Is this all wasted on me?
captain73 -- Wed, 06/16/2010 - 15:05
I hope my first post here isn't too insulting but here goes. I wouldn't call myself a high end audiophile however I have had experience of systems between £10,000-50,000.
The thing is that whilst I understand the need for 'live music' or 'orchestral' music at shows, for the most part I don't listen to this kind of music, and so I feel that most demo's for me are .... not a waste of time, rather wasted on me. Which leads mw to the question would a high end system, Mcintosh, Wilson audio, Magico speakers etc, etc be wasted on someone who's into old school rap (Public Enemy, Run DMC, Cypruss Hill) 80's music (Duran Duran, Depeche Mode, Level 42, Adam and the Ants) and 90 dance music (Orbital, Prodigy, Hybrid, 4 Hero)?
I hope I haven't insulted anyones musical tastes.
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Of course not! Have you heard Depeche Mode, A Tribe Called Quest or Aphex Twin on a pair of Wilsons?! I imagine the answer must be no. Carl Craig on a pair of Sashas is pure bliss.
Seriously, a great system, no matter what the price, can play ALL genres of music well, but the system must be chosen with care to please the listener. One listener may build a system that is geared towards a certain style of music and weak on another, but that doesn't mean the components used would be any less capable playing all kinds of music. Your tastes are similar to mine, which is to say counter to most audiophiles taste. For instance, when is TAS going to have an Electronica section? I'm not holding my breath. That's why whenever I do a demo I bring my own CDs, so if I want to hear how a system plays my Autechre, Square One or Noisia (bands that are most definitely NOT in my dealer's collection) I get to hear them. That goes for the more traditional audiophile genres like classical and jazz as well. The moral of the story is, "Always bring your own music."
Thanks for your comments. I come into some money, and I'm seriously thinking!
My advice is to take some of the music you like to an audio salon and play it on some audio systems in your price range. Good audio systems will allow you to listen to any type of music, but highlight both the good and bad qualities of reproduced music. In my experience pop/rock albums are generally recorded far too loud and are highly compressed. That doesn't mean you personally won't enjoy them since it depends entirely on personel preference. Can you enjoy music with mediocre sound quality or would that distract from your enjoyment. Personally I have trouble really enjoying a poorly recorded/mixed music album, but if I really love the music I'll make allowances. But I listen to music almost every afternoon as a primary source of entertainment - not as background.
Len
I listen to all kinds of non-audiophile, non-acoustic music through my high-end system and can tell you that accuracy in reproduction conveys more of the musicians' expression no matter what the music.
I'm going to throw a spanner in the works here and ask: Then why don't I hear more of 'this' kind of music at demo's then? I heard a Michael Jackson song once on a Audio research .... (forget the CD player and cables) Dynaudio set up, but I'm unwilling to part with my hard earned if I can't hear my own music, and for me there in lies my problem..... i've rarely been allowed to. When I have, I've handed over my cash, which is why I've yet to get a really high end system.
O.K. hands up i gave away much of my £4,000 5.1 (or 5.2 in this case) cinema system, in the name of getting rid of cables and boxes, and currently I just run a pair of Dynaudio MC15's as my main pleasure, but I'm looking again. However I'm a headphone person myself currently owning over 50 pairs.
I did hear a pair of Totem ... Arro quite a few years ago, but the memory of what I thought about them has stuck with me, even though I have some sort of mental issue concerning floorstandng speakers. I've always been a book shelf/stand mount person myself.
But I .... resent (might be too harsh a word) going to a dealer and being told what I'm hearing! Not resent ... I find it a tad annoying!
I have to add, that this is why I never go to shows. I went to one several years ago and was amazed by the equipment and prices, but was bored rigid by the music. Each time I was introduced to a sub £100,000 system my eyes rolled and I thought; ah great, I'm going to listen to another piece of music that I wouldn't even dream of sticking into 'my' CD player! Some moaning, talentless person that I've never heard of singing about their love life ... "I'm not interested in your sad love life!" Now give me a bit of Prodigy and I'll be in the front row!
I've long campaigned for using non-audiophile music at audio shows, but it feels a bit like throwing a rock at a curtain; nothing gets through and whatever you hurl falls flat.
The fact is someone demonstrating their equipment will want to play it to a packed house in a show - the last thing you want to have is an empty room where everyone else's room is full, because people will naturally assume that room is something to stay away from. Unfortunately, from experience, if you play things too far from the audiophile approved list, the room quickly empties. It's understandable because those who have already bought their hi-fi system and are thinking of buying another know these discs backwards.
I'm going to tear down the fourth wall here. One of the reasons why almost every demo collection you see has Stevie Ray Vaughan's 'Tin Pan Alley' in it is not simply because it's well recorded or a slow blues that's inoffensive enough to be OK for most listeners. It's because it's a little over nine minutes long, and that used to give the person running the demo just about enough time to go for a crafty cigarette. You knew that if you played 'Tin Pan Alley', the people sitting in the chairs at 0:01 would still be in the same chairs nine minutes, ten seconds later, they wouldn't have asked any questions during that time and the room could be left virtually unmanned. Over time, this crafty cigarette break track has become the Gold Standard of audio show demo material.
Sadly, it's got just as bad for classical enthusiasts. I ran a demo room in a UK show last year. We were undermanned, due to one of the team going down with Selective Peanut Allergy Syndrome (a peanut allergy that only manifests itself after drinking a dozen vodka red bulls washed down with six pints of Stella Artois). So, whenever we wanted to clear the room, we stuck on classical music of any description (apart from Hildegard of Bingen, strangely) and within five minutes the room was empty.
There are exceptions. Peter Qvortrup of Audio Note resolutely refuses to play anything remotely resembling 'audiophile-grade' music. Evil Nine, Puscifer, Slipknot and dodgy soundtracks from equally dodgy 1970s Spanish porno movies are in the Audio Note playlist. As well as anything people bring along. In fairness though, the majority of demonstrators should play anything you give them, but they often won't have everything to hand. If you hand them a Prodigy album, they should play it for you, even if it temporarily clears a room. If they don't... find another demonstration.
Exactly the same applies with dealers. The good ones would ask you to bring a selection of music along for the demonstration. Curiously, people invariably forget or take along what they think is good to assess music rather than their own tastes. The best demonstrations I did when I used to do demos invariably involved someone who didn't bring along Dire Straits or Suzanne Vega or Stevie Ray Vaughan, but a box of Fall records or some really structurally dense Panufnik. These were the ones where both parties took notes; not about the audio, but about the music played. OK, so the Panufnik still sounds like incidental music from an 1970s Eastern European cartoon about increasing productivity at the tractor factory, but it was still an exciting branch of music I'd never encountered before and in exchange I gave him a blast of John Zorn - we're quits.
Alan Sircom
Editor, Hi-Fi Plus Magazine
London, England
editor [at] hifiplus [dot] com
Right on Alan! Always luv to hear from u on this topic. I'd also like to second the other posters thought on Carl Craig through a high end system; Blisss is right!! I turn more music lovers into audio buffs via non-audiophile music than most dealers do replaying the Firebird a zillion times. Not that I have anything against some of the typical audiophile records, but if the person you're demo-ing for doesn't feel that music - bring out anything that feels right! That said - the new Dot Allison record (Room 7 1/2) sounds amazing.
Michael Mercer
The Daily Swarm
Positive Feedback
What do you mean by "audiophile music"? Music that's well-recorded? Well-recorded but innocuous? Music that's currently in fashion for demos?
Ivan Berger
former Technical Editor
Audio Magazine
Fanwood, NJ USA
I'm not pokin at the music Ivan (as Hp's former set-up man at TAS, and having worked in both the music and audio industries my whole life - I'm just backing up some other points made here ) - when I said "audiophile music" I mean the typical titles and songs u hear at shows:stuff on Mercury Living Presence, Living Stereo, Mofi, Chesky (which there is music on those labels that I love too btw) - but I am referring to the same music thats been flowin from speakers in those rooms for YEARS. and, there is a great deal of new music out there that sounds terrific; Trentemoller, Mr. C, Flying Lotus, Dot Allison, Blitzen Trapper, and Avi Buffalo to mention a few. its all about the music right? well - I'm also about getting new heads into this hobby, because I'm tired of being the youngest guy in the room, and I'm 35 now. that was the problem when I went to work for TAS when I was 19, and it hasn't changed - so I'm workin to change it
Michael Mercer
The Daily Swarm
Positive Feedback
It seems to me that so much modern popular music is recorded with specific effects that in no way are meant to represent the natural acoustic of a recording studio. In other words, it is an artificially induced effect, if not affectation.
Therefore, since a sound scheme is not based on "reality", the only thing any audio system can do is recreate a perception of that "reality." Since we cannot really know what the producers intended, we really cannot know exactly that perception, i.e., how the finished product should sound.
I may be introducing a basic philosophical concept here, but the question still remains, not only how do we know what we know, but also how do we know that what we hear is what is supposed to be?
Sherm
I also find it objectionable that some show demonstrators refuse to play your music, on the pretense that they cannot guarantee what it sounds like and that they would like to demonstrate their equipment in the 'best' light. Some of my faves (no names) are culprits of this lousy attitude, and I think that, in the end, they do themselves a disfavor. The nice folk out there who bend backwards trying to play whatever the dealers/critics/punters throw their way usually come on top, as being nice is a great tweak :)
The other point is that it could be a great forum for discovering new music. I've frequently exchanged music info with manufacturers or other attendees. Sharing musical discoveries is a great joy and part and parcel of this hobby - something some manufacturers seem to have lost track of.
At CES, it is usually possible to stick your own stuff in nearly all rooms (except the ones with only music servers - cue lousy attitude) on the first day, when it is still relatively quiet. The downside of it, is that the equipment/room setup is usually still a work in progress at this point.
Acoustic music is still my touchstone for fidelity (barring instruments I've never heard live, such as gamelan). I used to attend demos with a mix CD of many kinds of music. First three cuts were "You Look Good to me" (Oscar Peterson), an operetta aria sung by Elizabeth Schwarzkopf, and "Born in the USA!" Those three covered a lot of bases.
Stew Hegeman used to advise bringing music you disliked, as that way you'd listen to the sound instead of getting sucked into the music.
And i find that whenever I hear a demo and lust for that recording, the system playing it is pretty damn good.
And i find that whenever I hear a demo and lust for that recording, the system playing it is pretty damn good.
I must admit that I have bought music that I haven't like, because I thought that it would sound good on my system.
Noooo! Your ears and your taste are good enough. What good is a system that only sounds good playing music you don't like? I've never understood this approach, but to each their own. It is critically important to me that a system sound good playing music that I love. I know those tracks so well, some of them I've heard live, so I know how they're "supposed to sound" and more importantly what it is that I love about them. If a system can't deliver that, it is chucked from consideration.
I listened to a $40k system the other day that I didn't think was as good as my Nait 5i. Sure it had superior performance on paper and by no means sounded "bad", but it didn't deliver what is important to me when I listen to music while my current system does. Does that mean it's a bad system and not worth $40k? Not at all, just that it's not worth it's price to me.
What Hegeman meant was that it was easier to assess sound quality with music you don't like than with music you do, because if you like the music you're likely to get distracted from the sound. A system that sounds good playing Elliot Carter should also sound good playing Beethoven, but if you like Beethoven and not Carter you're less likely to be seduced when listening to the latter.
On the other hand, if you're doing a lot of listening, music you like is a lot easier to stand when you have to hear it over and over.
I should say that I bought music I wouldn't have usually bought. I'm still in a quandary about listening to music that I totally would never even consider listening to until i'd been dead 100 years! I'm net saying that everyone should be into Prodigy or Snoop Dog, but the spectrum for demo's (or at least the one boring show I went to) is very narrow. It's the same kind of 'vocal' 'instrument' driven clap trap.
I accept that there are some wealthy people out there, and their listening tastes probably differ from mine, however I'm sure there is common ground!
What does wealth have to do with musical taste? I suspect the wealthy are a bit more interested in classical music than people of average or lower music, because they've been exposed to it--but then I don't know many of them, so I can't be sure.
Please don't conflate culture and wealth. I know plenty of poor people (many musicians!) who love classical music. And I'm sure plenty of millionaires (pro basketball players?) who listen to nothing but rap.
I see no reason to value classical music above rap or vice versa. They are just different kinds of music produced by different human experiences. I think a music lover should not place any value on the social status of musical genres and one certainly should not let such things inform his reading of the music. Such nonsense is for lesser minds! :)
I was not attempting to make a value judgement, but to dispel one about wealth and musical taste.
However, since you brought it up... some musical genres tend to be more complex, subtle, and TO ME more interesting than others. Some reflect a much higher degree of musicianship and intelligence, as well as a broader and more mature emotional range.
I've heard plenty of rap - like it or not - since it prevades popular culture and is hard to escape. I've found it simplistic, repetitive, unoriginal, and boring... without exception.
I'm sure Mozart could have cranked out 4,00 raps instead of 40 symphonies. Alert me when Will I. Am publishes his first motet, OK?
This has nothing to do with social status. It's a matter of personal taste, and I prefer music which is... well, more MUSICAL, just as I'd rather read Steinbeck than 'Dick and Jane'.
I'm afraid that it is your artificially egalitarian ("all music is equal", "everyone is special") attitude that is the product of lesser minds.
This is a ridiculous post. The operative words in your comment are "TO ME..." Once you concede -- as you have -- that the question of taste in music is subjective, your views on the musical merits of rap are of zero import. All the more so when you resort to the sophistry of comparing Mozart to Will.I.Am. I mean, really.
Hey, I'd rather read Chinua Achebe, Isabel Allende or Gabriel Garcia Marquez than Steinbeck or Hemmingway. Takes nothing away from writers widely acknowledged as great; just that my preferences lie elsewhere.
Bully for you that you prefer classical to rap. As you say, it's a matter of personal taste. The original poster is not saying that all music is equal; he is saying the only judge that counts is the listener.
You've missed the point entirely... and I believe purposely. My response to 'naijeru' was to about the "social status" of different musical genres and the association of classical music with wealth. Both of those notions are nonsense. I capitalized "TO ME more interesting" specifically because this is NOT about taste.
Let's not dumb-down this conversation. Everyone is entitled to his own taste, of course. You just aren't entitled to your own truth.
What's truly ridiculous is the false equivalence of all musical genres! The are simply NOT all the same and equal, from a MUSICAL perspective - not based on what you or I like best. Which raps songs change tempo every other bar? Eminem ever do anything in 13/4 time? How about harmonic complexity? Any rappers using 9ths or augmented 7ths? Do you have any idea how difficult it is to perform some of this music, much less to compose it? Do you understand that guys like Bach and Beethoven INVENTED things like counterpoint and parallel 5ths?
So put aside what you or I like best for a moment, and see that the musical comparison is like Thomas Edison vs. a guy who turns on a light-switch. That's why I mentioned a 2nd-grade reading primer, not a world-class author like Marquez. (Good choice! Great writer!) There are two vastly different levels of dedication, intelligence, study, discipline, creativity, and invention operating here. From a musician's standpoint, they are pretty much the two extremes. That's not a value judgment, it's just a fact.
NOW let's talk about taste. Let's talk about MY taste, rather than you telling me what it is. I listen to many kinds of music, from old rock and soul music, to blues and folk, to symphonies and chamber music. But my favorite music by far is jazz! That is the music that really speaks to me, both intellectually and emotionally. I probably listen to 80% jazz, 10% classical, and 10% everything else these days. But I'm not going to tell you that Coltrane, Dizzy, and Miles are the equivalent of Bach, Mozart, and Brahms, no matter what I LIKE best.
I hope that's a little clearer, and elevates the conversation beyond personal taste and class warfare. The original post was about the sonic qualities of different musical genres and the appropriate audio gear to reproduce them. If you look below, you'll see a much more interesting discussion on that.
Of course Coltrane, Dizzy and Miles are every bit the equal of Bach, Mozart and Brahms. I reject your absurd notion that one form of music is better than another because it's in 13/4 time. How are technicalities such as 13/4 time, counterpoint and parallel 5ths more valuable than call and response, syncopation or swing? You use arbitrary criteria to judge musical value and you conflate complexity with quality. You then make qualitative comparisons of genres based on traits which are loose classifications at best. Your argument that genres are unequal is like saying Handel, Haydn and Holst are better than Sibelius, Strauss and Stravinsky because their names start with 'H'. Utterly ridiculous.
You are also trying way too hard to prove that rap isn't worthwhile music to people who don't care what you think of it.
You obviously care, since you keep writing back. And where do you get off deciding what 'people' care about or not. It's clear that you know nothing about music - syncopation & swing evident in the classics - and can't understand what I'm saying. Many things seem utterly ridiculous to the ignorant. ('Call and response' - LOL) I'm not wasting any more time. Please enjoy whatever music you like.
More deliberate misreading and false assertions. It is only natural that you reply with insults and drag out the tired, "I'm not gonna write anymore!" when I and other posters have shown your arguments to be false and your wit outmatched. Run along then.
This is an intelligent post - not one where your uninformed opinion is equal to actual knowledge. When you learn something about music (you know, the "technicalities"), we can have a discussion. Your last few posts really say nothing at all. Just some vague argumentative crap with no substance. (I guess one writes what one knows.)
And make no mistake, you are alone. No other poster has actually agreed with you, except to say that you have a right to your own taste (which I heartily agree with). You bore me, and I have no time for spitting at trolls on the web. You may have all the last words you like. I'm done with you, and your nonsense.
You want to clear a demo room take along a Dead Kennedys album! Take your own sounds. If the system/component doesn't make you want to air guitar, air drum or air conduct if classical is your bag then it isn't worth the price no matter what. I have heard audiophile discs by Esoteric (as if their CD players weren't over rated enough) through a £100'000 system and been suitably unimpressed. Mind you it didn't do anything for my favorite albums either. If you don't want to act like Keith Flint when listening to the Prodigy then something aint right, simple. Who cares if the third violin from the left is a nano octave deeper. unless you want to give your best Nigel Kennedy impression you are not listening to music you are listening to hifi. I use Thiel, Bel Canto and a Consonance Droplet that trounces Esoteric and the Levinson it replaced (always wanted one and it was so boring when I finally got it) because they make QOTSA sound like they did at the Brighton Dome. The big money players get all this info off the disk and line it up in such an unmusical manner. lots of people would think my system too bright. Those people have not stood in awe infront of NIN going full tilt at Brixton. The show guys want to sell you a 20k player and are happy to tell you it is built like a battle ship. Who cares, I don't want to go to sea in it. get a good dealer. I hate my dealers system but he lends me anything I might fancy and has guided me brilliantly on things I can't try at home like cartridges. Your music in your system in your home, It's the only way to really know where to drop your hard earned.
Can't agree more with that last comment, Your music, on your system, in your listening room is the ultimate test... because that is what you'll be listening to.
I also strongly agree that demonstrators should generally let you play anything you want to hear. I can see an exception if they think your music would be offensive to the majority of others and 'clear the room'. One of the drawbacks of shows is that you are only one of a roomful of customers.
That being said... the ONLY way to know what you are getting from a system is to listen to acoustic music and voices, because only they have an true analogue in reality. I love Hendrix, but how can I tell if Jimi's stratocaster sounds 'real' when it depends on the amp and whatever effects and distortion he's purposely applied. The same goes for music that has been aggressively 'produced' and no longer sounds like anything real. You can tell if that music sounds GOOD to you, but there is no such thing as it sounding RIGHT.
My favorite music is jazz, but I would have to say that classical music is the best test of a system, since it is the most demanding (dynamics, frequancy range, instrumental timbres, ambience). In my experience, the system that makes a violin sound like a violin and gives a french horn the proper reverberation is also the onme that Public Enemy and Snoop Dog sound best on. I also like to listen to acoustic guitars and voices, since I'm intimately familiar with how they really sound.)
But that's just me. I want a system that everything sounds its best on. If all you listen to is rap & pop, perhaps you have different priorities. And you should definitely be able to save yourself some cash, because you simply don't need the same level of refinement and fidelity to make that music sound good to you.
Lastly, the reason demonstrators use 'audiophile' recordings has little to do with their ages or individual tastes. It is simply because they want to show off what their gear is capable of. Dead Kennedys will not let you hear the texture of bowed string, or the decay of a piano chord, or anything resembling a realistic soundstage or room ambience.
You don't care? OK, but the rest of the people in the room, and at the show, probably do. And whoever designed the gear SURELY does! For example, take that player "built like a battleship". Did you ever consider that it's built that way to minimize vibration, which can make a HUGE difference in sound quality?
Probably not, because there's NO WAY you can hear that sort of subtle refinement listening to "NIN going full tilt". And I absolutely agree that you should not pay for what you cannot hear.
So each to his own. But please understand that if you're looking for a sports car, you need to see how it handles ay 180 mph. And if you're shopping for high-end audio gear, you want to see how well it reproduces the most difficult and demanding sound.
But that's just me. I want a system that everything sounds its best on. If all you listen to is rap & pop, perhaps you have different priorities. And you should definitely be able to save yourself some cash, because you simply don't need the same level of refinement and fidelity to make that music sound good to you.
My friend suggested to me that i get a pair of Cerwin Vega speakers. However not all of my music is ... drum and bass and 90's dance music. but I'm still feeling that such expensive gear migth be wasted on me. At the moment I'm still making do wth my tiny Dynaudio MC15 speakers (don't laugh) until i can make my mind up which way I want to go. I do have to add that i love the 'Plug and Play' convenience of the Dynaudio's.
Capt. 73 - I don't laugh at anyone's audio gear, ever. (You should see my car!) I just think it's cool that you care about sound at all. I wish more people did; maybe this gear would be less pricey if they sold more.
I should refine my suggestion by adding that it all depends on your budget. If you're rolling in dough, go for it. If cash is tight, look for bargains and make some compromises. Bottom Line: The system you buy should make you hear your favorite music sound the way you like it best.
The one caveat I'll offer is that none of our musical tastes remain static. Someday, you may need more system than you do now...
Only you can decide what is right for your music. I suggest demoing some high-end gear with your music before making a definitive judgement though.
"Your music, on your system, in your listening room is the ultimate test... because that is what you'll be listening to"
" I want a system that everything sounds its best on"
Potential conflict, there. Years ago, I was testing a bunch of speakers in my living room, and the two that sounded best were the AR-3 and the Rectilinear III, with t he AR sounding slightly the better on classical and the RIII slightly the better on jazz. Then I moved to a new apartment, and while my overall ranking of the speakers didn't change, the RIII was now subtly better on classical and the AR a hair better on jazz. On the other hand, I could cheerfully have lived with either as my sole choice.
Hmmm... two points here. But first, I've got to say that I still remember fondly my AR-3a's.
LISTENING ROOM:
You just illustrated why you want to audition speakers in your own room. When you change listening rooms, that's a HUGE variable. You can do some room-tuning. But if they are very different in size, they'll sound differently, period. That's why listening at a show is never more than 'window shopping'.
JAZZ VS. CLASSICAL:
What's the diff? In other words, what are you looking (or listening) for in what that's different from the other? Honest question - and I can think of some reasonable answers. For example, you don't need the same dynamics for an orchestra and a piano trio. But you do need them for a big band... and not for a string quartet.
So I'm a little curious what you heard from the two speakers that made you feel that way in each of your two listening spaces... if you can remember after all these years.
I can't recollect exactly what I heard--that move was in 1969. And the difference was subtle.
And the jazz and classical I listen to are both wide-ranging, solos to big-band/symphonic/opera.
Captain,
I really dont see your problem...,because by your own words "I come into some money"
So your are one up on the average audiophile smuck cause you can essentially buy a complete system in one hit rather than build it up over years (which is a hit and miss affair)
So the formula is simple:
1- Take £100,000 and stick it in a suitcase
2- Hire a body guard for a week
3- Go visit some dealers taking some of our music with you
4- Dress like a hobo... just to piss them off when you walk in
5- flop out the cash and tell them you will give them 2 hours to get a system together that meets your wants and needs with your music
6- watch the little bastards run and sweat and squirm
6- do this at various dealers and you will soon get the system you want.
I am serious here... with a brief case full of greens you will get what you need.
PS. If the bodyguard is also an audiophile... all the better
StackError: I've had friends bring with them suitcases of money when they left their country out of necessity, but you post makes buying hi-fi sound like a low-level drug deal, just waiting to go bad. I guess your suggesting an under-the-table deal, to save tax on both sides, but that does a dis-service to our hobby: there are great people out there, dealers, and listeners. My 2c.
No, I think you are taking my post a little to literally!!
What I am suggesting is that if I go in looking to spend $20000 on a CD player... I will hear that CD player probably with other components that I dont have, in a room I dont know much about (ie the typical piecemeal way we build our systems). Sure I can maybe get one on loan but that can be a hassle.
The Captain wants a complete system to meet his needs and he has the money.
So I guess I am trying to say to the Captain (given his original post is old)... is that he has the upper hand... he has money in the bank and is willing to spend it.
The metaphor for that was the cash in a bag. Use that "cash in bag" to get the dealers attention.
Visting dealers is not something the Captain has done a lot of and while some dealers are good... some can be snotty, rude and off hand..
But that would be their loss given the Captain has the cash and wants to spend it.
The Captain just needs to get out and do it. Some dealer visits might be good... some bad... but he has the upper hand.
I would also suggest that the Captain allocate some cash to the room. Better to spend 25% of your money on the room and 75% on the components rather than 100% on the components sitting in an crappy room.
Peter
Great post from TheArt. I would be very surprised if any demonstrator pulled out a DK's album as he is there to sell equipment and that music is just too far off most peoples radar. Just as importantly I have hundreds and hundreds of albums ranging from early English punk, through rock, electronica, dance, acoustic voice such as Tori Amos, Richard Thompson Ezio etc, a little jazz but no classical; so why have I never heard or seen an album I own at a show? The reason we buy quality hifi is to get the very best out of the music we own, not to show off 4 recordings of music we have never heard of. DK's? maybe not, but bands like The XX, Elbow, Radiohead, Blur, QOTSA Ice T, Eminem, Dispoable Heroes, the list is endless, should all figure at show demos because they shift units in their millions to people like us who then buy their systems to hear it on.
the ONLY way to know what you are getting from a system is to listen to acoustic music and voices. Don't agree I'm afraid! We want music at home to be as real as the live experience. Hendrix used an electric guitar through a box of tricks, Prodigy use mainly keyboards, even Tori, The Black Keys and Thompson amplify live or we wouldn't hear them at the back. My system was chosen, and as with all of us, upgraded and agonised over for many years with Iron Maiden and Royksopp on the platter. It just so happens that it does Roberta Flack's The First Time all the justice it deserves as well.
Have I ever considered why some equipment weighs so much? Indeed I have, and in my yoof I even got suckered into it by Levinson et al. My Consonance Droplet weighs slightly more than Mars but I think it's all to do with aesthetics rather than vibe control. I just don't buy that you need to mill a whole mountain down into a box to hold a cd mech or a couple of transformers. If the weight really was such a big deal then the mighty yet spindly (and still revered) Rotel RA965BX would not be held in such high esteem. It's not alone; Living voice OBX Rs, Consonance CD120, and the Bel Canto power amps can all easily be slipped under one arm while air guitaring with the other. All lightweights and all punch in the heavyweight arena. The reason a lot of stuff is in a 2 ton box is if you are going to hang a 15k price tag off a CD player you have to make it look like it's worth that much. Even the remote needs to be the weight of a house. Don't get me wrong I buy into it as well, but I have my eyes and ears open. My Levinson 27.5 was a two man lift and sounded awsome. My two Bel Canto mono's are a one arm lift and sound just as good, in fact better in my system hence the swap.
Many of my fave music going full tilt still has a subtle cow bell or wood block tapping away in the background, and the symbols still need to shimmer and sustain at track end, and these are subtleties I want to hear. Even early Metallica can be surprisingly musical if your system is good enough to let you hear it. Unfortunately we won't be hearing it at any show demo's.
Now, who want's to hear Dire Straights Brothers In Arms?......Again!
Upthedowns - Great response from you too. I hear ya' about Brothers in Arms, et. al. (It's not even all that good-sounding.) And I agree that demonstrators tend to play too much of 'same old, same old'. They should be seeking out new demo material, or at least listening enough to run into it. I know that I'm always finding new tracks to use, even though I have plenty of old favorites.
I actually think we agree about auditioning gear, but we're approaching it from opposite directions. You say the system you chose to play Iron Maiden also sounds very good for Robrta Flack. I'm not surprised, especially with all the megabuck gear you own. Here's my point about live acoustic music (which you may simply disagree with)...
If I understand correctly, you want your system to sound like a live rock concert. OK, I get that. What I'm saying is that any system that can reproduce a full orchestra at any reasonable volume level and sound anything like the real thing will handle Iron Maiden or Roberta Flack 'with one hand tied behind it's back'. To get the orchestra right, it has to reproduce the sublest instrumental timbres and textures (so you'll hear every bit of bite on Jimi's strat - no problem) while it goes from very, very, loud to dead silent. Andf if the gear has any weak points at all, well.. there's no place to hide. Not exactly the same for a live rock concert, true?
That does NOT mean you shouldn't audition with what you want to listen to. Ultimately, you MUST... or risk big-time disappointment, right? And if you're not even familiar with the sounds of acoustic instruments, then Maybe you're right. Those recordings won't help with no frame of reference.
Let me put it this way... Say you hear 3 systems and can't make up your mind. They all sound great with Iron Maiden AND Roberta Flack, and everything else you brought. THAT is when I would put on the 'audiophile-quality orchestral recording', because the one that does that best is going to end up sounding the best, whether you play solo guitar, punk, or sound-effects. Maybe it sucks that you can't hear DKs at an audio show. But if you're there to get some impressions, the gear that sounds best to you with that boring 'audiophile demo music' is the stuff you shoulld hear playing Iron Maiden at a dealer.
About the 'battleships'... I'm not arguing that a lot of gear is ridiculously high-priced. But trust me, they don't build those big heavy boxes to jack up the price. That just jacks up their cost. The price is whatever they think enough people will pay to make a buck. Their cost is as low as they can keep it, without sacrificing too much quality. Those big heavy boxes are a relatively simple attempt at vibration-control, which does, indeed, make them sound better.
In fact, vibration-control and isolation is one of the biggest topics in high-end audio right now. There are many new products to help deal with it, and this is no snake-oil. It's distortion that we didn't know was there... until it was gone...and then WOW. I'm not advertising anyone's products, but I own a power cord with connectors laced w/ ceramics & carbon-fiber to disipatethe vibration caused by the 60Hz power signal. I KNOW - sounds ridiculous!! But put it on your CD player and you're in a whole new world. The noise floor drops, the soundstage expands, the imaging is - as they say - 'holographic'. I tend to be skeptical, but vibration-control is for real, and can be pretty significant. (Disclosure: I don't own anything in a 20 lb. box. But I do have a good rack and use isolation feet.. and it helps.)
Now, regarding those 15K... I can turn you on to a few CDPs in the $3-6K range that will make you forget most of them. They don't have 20 lb. boxes, but they sound more like real music. In fact, I can think of a $1,500 SACD/CD player (which you can find for about $1,200 on-line) that will compete with those and move your CD120 to the bedroom-system (no offense intended). I try to avoid product names on these forums (unless they are the topic). If you're interested at all, maybe we can take it off-line.
Anyhow... good talk and Happy Listening! ... no matter WHAT you listen to - LOL
(vibration-control and isolation) "and this is no snake-oil"
I'm not suggesting that this particual issue is snake oil, but there is a aweful lot of snake oil in this industry! There is an aweful amount of people talking a lot of nonesense.
now slightly off topic and aI know you're going to laugh at the name, however I waz talking to a guy in Seven Oaks Sound and Vision, and he was slating Bang and Olufsen ... as many do. Noe i would say; Fair enough! and leave it there, however when I asked him when he last listened to a B&O system, he just looked at the ground. Exactly! I know full well he doesn't actually know what he's talking about. where's his comparison, how long did he listen to a B&O sysytem, what's the bass like? And of course he knew nothing about it.
As I might of said, the best Audio system i've ever heard was around £11,000. Can't remember the CD player, Audio Research amp and believe or not Dynaudio floorstanding speakers. No drum and bass, just the usual classical music and the like. Now i'm not newbie audiophile, but i don't claim to be the most experienced either, but why to my ears is a £11,000 system better than some £100,000 systems.
Sorry I've got to shoot off, but i'll be back soon to finish what i was saying.
"Oh Captain, my Captain", you are so right about snake-oil & nonsense! But let me get back to that, because first I want to address your question...
"why to my ears is a £11,000 system better than some £100,000 systems"
1. Price does NOT always equal quality.
2. Synergy is key!
3. Set-up and 'tweaks' can make a big difference.
My system is worth about £20-25,000, and is one of the best-sounding ones I've heard. That's because I've found components which well out-perform their price class and work very well together, then 'tweaked' with cables, etc. over aperiod of years. (I am also blessed with a wonderful listening-room, and spent considerable time on speaker placement.) I'm proud of this system, but not bragging here...
My point is that I've heard some VERY pricey gear in demos (and, alas, even in homes) sounding pretty bad, due to poor matching, set-up, etc. And I've heard some high-priced and vaunted gear in multiple systems NEVER sounding very good to my ears.
Don't get me wrong - It is much easier to build a wonderful system if you have unlimited resources. Doing it 'on the cheap' is much more of an art. But patience, experience, good advice, and some 'sweat equity' will get it done. Basically, it's not how MUCH you spend, but how WISELY.
Now, for the fun.... SNAKE-OIL & NONSENSE!
Snake-oil refers to potions & elixers which were really placebos, with only psychological effects. There's really very little of that in the design of audio equipment, but far too much in its sales (and pricing). The engineers who work long-and-hard on this stuff really DO care about sound. And most of the techo-babble you read actually is based in science and makes sense. How effective the final products are, and whether their pricing has any relation to the cost of research, development, and production... is another story.
For example, I use isolation feet that cost $25 a set and seem to work as well as some highly-touted ones costing $800. (In fact, they sound better to me!) One friend claims they are only 90% as good... at 1/16th the cost. The concept of isolation isn't snake-oil. But what's the mark-up on those $800 feet? And how well do they really work? They are VERY pretty. Could my friend's claim be psychological?
Most of the real nonsense comes from salesmen and your fellow audiophiles. At least your friend at Seven Oaks had the class to look at the floor, rather than chat you up about B&O's "unique advanced technology". Some of these shills can be pretty sophisticated in their BS. Your only defense is to learn enough about audio to 'smell' them out. (I like to ask a few questions I already know the answers too, and see what they say.)
At least with salesmen, there's an obvious profit-motive and you are forewarned. But fellow audiophiles can do you damage too. Some will cynically call anything they don't understand, or anything out of their price-range, "snake oil" Listen to them and you may never know what you're missing.
Now then Captain73, TheArt and I are jumping up and down on your bed here so let's get back on track with you (Oh and TheArt as I am loving His/Her posts)
It's been six months since you started this feed so it may well be that you are already enjoying your perfect 10k system, if not allow me to try and help. Hopefully TheArt and others will jump in as I am not claiming to be a prodigy here, (ooooh bad puns as well)!
Firstly as we all seem to agree, get some of your fave releases and if possible ones you know inside out and back to front and prepare to do battle. TheArt makes a fine point, our music tastes do not stay static so try to cover bases. We know I love the DK's but I would also take along Marc Cohn, Annie Difranco, Psapp and Tool to truly spread my bets.
Secondly. Do you need anything other than a CD player. Turntables are harder to hear on demo especially when you factor in that you need someone who knows what they are doing set up wise. You may want a tuner, or ipad and DAC for all I know. If you only require one source then your budget will be easier to set and obviously go further. If not do you need/can you afford everything at once? If you have 2000 CDs and 10 albums then realistically the record deck can wait.
Now the fun starts. If you are lucky you will find a good dealer close by who has a varied enough selection to sort you out. Despite the downturn in shop fronts there are still great stores out there. If not well Britain aint' so big! As you are using £ signs I'm guessing you are on this little island. TheArt is using $ so probably isn't. I worked in the U.S. for a short time and local is a different gravy over there. I hope I don't sound too off handish when I say book some demo's and then jump on a train. I bought a big integrated a few years back from the shop up the road but listened to others in London and Oxford as well.
There are no real rules in budgeting. HiFi + matched some silly money speakers with relatively cheap electronics not long back to make a point and by all accounts, make it they did. Try to have a starting point. By this I mean find a component you really like and buy it. Now build your demo's and by default a system around it. Obviously you will hear it in a system (and let's say it's a CD player) but take it away and try it with valve amps and a DAC. Try it in a friends system. Try it standing on different tables, make notes, don't be shy this could be serious money you are spending.
Do consider cables and tables, I agree with TheArt they DO matter. Here, as with all audio, you can spend top dollar or just sensible. My tables are a well known but reasonably priced brand and I had the source component platforms made to match at a local perspex shop. My cable loom is not so well known. My speaker cables proved to be such a perfect match for my speakers when I borrowed them that they never went back to the shop.
Speakers are the really hard part. be realistic about your room size. I was lucky enough to be loaned a set of Thiel 7.2s some time back. God how I wanted those to work for me. Alas in my room and even with my then big old ML giving it's best it was a non starter. I now own smaller Thiels and love them. If you like stand mounts then start there, far easier to heft about and get working in a room than dirty great boxes. Try a sub/sat system, a few manufacturers go down that route and the yanks have never been scared of Subs.
Most important enjoy the experience and you should come away with something that makes you want to chuck your telly in the bin. Mine went that way many years back.
My tips/suggestions. Note: they are mine and only suggestions:-)
Considering your primary music tastes go with transistors. I'm not saying valves won't, just that transistors most certainly will.
Fast punchy speakers if you really want to do Eminem credit. Again I'm not saying they can't, but horns?! probably not.
Don't go overboard with the lively stuff, it can get scary. I chose a CD with a valve output for two reasons. It got closer to the wonderful sound of my vinyl and it just took the edge off the punchy components perfectly.
Don't be scared of good used equipment. Plenty of serial upgraders keep this area very attractive.
Price don't mean a thing. That's why you can prefer a 10k system to a 100k system. My pre amp was big money, my tonearm was not. The amp has a big designer name which is probably half the reason it cost so much, but I bought it cause it sounds amazing. My tonearm is known by all but unrecognisable having been heavily modified by a cottage industry tweaker. Standard trim it's an audio bargain and even modified is still a give away in high end terms. Again I bought it cause it sounds great.
Right I'm off to put a very light Dead Kennedys album in my very heavy CD player, pump up the volume on my expensive pre amp and sit back in front of my reasonably priced speakers. You can't put a price on the enjoyment it all brings me.
But wait, surely that phono stage I was reading about would make Jello Biafra sound a little m.......Oh God not again!!!!!!
It's interesting but the guy who had the £52...52,000 system he said he tried all the £1,000 cable and he ended up running his speakers on bell cable .... again his words not mine so don't shoot the messenger.
Personally I'm trying to cut the boxes down as much as possible ..hence i'm looking at active speakers .. the likes of PMC in particular. But once again although i understand how certain types of music can really test a system, it's like there's also an assumption that people with that kind of money only listen to certain types of music. Now, I'm not saying that's the case, but that's what it feel like.
Greetings 'Up' and 'Cap'n 73', Yes indeed, I'm a Yank - Grew up in Chicago and now live in California. I agree with about 99.9% of what Up wrote above... and can't remember what that other 0.1% was. Most important - "price don't mean a thing"... and synergy DOES. Modest components that work well together (and with your room - which is KEY!) can sound better than mega-buck ones that don't.
Here's some general advice, based on my experience, and a few comments on Up's comments...
In addition to bringing a wide range of music with you to audition, don't shy away from listening to some music that might not be to your personal taste, but is clearly revealing of the gear's strengths & weaknesses.
100% agree about budgeting. There are no hard-and-fast rules. My speakers cost less than my CDP or pre-amp.
Speakers (obviously) have the greatest influence on the ultimate sound. But I have come to realize (sorry guys, realise) that the amp is really the heart-and-soul of a system and should not be overlooked. To strangle another metaphor, amp & speakers are the heart and lungs, and they must work well together. It's not just about adequate power and load-handling. For example, Thiel speakers lean to the dry side, so I might use a tube (valve) amp to warm them up just a tad. For speakers with huge dynamic woofers which need a lot of damping not to sound 'boomy', I'd go with solid-state.
In general, solid-state amps will give you more 'slam' and better bass-control. while tubes may throw a larger soundstage and produce richer & sweeter highs and mids. Transisters are generally a little faster & brighter, while tubes are warmer.
BTW, I highly recommend a CDP with a tubed output stage. Yes, they sound more like vinyl. But more importantly, they sound more like real live music.
Cables: My way is to build the system first, then tune & improve it with wires. Do NOT ignore the power cords! You can often make a bigger difference with a power cord than with interconnects (counter-intuitive, but true)! Speaker cables count too. But I've found them to be the least critical of the wires.
Well, I've spent way too much time on this post lately (and perhapas not enough on my work). I hope I've been helpful, but it's time to run. Cheers!
Power cords? I can see how power cords of inadequate gauge could limit amplifier performance on peaks, maybe. But for all the rest?
What power-cord purveyors say about their tech implies that their cords have higher bandwidth than normal ones. Since the "signal" they pass is either 50 or 60 Hz, +/- maybe 1 Hz if your power grid has problems, anything on the line that's <49 or >61 Hz (and anything from 51-59 Hz) is just garbage. A power cord with only that bandwidth might block some line noise if your components' power supplies don't filter it adequately....but expensive cords usually go to people with expensive components, whose makers could have afforded to include adequate filtering.
And whatever effect two meters of $$$ cable might provide would have to be pretty strong to undo whatever happened on the miles and miles of industrial-grade copper between them and the generating station.
Has anyone ever run double-blind tests on power cords? or even single-blind?
I completely understand your skepticism, because a few years ago I felt exactly the same way, and for most of the same reasons. I didn't even believe in A/C conditioners. The A/C is converted to DC in each component. Doesn't that clean it up? I thought so, but apparently not. Even the beefiest power supply sems to do better when fed with a better cord.
And , yes, I've tested & compared power cords, blind and otherwise, with very consistent results and corroboration of other listeners.
One notion I can dispel is that "last two meters" concept. As a Shunyata rep once explained to me, in A/C that is really the FIRST two meters (i.e. in proximity to the gear). Alternating current does not flow like water "through miles of copper".
Good A/C cords do not 'filter' as such. One thing they do is reject RF and EM that any cord tends to pick up (because cords are antennae). Some newer ones also deal with vibration at the connectors, which can audibly lower the noise-floor. And of course, they tend to be heavier-guaged, allowing more current flow. What has most surpised me is that metallurgy makes a difference too. Even .1 mm of gold, silver, or rhodium plating on a connector can change the tonal color of the sound.
The proof is in the listening, and I've learned that power cords can make a HUGE difference, especially on source components - in some cases, bigger changes than you get swapping interconnects. (And YES, I know how counter-intuitive that is!)
I suggest that you should not believe this, until you've heard it. I have, but don't take my word for it. You can only believe your own ears.
I wish none of this was true, because the mark-up on cables is the most ridiculous in audio. But I cannot ignore what I've heard in my own system and others, time and time again.