GAJ
Well-known member
Very nice speakers, I'm sure they sound great with that old well regarded Pioneer.
My secondary music system is powered by a 35 year old NAD7250PE I bought new back in the day.
Still in use daily.
Any BARF Audiophiles?
- Thread starter DReg350
- Start date
Very nice speakers, I'm sure they sound great with that old well regarded Pioneer.
My secondary music system is powered by a 35 year old NAD7250PE I bought new back in the day.
Still in use daily.
GAJ
Well-known member
Really need a very large room for those as they like to pulled away by several feet from the room boundaries.
Thankfully I don't have a big enough house to consider those excellent speakers. :laughing
GAJ
Well-known member
A true audiophile will tell you that if you found speakers you like then you are a lucky person no matter their "pedigree."
The Klipsch Palladiums are to die for.
The "audio fools" constantly on the prowl for the latest questionable tweak and yet never satisfied are the ones I feel sorry for, to be honest.
GAJ
Well-known member
Ha ha.
In my secondary listening room I stream music from my computer using the built in Realtek Dac and, guess what, I can play a vinyl record and compare it to the WAV rip on my computer and they sound, gasp, the same! :laughing
How much is the built in Dac do you think.
$3?
GAJ
Well-known member
ScarySpikes
tastes like burning
johnkol
Well-known member
No, it is not.
Audio *production* (that is, if you are the artist making music) is completely subjective, but audio *reproduction* (what we do as consumers of music) is absolutely objective: we are trying to transmit all the information that exists on the recorded medium, and the science of doing this has been not only well established for almost a century, but also developed to an unprecedented degree over the last 50 years.
The myth that audio is subjective has been promulgated by companies that have a financial interest in seeing that the industry remains a boutique one where unscrupulous vendors promote snake-oil products because "if it sounds good to you, then it is good".
Most of the press has been complicit in this charade, and the public (who, for the most part, have no technical backgrounds) has bought this fallacy wholesale.
We can characterise the quality of an audio device as accurately as we can the quality of any other electronic component, but this would ruin about 80% of the industry, so there is no incentive for anyone to undertake this task.
Faithful reproduction isn't subjective but the matter of what a given listener likes sure is. It's why there is still a market for tube amps.
jt2
Eschew Obfuscation
You should give it a try if you still have it. I'll swear there is a difference, but it could just be my brain trying to rationalize a thousand dollar CD player. :laughing
it is too bad it seems to have not really caught on as evidenced by the lack of titles released.
Reli
Well-known member
Except that the words used by journalists to evaluate speakers are totally subjective. Shit like "boxy", "tinny", "rounded", "constrained", "expansive", etc.
russ69
Backside Slider
Audiophiles bag on everything, that's what we do...
russ69
Backside Slider
johnkol, GAJ, and all,
Thanks for the thoughts and inisight. I've come from a Pioneer SX780. This little Jolida is... it's so much more defined. My little Alphas fall apart at higher volume, but down lower... OMG. It makes my eyes water. Once I've monkeyed with speaker and chair placement and find the the sweet spot. Way more detail than I ever got from my 780.
I spoke with Jolida, read articles, posts, and reviews. I popped for a pair of Meadowlark Kestrel 2s. Right or wrong, it's done. But, I feel good about it. I'm not looking for perfection. I'm looking for ear candy.
Still haven't hooked the turntable up. Still need a preamp. New belt is in transit. Waiting to see if I can get a bargain on a Denon 110 on Black Friday.
Listening now. So satisfying to have a stereo again.
Thanks for the thoughts and inisight. I've come from a Pioneer SX780. This little Jolida is... it's so much more defined. My little Alphas fall apart at higher volume, but down lower... OMG. It makes my eyes water. Once I've monkeyed with speaker and chair placement and find the the sweet spot. Way more detail than I ever got from my 780.
I spoke with Jolida, read articles, posts, and reviews. I popped for a pair of Meadowlark Kestrel 2s. Right or wrong, it's done. But, I feel good about it. I'm not looking for perfection. I'm looking for ear candy.
Still haven't hooked the turntable up. Still need a preamp. New belt is in transit. Waiting to see if I can get a bargain on a Denon 110 on Black Friday.
Listening now. So satisfying to have a stereo again.
nbean16
The Art of Seduction
What is your budget for new speakers?
Floorstanding or stand mount?
The Meadowlark Swifts have one of the weirdest frequency response graphs I've ever seen, (the black line is the one to look at).
http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/104meadowlark/index.html#SjMyj6roDh1StYEr.97
Assuming your Thorens TT works save your money towards the cartridge.
I own the Project Carbon with Ortofon Red cartridge and it is a very good combination, no question.
Main speakers in my HT, and I love them, are Usher V602s, in my secondary listening room I have Martin Logan LX16s and I compared them to my old B&W CM1 Concept 90s as well as to the excellent Q Acoustics Concept 20s and the quality of sound was close for all but where the Martin Logan Folded Motion tweeter really shined was when listening to Classical, Jazz or Acoustic music where the improved detail of that tweeter really shone through.
Both speakers are paired with subwoofers; the main HT has a Velodyne DD15+ (msrp over $4k) while the secondary room has two pathetic little Yamaha SW012s at a grand total of $183 for both. :laughing
I have to say while the DD15+ is might impressive, so are the pair of little Yamahas. Having two of them gives a real sense of tight controlled bass down to a true 28hz coming from everywhere/nowhere.
28hz is fine for music but the 15hz of the DD15+ for movies is like twisting the throttle on a literbike! :laughing
No offense, but those yamahas have a massive dropoff way above 28hz.
johnkol
Well-known member
Two examples to illustrate my counterpoint:
If a person does not like the original Ansel Adams photographs, but is proudly displaying "colorised" versions of it, are these really Ansel Adams photographs that he is enjoying?
Similarly, if someone does not like the Dead Kennedys through solid state/dynamic speakers, but enjoys them through tube and electrostatic speakers, is he really listening to the Dead Kennedys?
My point is that a consumer editorialising a piece of work means that he is not experiencing the work the artist intended him to experience.
Unlike the photo analogy, the truth is you don't really know if your system is reproducing what the mastering engineer heard. For one thing,not all mastering studios are equal in their own tuning. For another, while you can quantify efficiency and frequency response, there isn't a reliable spec for imaging. That is still very subjective and there are no guarantees you are hearing what the engineer heard. Don't kid yourself.
johnkol
Well-known member
That is true, we cannot know what the mastering engineer heard. The task of an audio engineer though is not to second-guess the mastering engineer, but to reproduce as faithfully as possible what is on the recorded medium, which is always going to serve as the reference against which all subsequent steps are measured. In other words, the only known fact is what is contained in the recording, and the engineering buck should stop there.
Your assertion though that we cannot measure imaging is wrong. Imaging is a temporal delay in signals arriving at your ears, either because of unequal distances between two sources, or due to reflections in a domestic environment. Its effects can be precisely measured in an anechoic chamber, so we can easily characterise the imaging information inherent in a recording.