On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:31:17 -0800, Serge Auckland wrote
(in article ):
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
After being told that audiophiles don't use FFTs and measurement mics to
enhance their listening rooms, I sit here amused by the non-response to
my
list of recent home audio products from 4 different major manufacturers,
that do exactly that, assisted by their own microprocessor controllers.
Oh, Arny, you know Harman, Denon, et al. aren't HIGH-END. *Real*
audiophiles
wouldn't dream of using digital EQ...
unless it looked like this and cost this much:
http://www.trinnov-audio.com/optimizer.php
http://www.audyssey.com/soundequalizer/index.html
An audiophile on HA complained that he obtained a bad-sounding download
from
a major source. Within 24 hours, two 30 second segments of the CD and
downloaded versions of the work had been prepared and uploaded, including
precise time-synching and level-matching. Someone then dowloaded the
files
and posted the results of their ABX test, which showed an audible
difference
at the 98% confidence level.
HA.org is quite simply one of the best web resources around, for those
truly interested in
audio.
--
-S
I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the
greatest complexity, can
seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would
oblige them to admit
the falsity of conclusions which they have proudly taught to others, and
which they have
woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their life -- Leo Tolstoy
In a way, we're returning to the "flat-earth" days when, in the UK at least,
if you didn't have a Linn Sondek and Naim amplifiers, you were beyond the
pale. Now, it's having to have mega expensive items with measurably poor
audio performance in order to qualify as high-end. I cannot believe that
anyone, short of a charlatan, would manufacture a SET amplifier that costs
huge amounts for appalling performance. Or loudspeakers with horribly spiky
frequency responses and high distortion also costing huge amounts. Or cables
costing hundreds and thousands when $£? 4.99 is all you need to spend to get
the same sound.
I agree with you there.
What ever happened to Hi-Fi meaning Hi-Fidelity, i.e. low distortion (of all
sorts), and some sensible engineering.
We are dealing with a heretofore largely non-existent entity, a product of
the greedy '80's and '90's, The vulgarly, gauchely and indecently rich. These
are people who think nothing of paying $20 million for a rare motorcar, hang
out in Monte Carlo in 500 foot yachts, have their own Gulfstar private jets,
and buy everything on price. The more expensive, the better. This is a guy
who will invite a fellow rich asshole over to his 60,000 square-foot mansion
to show him his music room, and then commence to point out the price of
EVERYTHING. See those amplifiers? They are hand-made in Japan by a little old
samurai, they are 12 watts /channel and cost $180,000 EACH. See those 1-meter
long interconnects going to the pre-amp? $4000 a pair......
This attitude (these billionaire jerks rarely if ever pick this stuff out
themselves. They hire an "A/V consultant" to put these systems together for
them. They don't really care about sound, and often have only a handful of
CDs and records to play on them. They care about cost and bragging rights,
that's all.
This has two effects on the audio industry, it allows companies who's
interest is in making better products to be able to afford to play with
"statement" level products, sure in the knowledge that whatever they end up
costing to produce, there will be people willing and able to buy them. The
new Martin-Logan CLX is an example of this kind company and product. truly a
groundbreaking achievement, and while expensive ($25,000/pair, not
outrageously so when compared to more mundane speaker systems costing 3 and
four times the price and given their incredible performance.
The other side of the coin are niche products which MIGHT cost a lot to make,
using rare materials and expensive manufacturing techniques which end up
being very expensive without actually bringing any new levels of performance
to the party. A couple of cases in point would be the Ongaku "Audio Note" SET
amplifiers and Nordost Valhalla interconnects. The Ongaku amps use NOS
Western Electric 300B triodes for output tubes, hand-wound output
transformers employing 99% pure SILVER wire and hand-made oil filled
capacitors. They produce SEVEN Watts each and were, last time that I saw a
pair, $80,000 each. They sounded mediocre at best, and awful when played
loudly. The Nordost Valhalla interconnects, are, I'm sure very costly to
build. I've seen cutaways of the cable used and it sure looks expensive and
in the amounts that Nordost undoubtably buys every year (couple of thousand
feet at most?), is, I'm sure, hundreds of dollars a foot. The problem, of
course, is that as fancy as these cables are, they are, ultimately, just wire
carrying low frequency audio signals. All of the technical gibberish used to
promote cables like these, things such as the different layers of cabling
with different strand diameters and different twists and the exotic materials
used as dielectrics and insulators can't alter the fact that these cables, at
best, sound just like a $3 pair of Radio Shack molded cables in a
double-blind test, and at worst screw with the high-frequencies to make them
sound "different" from other cables (although, believe me, most don't).
It seems to me that as the major manufacturers now (have been for 30+ years)
make products that are audibly transparent i.e. will pass a straight-wire
bypass test, selling for a few hundred £$?, the "High-End" have to respond
by mega expensive items with audibly flawed performance that will sound
different (hence better!) in a dealers demo.
No. The mainstream manufacturers are making good products, but the use very
expensive manufacturing processes and premium parts to do so. They do prey on
the average audiophile's paranoid need to "upgrade", though. A Mark Levinson
#53 monobloc power amp might really need to cost $24,000 each given it's
build quality and materials used, but the question is, does it sound any
different from another 500 Watt/Channel amplifier costing 1/10th or even
1/100th as much? The answer here is probably not. Speakers are, of course, a
different kettle of fish. There continue to be strides in this technology and
the great speakers are justifiably expensive.
Why is it that I can assemble a system from 1970 & 80s components that will
be the equal of anything produced now, with the possible exception of
loudness? Where is the progress?
There really isn't much except in speakers and possibly CD and LP
reproduction. But I will say this it is possible to buy mainstream Japanese
and Chinese receivers that outperform the very finest separates from the 70's
and 80's at a fraction of those separates' costs.