|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
8.25.246.235
Am I alone in finding the majority of modern equipment amusical? Is the pursuit of imaging and resolve really more important?
Why can I only find true contentment in the best of the old?
Follow Ups:
It appears to to me to be an unattainable quest to relive the past.
Well ,
Plenty said , still no names , c'mon old school guys throw out some audio stuff from the past still relevant today ...There's Plenty still around ...,
Edits: 04/26/16
For turntables:
Garrard 301
Thorens TD124
Yamaha GT-2000
Kenwood L-07
Exclusive P3
EMT
etc.
a good idler or DD from the past sounds as good as the better to best belt drivers of today. A good DD from today might be better still but the technology in the motors and control systems in the Japanese tables from the late 70s through mid-80s is still SOTA. They used all the motion control tricks that are still used in the modern arsenal of motion control (encoders, zero cogging, bi-directional servos etc.).
For amps:
None really, maybe the Altec triode amps or the WE original theater amps.
Vintage technology though with modern parts and transformers is another story...not vintage but vintage (or even antique) design concept.
For Speakers:
JBL Paragon
JBL Hartsfield
JBL DD55000
Altec VOTT (various models)
Other Altecs from the different eras
Tannoy GRF
other classic Tannoys
Quad 57 and 63
WE movie speakers (if you have a huge room)
Apogee Full Range and Scintilla (if the 80s is considered vintage)
Infinity IRS and Beta and Kappas (ditto)
Digital:
Most of the big players from the early 90s who were using true 18 and 20bit DAC chips.
Theta Gen V
Stax X-1T
Mark Levinson No. 30 and 35
Manley Reference DAC
Sonic Frontiers SFD-2 and MkII
Resolution Audio Quantum DAC
For redbook these go toe to toe with the best of today.
Disagree with DD /idler vs BD Turntable
You can...you wouldn't be correct but you can do what you like.
Which DD and which BD have you compared against?
I personally have found the old idlers to sound a bit "dirty" but I haven't heard one that has been fully restored etc. They do have a great sense of musical drive though that makes listening quite fun.
Really good DDs have that same drive but are way cleaner sounding.
I find it telling that VPI, after decades of doing top notch BDs, went with DD for their reference product.
However, as slick as the motor is in their TT and as good as the control system, it is no better than the best motors and control systems from the old Japanese decks.
I have measured some really good BDs (at least good reputation) with my Allnic Speednic while playing records and you can see that they are not totally speed stable under load. Do the same with my Yamaha and it is solid as a rock for speed stability.
Vintage vs modern
Edits: 04/30/16
Had Betas, they were great in some ways but definitely not perfect or even the best planars I have had.
You do realize that BD TT's have consistently been considered the best table type for the last 4 decades , yes imagine that, DD tables are so much better the market is flooded with them.VPI is not a good example with their DD..
It's been my experience that good sonics can be had from all TT type drive systems, but BD TT's alway sound more natural to me and to most audiophiles and is considered the better table by many, speed stability is not an issue with every BD TT, unless you talking really inexpensive BD tables.Platter weight is very important with BD tables.
TT over the years 1973- current
AR ES1, LP12, Micro Seiki, BL51, Solid5,DQX500 Thorens,124,126, Rega,2 Garrard 401,zero 100SB, Technics,1200,SL202 Kenwood 500,650, SOTA sapphire
Currently only have 5 out of the bunch ...
I did have a Dual many years ago, was not fond of it so it went (cant recall model) and have heard many , many Sota setups over the decades, from a time when audiophiles used to actually compare and shoot out stuff, not this mine is better than yours internet BS of today.
SO , no i cannot agree that DD turntables are better than BD, i have heard them both sound good, but ultimately BD has always won out as the choice to stay..
regards
Edits: 04/29/16 04/29/16
None of the DDs you have on your list would qualify as a superior example from that era.
Try a really good one from that era and get back to me.
Try a really good BD and get back to me , its easy they are everywhere , then of course the difficult task in finding a good DD to compare ....
Edits: 05/01/16
Does a Voyd reference or a big Transrotor ( was about 25k new) with three motors and magnetic decoupling of the belt drive system from the platter/bearing? What about the SME20/2 or the acoustic Signature Challenger? A Michel Gyrodeck (DC version) or a Linn Sondek?
What about the Dr. Feickert Twin with Kuzma airline arm and Lyra Skalla cart?
All of these were quite good, especially the Feickert and the Voyd, but not better than top DDs I have heard and owned at length.
What was the deal with the SME 20/2
Well you put an Allnic speednic strob weight on it and you can watch the speed varying slightly as you actually play a record. A little forward a little backwards but the strob lines were not rock solid. Also, initially it was runnning a bit slow, so we had to bring it up to the right speed first...but then it wasn't stable with the music playing. So, IMO, it failed its primary purpose...speed stability.
Do the same with my Yamaha and even touch the edge of the platter with your finger and you get no dancing of the strob whatsoever. Essentially perfect speed stability, loaded or unloaded or under fluctuating load.
The other BD TTs were all slightly off the right speed. We had to tune up every single one of them. Who knows how long they will hold to the correct speed? The big transrotor did at least look pretty stable when playing a record.
Accuphase electronics, Micro Seiki turntables, Infinity loudspeakers!
What Vintage Accuphase
Too many to list. I am partial to the C200/P300 series of separates, and the E303 series of integrates.The original discreet digital offerings as well (DP80/80L/DC81/81L/DP70/70v).
Edits: 04/29/16
I should note that I am a fan of Apogee, McIntosh, Spendor, and the original Yamaha series as well.
The most musical SS system that I can vividly recall hearing was comprised of a big Tandberg receiver, a Revox Reel-to-Reel, and a big 3-way set of Spendors playing a recording that to this day I am unfamiliar with.
Up until this last year, I owned a lot of gear, including nearly every model of component that Accuphase has produced. I was forced to sell of this collection, save a few units.
I still have 2 Micro Seiki turntables, and 3 models of Infinity speakers, and a few other select pieces of gear as well.
My Sony amp seems to have been made at the very height of their hi-end efforts. A remarkable unit really. Smooth yet transparent!
I had the Infinity Modulus Sat/sub system and the IRS Beta beastie. Never owned any Accuphase other than a F-25 active crossover.
Micros are nice TTs, especially their upper model stuff. I, however, prefer big Japanese DD designs.
Never liked any Japanese SS amp designs. Ever. Their top tube efforts; however, are another story altogether.
Morricab,
You did not answer as to what DD tables we are discussing anyway i see you are in Munich , fraternizing with toobs and Horns for more Bias reports..:)
BTW, you must have missed it where Fremer had mention the speed stability on the AF2 vs DD tables ( VPI) I'm sure you are not basing this on an odd "deal" ..
regards..
Morricab,
I will respond in length when time allows, you still did not list or name any of the superior DD tables for discussion.
Regards..
Everyone has their own idea of sonic nirvana, some favor "convenience-meaning streaming digital" over the last bit of sound created by Vinyl or CD.
Others don't mind changing records manually, dealing with tube issues, etc.
Depends on what you are willing and able to tolerate.
I had many different systems, my favorite and most musically accurate was Thor all tube electronics. Quad ESLs, ClearAudio Champion table, and reasonably priced interconnects.
What I don't agree with are the absolutely insane prices manufacturers are charging for various types of audio equipment that do not measure up to their marketed hype.
And I was a dealer so I got allot of it for reasonable prices, or if very unknown product nothing just to try and sell it for them.
"Is the pursuit of imaging and resolve really more important?"
You're over simplifying design goals to justify your rant.
"Why can I only find true contentment in the best of the old?"
Free therapy, audio or otherwise? Good luck.
My guess, without reading dutifully through this thread to avoid repeating something someone else has said better, is that you're not really looking for the real sound of instruments and voices but something that pleases or charms you.. If that is your conscious or unconscious goal, all bets are off. The best new gear out there these days does a far better job of retrieving and reproducing the sound of music than any or most of the old stuff, much of which I owned. It is of course possible that you simply listening to the wrong new gear, of course.
With the SS amplifiers you enjoy so much (except for Class D), i don't think the technology is so new, it's the quality of the output devices and their implementation that is new (and better-sounding).
Too many questions, not enough time or interest!
My current system is at the opposite end of the spectrum, but you will most likely will find fault with it too!
Sony GX900ES amp, Micro Seiki BL-51 turntable (Grace 707, Signet TK7e), modified Infinity RS5000 speakers, and modified Grado SR125i headphones!
These components give me an honest and fairly musical result.
But, I will most likely gain greater musicality with a Grado wood body cartridge!
These components give me an honest and fairly musical result.
Certainly should. Nice system!
I do have an Accuphase DP70v as well, but it is sitting in its box at the moment.
Nt
regarding your adaptation of the Biblical verse, because you seem to trot it out with regularity.
Frankly, your comment isn't that witty, or true. Plenty are the enthusiasts in this hobby who found out that one must spend more to obtain a more beautiful experience - the opposite of your assertion. :)
As for discontentment, I see more grousing by people toward the lower end, cheaper end, than by those with the means. The cheapskates simply will not enter the realm of the High End; they cannot, as their systems are incapable. They can delude themselves all they want, but they don't have the best experience. Perhaps they do not care, but it is laughable the way they insist they have it.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
Old school or new ...?
You wrote,
"The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile."
Exactly! See, we actually agree.
Tootles
But did you ever stop to consider that in may cases he who spends six figures (or even five) on the bright and shiny may be reluctant to admit that his brand new system kinda isn't doing for him what he thought it would?
Not saying that only cheap old stuff is capable of audio excellence in the "trans-formative" sense. In fact I agree with you that high end gear is more likely to bring an enthusiast to "that state" than 30 year old components from the used market.
But I think we should all agree that both expensive and cheap can get one there... the cost is either monetary or effort. One isn't better than the other except in the eye of each enthusiast.
I would like to amend your " The cost is either money or effort" statement a bit. I have heard very expensive systems at shows that I couldn't stay in the room with. Lots of effort with modest priced stuff can yield excellent sound. I like to view it as a combination of both. Money, effort in combo, used wisely. The worshiping of vintage gear is nonsense. At no other time has there been the kind of products and information available to people interested in sound quality. As to Geoff's comment, I assure you that if I was rich I'd have a much better sound system. And a much better place to put it.
Totally agree with that!
Worshiping any gear is silly. There is always something better waiting in the wings!
... but there must be more to this. Please further the definition.
Sounds like you prefer the colorations of old gear to the colorations onew stuff. I'd argue we actually have made progress but that doesn
't mean we don't still have lots of colorations that many find objectionable.
"Am I alone in finding the majority of modern equipment amusical?"
Probably not, if the equipment isn't tubes and/or analog.....
It also depends if you are listening to a lot of recently-produced music, which could lead to such perception. This is maybe the reason why recent gear often gets shortchanged. (I could be guilty of this.) It's also the reason why it's difficult to get younger people interested in high-end audio.
"Is the pursuit of imaging and resolve really more important?"
Once again, depends on the playback medium and recording.... I cannot tolerate an Auto-Tuned singer on a resolving system..... (It's a lot more tolerable through a cheap radio.) But can be heaven with Ella Fitzgerald on vinyl.....
"Why can I only find true contentment in the best of the old?"
I tend to be old school personally.... (I wouldn't get caught dead with a computer tied to one of my two big systems.) But some of the gear I own is relatively recent. I personally think loudspeakers are the one component which the best stuff out there is the recent stuff.
You have to pick and choose. The music you listen to will be the biggest influence.
... Recordings made in the last 10-15 years are more likely to be better than anything made earlier. Perhaps Auto-Tune or other processing technologies are used less in case of classical.
Almost all my listening is to lossless computer files, (FLAC or ALAC and a few Monkey), via Foobar2000 using WASAPI. I usually use the Electri-Q equalizer which is highly, (to my ear, perfectly), transparent.
I started my hifi hobby with home-built Dynaco solid state components. Maybe my feelings would be different had I choose Dynaco's tube components instead.
Speaking of old solid state, the Phase Linear 400 I used for over 20 years was possibly the most unmusical piece of equipment I ever owned.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich ...
The classical catalog is probably the best place to go for *natural* sounding recordings. Un-amplified acoustic instruments provide us with hard references for what "good sound" actually is.Fantastic and *unnatural* sounds are often the mainstay of the pop catalog and are often difficult or impossible to judge by naturalistic standards as they sometimes contain mere traces of naturalistic tone, timbre, and texture (just enough to be recognizable as music made by humans in an earthly atmosphere, at times), and as they become a sort of reference unto themselves, sound-wise. The hifi enthusiast is left guessing about exactly what it is that constitutes "hifi" with some types of pop recordings. Reproducing pop music engages the imagination and the resources of the hifi enthusiast differently than naturalistic classical recordings do.
I find that both types of recordings can be equally *good*, as recordings go, but in different ways and for different reasons.
Edits: 04/25/16
Yeah - like, not at all! ;-)
Actually, I'm speaking only of AutoTune. Certainly, I've never heard a classical recording which has used Auto-Tune.
I'm hearing it more with classical...... Acoustic jazz too...... The depressing part is I'm hearing it applied to classic singers on remasters..... It's as if the recording producers/engineers think nobody will notice, but it's blatantly noticeable.
Just another digital conundrum.
I think modern tube amps are quite a bit superior to the vintage ones I have heard. I don't necessarily think speakers have truly improved all that much.
After hearing some vintage Western Electric movie speakers and some modern Western Electric replicas, I can say that there is some powerful and convincing sound to be had from these old designs that make most modern speakers, even big ones, sound rather emaciated...so I can relate to a lot of what this guy is saying...but not completely.
I think if you take the best from the past and mix with the best bits from today then you can find a truly convincing way to go.
My current system would blow your mind!
but WTF is it?
Is there any substance to any of your posts? So far, zero.
Post a pic and we'll be the judge. :)
While I'm an old boomer, I'm not in your court.
Examples of what?
Am I alone in finding the majority of modern equipment amusical?
"Modern equipment" presumably vs vintage equipment.
Maybe you're not listening to what's available. What's your point of reference as to "modern equipment"?
Considering that I have heard nearly every component made in the last 50 years, I can't say that I have missed much.
Until a year ago, I was constantly auditioning gear at all price-points the world over!
Even the Japanese have sold out to this deluded western pursuit of "modern sound"!
If anyone else has anything to say, please chime in.
Can you give just one example of a modern component you auditioned that you feel has "sold out" or whatever to the modern sound.A specific component. With brand and model.
Edits: 04/25/16
I would rather not mention anything specifically!
Well then I hope you can understand that few are going to take your statement seriously and view it as more of an attempt to troll.
Without specifics, you're sounding like a grumpy old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn.
Give us some examples of equipment you enjoy and the modern equivalent you think is lesser for the pursuit of "modern sounds" and maybe then we will be able to have an intelligent conversation about it.
First of all, you misunderstood my post concerning the Accuphase/Avalon setup. It is the most true-to-life system that money can buy, and as such, I enjoyed it immensely!
But this is $300,000 dollars worth of gear we are talking about!
Again, I did not come here to bad-mouth any particular make or model of gear, so that's out!
How about what they are doing differently in design?
OR
Who is doing it right, in your opinion? Is anyone?
I looked at your past posts and I don't think you're trolling. I DO think you're being a bit vague and that you're thinking manufacturers are a bit more sensitive than they are.
Would that help?
I guess you missed this one.
"No, it is really a question of musicality, or lack thereof! The majority of modern components are full of fatigue, and devoid of harmonic content.
Soundstage, imaging, details up the wazoo! but little to no musicality!"
Yes I had missed that one.
I'm going to have to disagree on some of those points. I find lots of modern equipment as good or better than classics stuff with the exception of the very advanced turntables/cartridges from the late 80's which are still superior to many things available today.
To each his own!
And again, the majority to different degrees, not all!
What's to agree or disagree with an utter lack of any information?
Yes
No
What are we talking about anyway?
... to say absolutely nothing.
Is my Accuphase DP70v (the most natural sounding player) good enough for you?
Did you modify your Accuphase to have murky Black Cat caps and dull compressed sounding carbon comp resistors dampened with some mold? Maybe you weren't listening to recordings of records so you could get the satisfaction of clicks and pops, my fav. I also love tape hiss.
No. Heard better at Sea Cliff years back.
So what exactly is this "non-modern" system that is so wonderful?
I assume you are able to describe such. Do enlighten us all!
"So what exactly is this "non-modern" system that is so wonderful?"A masterfully rebuilt and modified Citation 1 preamp, feeding a set of full-range, vintage triode tube amps, driving a set of Shindo Latours (Oop's), fed by a rebuilt Garrard 301 with proper plinth and stand, plus a select Ortofon SPU!
Edits: 04/24/16 04/24/16
And you find modern SET and/or push/pull triode amps too revealing and what? Not warm enough (sonically speaking). Personally, I have found the modern SETs to outperform most of the vintage tube gear I have heard by being revealing and precise as well as having a natural tonality. Best of both worlds IMO.
I have heard rebuilt Garrards a number of times and never found them ultimately to be my thing...I much prefer my 1980s Yamaha GT-2000 ;-). I was never a fan of the Ortofon SPU sound...
What is the driver in the Shindo Latour? Is it an Altec coaxial driver?
I find it interesting you mention a Citation 1 preamp but that it has been rebuilt and modified. Rebuilt with vinatge or modern parts? Modified how and if it was so much better than modern gear why was it modified at all?
Finally, you mention an Accuphase cd player but I do not know from what year it comes? Is it from the late 80s, the 90s, early 2000s? You imply it is vintage but if it is not 80s or early 90s then I would still call it a modern player.
What I can agree with you on is that the older cd players/DACs that used good multibit chips like the Burr Brown PCM63 or the ambitious UltraAnalog D20400, were more musical, but still very resolving, compared to "modern" DAC chipsets that were driven more by cost cutting than any real sonic advantage. I use "vintage" DAC chipsets in my digital to this day.
Best to define vintage , 50,'s,60's ,70's,80's which era and what components ?
I'm sure vintage state of the art Audio will sound good today as it did in the late 60's , better in everyway than modern day stuff , i'm doubtful of that , but yes i can see one being able to put together a vintage system to rival modern day Audio ..
Nice, but I think you'll find those who prefer otherwise.
As for "vintage triode tube amps", that doesn't say much at all. I think you'll find there are hundreds available today.
driving a set of Shindo Latours (Oop's),
Two way horns based upon an Altec design?
fed by a rebuilt Garrard 301 with proper plinth and stand, plus a select Ortofon SPU!
Ever heard a Clearaudio Statement with Goldfinger cartridge?
These are just a few examples!
you have to take the best of both worlds.
My sources are digital files,CDs. or SACDs, to musical fidelity streamer/dac, but from there into run a Transcendent Grounded Grid tube preamp, either a musical fidelity A1 ss amp, or a Transcendent sound tube OTL amp, and Refererence 3A DeCapoI speakers.
mostly blissful!
Why can I only find true contentment in the best of the old?
Maybe you're old. ;-)
I'll back that up by saying that I think many of us cling to what we're familiar with along with the nostalgia and romance for the past. You know, your happy places and happy times in association with the equipment you owned back then.
Personally, I remember some pretty crappy AND outstanding sounds from the equipment I owned back in the 1970's and 1980's. Oh and guess what? I have the exact same experiences with modern day equipment!
No, it is really a question of musicality, or lack thereof! The majority of modern components are full of fatigue, and devoid of harmonic content.
Soundstage, imaging, details up the wazoo! but little to no musicality!
I don't believe that for a minute, because I thoroughly enjoy my digital setup as much as I do my all analog vinyl system. If the harmonics are there, my digital system with reproduce them.However, if you want to embellish with a more harmonically rich sound certain tube preamps and tube power amps downstream will get you there.
Edits: 04/24/16
Proper harmonics, from digital? I have yet to here it!
Proper harmonics, from digital? I have yet to here it!
Proper digital? Perhaps you have yet to own it. ;-)
Actually, I have owned the very finest playback gear available!
tell us about your perspective of the "very best playback gear available"
Somehow, I think your posts will continue to be fact free. :)
"tell us about your perspective of the "very best playback gear available"
A system composed of Reference-class Accuphase, Avalon and Micro Seiki components perhaps?
Accuphase and Avalon together was likely part of a problem, IMO. Avalon is the very epitome of a "modern" sounding speaker...one I also do not like. Ceramic drivers have never sounded natural or right to me.
Martens make me want to run. They have a "boom sizzle" type sound that is exciting at first, but fatiguing thereafter.
do tell us the "non-modern" gear that is superior.
Please put your comments into perspective.
That is enough for now!
.
You are trolling me!
let us know when you're ready to supply something beyond vapor .
Just like digital!
Initial reaction was sure, I remember my old receiver, and the vintage equipment my friend had setup when we were in high school and just discovering beer and pot.
However, is it really better, was it really better? Or does it just get consistently worse as you get older and yearn for the life energy you once had?
For me my experience is everything has compounded and is getting exponentially worse.
System sounds good but that's about all I got to smile upon. Even the pleasure is all gone, I am left with a soulless feeling with a half smoked cigar in my hand.
Well, don't want to judge, but you have chosen rather soulless components upon which to pin your audio hopes on.
I take great pleasure in listening to my system, which while not totally vintage, has vintage elements where I think they will enhance the overall experience of music listening.
I also have great memories of listening to music in high school in my friend's basements, shooting pool and jamming away to the great classic rock of the period on vinyl of course but I know now that it was the total experience and not just the sound quality that is inextricably intertwined in those memories.
Sounds like you need more hope, not more or better tobacco and electronics.
I need hope and (pocket) change.
Yes we can!
I find excellent imaging very rare regardless of the price of the gear and Ive heard many high dollar setup. While how a system sounds tonally is very subjective for the most part image size is not.Many agree that digital which is inthe modern group is less musical and while I feel overall it is generally true the are many exceptions but they still represent and pretty large minority of systems.
ET
Edits: 04/24/16
Personally, I agree with Feanor, below. Doubtful that a tube or transistor cares when it was first powered up.
Lots of shitty recordings though. Every era has its own idiom, seems to me. Today's is compressed, gritty, lacking in detail.
Speaking in general terms of course. There are always exceptions.
___
The little old ladies wait in wild anticipation for the meetings of the Double-A-C-ASSN...
I listen to precious few recordings beyond the '70's. Yes, there is great, and not so great from this era.
But precious few are anywhere near as bad as those made since!
and for five or six years after that, a lot of popular music was ear-bleedingly bright.
Late-1980's/through the 1990's was better.
Now, it's just a lot of compression and a lack of dynamics.
___
The little old ladies wait in wild anticipation for the meetings of the Double-A-C-ASSN...
Me to.
A PC based digital source with an old school system. Good recordings can be found.
My modern equipment sound pretty good, (and it's not even high end).Plenty of crappy recordings out there, though, but I don't think it's the job of playback equipment to make them tolerable.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich ...
Edits: 04/24/16 04/25/16
With the over-processing and excessive "enhancements" engulfing modern popular music/recordings like a stage 4 cancer, it would be difficult to determine whether the music/recordings or the equipment is the root cause of the dissatisfaction in recently produced audio gear.
Im very happy w my restored 1980 vintage Lp12and Grace cartridge
SO much new stuff sounds like crap, and it doesnt matter how much you spend.
Somewhere along the way we lost the music. I think the influenceof digital is to blame to some degree, but its also a cultural thing of accuracy at all costs.
Yes, digital ruined everything!
it Even ruined new analog!
Many new turntables leave me cold, and new vinyl, thats made from digital masters, is awful.
and im not old, Im 44! So i grew up with digital, and didnt know what i was missing until rceently.
its not nostalgia, its music.
Yes, absolutely! I am 47, and have been listening to records since I was born ('68).
I think that I am going to have to go back to a full tube front-end just to keep interested in this hobby (high maintenance)!
"Am I alone in finding the majority of modern equipment amusical?"
Probably not.
"Is the pursuit of imaging and resolve really more important?"
Certainly to some, but not to all.
"Why can I only find true contentment in the best of the old?"
Lucky? Fortunate?
Is there a problem? Are you unhappy? What are you searching for?
Most importantly, is there anything wrong with being content?
There shouldn't be, there shouldn't be...
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
I am only unhappy because there seems to be no suitable replacements for anywhere near a sane amount, if at all!
It is getting increasingly difficult to keep the old stuff in working order.
There's still a LOT of good old stuff available and plenty of folk that can help keep it
keeping on, if you're like me (DIY = fail) and it's something you can't/don't/choose not
to do.Check in over at vintage (one of the more friendly/helpful/camaraderie inclined boards
here at AA) for tips, help, info, support, etc.If you've found what you like and prefer it's good to invest your time and
interest and $ in that rather than pursue something that may not be as
satisfying - even with the applied and oblique pressures in this hobby to
keep up with the new, have the latest, be part of the trend.Staying musical is a good thing.
BTW, what kind of system are you using?
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination"-Michael McClure
Edits: 04/24/16
"Musical"?
You have dared to use the "M" word, now please help define it.
Musical = warm, inviting, involving, natural, non-fatiguing sound!
Oh, Glad you explained it. I thought you were talking about horribly murky compressed capacitors and dull carbon resistors. Tweaker
I'd venture to guess that you might like a big, biG, BIG pair of cone + dome speakers that have some upper bass/lower midrange emphasis.A pair of used Harbeth M-40.1 speakers should serve your needs just fine. Expect to pay upwards of $7000...
The updated 40.2 version sells for only $15,000 but I believe that they sound a bit more "modern" than the older 40.1 version does.
Good Luck in your quest for *musical nirvana*.
Edits: 04/24/16 04/24/16
I have enough speakers, big or otherwise. They are not the problem.
... something called "musicality".
If the root of this problem is not loudspeakers then where does the root of this problem lie? Would you suggest that *digital sound* alone is to blame?
What I am saying is, digital has not only ruined recordings, but the objectives concerning the very pursuit of what things should sound like!
Well, it is easy to get SOTA imaging and soundstaging from a vintage vinyl system. I have a Yamaha GT-2000 that is from the early 80s and was one of the great direct drive TTs of that era. I use a modern Audio Technica AT150MLX cartridge and feed that into a superb Silvaweld, all tube phonostage. That last bit, the phonostage, is critical BTW.
The pursuit of better imaging and soundstaging has been a goal of hifi for a long time and rightly so or there wouldn't be a need for stereo at all! However, I do agree that most modern systems throw out the baby with the bath water! That doesn't mean there aren't modern ones that can't do what you want on top of the high resolution etc.
Your examples above of an Accuphase, Avalon type system would give me the shivers and I would never call that SOTA from a music listening POV.
our examples above of an Accuphase, Avalon type system would give me the shivers and I would never call that SOTA from a music listening POV.
He says that is the best sounding system available today at any price (according to exactly whom?) and then complains about it.
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't choose those components either. :)
E-stat, you are nothing but a troll!
Right-ty-O!
Welcome to the Asylum. I think you'll find you will be better received when your posts aren't of what Manny succinctly identified as:
"Without specifics, you're sounding like a grumpy old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn. "
Does anyone actually believe you've owned ALL the state-of-the-art gear available today? You must be joking. :)
The sound of today's speakers ARE part of the problem!
I think what people are asking is you specify what manufacturers/models you find to be lacking. 'Modern' is painting with far to wide a brush to be meaningful.
'Old is Better' means nothing to me.
'The Gigantor 300x, driven by the Zorbitron II with [insert source here]
sounds sterile compared to [detailed list of vintage gear here] ' is something people would understand.
!
Most of my critical listening is done with headphones anyhow.
I really like Senneheiser HD-650 when I'm in the mood for a relaxing listen. Powered by my balanced-drive DNA Sonett amp, they really come alive in a very (ahem!) *musical* way.
Slightly dark sounding, the sonic perspective they provide reminds me of when I'm sitting several rows back from the performance, in a large hall venue. I consider them to be the ideal headphones when I'm listening to large-scale classical music recordings.
That describes my system
Shindo preamp, David Berning power amps, Maggie 3.6 speakers, Rega turntable, Audio-GD Master7 dac. I love the fact that I can totally lose myself in the beauty of this system
Alan
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: