes this.
adjutant is offline  
post #18 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 03:09 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
For power amps, I find technical measurements really don't tell the whole story, the sound is the ultimate goal of paying boat loads of money for a system. If measurement is that important, people might as well throw the tube amps away as there is no way a tube amp can achieve the low THD, damping factor and the power of SS amp. BUT as you see there are a lot of people that use tube amps and willing to pay boat loads of money for them.

I know there are some that spend a lot of money on a system just for show, BUT I believe that most spend the money because they hear something that worth the money they spent. that's what I like to hear from those people.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #19 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 03:19 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
If you talk about measurement, nothing can be worst than SET amps. They are high THD ( hell, they are as bad as 1%!!!), low damping factor, you'll be lucky to get one over 15W. These are hallmark of a really bad amp from the spec!!!! BUT there is a group of people that swear by SET amps. Some cost boat loads of money, just look at Cary!!! I even tried one, it did not work with my speakers. You need special type of speakers that work with SET amps. I remember I listened to a pair of Cary monoblock SET driving a pair of Sonus Faber speakers, it was heavenly.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-28-2018 at 03:35 PM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #20 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 03:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,170
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2800 Post(s)
Liked: 2717
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
If you talk about measurement, nothing can be worst than SET amps. They are high THD ( held, they are as bad as 1%!!!), low damping factor, you'll be lucky to get one over 15W. These are hallmark of a really bad amps!!!! BUT there is a group of people that swear by SET amps. Some cost boat loads of money, just look at Cary!!! I even tried one, it did not work with my speakers. You need special type of speakers that work with SET amps. I remember I listened to a pair of Cary monoblock driving a pair of Sonus Faber speakers, it was heavenly.
I've had various amplifiers, solid state from Harman Kardon, Bryston and others, and have always gravitated back to tube amps.

One time some years back the HK amp driving some monitor-sized Thiel speakers I owned went on the fritz, so I just wanted any amp to get them up and running again (I was actually doing tests for my home theater design and the monitors were useful and easy to move around, but I'd also listen to music).
My pal said he had a spare amp I could borrow if "you just need sound coming out of your speakers." Turned out it was some little old integrated tube amp I'd never heard of that he got out of someone's garbage or yard sale or something. I hooked it up hoping to at least just get sound so I could continue my experimenting, threw on some music to see if I was getting any sound and...holy cow! It just sounded glorious! The sound was so big, rich, expansive, organic. I literally spent most of the night stuck to my listening chair going through album after album, enjoying it so much. Same happened the next day, and the next day, and the next. I phoned my friend and said "what the hell is this thing, it sounds amazing!" He said "Oh, yeah, that's an old Eico HF-81 from the 60's. It's supposed to be something of a little classic. I never bothered to hook it up though."

Then I did research and sure enough, there were raves all over the place for that little amp as a classic.

Turns out a Stereophile article had raised it's profile so it went to a "gem to those in the know" to more sought after. But look at how it measures, like crap:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-measurements

If I simply sought an amp looking for conventionally good measurements, I sure as heck would never have put that thing in to my system. But it was how it actually sounded with my speakers that made all the difference in the world.

Similarly, I even tried pairing it with what, in technically-sound terms, ought to be a bad match up: powering my MBL 121 omni-directional speakers. That's a brand that is notoriously power hungry (hovers around 4 ohm, with dips, and 82db sensitivity). But, again..wow!....there was that same big, rich, gorgeously organic tone, but with clarity and nice transient "zip." It's probably my favourite amp on the MBLs.

I still use my bigger more powerful Conrad Johnson amplifiers and pre-amp for most listening duties (I have a number of speakers) as they are more practical and sound fantastic. But for me the Eico is just another reason why for me listening, and listening pleasure, takes precedence as a criteria over how something measurements.
alan0354 and Scotth3886 like this.
R Harkness is offline  
post #21 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 03:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,768
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3767 Post(s)
Liked: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Wow that's...interesting. Could you explain the logic there?

I understand the importance of measurements. The better measurements we have, the more we can correlate them with what we can expect to hear, the more valuable are the measurements.

Floyd Toole has for instance probably gone as far as anyone in investigating this correlation, though even he has emphasized that, though we have a good sense of which measurements predict a statistically reliable level of listener preference....our ability to measure and correlate a number of possible distortions to audibility remains woefully incomplete.

This means that, although a greater understanding of measurements can help predict LIKELY listener responses, given the goal of listening to speakers as the end point, it's actually listening tests that are most important in establishing the success of a speaker. Which is why listening tests played such an important role in his research. And it was surprises born of listening tests that actually motivated Prof Toole to start trying to correlate measurements to listener preference IIRC. So proper listening tests are really paramount even from the scientific perspective.

Further, even IF Floyd Toole-type measurements predict a statistical majority will prefer speaker design A over B, that doesn't tell you if you are within that statistical majority and you may well prefer speaker B...which neither you nor Floyd Tool could know until you did a blind LISTENING test.

But the point is, I wonder what function you have for your speakers? Is it as a form of lab instrument? If so, going on measurements, for the least distortion, most neutral would seem to make sense. All you are concerned about is the output matching the input as accurately as possible, and measurements can detect levels of accuracy or inaccuracy that we can't even hear.

But most people buy sound systems for listening pleasure. And if it's for listening pleasure, even *if* measurements can tend to predict what speakers you will prefer, why wouldn't your listening pleasure be the deciding factor? Given the lack of precision still left in statistical analysis correlating measurements to listener preference, and given the problem of still trying to understand the relationship of various distortion measurements to audibility/subjective effect, you listening would logically ALWAYS be the deciding factor.

But, again, this depends on whether you want a "lab tool" criteria for your speaker, or your main goal is what you actually enjoy listening to most.

If enjoying your system is paramount, it would be awfully strange if in a blind test you preferred to listen to speaker A...but nonetheless chose speaker B because it measured more accurately or whatever.


Personally, though I am all for speaker measurements increasing the science and predictability of loudspeaker design, and I like when a speaker measures "well," I've had too many instances of just loving the sound of some designs that have been derided as "wrong" or likely to suck based on "how one would properly design a speaker." There's no way I would sacrifice my own listening enjoyment to some alter of measurements. Why?
That is a lot of words to basically say that measurements don't matter to you. To each his own.

All I can say is that my experience with blinded loudspeaker comparisons has never had me choose the inferior measuring speaker, and all the actual scientific evidence I can find supports the reliability of measurements and the fallibility of listening. So I have no reason not to trust measurements. You mention Dr. Toole, but fail to mention that for loudspeakers of similar size, and bass response, the correlation of Dr. Toole's measurements to listener preference was 0.995. Of course you could be that 0.005 listener, but careful comparison of your preferences to measurements should easily let you figure that out. I'm very confident that I'm in that 0.995 group.

I also believe that many factors impact our listening enjoyment, entirely independent of the loudspeaker, so my short term listening impressions cannot be relied upon. All speaker auditioning is short term, therefore unreliable. IMO long term enjoyment is predicted by measurements, not short speaker auditions.

But I have no problem with however anyone chooses their speakers, or amps, or cable lifters, or crystals, or whatever they want to spend there money on. I'm just giving my opinion here .
Gooddoc is offline  
post #22 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 04:00 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,170
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2800 Post(s)
Liked: 2717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
That is a lot of words to basically say that measurements don't matter to you. To each his own.
Nope. That wasn't the message at all. In fact, I was explicit that this was not the message.

I simply pointed out that if listening satisfaction was the goal...then listening would be the deciding factor, not measurements. That is NOT to say measurements "don't matter" for the reasons I'd already stated.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
I also believe that many factors impact our listening enjoyment, entirely independent of the loudspeaker, so my short term listening impressions cannot be relied upon.
But...blind listening tests of speakers are "short term listening tests."

If short term tests can't be relied on for listener preference...what are you relying on???


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
All speaker auditioning is short term, therefore unreliable. IMO long term enjoyment is predicted by measurements, not short speaker auditions.
Again...the data for listener preference, e.g. Toole et al, only establishes SHORT TERM listening preference, as that is all they are set up to test. And I'm unaware of any studies correlating measurements to *long term* listener preference/enjoyment. So...where are you getting this correlation?

Aren't you deriving this validation between measurements and long term listening pleasure from....your own....listening?

Scotth3886 likes this.
R Harkness is offline  
post #23 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 07:13 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
I can't speak for tube amps as I don't have enough experience. I only talk about SS power amp. I design SS power amps, I have instruments to measure THD, slew rate, frequency response.....you name it, I measure it. I design and built 3 amps, all with THD below 0.002%@1KHz, and 0.004%@20KHz, damping factor of over [email protected]@8ohm. Flat frequency response from 20Hz to over 50KHz ( less than 0.5dB, limited by the oscilloscope). You would think with this low distortion and flat frequency response of all 3 amps, they should sounds the same. Talk about ideally as a wire with gain. WRONG. The three cannot sound more different.



I don't want to get into this as this is not a technical forum and I've gone through this in past threads here. Bottom line, I think there is a lot more than instrumental measurements. I use it as a guide line for SS amps ( I can't even say this for tube amps as the THD of tube amps are so high). You check to make sure you are in the ball park. Then put away all the test equipment. Just listen to it and judge. All the good measure doesn't worth anything if it doesn't sound good!!! That's why I ask only on impression and subjective opinions in this thread.
MajorTendonitis likes this.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #24 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 07:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,768
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3767 Post(s)
Liked: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Nope. That wasn't the message at all. In fact, I was explicit that this was not the message.

I simply pointed out that if listening satisfaction was the goal...then listening would be the deciding factor, not measurements. That is NOT to say measurements "don't matter" for the reasons I'd already stated.




But...blind listening tests of speakers are "short term listening tests."

If short term tests can't be relied on for listener preference...what are you relying on???




Again...the data for listener preference, e.g. Toole et al, only establishes SHORT TERM listening preference, as that is all they are set up to test. And I'm unaware of any studies correlating measurements to *long term* listener preference/enjoyment. So...where are you getting this correlation?

Aren't you deriving this validation between measurements and long term listening pleasure from....your own....listening?

When I said short term listening, I was speaking in terms of a typical sighted speaker audition - like in an audio shop or home. Not a controlled lab grade environment where all factors are controlled for and near instantaneous switching between speakers and content is possible. It takes much, much longer to reveal speaker flaws in the typical sighted listening environment with many uncontrolled factors. By using trained listeners with excellent hearing in a controlled environment Dr. Toole dramatically shortens the time it takes to get answers. Crudely done home blind listening tests can be much more helpful and dramatically further decrease the time it takes to evaluate a speaker compared to the typical sighted audio shop or home listening method. Moreso if blind mono comparisons are done. But these are difficult to pull off with more than a few speakers and are prone to errors, and if it were done in an increasingly controlled manner you would have the same results that Dr.Toole and Olive came up with. So why not just look at the correlated measurements? Even with the "distortion" you're concerned about, a 99.5% correlation was made. How much correlation do you need?

And if you don't look at measurements, how do you determine what speakers to audition to begin with? Price? Looks? Sighted reviews? None of which correlate in any way to speaker quality. That was also clearly proven in the research. The only proven correlation I'm aware of to speaker quality and preference is measurements.

I could buy some of your argument if you could prove that those terribly measuring loudspeakers you like so much also held up to a blind comparison test. But Dr. Toole proved many times that the positive sighted listening impressions of terribly measuring loudspeakers you speak of don't hold up in blind listening tests. If it measures bad it loses. Every time.

Yes, the long term stuff is my opinion, which I clearly stated.
neo_2009 and bear123 like this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #25 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 07:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,768
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3767 Post(s)
Liked: 3373
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
I can't speak for tube amps as I don't have enough experience. I only talk about SS power amp. I design SS power amps, I have instruments to measure THD, slew rate, frequency response.....you name it, I measure it. I design and built 3 amps, all with THD below 0.002%@1KHz, and 0.004%@20KHz, damping factor of over [email protected]@8ohm. Flat frequency response from 20Hz to over 50KHz ( less than 0.5dB, limited by the oscilloscope). You would think with this low distortion and flat frequency response of all 3 amps, they should sounds the same. Talk about ideally as a wire with gain. WRONG. The three cannot sound more different.
Assuming your measurements are accurate, you would have to prove that to me in blind listening tests.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #26 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 07:19 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,234
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3589 Post(s)
Liked: 2023
since no speakers sound like a live band I just go with what I can listen to at loud level for long time...big room and retired so many days the music going 8 hrs plus. no cringing moments no matter the recording. also a must is not hearing the speaker as if the sounds just floating in space.

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #27 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 08:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
Williams2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 840
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 465 Post(s)
Liked: 256
What I’m looking for in a high end music system has changed just in the last year. For 20 years off and on I would go looking for the clearest, most tonally accurate, non-fatiguing speakers I could afford. I bought Bryston Mini T’s about 3 years ago after much searching because they checked off those boxes the best for me for $4,000. Although I still think they’re awesome, I found them to be a little too revealing for some of the types of music I listen to, or just don’t seem musical enough. I have recently found even clearer, yet very smooth and musical speakers, but they are way over budget, the Kharma Elegance S7’s at around $27,000.
I also just heard the small Totem Tribe towers at Toronto Audio Fest, and although I didn’t find them as clear or tonally perfect as the Bryston Mini T’s, there was something about their musicality that I want to hear again, as long as the bass is more accurate than I heard in the untreated demo room. With having an excellent 3.1 system for home theatre and amazing headphones for music, I’m not in a rush for a new music system yet, but I will someday when I find it.

Last edited by Williams2; 10-29-2018 at 02:35 AM.
Williams2 is offline  
post #28 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 08:43 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,170
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2800 Post(s)
Liked: 2717
Gooddoc,

(Apologies for the length...I understand if you don't read or respond to this reply...to lazy to edit...;-) )

Just to keep things clear: once again, I'm absolutely not arguing against the worth of measurements. (I tend to spend more time arguing FOR measurements in audiophile forums, never against). We both believe that measurements are useful and important. And that listening is important.
It's just it seems we disagree on which one sensibly has primacy. You seem to want to put measurements in front, I suggest listening is the ultimate arbiter.
I say that because listening to (sound through) speakers is the ultimate goal, it's what they are for. (IF we are talking about listening pleasure as a goal, as it normally is, and which it seems we are agreed upon).

So the ultimate test has to be how a speaker sounds to the individual who may purchase that speaker.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
When I said short term listening, I was speaking in terms of a typical sighted speaker audition - like in an audio shop or home. Not a controlled lab grade environment where all factors are controlled for and near instantaneous switching between speakers and content is possible. It takes much, much longer to reveal speaker flaws in the typical sighted listening environment with many uncontrolled factors. By using trained listeners with excellent hearing in a controlled environment Dr. Toole dramatically shortens the time it takes to get answers.
But in both cases they are short-term listening tests. You'd said: "IMO long term enjoyment is predicted by measurements." Was I wrong to presume that by "long term" satisfaction over long periods of time owning a speaker? If so...what relevance does the "instantaneous switching" have, it's still short-term testing that can only make claims to predict preferences over a short time using instantaneous switching.

But you say they predict long term satisfaction. Since you don't have actual scientific data establishing long term satisfaction (at least that I'm aware of), the only evidence it seems you could appeal to is your own experience listening over long periods of time. So your listening IS in fact the final arbiter, not how the speakers measure.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
And if you don't look at measurements, how do you determine what speakers to audition to begin with? Price? Looks? Sighted reviews? None of which correlate in any way to speaker quality. That was also clearly proven in the research. The only proven correlation I'm aware of to speaker quality and preference is measurements.
I don't have trouble believing that I may be among those who pick a Harman Kardon or Revel speaker in the type of blind listening tests they set up. Statically speaking, I should bet money on it.

The problem is, in my actual experience listening to a very wide variety of speakers, the type of measurements from the NRC and Toole don't help predict what I'll like BEST. If the measurements and design criteria used by Harmon Kardon and Revel were the end of the story, then I may as well just buy HK or Revel speakers and be done with it. The problem is...I've heard those speakers. Auditioned a number of Revels. They matched the sound predicted by the measurements to this degree: they sounded like VERY competently designed speakers, coherent, pretty smooth, well controlled and generally neutral top to bottom, and smooth off axis performance.

But they just didn't turn my crank. They had not "it" factor at all for me. I did not find myself at all excitedly wanting to dig through ever more of my CD collection to keep hearing everything I've got on them. I could just take or leave the listening experience. That is entirely unlike my reaction to some other speakers (including many I've owned), which just spin my head with some "it factor."

I'm a fanatic for timbral realism and an organic quality. When I play my acoustic guitar I "see" the tones in my mind vividly, a sort of golden sparkly harmonic quality and absolutely "woody" resonance of the guitar. I've used recordings of my guitar (and my son playing sax, and voices in my family) to do live vs reproduced comparisons with many speakers in my home (I also used to review speakers so I had access to many different types), and closing my eyes many just did not nail what I hear in real life, but some DID, they came really close, and THOSE ones were always the speakers that would have me stuck to my chair late in to the night, listening.

I just didn't ever get that magic from the Revels. Just a sense of competence.

I'm familiar with the general "NRC" school speakers, which are designed generally with the characteristics advised by Toole's research. Most of them have left me unmoved. I've owned PSB speakers (used them for work and some music listening). They never did much for me. I still own waveform speakers - designed for the characteristics of neutrality and well-behaved off-axis performance - and I love them. But they sound a bit different than the PSB (or Paradigm speakers) to my ears. They have a natural timbral warmth (I don't mean added richness of lower mids, I mean that wood based instruments SOUND like they are made of wood, not like an electronic facsimile, that kind of thing). I could go through any number of speakers I've heard, or had in my house, that I found utterly mesmerizing...that were not of the strict "Harman Kardon" or NRC-approved" design.

Not long after auditioning a couple of Revel speakers, I auditioned some Devore Fidelity Orangutan speakers. The Devores had received excellent reviews, but some raspberries for their design from "by the books" folks, and for how they measured in some parameters. But I preferred the Devores by a large measure to my auditions of the Revels. Some drum tracks I'm familiar with sounded like excellent recordings of drums on the Revels. On the Devores I'll be darned if they didn't sound like....drums! Right in front of me! Closing my eyes they were just more dynamically and tonally believable to me than the same tracks on the Revels. Unlike the Revels, I was excited to hear track after track on the Devores, they had an "it" factor for me.

Would I have predicted this reaction if I went only on some small selection of speakers approved by the spinnerama-type-measurements? Likely not. And yet...they were a revelation. I'd hate to have missed out on the many speakers I've truly enjoyed, by thinking only speakers known to pass the HK-type tests would please me most. They don't.

So I've listened to speaker A, and to speaker B, and preferred speaker B. Why would I then choose to pay for speaker A because someone has told me "it measures better, and predicts listener satisfaction." Well, sorry, that may be theoretically true if I were doing blind tests, but in the conditions I'm actually listening, both in stores and at home, for whatever collection of reasons, I prefer speaker B. So why pay for speaker A?


For me, my satisfaction with a speaker has always been determined by listening. I've never heard a speaker that left me unmoved on first audition, that later grabbed me or blew me away another time.

Finally, as for long term satisfaction: Again, we don't have any scientific data on that, that I'm aware of. The best we have is just a sort of "in the field" loose surveying. In the various forums I've been a part of for decades, many threads have come up asking "For those who are satisfied long term: what speaker did you settle on?" And every time, the results are ALL OVER THE MAP in terms of speaker design. You have people who swear by their electrostatics, by their Maggies, by their British box speakers like Harbeth, by their High sensitivity Horns, by their narrow tower speakers, by full range speakers, by "stand mounted only," by omnis, by controlled directivity. ALL of those have managed to make audiophiles intensely happy over long periods of time. Despite that most audiophiles have been exposed to many different types of design. In other words, I don't see that the spinnerama measurements correlate with or predict what speakers audiophiles will latch on to as satisfying their particular criteria and interests, as audiophiles manage to love a great many designs that will measure quite differently. There's all sorts of real-world influences going on for that, no doubt. But the end result is that just going by spinnerama measurements don't seem to be the road to success in satisfying all the different criteria audiophiles have in speaker preferences, which is why individuals decide on their own listening tests, not just on Harman Kardon's or the NRCs or whatever. Anyone who has attended audio shows have heard the Revel speakers, and yet most go on to prefer speakers in other rooms, and other speakers more often win "best in show" with most votes for "best sound."
alan0354 and Scotth3886 like this.
R Harkness is offline  
post #29 of 433 Old 10-28-2018, 09:26 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,170
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2800 Post(s)
Liked: 2717
BTW, apropos of Alan's question in the OP.

I'd been listening online, via my imac desktop computer, to an electronic album that I really like. It's actually quite pleasant via the imac's speakers, which have some nice punch and decent clarity, all things considered.

But I finally got around to purchasing the album (digital download) and just played it on my high end system. Wow, it's just another world. So much is revealed in the high end system, every instrument has such an individual presence and texture and tonal quality. All the different keyboard, drum and bass lines just inhabit their place in the room around the speakers, in a very "physical" manner. It never loses it's thrill.
R Harkness is offline  
post #30 of 433 Old 10-29-2018, 12:15 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Assuming your measurements are accurate, you would have to prove that to me in blind listening tests.

I don't have to proof anything to you. I am here to ask specifically people with high end system what are they looking for, I am not interested on your type of analytical test. Hi-Fi is for listening, not to analyze on some instruments.
Scotth3886 likes this.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2-Channel Audio

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off