|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
173.56.36.60
just some tips, I've been doing this for about 15 years in this hobby. When I stopped "parallel upgrading" everything went a notch up in performance.
cost was about 3x, not sure if this is exponential, I think I am happy with what I got and I have to seriously consider losing my retirement if I decide to upgrade up another notch. Not sure if the notch up is worth it, I am sure it is.
Follow Ups:
Going back to 2004, my downstairs system was modestly priced. It came to ~$10k at full retail for a pair of small standmount speakers, integrated amp, tube modded SACD player, tuner, and cables. It was far from SOTA but at least gave a taste of the high end. If I were spending $10k today for a new system, I would be stuck with entry level hi-fi that's at least couple notches below what I had in performance. My downstairs system today would be a little over $30k at full retail price and is only one notch above what I had 10 years ago in performance. That's three times the cost for one step up that you would have to be an audiophile to appreciate.
Part of that is due to diminishing returns as you climb the price ladder in hi-fi, but most of it is price inflation. Some of the components I considered and auditioned back in the 2000-2005 time frame are still in production but the retail price today is 2x what it was back then. An example is the Wilson Benesch Arc, which was $3800 when I auditioned it in 2002 or 2003 and it is now $7k. Others have been replaced by newer models at approximately the same performance level for 2x the price. An example is the Simaudio i-7, which was $6k when I auditioned it in 2005 or 2006, and the current equivalent is the 700i which is $13k. Cable prices have seen similar inflation.
Ironically, hi-fi price inflation seemed to be worst during the recession. Although it varied from manufacturer to manufacturer, it seemed like most of the price growth occurred between 2007 and 2010.
indeed, also I used meat (beef) as an example.
it just happens when you print trillions into a CPU screen, suddenly the $1 isn't worth what it used to be. QE infinity I say!
I have changed gear many times to less costly (amps,speakers,etc) and many times the less expensive stuff was better ! The price of something does not guarantee audio bliss !
I had the complete opposite experience.
Time for some Wilson's and a d'agostino amplifier.
Guess you will have to put your retirement off for a while !
I'll just spend it all now and be a greeter at Wal-Mart in my 80s.
There is great value in quality audio and TV gear, but you must slow down and buy one piece at a time to not waste money and have better results.
Different (as long as it is in the same SQ ballpark) usually sounds better for a while,Buying new stuff adds bias to our perception and decision making,
Listening to compare equipment is a different experience than listening for enjoyment of music,
These factors complicate our analysis of equipment/system SQ and price/value,
I have taken a buy and hold strategy. I encourage you to experiment with some well recorded material. if you are mostly streaming, try a few hirez tracks from Linn or Bluecoast. The material is limited, but it may demonstrate some system potential surprises.
High quality recordings may be the best upgrade,
Edits: 07/06/15
OH! You mean substituting different components at the same cost level??Have to disagree a bit: Many of us are LOCKED into a specific price bracket and that is just life!
BUT, BIG BUT! For instance, between tubes and solid states, specific loudspeakers. You have to choose appropriately, and I DO believe that price bracket IS very important, but one does need to lock in the sound one can live with, though, and if the requirements are NOT very extreme, it shouldn't be THAT difficult actually.
I fundatmentally believe that the AUDIOPHILE is the most important component of an audio system, though, so it is NOT just spending that is important.
(But thanks for the incentive for updating my System page, as I have progressed in little, but significant, increments ;-)
Edits: 07/05/15 07/05/15 07/05/15 07/05/15
Why is everyone being so dense? He's talking about inflation...and how things cost more as time continues.
You might consider going the DIY route. I upgrade my system with my soldering iron instead of my wallet. I've managed to bring my system up a "notch" every year for the last several years with a minimum outlay of cash. This year I replaced and upgraded all the active current sources (27 in total) in my system for a significant improvement in sonics. Cost was less than $100. There is so much "mark up" in HIgh End audio gear that unless your looking for bragging rights, most of it is a waste.
"It is better to remain silent and thought a fool, then speak and remove all doubt." A. Lincoln
Very rare for a DIY project to match used at the same expenditure ....
Rare maybe; but not unheard of. In my case there are no examples in the high end world that use the same circuit topology, phono input to output. In that sense there are no matches out there.
"It is better to remain silent and thought a fool, then speak and remove all doubt." A. Lincoln
All this passes me by. My task now is to figure out how to pay for a casket big enough to take all the great stuff I've accumulated with me. Oh yeah, dont pay any attention to the electrical plug sticking out of the ground near my grave.
I agree 100% with what you have said.
We are going to have to go back to the ways of old, and the ways of our ancestors, not only to fix if something is broken, but also to improve as well.
If you want something done right do it yourself. There is also more pride in that as well.
N/T
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
"Not sure if the notch up is worth it, I am sure it is"
Huh?
----------------------
"E Burres Stigano?"
How many "notches" below top notch is your system right now? I think you might need to get away from this notchy way of thinking.
I think it is an exponential system we see here.
to put it into perspective, steak 10 years ago (the food source), what a good steak at about $5 10 years ago, now it is about $30, for something similar with a ghost of what it was in the past.
I think I just figured out that I need to spend about half a million to about 2MM dollars to get one more notch up with I currently have.
Now all these vintage guys make complete sense to me.
I can better your system for $10-15K no problem.
I will agree somewhat and with a few exceptions, especially with all the retro moves in audio today with tubes and Horns...
Regards
The designs of horns and tubes today are anything but retro, with some exceptions for restored Altecs and JBLs etc. However, much of that technology was never really bettered and new designs are taking advantage of materials advancements that probably make the most difference.
It was funny listening to the "baby" Western Electric system they had in Munich this year (it was NOT domestic friendly). It was the ONLY system at the show that brought tears to my wife's eyes (literally). While we both agreed the Living Voice/Kondo system was more realistic in like being at a real concert, the WE/Silbatone system was utterly involving and moving. Imperfect, for sure, but in ways that matter far less than you think. I doubt your system will move someone in the same way...i have heard very few that do.
Funny and Ironic , toobs and horns not being retro , yet you rave over the "WE" setup .. :)
And the electrostatic speaker concept predates moving coils and ribbons date from the 1920s. Not to mention the plasma ion speaker, the principle has been known since the late 1800s (the singing arc!). So, there is actually nothing really new and in that sense it can all be seen as "retro" to whomever might decide to call it that. Horns of course, being acoustic transformers, were probably the most popular early on when the amp power was low and you had to fill a whole theater full with sound. This is why it probably seems retro to you.
Quad was famous not because they invented the electrostatic speaker but because they figured out how to make it sort of reliable and somewhat room friendly (in the beginning you only needed 1). Ribbons have been commercially available, at least as tweeters, also since the mid 1950s. Now though with rare earth magnets we can bring that "retro" technology up to fairly high sensitivity. Horns have been improved as well, although I will reiterate that the old ones were pretty special as well and if you haven't heard it then you don't know what you are missing. I heard recently a 40K WE clone system, although it used original Jensen 15 inch field coil drivers.
Hell, even that idea has come back as people have realized you can control damping of a driver pretty effectively this way (witness Focal's Grand Utopia Be EM with electromagnetic damping adjustment).
Also, horn design has not been static anymore than other types of speaker design (witness the latest from Avantgarde, Odeon, Acapella, Living Voice, Tune Audio and many others).
Finally, the tube designs, although taking the basic concepts from the simplest designs...ie. the SET doesn't make it anymore retro than a ribbon speaker. Modern transformers, modern passive parts and even modernized circuit and especially power supply designs make them pretty far removed from the SETs of the 1920s and 1930s. Taking a concept from the past and executing it in a modern way is not necessarily retro...although that is the angle that some strive for...it is a wide open market afterall.
Precisely and you made my point , it's all retro with speakers , toobs take it full circle ...
KR invented new tubes just about 20 years ago...is that retro or new then??
Yes, Kinda like reinventing Aspirin in a new tamper proof box ....... :)
Edits: 07/09/15
No, its like calling a 2015 911 turbo retro because its progenitor dates from the 1930s (the famous Volkswagen Beetle).
Morri ,
I do believe the Baby WE brought tears to your wife eyes after seeing them , I'm sure she envisioned you bringing a pr of those WAF "Beasties" home ...,. :)
Well at least you try to have a sense of humor...
It all depends.I don't think there has ever been an easy way to calculate or quantify "performance for the dollar". 20K spent in 2016 might buy a hell of a lot more than 20K spent in 2000 - or it might not. It might depend on the products and brands involved and - last but not least - our personal state of mind and subjective impressions. When it comes to anything that's considered *hi-tech* at any given moment, I can think of one possible "rule of thumb" and that is: "Buy cheap and buy often". It's practically impossible to keep up with the pace of innovation sometimes.
Edits: 07/05/15 07/05/15 07/05/15 07/05/15
auditioning before buying.
what I am saying.
If in 2000 the year I spend $20K and in 2016 I spend $20K, I am getting worse performance for the same cost.
This is all a racket!
...mostly because the goal posts keep changing for the industry.
Recession, depressions, devaluations, pressure to put out new products, competition (which on the whole, in my view, makes things worse rather than better...everybody says they're better when they're not, and prices increase for the stuff that really is better while most money goes into mediocre stuff) and the move to PC audio, ipod like equipment, and streaming technology, reduces the actual performance because the focus is less on good sound but on convenience, archiving, etc.
But this process started decades ago (with transistors, and CD, and think about how much money we, and the industry has spent trying to get those technologies to sound right).
The best system I ever had cost me around $12,000 in 1999 money, but it took a lot in terms of system matching, mods, etc., upgrades, buying and trying and selling, etc. before it reached that 'wow' factor. Unless you're really rich and have somebody do an install for you, the mods and the dedication to the hobby are the only way to get superior sound, whether now, 10 years ago, 30 years ago, etc.....
This is not a sustainable hobby, and it's not a sustainable industry. It's run by nuts for nuts.
Again, you are assuming that there is a strong price/performance correlation. There is not, especially once moving beyond mass market to specialist hifi.
It is probably true that the MATERIAL cost in a 20K system were relatively higher in 2000 than now because of inflation but that doesn't necessarily mean that it will result in a worse sound...it might, it might not (see again my comment about price/performance correlation).
Is it a racket if your manufacturing costs keep going up that you keep raising your prices to compensate (just, in fact to get the SAME profit?). You are actually making less money, adjusted to inflation, if you only increase your prices to keep the profit static. So you actually have to increase your prices ahead of inflation so that your profit margin increases so you can keep pace with inflation in other areas of your life (buying food, paying rent, going on vacation etc.)
So, naturally, if your budget is static at $20K then if you buy new you will get less for that money, at least in material terms. Sonically it is no guarantee of a drop or a gain.
The way most beat this is buying used and taking advantage of depreciation of formerly very expensive stuff.
..than they were 15 years ago, due to the explosion of the IT markets and the explosion of the 'world' economy since the 90s, when the Chinese got 'most favoured nation' status in the US and almost all remaining manufacturing moved there.
There is more than ever low performance low cost material being manufactured than ever before in the electronics industry, meaning the actual materials costs (supply of the raw materials is ultimately limited by actual availability and higher costs to mine, etc.) have increased on the whole.
At the retail level, only the very low volume stuff can be really good, and prices increase virtually exponentially with low volume (who can live on designing and manufacturing expensive pieces that only a few people buy? Almost no one.)
"At the retail level, only the very low volume stuff can be really good"
The deal is (IMHO) that to this day we still don't have a comprehensive handle on the factors and their limits that are necessary to control to insure the best listening experience. Bummer.
The implementation is a level below that and really should be driven by it. Currently that is not typically the case so our systems tend to be "tuned" rather than "optimized" because we don't know what optimization means. It has nothing directly to do with production volume.
Rick
It is unfortunate that the review magazines (SP in particular) tend to think so little in terms of system synergy and review components as such.
But this is market and cost-driven (SP for example, won't review anything that isn't available in a dealer network, for advertising reasons IMO).
Consumers then come to think of components as better than other components at what they do (in traditional component categories), when everything should really be designed with the whole chain in mind.
The market has moved towards swiss army knives of audio to save costs,
True optimization is expensive because 1) each listening room is different 2) every recording is different 3) ears vary 4) only the super rich can afford optimization.
It's what keeps people on the 'upgrade mill', in addition to just getting tired of the way their mid fi electronics are reproducing the recording.
By the way, in our focus on the reproduction, we forget that the recording and mastering is also crucial. Give me a great recording on a boombox ANY DAY over a poor recording on the world's most expensive stereo.
And it does, indirectly, have to do with production volume. Everyone's tastes, ears, and rooms are different, just as every piece of music is different. Making products that reproduce them all with reasonable facsimile is truly an engineering miracle, which is only made 'affordable' with mass production.
Even the most expensive amplifier uses production parts, not one-offs.
"It is unfortunate that the review magazines (SP in particular) tend to think so little in terms of system synergy and review components as such."
Well, in a way I think they're kinda stuck. The potential field configurations are almost limitless and the device I/O's are poorly specified especially for out-of-band susceptibility and emission and longitudinal currents.
On the other hand for users, say me for instance, it's a different story. If I am changing just one link in the signal chain and anticipate relative stability in the rest of the system's environment then it's a matter of finding the best fit for my particular case. My dealer allows trials and when I find a good fit, I keep it. Maybe crude but It has proven quite effective...
Rick
"you are assuming that there is a strong price/performance correlation. There is not,
Amen!
Rick
And that equation changes over time as designers learn more and have access to better parts.
The speakers I bought this year for $4500 sound a lot better than the Snell B's I bought in 1992 for the same price. The W4S STP preamp I bought last year for $2k beats the snot out of the Classe DR6 I bought in 1994 for double the money. The amps I bought 2 years ago for $2k sound a lot better than the ones I bought for $7500 in 1993. The turntable I bought for $3k in 2011 sounds better than the TNT/ET2 I bought in 1995 for about $5500.
By my math, I have upgraded every major component in my system in modern times with components that are, at best, the same cost or as little as 1/3 the price I paid for the components long ago. And, my system sounds better than I ever dared to hope for when I started out. The common thread is that is that being retired means that I have to be more careful what I buy than I was before. Doubling or tripling the cost of components is a good way to go broke for only a marginal return. System setup often matters more than the cost of a component in getting good sound.
Everything is going to the dogs
What amps , what speakers ..?
I bought a pair of Genesis 6.1 speakers from Audiogon for $4500 including delivery. The Snell B's I had before are still fantastic speakers, but the metal dome tweeters can't compete with the round ribbon tweeters on the 6.1s. The Snells 10" woofer and subwoof can play low in the 20s for bass but each Genesis has a pair of aluminum 12" servo-controlled woofers that can be as clean as your room lets you play.
The amps I have now are a pair of B-stock (show demo) D-Sonic 600w mono-blocks that double at 4 ohms. I didn't audition these - I bought them on a hunch that they could fill some pretty big footsteps left empty when my MA-1 100 w/channel OTLs went belly up. I just flat out did not have the money to get them repaired. The 1200 watt D-Sonics were highly praised in a 2012 6Moons review and I threw the dice and ordered a pair of their baby brothers for around $1800 shipped. They did not go effortlessly into my system, although they had some stellar qualities right out of the box. They were so close to sounding good enough that I became obsessed with getting the maximum performance out of them before giving up and reselling them. It seems that they were far more transparent than my aging OTLs had been late in their life, and they were showing me problems that had been masked. Determined to give them the best chance to show what they could do, I read everything I could find on-line about class D amps, including interviews with some of the all-star amp designers who were dabbling in them like Merril Audio, Jeff Rowland, Steve McCormack to see what the 6-figure amps have. In all cases the class D amps seem to respond more than other amp classes to audiophile fundamentals: Footers, platforms, EMI/RF abatement, power cords, cables supported off the floor, etc. The common denominator was that small-signal interference such as EMI and vibration-spawned noise was far more detrimental to Class D amps and must be prioritized before further component sound quality can truly show its full potential.
Since I have upgraded my system as redically as I have, it is unfair to attempt to describe the sound of the Atma-sphere amps. They never had the footers and maple platforms or all the brass or the clean power or the benefit of properly dressed cables; it's just not fair. I hope that I will have the money to bring them back to life someday, but the rest of the system has become even more transparent and it is telling me to upgrade my power conditioning. I am waiting for a new UberBuss that will cost me about a hundred dollars more than I paid for my first power conditioner - an original Tice Power Block that cost a grand.
The point I am trying to make is that the strategy of throwing more and more money at your system in an eternal cycle is not the only way to improve your sound. The improvements in material science, manufacturing and process improvements and a lot of creative designers plus a thriving on-line marketplace for used equipment make it possible to actually improve your system despite the reduced budget that retirement brings, and to bring hope to others who are dreading the day when their old gear needs replacement. The world has moved on and I'm glad it has.
Everything is going to the dogs
...but I am not one to thinks that 'things are always better than they were, because now is now and then was then' - half of the pressure in the industry to change technologies comes from factors other than 'improving sound' - like convenience, archiving, energy efficiency, etc....
And, comparing new equipment to 20 year old equipment is fraught with difficulties, leaving aside that aural memory is extremely short, the Classe cannot possibly sound as good now as it did then (even electronics age).
Also, maybe your OTL were not matched to the right speakers. The research you did on the Class Ds, would have worked for the OTLs as well in terms of system matching (although precious few speakers match well with this technology).
I'd be surprised when much of anything made today still works in 20 years.
Hell, we might not even be using A/C anymore then.
The Genesis was originally a 10K speaker , OTL's can be pretty colored , their sonics are very dependent on the impedance curve of the speakers being used , because of their high output impedance , so no surprise their ....
Regards
I am getting worse performance for the same cost.
Only if you choose poorly.
component x from brand a let's say cost $3,000 USD, component y from brand b costs $3,000 USD
if bought at the same time in order to upgrade (to avoid inflation) the commodity components are at the same trajectory, meaning whatever advancements in science at the time has to still bear market forces for components, meaning the insides of the unit, if it is $1 for a cup of coffee at the time, you can get the same cup from someone else for $1 as well due to market forces.
this got me thinking, if you parallel upgrade after a number of years your investment will actually diminish and performance will diminish due to inflation with the currency.
You are assuming a very strong price/performance correlation and I think once you get into the $$$thousands for a component this correlation is very weak at best (despite what the magazines claim for the extravagantly priced gear).
As to advancement in science related to audio...many still think Western Electric was the pinnacle of reproduced music...I might believe that passive parts have taken a huge step forward but the rest?? Not too sure about it.
It is for sure true to that to get a "price equivalent" piece of gear years later means to spend more money due to inflation (a $3000 piece would be $4000 piece 10 years later, for example) but that doesn't mean the piece 10 years later will be better or worse...just more expensive (because it is unlikely your salary has risen the same amount in that time).
However, a way to move up, sonically speaking, while perhaps spending less money is to by top high end gear from 10-20 years ago for a nice price. If you are like me and assume that there is nothing really new under the sun with hifi then you can get some SOTA stuff for a lot less than new mediocre stuff. If you are the type that automatically thinks new = better then probably I cannot convince you.
I agree with Morricab.Point well made!
The physics and properties of sound have not changed, so my example:
Klipsch Heritage, used:750
new crossover 250
total cost : 1000 dollars for an excellent pair of speakers.
Will they sound as good, according to anechoic chamber computer analysis, as a new pair of expensive speakers?probably not. But, IMHO , can the human ear really make the difference?
Thoughts?
Regards.
"this got me thinking, if you parallel upgrade after a number of years your investment will actually diminish and performance will diminish due to inflation with the currency."
This got me to thinking, if any of this made any sense, we could start up an investment firm.
I would have guessed "parallel upgrade" as upgrading two components simultaneously..... (And then having no clue what's causing the improvements or degradations..... )
I've never really thought much about price in an upgrade.... I think correlating price to improvement will stunt the upgrade trajectory, whether it's "parallel" or not.
Don't let price influence your decisions.... Go with what you like..... And if it happens to be cheap, it's a bonus.
Agreed. Many people are depriving themselves of better performance because the new item costs (substantially) less than what they already have = they think it can't possibly be better. Very common to find this these days, for some components (not involving mechanicals). May have cheaper components, but may perform better...
Your message doesn't make much sense, care to try again?
-RW-
component x, cost $1k upgrading to component y at $1k, stuck in the same place, make sense? let me know if it doesn't
.
I don't understand. You're not sure but you are?
it is a quantum thought process I gather. It is either a 0 or a 1 but it can be 2.
I see. As long as we understand that the difference between 0 and 1 can be very different than 1 and 2. And that 0 and 2 may be entangled and may not be.
or all 3, they can be pulsating at the same time. it depends on the observer.
.
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: