Audiophiles/hifi buff brewers?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

superfluent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
422
Reaction score
2
OK, hands down, I admit, I'm a sucker for lifelike audio reproduction. I'm also a sucker for quality (not seldome homebrewed) beer. For me there's nothing like listening to well recorded music on a truly transparent high end stereo system while sipping a good beer (next to listeing to live music, sipping a good beer, of course...or listening to live music, sipping beer next to a beautiful woman...etc. etc.).

Anyway, are there any other audiophiles/beerphiles on this board or am I the only audiobrewbuff around?

/
H
 
My business partner was co-owner of Theta Digital before they sold the business. I have a few pieces of high-end gear, just enough to realize I don't have golden ears like she does. Her setup is amazing. Listening to an opera, you know exactly where everyone is on stage.
 
I think I might qualify ;)

I currently make my living in "High End" Audio by building cables and modding network media servers, aka SqueezeBox. http://www.slimdevices.com

Check out http://www.audiocircle.com
Lots of audiogeeks and even a few homebrewers there.

There is a great audio show in Denver every year called the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest. http://www.audiofest.net
It is held in the Marriott Denver Tech Center. The "lounge" has all of Great Divide's beer on draft. There is nothing like sitting down to a nice, hoppy Titan IPA after a long day at a trade show :)

If you are at all interested, check out my offerings at http://www.boldercables.com

My personal systems are always in a state of flux. I have been using VMPS 626R speakers for quite a few years. My latest pair are highly customized with external crossovers built with all Sonicaps and Sonicap Platinum caps. All the internal wiring is my design. Lots of Bybee Purifiers and other geek tweaks.

I put a set of "rock" speakers in my back yard last year.

310-045L.jpg


They are not the greatest in terms of fantastic definition or extended low end responce, but powered by an old '70s vintage Kenwood receiver and fed by a SqueezeBox, it is a great way to pass an evening.

The "heart" of my systems is my media server. I have over 2500 albums stored in .flac files on 1.2 terabytes of Hard Drives. The modded SqueezeBoxes get the information streamed to them through my wi-fi network. I have compared the sound to a lot of separate CD transports and DAC s and for under $10K, I haven't heard anything that sounds close.

I do have a Teres 255 turntable and about 600 vinyl albums. Since I started with hard drive based music, it has been just sitting on a shelf.

I made my first beer at home 26 years ago. Listening to music with a beer in my hand is one of my few simple pleasures. It really doesn't have to be on an "audiophile" system. Sitting on my deck during a warm evening and listening to some great recordings of live concerts with a Dale's Pale Ale... :mug:
 
Wayne1
"Listening to music with a beer in my hand is one of my few simple pleasures. It really doesn't have to be on an "audiophile" system. Sitting on my deck during a warm evening and listening to some great recordings of live concerts with a Dale's Pale Ale... "

I don't have my FIL's system, but the stereo is always on (sirius 16 the vault) while I brew.
 
Audio is my second hobby (actually my first before homebrewing). Yes, I am a subscriber to Stereophile.

I can recall mowing lawns back in the 60's to save up for that Garrard Synchro-Lab turntable and a pair of AR 4x speakers... friends in college though I was nuts the way I prepared my LP's before I played them on an AR turntable with the Shure V15 cartridge - it sounded great. I am thinking of getting back into vinyl..

I had a pretty decent Kenwood receiver and also reel to reel (TEAC) ..

Tp hell with the home theatre stuff ... I wantr to just be able to focus on the music..

Marriage, kids etc ... but still really enjoy FM radio (such higher quality than satellite) and we are lucky to have such great college stations here (I have an outdoor FM only antenna on a rotator feeding a vintage Yamaha T-80 tuner.

I am now looking at a McIntosh MC250. I have always wanted to own anything McIntosh. It's all about quality - right ??

I think I will hook it up in my fantasy basement brewery ! Make the sound as good as the suds..

Let's keep this thread going guys !
 
kappclark said:
I am thinking of getting back into vinyl..

As long as you enjoy the ceremony, go for it!

Vinyl just takes too long. Or I am too impatient.

This is a picture of the same model TT I own

g-81.jpg


I also have a Hagerman Cornet tube phono pre-amp and Clarinet tube pre-amp.

Using Hard Drive audio is just FAR too easy. I don't have to find the record. Remove it from all the covers protecting it from the enviroment. Place the album on the platter. Clean the album. Adjust the VTA so it sounds right. Very carefully move the tonearm over the cut I want to listen to. Play the one cut I want to hear. Raise the stylus off the record. Bring the tonearm back to it's rest. Remove the record from the platter. Place it back in it's protective covering. Try to find where it goes back in my collection.

If I want to listen to something I just pick up the remote control. Scroll through either artists, album titles, genres, etc. I find what I want to listen to. I hit play. That's it.
 
I used to be a fanatic, but life just got too busy. I still have my ADCOM GFA5800 Amplifier as well as ADCOM AC line enhancer, Tuner and 5 disc Carousel also all ADCOM, that I purchased back in 1991. I decided that I just HAD to own a pair of Klipschorns once in my life, so I bought all the original drivers out of a set in USA, along with the original labels, emblems, crossovers etc and had them shipped here. I have precise plans to build them and have a mate with a CNC machine to cut everything and another mate that's a proper cabinet maker, so they will be perfect when completed.


2 reasons for not purchasing a proper set?

$18,000 AUS to buy a set here.
$7,000 to buy a set in USA and $2,500 to ship them.
 
McIntosh MC250- omg Macs are pure beauty!

I stuck with Harmon Kardon as I dont have the money for serious **** like Macs. After looking up the Mac wow - I had no idea they make anything less than $3K.

I bought some cheap JBL speakers when I was an Airman and holy crap I cant find a reason to get rid of them!
 
We discovered the MC250 on the 4th floor of a building where I work... I don't know how long it has been in storage, but I plan to take it for a spin this weekend probably ... I will make them an offer if it seems to work well.



They're on ebay for less than $400, so I figure I can get my ego off on saying I actually owned a Mac amp ..

The new McIntosh stuff is still very expensive.

That's quite a turntable ... trust me, I am not a member of the lunatic fringe who, for example, believe that stereos on the West coast sound better because the power is from clean hydro-electric dams, not dirty coal ! I have abt 40 albums which I haven't listened to in years..

How about tubes ? I am thinking of getting a refurbed Dynaco ST-70 for that sweet tube sound.
 
Here is a better shot of my TT

teres250.jpg


Here are my phono pre-amp and pre-amp

Cornet.JPG



Clarinet.JPG



I built all three of those. The TT was a "kit" I had to assemble the bearing and finish the wood.

The pre-amp were bought ar empty circuit boards. I stuffed them with my own choice of parts and installed them in cases I had custom made for them.

You may want to take a look at Response Audio.
http://www.responseaudio.com/
He makes some FANTASTIC tube amps that sound quite a bit better than the old Dynaco gear.

I used a Bella EXtreme 3205 at RMAF two years ago driving a pair of VMPS RM-30s

n-RMAF-2006.jpg



That combination sounded superb.
 
Nice to know I'm not alone :)

I used to be into the esotheric stuff (cables etc), but a visit to a friend's friend several years ago totally changed my perception of sound reproduction and high-end audio. This guy had spent the better part of his life researching the human hearing and the physics involved in sound reproduction. He turned out to be quite a character.

For starters, he really just wanted to design speakers -not sell them- and he wanted to educate people about what matters in audio reproduction.

His speakers was originally designed as research tools but he soon found out that people wanted to buy them because of their exceptional performance he and started manufacturing small quantites (partly because he designed every part of the speaker elements for each speaker himself and he had to order fairly large quantities of the parts to get them manufacutred).

He also refused to sell his speakers to anyone he had not met in person, but in return you got a one day chatt with him about speaker design, psychoacoustics, room acoustics etc. and the speakers where sold pretty much for what they cost to manufacture. In short, a true character!

Anyway, the first system he showed me consisted of his entry level bookshelf speakers (today ~$800 as a kit), a cheapo integrated amp and a cheapo DVD player used as CD. The speakers where hooked up with zipcord. The sound from this system was simply unreal. Redicilously effortless and accurate with bass that almost seemed to defy physics (taking into account the small boxes). It was simply jawdropping. Back then I didn't have the money to buy his floorstander (that is probably the uggliest, but also most accurate, dynamic, realistic sounding speakers I have ever encountered, and I've listened to quite a few), so I settled for the bookshelf version that I've enjoyed ever since.

Just a few days ago I was talking to him about letting me buy one of his big systems (and we're talking *serious* speakers, here :), I found out he finally has been talked into designing a commercial speaker for a newely formed company. The speaker is largely based on the bookshelf speaker I have but has been commercially pimped (and priced). It supposedly has just been released on the US market (Guru Pro Audio QM10). Fortionatly for me, he will still continue to sell his "non-commercial" speaker line from his basement.

H
 
Hehe, after I make some money this summer I'll be buying some new toys...One of which will be a decent sound system. For me, that probably means $800 or so, which might be laughable for some of the folks here, but better than 95% of the systems on the market. And at least for the moment, that's good enough for me :D.

No boxed systems for me, though. All a la carte or DIY.
 
RadicalEd said:
Hehe, after I make some money this summer I'll be buying some new toys...One of which will be a decent sound system. For me, that probably means $800 or so, which might be laughable for some of the folks here, but better than 95% of the systems on the market. And at least for the moment, that's good enough for me :D.

No boxed systems for me, though. All a la carte or DIY.

Hey, only *****bags would laugh about that. The important thing is that *you* feel it is worth the investment. You can get *superb* sound out of $800. In fact, getting a great system out of $100k is not hard, the true challenge (and reward) is to have a great system out of $800...

H
 
Henrik,

Thank you for posting the information about those speakers. They look great. The reviews are really good. I'll have to try to listen to them this year at RMAF.

RadicalEd,

You can get some really good sound for under $1K.

Take a look at the AV123.com site.
The X-series speakers look incredible and sound even better.
I think they are the best value in Hi-Fi today.

Couple them with one of the XR series Panasonic receivers, and you will have killer sounds for low dollars.

I use the original X-LS speakers with sub and a Panny for my bedroom system. After first hooking it up, I thought that this is a system I could EASILY live with as a main system.
 
Thanks fellas :D.

I've heard that av123 offers some excellent speakers in this range. I'll definitely be checking them out. WhenI was last doing research, oh, 7 months ago, Polks and Athenas were the big 'on a budget' speakers. Apparently Bic makes a good sub too.

A friend of mine also recommended a Panny receiver, but that version at least didn't have any analog ins worth speaking about. Which is a requirement for me, as I'll be routing my computer's sound through the speakers, and digitally my sound card (X-fi, used because I'm a gamer) only supports 2.1 digital out. Onkyo is supposed to make a pretty darn decent receiver (although the speakers are nothing to speak of). I'll definitely be doing lots of research before I can make that kind of investment.
 
I do acoustic analysis. Through that I realized I didn't have to spend a fortune to have transparent audio, I just had to tune the room. Yamaha RXZ-9 for the brains and 10 sattelites (bookshelf speakers) with a massive 1000watt sub to bring them all together. Digital and vinyl software. I am also a video buff too. 150" screen for projection.
 
I dug a working late '70s to early '80s HiFi tape player out of the trash last week, does that count? My "surround" unit is a 3-channel Pioneer reciever I got for free and the biggest recent upgrade to my audio setup was some noise-cancelling Maxell headphones.

I feel so out of place in this thread. :D

I actually sort of collect "vintage" electronics. I'm reminded of that antique electronics dealer in one of the Cowboy Bebop episodes.....hey RadicalEd, is there any relation? ;)
 
I've never spent that much on equipment but I've researched room design quite a bit. If you're looking to invest in good audio, you should spend about 75% of your budget on your room, 25% on the equipment. You can put $20,000 speakers in a sh!tty box of a room and make them sound like a frickin Bose wave radio.

That might sound extreme, but you can compromise with at LEAST putting some decent corner bass traps in and some absorption at the first reflection surfaces.
 
BobbyM,

You nailed it!

The ROOM is THE most important piece of your sound system. Placement of your gear within the room is equally important.

I have dealt with three companies supplying room treatments. All are great to work with. Please take a look at : [URL="http://www.realtraps.com/"] http://www.realtraps.com/
http://www.gikacoustics.com/ [/URL]
and http://www.eighthnerve.com/

Last year I used Real Traps at RMAF. This year GIK introduced some more attractive finishes on their traps. They will be used in my two rooms at the October show.

Clean AC is another important factor. Try to keep all switching power supplies off the run to your system. A dedicated line would be a good investment.
http://www.realtraps.com/
 
I had been wondering if there were other audiophiles on here as well. My system is unimpressive, I'm really into vintage stuff, but I aspire to build something great when I have the money. I'm into vinyl and to be honest while I have a fairly good cd player you can't beat the reproduction of vinyl. I've been working on some book shelves for a while now that I need to get new drivers for, I'm excited cause they throw a great soundstage. I used to get stereophile mag but to be honest it sucks, too much way expensive stuff and I believe those guys live in a la la world when it comes to what sounds good, you'd be surprised what you can do for a thousand bucks.
 
Brew Runner: yes, there is a connection :D.

Bobby_M: now really, if you had done much research at the forums I visit you would have found out that Bose is the laughting stock of home theater/audio world. Sure their equipment sounds nice enough, but with a little time and research you can put something together for a small fraction of the price. I've seen several side-by side reviews that put a well-selected $600 setup outperform a $3000 bose setup. Course, things could have changed in the last nine months since I was researching, but considering that Bose spends far more on marketing than on R&D, I kinda doubt that.

For me, I don't know if the equipment I'll be buying will be good enough to warrant an environment treatment. I mean, if I was investing in a $5000 setup I'd totally believe the greater cost effectiveness of sound panels/ dampening, but at the cost of $60-100 that I saw at those sites it very quickly adds up to a large percentage of my budget. But again, if you like DIY you can order sound panels/tiles/foam at places like mcmaster.com and save a bunch of money that way. I will be buying a tuning device, at the very least, though.
 
After brewing, music is my greatest obsession. Though I am an audiophile, I'm not a hi-fi fanatic. My favorite band is The Velvet Underground, and I'd much rather listen to my mint White Light/White Heat or my extremely worn Live in '69 on vinyl than any digitally recorded or "remastered" versions. What the sound lacks in fidelity it makes up for in texture, if that makes any sense. A compact disc is just an @ssload of ones and zeros; a vinyl record is a physical translation of sound on to solid matter, then played back. The tangible element of vinyl makes me feel much more in touch with the original performance than a CD ever will.
 
Ed, I don't know if you glanced over my post or what, but you didn't comprehend my analogy. I said:
You can put $20,000 speakers in a sh!tty box of a room and make them sound like a frickin Bose wave radio.

I'll say it differently... I don't care how much you spend on speakers but if you put them in a bad room, they will sound as BAD as BOSE.

You just can't fix a bad room without at least some absorbtion and I seriously believe you can make a $500 system sound great. IOW, it's better to spend $500 on a theater in a box and another $500 on room treatments than $1000 on equipment alone.
 
True about the room (and bose ;-).

The speaker designer I mentioned ealier is very specific about how his speakers should be placed and how the room should perform acoustically for his speakers to perform its best. His larger speakers (like the one I'm interested in) are not full-range, instead they are specifically designed to be used with sepparate bass-modules that can be optimally placed and tuned for the room, greatly reducing the need of bulky bass traps.

H
 
Bobby_M said:
You just can't fix a bad room without at least some absorbtion and I seriously believe you can make a $500 system sound great. IOW, it's better to spend $500 on a theater in a box and another $500 on room treatments than $1000 on equipment alone.

I'll agree with you for the most part on this. Yes, a bad room is just that. But, it doesn't always take $500 worth of foam to fix a room. Small rooms are an animal all their own and most of the problems with them are associated with the natural modal frequencies of the room. That is, certain dimensions of the room support and emphasise certain frequncies.

Sure, you can simply buy a bass trap and stick it in a corner but it isn't always necessary.

You know, all that vinyl we are talking about? A sensibly placed bookshelf, full of that vinyl can act as a bass trap too. Some witfully placed solid objects in that bookshelf "can" take that bass trap into the real of a Quadratic Residue Diffusor.

Curtains, cushions, medium density foam behind canvased artwork, glass, etc...

These can all be used to simulate the effect of diffusors, traps, and absorbers and most likely are things you already have around, they just ned to be placed in a manner that makes them more effective.

The only thing worse than a untreated room, is a poorly treated room after hundred to thousands of dollars have been spent. An overly treated room, even a poorly treated room can result in a dead room that sound just as bad, if not worse.

My devices of choice have always been RPG. But then again, I am biased. I am also a dealer for them. But that ain't going to well for me. As said before, room treatments can be cost prohibitive to many and the mentality of most consumers is to spend more money on bigger speakers, stronger amplifiers, and the likes.

Through my studys in acoustic physics, I intend to take this to a more commercial venue into Noise cancellation, studio acoustics, and civic center (concert halls). Who know, thatt'll probly flop too but it's something I enjoy and it all makes sense to me.

As for Bose, well it's a waveguide. What can I say, they are taking a midrange driver and attemptinbg to make it perform like a sub. To many, it sounds great but for others nothing less than a dedicated sub will do. Not all waveguide designs are bad, Freid Audio makes an excellent set of waveguide towers that perform beautifully if you have an amp capable of driving a 4 Ohm load. Which any Audiophile shouldn't have any issue with. Hook those beauties up to some tube gear, even the newer Cary stuff, and they sing a song that would temp even the sirens to crash into the rocks.
 
MikeFlynn74 said:
Rocket Propelled Grenade? I bet that works wonders

Well, they do cancel out a lot of noise and will provide that lifelike boom and sizzle. And they are really effective against those troubleome clients.

In the acoustics world there is a device called a Reflective Phase Grating or RPG. The manufacturer named his company as a play on that term. But, IIRC ironically, partners also have initials that help make up the acronym.
 
I totally agree that poorly treated rooms can be bad and you can optimize furniture placement (even not so obviously to place the listener in an ideal position) but it's really hard to convince people of this. They want to sit where they want to sit and most people will think you're talking nonsense that it matters. I also agree that you can kill a room with too much treatment, but it's almost like the over oxygenation debate, it's really hard to do at a casual level. I'd rather have more bass traps than necessary and tuck them in where the SWMBOs will least have a heart attack. It's even harder to convince people that they shouldn't put glass framed artwork at first reflection points but they should put a absorption panel there instead. Wifey say WHAT?

I don't mean to belittle the detailed view of ideal acoustics but for most people, the dumbed down version is the only one that will fly. The homebrew analogy I'd apply here is that some people that brew extract would sooner quit the hobby before taking on the more involved all grain process.
 
Bobby_M said:
I totally agree that poorly treated rooms can be bad and you can optimize furniture placement (even not so obviously to place the listener in an ideal position) but it's really hard to convince people of this. They want to sit where they want to sit and most people will think you're talking nonsense that it matters. I also agree that you can kill a room with too much treatment, but it's almost like the over oxygenation debate, it's really hard to do at a casual level. I'd rather have more bass traps than necessary and tuck them in where the SWMBOs will least have a heart attack. It's even harder to convince people that they shouldn't put glass framed artwork at first reflection points but they should put a absorption panel there instead. Wifey say WHAT?

I don't mean to belittle the detailed view of ideal acoustics but for most people, the dumbed down version is the only one that will fly. The homebrew analogy I'd apply here is that some people that brew extract would sooner quit the hobby before taking on the more involved all grain process.

I hear ya' on this, which is why I got out of it. I just couldn't be satisfied by "pushing boxes". Too many times was I hired to fix a room for poor sound only to hit the SWMBO brick wall, and that was merely by suggesting different furniture placement. All too often people come back from a engineered showroom and want the worst room they have to look, feel and sound like that until they see the cost. Everybody wants it, but very few can justify it.

The worst commsission I had encountered was a spare exercise room. The owner liked to listen to classical while working out. The secondary listening room was, essentially a small library and very damped. This room however had 2 walls of picture windows and the 4th was a full height, full length mirror. The flooring was a combination of half the room was a hardwood dance floor, and the other were rubber tiles on concrete. Only 1 wall and the ceiling were a blank canvas of sheetrock.

The customer wanted me to make that room sound like the library, which personally I thought was almost dead. The room was really large, approx. 1000sf and the major problem was high frequency flutter/echo. I advidsed the client that it wouldn't be possible to make the room sound like the library but some remedial changes could be made to control the echo. Mostly, I recommended some heavy drapery over the windows and mirrors to help dampen the room some. Of course, SWMBO was happy for that but when I explained that the only way they would work effectively is if they were closed which of course would block the light which was un-acceptable, understandably. I didn't charge them and walked away.
 
These are phenomenal for bad rooms that are not big (i.e. a standard low ceiling living room, etc).

m1-550-OSv2-Silver-grill-off.jpg


I have a 5.1 with the original Omnisats and they are amazing. Got them for an absolute steal from Vann's when Mirage put out their newest line.
 
I have used the omni-directionals successfully as surrounds in lieu of bi-pole or di-pole surrounds. And they are good for a listening room, but IMO if also used for support of video you have to have directional cues from the front stage.
 
GilaMinumBeer said:
I have used the omni-directionals successfully as surrounds in lieu of bi-pole or di-pole surrounds. And they are good for a listening room, but IMO if also used for support of video you have to have directional cues from the front stage.

The one I have set up for a center works amazingly well, I think it is just a 'different' feel. The immersion factor in films is really good. I do have it forward of the others, mounted inverted on the ceiling (so it is not as reflective).
 
kaptain_karma said:
A compact disc is just an @ssload of ones and zeros; a vinyl record is a physical translation of sound on to solid matter, then played back. The tangible element of vinyl makes me feel much more in touch with the original performance than a CD ever will.

True, vinyl on a good system can be mezmorizing. One of my audiophile friends is a distinguished recording engineer at a "big name" studio and he explained to me why vinyl usually sounds way superior to CD. It's all about the mastering.

Know what a master engineer does? Back in the days, the mastering engineer's task was to transfer the master audio into the wiggly spiral pattern that would end up on the vinyl. He had to adjust the groove for the changes in the recorded sound which affected how wide the space for the groove had to be on each rotation, often adding compression and adjusting levels to allow the music to fit on the vinyl.

Then came the CD and the master engineer was out of work. Or so he should have been... Nowadays, the master engineer takes the master and tweaks it to produce a "unique" sound, usually meaning he compresses the hell out of it to make it sound decent in your car stereo. The vinyl on the other hand are often targeted at the audiophile market and are much more carefully mastered.

Through my friend I've had the opportunity to listen to the master tape, the SACD, the CD and the vinyl version of many top notch recordings and it *allways* comes out master, vinyl and CD/SACD. Whereas if you just take the master and burn it on a CD the master and the CD are almost indistinguishable...

H
 
I am quoting myself from another thread, yeah somewhat lame...but it's applicable:

zoebisch01 said:
The death of musical nuance was the invention of discrete recording formats. Everything today is just too damned clean, and I am not talking about the hiss and pop you get from scratched vinyl. It's nice for movies though.

source thread
 
zoebisch01 said:
I am quoting myself from another thread, yeah somewhat lame...but it's applicable:



source thread

When it comes to my audiophile preferences, I've become a hardcore "true to the original" beleaver. Ideally, the system should not add or subtract anything from the original recording. To me, if it sounds more like the original, it is good, because then I have a more transparent system. Sometimes it is vinyl, sometimes it is CD.

Since I got to know Mr Oeman (the speaker designer i'm ranting about) I've become a firm beleaver in "uncolored components", and the "true to the original" sound reproduction approach.

H
 
Henrik said:
When it comes to my audiophile preferences, I've become a hardcore "true to the original" beleaver. Ideally, the system should not add or subtract anything from the original recording. To me, if it sounds more like the original, it is good, because then I have a more transparent system. Sometimes it is vinyl, sometimes it is CD.

Since I got to know Mr Oeman (the speaker designer i'm ranting about) I've become a firm beleaver in "uncolored components", and the "true to the original" sound reproduction approach.

H

I thought about this for some time a few years back. The one thing that always nagged at me is, short of hearing it live you can never really get a baseline of what something truly is. A studio recording in that particular studio with those particular settings at the time of the recording is the baseline and that particular equipment is introducing coloring. Even the recording engineer, making level adjustments is influencing the process.

What I am getting at is I do agree with you and believe that coloring is real, but speakers are like individual instruments really and it is inevitable they will add their own nuance to the recording. It gets into a realm of hair splitting though because often times these things are only recognizable when you get deeper in to the experience. Even manufacturers that claim to have a flat FR curve, the speakers will inevitably introduce color. As good as you can afford and can resolve on your own is what often dictates the level I suppose :)

Of course, I have to make a default analogy with beer :D

If three people brew a Tripel, you'll have 3 different results. All could be an excellent interpretation of a Tripel as per the guidelines but in the end it is up to the consumer to judge what he/she prefers.

I guess what I am getting at in all of this is, it seems that if one is happy with the equipment it shouldn't matter. The point of diminishing returns in terms of cost to performance is going to fall off at different points for different people. I am getting way too philosophical now :D

P.S. To clarify what my earlier quoted statement means is that we have mercilessly been dragged into a dumbing down of reproduction because it is way too easy for people making the recordings to use a lossy format. The invention of the MP3 has further pushed this. It's not that you can't use a binary format to make a stellar recording, but rather that it is much easier to take a recording and make it lose most of the nuance.
 
zoebisch01 said:
I thought about this for some time a few years back. The one thing that always nagged at me is...

<blah blah blah, snipped witout permission but with great respect for the OP>

I think we are on the same page (and i'm at least 6 hrs ahead of you and on the verge of getting drunk so I'm allowed to ramble :) ).

My view on audio reprocuction is decievingly simple (and I think you'll agree):
It is a physical impisibility to perfectly reproduce the original event because of the limitations of the two chanel format (or multicanel, for that matter). Spatial information loss is inevitable when encoding the event into discreete channels in the first place, and the reproduction by two or more speakers in a small room are just a poor, distorted aproximation of the real audible information that took place in the real event.

However, "true to the original" dosn't mean "perfect reproduction". It means that the goal of (my) system is to communicate the original source material without additions or subtractions to the information. For me it is liberating to know that I can't detect any coloration in my CD-player, the preamp or the power amp in my system. It is all down to the room and the speakers. The speakers (according to my friend the speaker designer) adds about a tousand times more distortion than any other component in the reproduction chain. Only the room adds more... Fortionalty for me, it not all about numbers, but rather, how and what corners you're allowed to cut to fool the human hearing (and there are corners to cut!).

In the end, I am just infinately gracious that I met this guy that know what matters and what does not when it comes to audio reproduction. It's amazing, yet disturbing to see that some people are prepared to go to great length and invest huge amounts of money to elmiminate someting that make the same difference as holding a strand of hair before the tweeter or not.

BTW, interestingly, recording in lossy formats at "reasonable rates" are way *less* intrusive than the compression added to basically all recordings today by the mastering process...

:mug:
H
 
Back
Top