|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.203.57.185
In Reply to: RE: Great Falcon LS3/5a Review by Paul Seydor posted by Isaak J. Garvey on April 14, 2016 at 11:04:19
Please feel free to call me Pau, Isaak. The reason I don't include my reference system is that it varies to some extent, and I do enough reviewing that there are not hours in the day left to listen to what I "own." Regular readers of mine know that my principal speakers are Quad 2805 ESLs, Harbeth Monitor 30.1, and the latest version of the smallest Harbeths, the HLP3R. My CD player is a Marantz SA-CD 8004 that is used for SACDs and that feeds a Benchmark DAC-1 for Redbook. Electronics? Well, for the last year or so I've used a Quad 909 and Zesto Audio Bia. LP? Basis Vector IV arm, 2200 turntable, and Ortofon Windfeld or Ortofon Bronze pickup, and sometimes an AR XA in mint condition with a Shure V15 MR. I used Zesto Audio's line stage and phono stage and also the latest version of Musical Surroundings's Phenomena (especially useful for exact MC loading). I hope this helps. I should point out that I am of the school that believes source components and speakers, especially the latter, make by far the lions share of observable differences in systems. Electronics behavior is far more predictable. Most present day solid state amplifiers that are competently design are far more similar in their sound than different. I'm not suggesting the differences aren't important, but surely no one can argue they are anything like the same magnitude as speakers'. I hope this has been of some help. The truth is, when I'm not actively evaluating equipment, I don't fool around with the equipment much. At the end of the day, the electronics I'm listening to for pleasure are generally the electronics I'm reviewing. The speakers are typically the Quads--by the way, I also own and regularly enjoy fully restored ESL57s, driven by a beautiful sounding Quad 303 amp--and occasionally the Harbeths.
Follow Ups:
Hi Paul:
Thank you very much for the detail. You left no stone un-turned.
You will see if you check my system I own Quad 2192s.
I am surprised, that as a reviewer you do not have a high resolution digital set up aside from SACD. You will note from previous comments I think this does not allow for the thorough test of many modern components.
But I understand there are limitations.
Isaac, I answer this question with great trepidation, as I do not wish to give offense and I have no interest in arguing about this kind of thing, but here goes. First, I do not and never have believed there is a necessary correlation between the price of something and its worth, especially in audio, viz., I have no heard speakers costing more than my Quad 2805 or Harberth Monitor 40.2 that I would take over them regardless of cost. And this includes all the usual suspects. Second, as regards digital reproduction, if I had more disposable income than I do I might be tempted by one of the more expensive SACD players, but as for Redbook CD, I've yet to be convinced--and I have listened--that you can do all that much better than Benchmark's DACs, if you can do better at all. I'd wager that better than a third to half of all recordings you buy have been made with something by Benchmark somewhere in the chain. There are some more expensive players than the Marantz that I like (including a more expensive Marantz and at least one of the upper-level Luxman), but I like the Marantz just fine. I won't make a claim that it's the best, but it is very good, is always extremely listening and musical, and rarely grates or given any evidence of digititis, And this it the player as a standalone--when paired with the Benchmark as a backend, I find almost nothing to complain about and the level of detail, transparency, and resolution is quite remarkable.
Paul, forgive me, I did not articulate my comment clearly. My fault.
I did not in any way indict your current source. I am a big fan of Marantz digital sources.
What I meant to say was that many of the components being produced and reviewed today, integrated amplifiers, preamps, and virtually all disc players, including the superb current crop of Marantz SACD players, all have high resolution USB inputs that can be fed 24/96/24/192, and DSD files.
I think not reviewing this feature is selling the reader short.
A file player/streamer or computer running a premium playback software package to me would be a minimum requirement.
Just me two shekels.
Then it was my mistake, Isaac. Well, as regards hi-res USB inputs and all that, I confess to being something of Luddite here. Well, not exactly a Luddite, but, look at this way, as a film editor I all my work on computers these days and have done for the last twenty years; same with writing. At the end of the day, when I listen to music, I don't want to have to use a computer and list of titles. I want to browse the shelves, I want to hold physical media in my hand. I grant the sonics are better when hi res downloads--at least all things being equal--but I guess for me they're not that much better that I don't prefer the way I do it now. I mean, I go to the shelf to listen to a Beethoven symphony and in the course of the browsing, well, be damned if I didn't notice as I ran my fingers across the titles that I haven't listened to the Berlioz Te Deum in a good while. Such are the joys of physical media and old fashioned browsing.
But, yes, I agree that readers should be aware of all this and fortunately we have enough reviewers at TAS that I think all aspects are adequately satisfied.
If you refer to a particular track in a review as sounding a particular way with a given piece of gear, there is a good chance the reader has heard that track of that CD and doesn't have to wonder about which version/bit depth/sample rate file you might have downloaded not to mention PCM vs. DSD.I go to a lot of shows(CES/T.H.E/RMAF/Etc.) and one of the irritations is everyone is playing music from computers and we REALLY have no idea what we are hearing. Not to mention the possibility of DSP in the Computer Software such as Amarra, HDTracks, or worse, room correction.
Edits: 04/15/16
You know, Ivan, I never thought of it in quite that way and this is an excellent, indeed brilliant point. Write a letter to this effect to TAS ASAP,
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: