|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.232.194.86
In Reply to: RE: For the Audio Note NOS guys - New technology coming from AN. posted by John Elison on July 23, 2014 at 20:47:20
Well maybe he has different standards/preferences than you do.
It is entirely possible to get very good results with mixed and matched systems - But the sliding scale of very good changes with experience. My first Stereo (Fisher) was State of the Art compared to my $80 Transonic boom box. And my Pioneer receiver and 6 pack CD changer was state of the art better over the Fisher and then the Arcam/Cambridge Audio and Wharfedale was state of the art better than the Pioneer.
So what Peter views as "slightly above mediocre" may very much be viewed as outstanding to many other people just as the Pioneer would make many OTHER people happy I became very aware of how crappy it was ONLY when I heard the Wharfedale/Arcam/CA.
Just as many people think Bose is the greatest sound ever while many audiophiles on these boards (with experience) consider to be poo.
Wes Philips of Stereophile noted after hearing Audio Note compared to "everything else" at CES
"Forget best sound of show, for sheer emotional delivery, timbral clarity, dynamic agility, and, yes, the highest fidelity, the Audio Note system may have been the best hi-fi I have ever heard. It was one of those magical moments that we audiophiles put up with all of the hassles for.
After the Audio Note demo. the rest was noise, so I quit on a winner. Not many people who come to Vegas can say that."
So yes maybe to Peter - "the rest is noise" and to people who have heard it properly set-up then like Wes noted otherwise previously loved stuff is outclassed and what WAS the greatest thing ever now takes a back seat. Well at least for some.
The way to determine if true is to try it out at home. I have found his stuff works together better than mixed and matched.
Peter's a character - but he's not an engineer - he hires engineers to get him the sound he wants.
Why is it that when anyone disagrees about something the other guy is always a crook or evil. You know you can actually have a disagreement on a topic without the other guy being relegated to nutjob status.
I happen to be an Atheist who absolutely doesn't believe in any religion but I don't call my pastor friend an idiot or a liar because he sells people stuff I think is mythology and leading people down the wrong path.
Peter believes his systems are the best systems and better than anything else out there. And plenty of people happen to agree with him based on hearing it exactly the way Wes heard it above.
Some people rave about panels to the same degree and i scratch my head - I get why they like it but they're not for me. So be it.
Follow Ups:
much less heard the system he brings to CES most years (I did every year from 2000 to 2007), or even care.
Well a video is a static thing - there is no question answer to say hey Peter what about X to let the person expand or explain the point more. That's the nature of such things - in conversation the person can explain and expand their points.
People who know him and have talked to him more know what he meant with system matching - since his gear is system matched from different companies. But oh well.
We also understand the analogy of the car - he is talking about premade parts and walking over to a Honda and taking out a Honda Civic engine and sticking it in Ferrari and taking the wheels off a Ford Escort and sticking it on the Ferrari.
He was NOT talking about a company like a BMW designing a car and then OEMing other companies to build the products such as having Pirelli designing tires and having Ferrari building the engines etc.
Clearly he was talking about putting post production part that was made for another car and plopping it into a vehicle that doesn't fit. E-Stat is smart enough to know this of course but he has axes to grind.
he is talking about premade parts and walking over to a Honda and taking out a Honda Civic engine and sticking it in Ferrari and taking the wheels off a Ford Escort and sticking it on the Ferrari.
Well, I guess if you're inept enough to match a Behringer preamplifier with a Lamm power amplifier connected via red and white patch cords your example might make sense. :)
He specifically spoke of "the challenge" of matching amps to the efficiency of a speaker and the output impedance of a preamp to a power amp. Do solving these simple matching concepts present a challenge to you, too?
I have no bone to pick with him. Utter BS, however, is well - utter BS. :)
but it's the minutia they choose to pick apart.
A lot of what Audio Note does is counter intuitive. And his point of the silver wire and silver transformer wire is spot on, from my experience.
Silver is REALLY hard to manage as it make a marginal system sound WORSE!
And who else is selling a DAC for $100K then finding a BETTER solution more in the $20K+ range, then deciding to upgrade the $100K customers for free?
Most manufacturers would exclaim the greatness of the new/better product and sell it for $120K.
But Peter is in for the long haul, and his customer ain't wasting time posting on this board. They're busy making money so they can afford to buy a complete, 100% AN system and not worry about the endless audiophile component roulette. Why? Because they spend their time MAKING MONEY and listening to their systems, not fiddling with them, like I do. :-(
Many of us would like to think that the mindless marketing nonsense could be dispensed with when you get to this end of the market.
The fact that he lays it on so thick should be embarrassing to him but then I guess there are many who like the fog of marketing. Just like when it comes to some of the more exotic tweaks, belief is a large part of the mystique.
The man started his company by tricking a very seasoned music lover in Japan. Not to say his company has not come up with things that sound good but he is a slippery man.
The speakers remind me of the old days. Visually, the drivers look like very ordinary stuff. Of course, that does not preclude getting decent sound from them but they have always given me that INFINITY POS1 feeling.
To each his own and if the mystique works for you and enjoyment ensues, that is good.
Rick,
Before coming down too hard on the marketing profession, I think it important to keep in mind that engineering, while a demanding discipline, usually deals with concrete problems. Meaning, that there usually are exact or optimum answers to a given, well defined, problem. Marketing, on the other hand, in often deals with non-concrete problems, dealing with issues of buyer psychology. Marketing problems are often not well defined, and the variables plentiful, sometimes, even inscrutable. Much guess work is necessarily involved in marketing.
The cold truth is, that the best engineered product will quickly disappear from existence if it's potential customers aren't made aware of the benefits of that engineering. It is the job of marketing to make potential customers so aware. I've worked in both the Engineering and the Marketing departments of an large electronics corporation. I know the arrogance with which engineers frequently look down their noses at the role of the marketing staff. Both functions, however, require certain skills and talents, and both are essential to a successful product launch.
_
Ken Newton
"Marketing, on the other hand, in often deals with non-concrete problems, dealing with issues of buyer psychology."
Correct. Marketing deals with buyer psychology. The idea is to scam the buyer into buying something he doesn't need, buying something that's more than what he needs, while scamming him to pay as much as possible. I figured this out by the time I was 10 years old and learned that my grandfather's advertising agency had created the slogan, "A diamond is forever" to allow a cartel to sell nearly worthless rocks as high priced "engagement rings". A complete and utter scam.
There is a small portion of the marketing function that is actually useful. In practice this provides an lame excuse for the existence of a "profession" that is 90% lies and exaggeration.
Like you I have worked in both the engineering and marketing departments of a large electronics company, including a stint as a product manager where I wrote marketing brochures, so I know the territory well.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
As I indicated, engineers too often tend toward arrogance, even self-righteousness, I'm sorry to say. In my experience, engineers (God bless us) are no more honest or virtuous than any other persons. The nature of our profession simply leaves us little place to hide in the making of factual misrepresentations or errors. I suggest, that it actually takes more self-discipline to be an ethical marketer, than it does to be an ethical engineer.Engineering, by it's scientific nature, doesn't easily lend itself to misrepresentation of the facts. Honest factual mistakes, let alone intentional misrepresentations can get an engineer fired. Marketing, by it's far more subjective, non-concrete nature, affords greater opportunity for consequence free misrepresentation of facts, whether intentional or unintentional. The marketer often knows that they can likely get away with misrepresentations, and may even feel quite strong organizational pressure to do so. The marketer can often find themselves forced to walk a tight rope of professional conduct if they are to succeed. Sadly, being too straight with the facts can get a marketer fired.
I am curious to read what your instructions would be to the marketing personnel of an software company, just for example, who are given the task of marketing a technically flawed core software product developed by the firm's engineering department?
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 07/25/14 07/25/14 07/25/14 07/25/14 07/25/14
"I am curious to read what your instructions would be to the marketing personnel of an software company, just for example, who are given the task of marketing a technically flawed core software product developed by the firm's engineering department?"
If I were given the job of marketing a technically flawed product I would refuse to do it in a dishonest way. If an honest presentation of the product was such that the product could not possibly earn its keep then I would recommend to cancel the product. If this meant that I needed to find another job, so be it. I would like to hope that I would have managed my personal affairs in such a way that I would be relatively immune to corruption, which is what it would be were I to proceed with creating a dishonest marketing program. But then, I might have had a sick child with enormous medical bills and desperately needed a job...
I've been in a position where my team designed a product that was designed for commercial use, with explicit tradeoffs between cost, performance and reliability that were appropriate for normal commercial operations such as office use, but in appropriate for safety critical systems. In one product design meeting we even joked that the design was good enough for commercial use but not good enough for use in an air traffic control system or nuclear power plant. At the time, the company had an a public policy that it's products were not to be used for safety critical systems. A few years later during a business downturn I learned that this product was being bid as part of an air traffic control system. My first reaction was to go directly to my CEO and blow the whistle, but instead I asked who the sales manager was and learned that this was a potential multi-billion dollar sale. Since it seemed likely that blowing the whistle would have no effect on the project, I formulated an alternate plan. I asked for a meeting with the technical lead of the prime contractor. He thought the purpose was for us to help him understand our products better, but my main purpose was for me to evaluate him to see if he was technically competent to understand the limitations of our design. He passed the test and we were able to reconfigure the proposed system to avoid all the problems that I knew of. I'm not sure what I would have done had he proven incompetent, probably gone to the CEO of my company and explained my position, while being prepared to find a new job.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Which knowing the man from way back--alls fair in love and War-Ha!
Can't argue with the success though especially the NOS
DACs
Hope they get to use all those Black Gates before they "wilt"
Des
I didn't mean to imply that Peter is a crook or that he is evil. I meant to say that his outlook on component synergy is a "crock" of bullshit. He impressed me as being an idiot based on his total inability to match audio components of different brands for synergistic performance and his erroneous opinion that other audiophiles couldn't do it either. The fact of the matter is that nearly all components are purposely designed to have impedance synergy with other components so that people will buy them.As far as my knowing what sounds good, I have as much experience as any 66-year old man who has been an audio enthusiast all his life and attended numerous audio shows for the express purpose of listening to the finest sounding and most expensive stereo equipment in the world. Therefore, after listening to Peter's drivel, I have absolutely no respect for anything else he has to say or anything he has to sell.
Best regards,
John Elison
Edits: 07/23/14
JohnThat is the reason I linked Wes's show report because say you have 200 rooms all set up with mixed and matched components - all set up using the most expensive gear in the audio industry, all set-up by dealers and manufacturers who should be able to match impedances and Wes found them to all sound like noise compared to the "matched" AN system.
And it should be pointed out that AN is a series of matched components - the speakers are based on Snell speakers, turntables (Systemdek).
I know everyone is always ready to dump on people but Peter clearly says "it was is very very difficult to..." Not "It is impossible to..." (2:25)
He is correct that many many people are continually cycling through various gear to fix problems in the sound and that is either because the pieces are NOT matched properly or the products are flashy on the outside and junk inside.
He brings up efficiency - I have seen so many systems that use hard to drive speakers and low watt SET amps and then people complain that the amp has no bass or rolled of highs. Hell I read a REVIEW of my 10 watt (4 watts undistorted) OTO that was being reviewed with big Thiel speakers and speaker absolutely in no way was designed for or would be good with the OTO. And amazingly the reviewer said he would buy it if he were no longer reviewing - but he had issues with the bass and it being strained - well duh. And from a supposed experienced reviewer who should know better than to run a Thiel with that amp.
Some points - this is a SET maker who views SS as pretty much unlistenable dredge. Having a set of 86dB B&Ws then matching a SS amps is easy - choose any SS from a decent manufacturer Krell/Classe/Rotel/Bryston/Levinson and stick the amp/cd player on them and you get pretty much the same kind of sound - a B&W sound with a SS amp --- Many people would absolutely love them and some will argue about which of those works best with the B&W - me I find it "mediocre" because A) I don't love the speakers, and B) I wouldn't want any of the amps and C) after hearing the combos none of it improves on the other.
And then John let's talk about cables. All the folks pissing money away on $5000 Nordost are puzzling to me.
Why?
If you have a mixed and matched stereo of Turntable, Arm, Cart, CD transport, DAC, Preamp, Amp, Speakers, Interconnects and speaker cables in a stereo system.
All of these are mixed and matched from totally different designers.
The internal wiring of the SS preamp uses a torroid wound with $.06meter copper trash wires. All the other wiring is similar $.06 wiring to a gold plated connector. The Amp is wound with a different copper wires and an EI transformer - the caps in both are different - one uses Mundorf the other uses Jensen.
The turntable and CD player may use silver wires and silver connectors - you have MIT interconnects and Nordost Copper speaker cables, a Shunyata power cord and the speakers have Audio Note silver internals.
WHAAAAAT?
Oh sure adding the Nordost $5k cable may make it sound different which may initially sound better (and indeed, it may sound better) but it doesn;t sound perhaps as better as it COULD sound if the ENTIRE chain were Nordost. And the sound is an utter and total fluke that you happened to by chance get lucky that the 9 wires aren't fighting against each other. Indeed, it would indicate that the $.06/m wire isn't in the least bit hurting the sound RIIIIGHT! If that is so then wires all sound the same.
With a matched system that Peter is talking about - everything from catridge to speaker voice coil can be bought with the same material (silver or copper all the way including the soldering material and the internals on the transformers and voice coils).
The caps in the DAC and the preamp and amp and speakers are the same all speaking in unison.
I don't know but this is a helluva lot more logical than throwing any ole parts together and saying yup buy a tube preamp from a company that hates SS and sticking it on a SS power amp (where the power amp maker hates tubes). How many people do you know who buy hybrids? Forcing the mismatch.
And maybe it sounds good. But I have not heard any such combo sound truly great.
Edits: 07/24/14 07/24/14
"I have as much experience as any 66-year old man who has been an audio enthusiast all his life and attended numerous audio shows for the express purpose of listening to the finest sounding and most expensive stereo equipment in the world."
You have just described me also right down to the age.
"after listening to Peter's drivel, I have absolutely no respect for anything else he has to say or anything he has to sell."
I had precisely the opposite reaction. Which surprised the heck out of me since I'm a pretty hard-bitten engineer type who has grown weary of both boutique manufacturers bloating their BOMs to 'justify' insane prices and the crackpot views that many inmates hold regarding the value of measurements. They just don't understand...
BUT I used to work on audio frequency systems with ~100dB dynamic range and ~.001 degree phase sensitivity (but not at the same time). Let me tell you the passives, especially the capacitors, are real PITAs. So I was rather nodding my head as he spoke. And I've worked in RF where we used capacitors with solid silver leads in critical places to keep the Q up. (The assemblers in that area were VERY tidy, the cleaning crew never had to sweep up the ends.)
So how do these experiences relate to home audio? I don't KNOW that they do. But I find it interesting that the very same component attributes that were important in other applications which I do understand pretty well via both theory and measurements seem to also be ones that audiophiles fret about, even though it is impossible...
My view is that inappropriate assumptions are afoot primarily concerning the discernment threshold of human aural perception. I think they are damn low. Illogically low. I don't have data to trot out but I think it all goes back to surviving in the (unurban) jungle. Being able to detect minute differences in impulses and being able to filter out large signals and focus on minutia probably made the difference between getting laid and getting eaten.
Primitive processes are conveyed through emotions rather than newer chunks of the brain so probably the reason we have so much problem "hearing" the things that we feel when listening to music is that we aren't especially well wired for it. Music is a drug that hits the old brain to invoke those primitive emotions. It takes special training and focus to use the modern areas to sort out the why and my understanding is that folks that do DBT's for Harmon are trained to do so. I wonder if that subsequently decreases their enjoyment of music?
Rick
Not to mention the high prices they are charging. I didn't see anything special about his turntable that he wants over three grand for without arm....
There are two turntables that look the same. The entry level is this one
How could that possibly provide any more than mediocre performance? ;-)
He never said he didn't and ever since the webpage has been up he has said if something exists that already works he will use it. The "specific" Rega tone arm worked.
Rega stopped making the tone arm. Audio Note now makes their own and much better tonearms.
How do you know they're better?
Edits: 07/25/14
Because I've tried them both because I had the TT2 with a Rega tone arm. I heard the player with the AN tonearm. That's how. So have many others. The AN Tone-arm as a stand alone piece is being viewed as a giant killer tone arm - people are dumping their much more costly SME arms for them. To be fair to Rega though the AN arm is a much more serious piece of engineering and considerably more expensive.
What people? How many?
It's no secret that you're an Audio Note fanboy, and we've been subjected to your diatribe many times, but statements like that which I've highlighted are in the same vein as the "crap" that PQ tosses about.
I harbour no appreciation for Rega tonearms, but your assertion that AN tonearms are a much more serious piece of engineering than those of Rega is ludicrous!!!
RGA, what are your credentials where mechanical engineering is concerned? What criteria have you used to determine that the "engineering" performed by AN is superior to that employed by Rega?
Each time you initiate another AN post I become even more convinced that you are somehow associated with the marketing firm known as Audio Note.
Rick.
No because you're too close minded to try it and judge stuff on sound quality.Fortunately other SME V owners got past personalities... and indeed judges something on sound other than price. The AN Arms start at less than 1/4 the price of the SME V too which usually means a negative bias at the outset like "it's cheaper so it must be worse."
To this SME V owner's credit he didn't do that. And people wonder why there are fanboys - yes fanboys start when something at less than 1/4 the retail price sounds a lot better. Granted I might disagree with some of these folks as well since I have not done direct A/B comparisons but the fact that the AN arm would even hang in with stuff that is multiples of the price is interesting to me.
Edits: 07/26/14
It's seriously good as in OMG.
Gives credence to the Emperor's new clothes arguement
SO many get sucked in by the glitz and prices.
Like children with noses pressed flat to the Toy shop window.
Unbecoming is one descriptor... Fanboy is another
I am a fan of Audio Note products and I will not deny that fact. I think they make better sounding gear than about 99% of the stuff out there.
People are entitled to have their views and that is my view. Because I like Audio Note doesn't mean I'm on the payroll and because I like Vivaldi doesn't mean I'm related, and because I like Jackson Browne doesn't mean I'm with the record label selling his CD's. Or does it mean that EVERYTHING you like I should take to mean that you only like it because you're getting paid?
This digital forum has had a lot of people interested in AN DA converters.
Since enjoythemusic.com bothered to do a 30 minute interview with their owner - it should clue you into the fact that there are more people in the world than JUST RGA who likes their stuff and are interested in what they're doing. You may not be but I am since I am looking to buy some products from them including a DAC.
News of a new DAC is interesting to me and I felt would be interesting to others looking at buying one. Indeed, with this video people who are looking to spend $10,000+ on a DAC as I am may decide to wait and NOT BUY AND NOT GIVE THEM MONEY if a new technology is coming down the line in a few years.
This is from Hi-Fi Choice
"If the TT-2 is a pleasant surprise, the Arm One is something of a revelation. This is an immaculately finished and well thought out unit that is as good as anything we have seen under £1,000...The cueing action and the general arm movement suggest the bearings are excellent as well."
http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/news/article/audio-note-an-tt2-deluxe-pound;3275/8849/
If you can't tell by looking at this stuff if it's any good - or by the way it sounds then no amount of writing can help you. It's time to find another hobby.
An owner of the SME V who bought the Audio Note arm 1
RGA, you have once again skirted the issue presented you!
My questions were specific to your assertion that the tonearm designed by AN was an engineering tour de force vs that manufactured by Rega...but then this is always your assertion when PQ and AN are the subject.
Many moons ago on Canuckaudiomart I wrote of a full AN system with a purchase price in excess of $150K USD that I had the opportunity to listen to in the home of an audio friend. My post was one of many in response to a multipage post you wrote. I didn't like the system, nor did the other 2 invitees...you spent a great deal of time writing that there must be something wrong with me or the way the system was setup...and here's your response to my query this round that takes us back to square one.
"If you can't tell by looking at this stuff if it's any good - or by the way it sounds then no amount of writing can help you. It's time to find another hobby."
So...if I don't agree with you and "get it", I need a new hobby?
This is aptly applied to you...
To each is given a book of rules,
A shapeless mass and some building tools,
And each must make his life a stepping stone or a stumbling block!
HELLO STUMBLING BLOCK!!!!
Your question about the tone arms - have you actually held the Rega 250 and used it and used the all metal one piece machined AN arm? Use a brain for Pete sake. Peter has been using the Rega 250 for years in their entry level models - so Peter obviously thinks they were very well designed arms. If you watched the video you will note that Peter works with other manufacturers in combination to design stuff - he is working with Rubycon a famous capacitor maker to make a better capacitor. For all you know the AN Tonearm is being co designed with SME or for that matter Rega.It sounds better therefore it implies that it is a superior tone arm. All the people who own current TT1 and TT2 turntables with Rega arms are the primary targets to upgrade their Rega - so if it's not better they'll be the first ones to know about it.
You asked about the engineering I directed you to review publications that can comment on such things because I was listening not inspecting - they did.
At that time(the other forums many years ago) I heard AN systems that always sounded excellent - I have since heard some less than great set-ups where the sound was rather average (California Audio Show 2012). So based on experiences like that (had it been my first exposure) I might walk away rather unimpressed as well.My comment about finding another hobby was based on the tone arm - both of them are AN tone arms (one of them is a Rega shell) but the new one is clearly better. This has nothing to do with the fact that you heard a buddy's $150k AN system and didn't like it - big deal so have I. But to then leap to the new tone arm isn't good is strange.
I have also experienced a lot of people who claim to have auditioned stuff on forums and when you ask basic questions they can't answer any of them.
I can't hide from my "auditions" and now when I audition stuff I almost always take a photo of what I hear so I can prove to people that yes I auditioned a Giya or a Magnepan or whatever. Internet posters with no names can make anything up. Oh yes I heard X and it stunk because they have an axe to grind with me or the maker or because they're trying to hock an alternative.
As an M40 owner if the AN E based system sounded bad - it truly is IMO a problem with system set-up. Soundhounds carries both the AN E and the M40. Bob Neil was a Harbeth dealer for years and now sell Audio Note.
Personally I like them both. It is just very odd that one would sound world's apart - they share some philosophies as well wide baffles lossy cabinets etc. They don't even measure all that differently in room when they were directly compared in Stereophile.
Edits: 07/27/14
it may clear up the BS problem!!!
So you are saying because you heard a $150k AN system (which I have to take on pure faith) and didn't like it that means you can say that every product they make is overrated. Gotcha.
At no time have I stated that "every product they make is overrated"!?!?
Please...get over yourself.
Reviewer?...sheesh!
So what point exactly are you trying to make. The thread is about DACs you're talking about a system you heard for $150k (which we have to take on faith) and tone arms.You ask about SME versus AN arms - I provided links.
You ask about many people liking them - google reviews. Not sure what you're exactly after as it seems to me to be a scatter-shot hoping to hit something. So what Axe are you grinding?
Is it because it's me. I mean would you rather me be upfront about what I like or would you prefer I go to a different computer and make a fake account. Unlike most reviewers who absolutely love absolutely every product that has ever been made - I don't. I consider about 5% of the stuff out there to be worth owning (to me) then I consider about 30-50% of stuff to be quite good for what it is or what it's priced at and then the rest I'd generally avoid. I'm not and never have been in the everything is equal it's just a matter of personal opinion. I find people/reviewers in the spectrum to be delusional or deaf.
The point of the video - was about seeing a new dac from a popular dac company that may be coming down that will be much better for much less money and in fact Peter is hurting his own sales with his comments because the guy looking to drop $80,000 on a redbook system will now likely not buy it until the new model comes down the line. His other comments have mirrored his Comparison by Contrast essay (co-written by enjoythemusic reviewer and classical composer Leonard Norwitz) 20 years ago.
Edits: 07/28/14
It is nice of you to provide the link to the interview with Peter Q. It allows people to make up their own minds.
Thanks,
John Elison
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: