2. misc-audio
  3. 141393-91232

Am I missing something here?

Hello to all Audiophiles on Audiogon.

I am currently using the following system to listen to my music.
Carver M500t
Nad 7130 as preamp.
Arcam r-blink Bluetooth DAC
 Boston A200 Speakers

I am a Bass player now for over 40 years playing various styles and one who listens to all types of music.

So I guess what I am trying to get at here is why am I left so underwhelmed by very expensive highly rated very “thin” sounding audiophile systems that I have encountered when auditioning systems considered for purchase?

I have listened to various tube amps, small to monstrous Piano Lacquered speakers..side firing woofers...etc..I have owned Maggie’s. and various box speakers..(still do) but yet I just can’t get  a similar reproduction in many instances of auditions for instance on a song like “Slap Happy” by Milt Hinton for Bass repro with not only weight, timbre, image and soundstage that my system gives me...also in the same respect minus the bass as say “Blue and Grey by The Who that justifies spending the dollars on a much more expensive system.

I feel my system gives a more true reproduction. Am I jaded from my actual playing music and hearing what that sounds like when comparing to a recorded listening experience?

All said for a system of mine that has cost me roughly $1,200.00 I would say it sounds better than most systems I have heard in the 10k+ region.

Thanks for listening.

Howard

ishkabibil
n80
2,116 posts
 
@onhwy61 
what an engineer intends his recording to sound like is rarely relevant to the circumstances and equipment the end listener can provide.

"Totally disagree! High fidelity still means something to some of us."

I don't think there is anything exclusive of high fidelity in my comment that you quoted. I just think that recordings are listened to in a wide variety of ways. A producer has no idea what your system is or what it sounds like and he can't record for every possibility. So the idea that what you are listening to is exactly as the engineer/producer wanted it to be heard is remote. This becomes especially true of older recordings in which the engineer/producer could not even have conceived of the gear we are using. None of that excludes high sound quality from the recording.

Off topic, sometimes I would like to hear about your user name. I've traveled highway 61 a number of times. Mostly for blues, food and literature. Lived there for a while too.
mrmb's avatar
mrmb
299 posts
 
....for a system....that has cost me roughly $1,200.00 I would say it sounds better than most systems I have heard in the 10k+ region.
Congratulations on assembling a system that is personally satisfying....  
rodman99999
6,123 posts
 
Who would know better, the sensations a rhythm section, tympani or pipe organ generate, than a musician or competent sound technician?
gdnrbob
4,444 posts
 
That you are a bass player probably makes you especially sensitive to that region of sound,
I am thinking that a sub with EQ would be something that would give you what you want.
I am trying to resist, but I am leaning toward the new Vandy 3 subs. I have the older model, but think being able to correct room nodes would provide me with even greater sound reproduction quality.
The price isn't cheap, nor is it exorbitant.
Just a thought...
Bob
terry9
2,333 posts
 
It may be the room. Seriously.

The science is that most rooms are poor, and most of the remainder range from OK to good. Only 1 or 2 % are very good - and it may be that yours is one of those. Lucky you!
More to discover