Emotional rollercoaster

We are human beings always looking at what the othe rguy has.At times it depends on moneh.But there is alot of help here and on you tube.Which other than seeing it in person helps greatly.You see it working and playing most ofthe time.I have always tried to upgrade.Sometimes buying something i have regreted .Usally something used .lol.But thats me trying to spend  less.I have way to much audio equipment.

rixthetrick,

’As I have worked for some years in the industry, I have met successful salesman and managers of hifi stores.

Their purpose was to move product, and make revenue for the store and thus themselves.’


When a vacancy arose at a local dealer’s, (specialist separates) the only thing that I recall being on the owner’s mind were sales targets, not sound quality.


’I have often wondered what kind of a system could be built on a reasonably sane budget if we the consumer
could actually line up, side by side the cream of the crop, that actually perform at value driven pricing.’


This was not possible in the UK as companies such as Linn simply would not allow dealers to stock products from their immediate rivals. Who knows what happens nowadays? As far as I’m concerned, despite its lack of high end speakers, the nationwide chain Richer Sounds offers great sales service today.


As you can imagine UK audio magazines were bewildering to a newcomer back in the mid 80s, but somehow I stumbled onto one that made things a lot clearer.

Enter Hi-Fi Review. Published and written by a certain Chris Frankland it became my favourite for its forthright and opinionated views.

It’s basic premise was that the only products worth buying were those made either by Linn (turntable/arms/cartridges and speakers) and Naim (amps).

Occasionally a different manufacturer might get a look in, apart from Rega it’s hard to recall many. Maybe Epos, Kuzma, Inca Tech, and perhaps some Audio Technica higher end cartridges.

This simplified view of the audio ladder was shared by many dealers, one of whom was Derek Whittington. He ran a lovely civilised shop called (I think) Sound Advice in Loughborough.

It was a fair trek but he stocked Linn, Naim and Rega. Some of those demos in his concrete floored, bare brick-walled demo room have remained the most memorable.

Hi-Fi Review bit the dust a few years later (as did sadly Sound Advice) and perhaps as a direct consequence I managed to escape the Linn / Naim eco-system. More on the Chris Frankland and his Flat Response /Hi-Fi Review shenanigans here:

http://thetomtomclub.ning.com/m/blogpost?id=6506457%3ABlogPost%3A9465


With the development of the internet age I’m not sure whether published magazines domestic audio magazines have any useful role other than maybe fictional light reading.

So what’s different today?

Well, for one there’s far more trading in used equipment now, and there’s far more information, often contradictory, available online. Whichever way you look at it, the consumer is far better informed today.

Anyway, that was my experience, and as a consequence I’m all for sharing experiences, good or bad.

I’m still wondering how the OP (mid-fi-crisis) is now feeling. Has he come to terms with his disturbing realisation?

Let’s hope so.

@cleeds

In regards to cd318’s comments, there may be more truth to it at times than I’d like to contemplate.
As I have worked for some years in the industry, I have met successful salesman and managers of hifi stores. Their purpose was to move product, and make revenue for the store and thus themselves.

Not all actually cared particularly for the quality of the product, not all would share their actual opinion, and were rewarded financially for being helpful in letting a customer with less or little exposure to the plethora of options spend up big on attractive packaged devices that simply didn’t have the sound quality some of the less bling looking
understated devices had.

They were happy to sell pride of ownership to those who didn’t know or somehow didn’t appear to care about the sound.

I have often wondered what kind of a system could be built on a reasonably sane budget if we the consumer
could actually line up, side by side the cream of the crop, that actually perform at value driven pricing.
I do believe that many really talented craftsmen are good as designing and building audiophile equipment, however they aren’t skilled at marketing, and many great products have simply failed to capture sales in the market place.
However, they didn’t fail at excellence in the devices they crafted.

In as much as we all in here can’t possibly know which of all of the speakers, amplifiers, DACs, cables around the World would work the best to make for a system that is optimum for us - because we simply don’t have the resources to explore them all; the salesman in the stores can’t possibly know either.
There’s simply not enough time, floor space and access to everything out there.
As for me, I’m happy to be in here as opinionated as I can be, and have people boldly tell me I am dead wrong!
When people can back up with an intelligent response with reasoning, I’m so glad for challenge to my opinion and the opportunity to weigh it up and learn something more.

Due diligence takes time and experience to cultivate, especially in curating a system. One of the posters mentioned about building a system from reviews and specifications - which pulled together a system that was very good sounding to him and others. This selection of items took only a small percentage of the time to actually understand what to look for, how to make devices work together with a synergy that worked well.

I’d guess a person with good knowledge could build systems with reasonable consistency, how do the customers know who to trust?
Maybe the salesman is honest but simply doesn’t know as much as another who’s not selling, he’s in it for the love of it.
It’s not because of a lack of integrity, it could be a lack of knowledge, or just less knowledge.

I’ve made some hifi purchase mistakes, and some automotive ones and the list goes on... I’m on my second marriage - need I say more?

I don’t know what cd318’s experience actually was, but I can see there’s plenty of opportunity for misfortune in trusting
someone who either doesn’t care to know, or honestly is misinformed, and sadly will make the sale with the biggest margin.

Perception versus reality is a powerful thing. On that note, this may be my favorite group of old bastards...ever! It takes a long time to develop your ear but we are all seaking "Rubicon". Could you imagine a group of Millennials having this discourse? My people...thank you for the perspective! More "must have" recordings please! What lights your fire? What makes you crank that dial when you hear that song? Peace!

Good to know cd318, I'll check that album out / Thanks

boxer12,

Thanks for sharing, I might check them out myself after I've stopped playing the last Dylan album.

Good recording too.

cd318,
To clarify, I'm not a shill but an audiophile looking to get the most out of my system.
A few (there are many) of the better recordings for ambiance:
   Wax Poetic / Istanbul
   Larkin Grimm / The Last Tree
   Starlight Mints / Built on Squares
   moe. / Wormwood

I hope this helps

boxer12,
 
"High end audio isn't a sham. The sound I have now is something I could only dream about 20 or 30 years ago. The stage is wall to wall, deep, with ambiance accurate to the recording."

"BTW, it took a far amount of tweaks & cable changes to finally hear it (across the same speakers & room)."


Without details, your posts could be mistaken as mere shills for high-end audio, tweaking and dabbling in random cable upgrades.

It might be more helpful if you at least provided us with a list of a few of these recordings you are now able to reproduce so successfully at home.

Evaluating recordings is difficult enough already without details and specifics.

Perhaps this might help to clarify things.

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/audios-circle-of-confusion.html?m=1

Good point atdavid (robertwhatever). I wasn’t there, but the ambience is there in spades in the recordings. BTW, it took a far amount of tweaks & cable changes to finally hear it (across the same speakers & room).

How do you know the ambience was accurate to the recording @boxer12? How many of your recordings are live miked with only 2 microphones placed head width at a typical listener position? .... Oh and that you were there for the recording?

noble Tim....*G*=Grin, as in not a *S*mile or a *L*augh.....

It's OK....Old (age and era) previous 'webchatters' sometimes find emoji-speak time consuming....;)
That, and they've made Tribbles look slow in reproduction.....

I'm just obviously somewhat weird in this venue....not that I give a rats' arse over it....;)

I have a mint Mossberg bolt action that might be worth $60, but when a fast flyer drops on the Doyen Superposed, even the Labrador can feel the fluid swing....

but for grins a NAD 3020 with a few tweaks will hunt...

enjoy the music...

Lots of good information here. I agree that a properly treated room is very important, in fact it's a prerequisite. After that, I'm with mill in regard to everything being important. Obviously speakers will bring a dramatic change to the sound, but if they are transparent, they are only as good as the equipment (including cables, power cords, etc.) upstream. High end audio isn't a sham. The sound I have now is something I could only dream about 20 or 30 years ago. The stage is wall to wall, deep, with ambiance accurate to the recording. I don't regret any of it & typically listen to music 4 or more hours a day. 

barts,

Good for you. As Clint Eastwood used to say, "A man’s got to know his limitations."

Maybe it’s the same for audiophiles - knowing when enough is enough.


audiorusty,

'If you can imagine your perfect audio system in your mind, what would it sound like? If you don’t know, how will you know when you have a system that has achieved it?’

I can’t speak for anyone else but in my main system, which does so many other right things, the speakers are just a little obvious. Large 1970s chipboard cabinets probably leave a little to be desired when it comes to self effacement and neutrality.

The final frontier (or crossing the Rubicon as someone wittily said earlier), would be precisely that kind of loudspeaker that Siegfried Linkwitz talked about.

One that does most things right and somehow seemingly disappears just leaving behind a phantom musical image.

Just like a reasonable facsimile of performance in front of you.

In the meantime perhaps it’s better to take a leaf out of barts book.

I don't believe high end audio is a sham but it is very complex. The first question is, what is better sound? I'm guessing it means something different to each and everyone of us. If you can imagine your perfect audio system in your mind, what would it sound like? If you don't know, how will you know when you have a system that has achieved it? Figure out what good sound is to you. Be honest with yourself about your abilities and trust what you hear. Understand how important room acoustics are to what you are trying to achieve and how issues can be dealt with. Try to figure out who the other people are that share your audio philosophies and seek out their advice.

A great audio system can be very fulfilling and rewarding or it can be a huge pita. Good luck in your journey.

barts:" My car is still as fast, still is a blast, still blows my dress up, makes me smile and never stops impressing me! I am completely satisfied with its performance, couldn't care less about the newest bestest thing on the block."

Hello barts,

     Apparently, things tend to blow your dress up fairly regularly.  Have you ever considered wearing pants? 
    It would be a simple solution for a complexly simple guy.

Tim 

Maybe Xanax is the answer. 

barts,

'I'm not on another upgrade path....this is it, the last rodeo, just like every other time. Time to sit back and and reap what I have sown.'

cd318 ,
"Yes, but what if a loudspeaker finally comes along that does most things right?"

Good question, here's my analog (no pun) to that:
Say I go out and buy a new Porsche 911 Turbo S and it's fast as hell, a blast to drive, blows my dress up, makes me smile and never stops impressing me.   The following year Porsche comes out with a new version that has 25hp more, is better on the skid pad and is raved about in the auto rags.  My take: My car is still as fast, still is a blast, still blows my dress up, makes me smile and never stops impressing me! I am completely satisfied with its performance, couldn't care less about the newest bestest thing on the block.  That's my approach to many things in life: bikes cars stereo house wife. I'm just a complexly simple guy.  
  

glupson,

’If we ignore speakers. do those British magazines ever do group tests of other higher-end equipment?’


No, sadly they don’t - and never have as far as I know.

For sure experienced reviewers like Ken Kessler will cover high-end products. I don’t know how well he’s known in the US, but being originally from the states he’s more likely to cover lesser known products from further afield but he’s a rarity, and doesn’t do group tests.

Other experienced reviewers like Alan Sircom will also take the occasional look at more esoteric gear but again no group tests.

In fact the UK press was so resolutely insular that many of us had no idea of what a Mackintosh amplifier was. Even a monumentally important companies such as Acoustic Research and JBL got very scarce coverage. Magnepan, Thiel, Macintosh, Wilson etc all got similarly short shrift.

For a long time 70s through to 80s the print media continuously pushed a very simple system building philosophy.

For a turntable you started with either a Dual cs505 or a Rega Planar 3 and then upgraded to a Linn LP12 when funds allowed.

For an amplifier you could start with either a Nytech / NAD 3020 and upgrade to an A&R A60 before moving on to pre/power stuff from Naim Audio.

Speakers were more complicated as there were various options ranging from AR, Heybrook, Mordaunt Short, Celestion, Gale, Goodmans, Wharfedale and many more.

Unsurprisingly many magazines still suggested Linn (who had an entire range back then) as a final loudspeaker destination. Thankfully I was never tempted to buy one. Especially so after hearing the fabled Linn Isobariks for the first time in the mid 1980s.

The feeling of being underwhelmed upon hearing such a highly vaunted (and highly priced) loudspeaker has never left me.

As I write this it becomes clear that there was a method behind the machinations of the British press, one that probably still applies today.

It seems as if they were only really interested in products which were available in the UK. That’s where their advertising came from, so it was in effect a cartel of UK manufacturers and UK dealers pushing mainly UK goods.

I think it’s fairly well known now how Linn/Naim in particular, financially pressured dealers with almost draconian measures to stock their products whilst excluding those from their rivals.

Bear in mind there was also considerable barely disguised hostility towards foreign products all in the name of misguided patriotism. In particular Japanese goods (cars, motorbikes and hi-fi) seemed to get a very bad press during the 1970s /80s.

Nevertheless they were able to eventually overcome these handicaps through mainly word of mouth and the odd helpful consumerist programme on TV such as ’That’s Life!’

It also didn’t hurt that they were giant multinationals too. Lesser companies, UK or overseas must have had a torrid time getting a look in.

I bet they still do, on both sides of the pond. I’d go further and argue that there is still a cartel in operation today comprised of manufacturers/dealers and press that renders it extremely difficult for newcomers to succeed.

In fact what are the big new audio success stories of recent times? I can only think of 2 - PMC Speakers and Zu Audio. So congrats to both!

Everyone else could do worse than carefully study them both.

Hello asvjerry,

     I may be showing my age, but what the heck does *G* mean in your posts?  Giggles?

Thanks.
 Tim

*L*(sympathetic variant)  @mid-fi-crisis...Your plantive post reminded me of a line in a concert vid I like....

"They know what they want, but they don't know what is what.....it just sucks.....WT*!"

One can spend phenominal $ 'chasing the spirit' of experience etched into ones' mind of a event in one's past.....

"It was like 'they' were Right There....in the room!  I could almost hear them breathing!"

Imho....like most things involving technology used to evoke experience...one can only expect varying degrees of success to do so.  The equipment, the room, the media can only get one so far....beyond that....

It's like a movie, a book, the 'thing' that lets one forget that you are involved with the suspension of disbelief....acceptance of a recreation of an event, a performance, that which carved a groove into your synapses....

Music, and the performance of it, is a funny thing in its' way.  It has this way of penetrating deep into ones' psyche', invoking all manner of responses.  Like a odor, a word, a thought, it triggers responses you'd thought improbable or forgotten.

And....it doesn't surprise me in the least that some or one can spend inordinate amounts to reprise these states...*S*  And yet, be surprised that those same responses can suddenlly be invoked by something as basic as a car radio....or a desktop Bose....or an ancient receiver driving an old pair of speakers. ;)

That mass betwixt your ears is a marvelous thing.
And it will never cease to amaze you. ;)

Perhaps a case in point...if you're up to it....*beckoning finger, curling*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEutbPu2YwI&feature=emb_rel_end

@ 34:15, an 'intro' to the familiar...the woman on the left @ 34:50 certainly feels so....*G*
@39:35, one is reminded of Fate....;)

For Someone @ that event....it's their 'high water mark', whether you agree or Not.....and the latter doesn't mean anything to anyone but You.

BTW.....FBS is only 10ish yrs. younger than yours truly.
I prefer excitement in my artful noises....;)
But, I'm just like that....*G*
I like my rollercoasters steep.....
Cheers, J

I suppose most all of us on this here forum have had our moment at the edge of the Rubicon. It’s about what you want to hear, not what you spend.  You spend what you can to hear what you want to hear.  All the rest is the details. Last weekend at a friend’s house we all had a grand time listening to a plastic receiver and CD player and pair of pressboard speakers on my friend’s patio.  Someone said how good it sounded. They said that because it sounded better than they thought it should, given the obvious quality of the system.  In that moment, that very inexpensive and old stereo fit the bill. Perfectly.  The next day at home, listening to my system, well....  I was reminded I had already crossed the Rubicon, many years ago. 
Happy Friday, happy listening 

"U.S. mags would never contemplate this as they'd immediately lose all kinds of advertising revenue..."

Wouldn't the same happen to those British ones? I know nothing about differences.

The moment that you do group tests, it becomes comparative, and one ends up a winner, another the loser, and the others in between.  U.S. mags would never contemplate this as they'd immediately lose all kinds of advertising revenue, plus many manufacturers would stop sending them freebie examples (long-term loaners) to review.
Of course, given the access of the most of the population in the U.S. to easy audition of multiple competitive components--which is close to zero if you don't live in NY, Chicago or LA--then precisely this kind of review would be the most helpful and a genuine service that a magazine could provide.

barts,

'I'm not on another upgrade path....this is it, the last rodeo, just like every other time. Time to sit back and and reap what I have sown.'


Yes, but what if a loudspeaker finally comes along that does most things right?

Texture, timbre, dynamics, bandwidth, dispersion, vanishingly low distortion esp through the 'presence' zone.

What if it can also pull off that all-important disappearing act too?

I guess we'd have to start saving up!

https://www.soundgym.co/blog/item?id=seven-frequency-zones-you-must-identify

@millercarbon " Money is just the very crude indicator we use as a substitute for performance. Its a crutch. Its not really the cost that matters, its the performance. As long as everything performs at about the same level then your odds of finding magic go way up."

Chuck, couldn't agree more.

I have spent considerable time, energy and treasure building stereos.
Interestingly, I have always been satisfied with the result. You may ask "If the first one was that good why move on?". The answer is as simple as the stages of life we all go through. But my tastes and desires have not changed in 50 years as far as stereo/music are concerned.

I'm not on another upgrade path....this is it, the last rodeo, just like every other time. Time to sit back and and reap what I have sown.

Music is not the first thing, it's the only thing.  

another plus one for room acoustics. I have large 38X22 room and a high end system well tweaked and some room treatments such as in front of speakers and first reflections that I can get away with in a family room. Sounds really good. We are having wood floors put into 3 upstairs bedrooms rooms at the moment so all that extra furniture, mattresses etc is now crammed in my listening room, resulting in even more absorption and diffusion, and guess what - sounds even better!

glupson,

"British magazines had comparison tests of speakers. I am not sure how believable they were and if they ever had high end"

In my experience they were never high end. No one does high end group tests - for anything. It can’t be for lack of interest, can it?

Hi-Fi World (prob the most quirkiest of the bunch), Hi-Fi Choice, Hi-Fi News (best for vintage gear) and What Hi-Fi? (though I’m not too sure if this one is an audio magazine - nice pictures though!) all do feature the odd loudspeaker group test.

These are always current flavour of the month budget designs. You’ll find never a top model from the likes of B&W, Harbeth, Monopulse, Kerr, Spendor, ATC, Tannoy etc featured in a group test - let alone anything from abroad or the pro audio market.

They will also never include a familiar classic design such as the Quad ESL, LS3/5, Spendor BC1 etc for comparison.

In a word or two these tests are mostly useless. At least for any meaningful critical evaluation purposes.

As entertainment, they have their purposes. Ken Kessler for example, in person or in print, is always interesting.

When it comes to sound quality, some of the reviews here on Audiogon are far more relevant.

In fact it was initially stumbling on something that @prof had written about his Thiel CS3.7s timbral and textural qualities that led me to sign up here.

Here was someone posting online on a forum about essential sonic qualities that hardly any journalist had ever considered worth writing about!!

The only one exception I was aware of was the one and only Harvey Rosenberg.

I guess, like most of us, the best we can all hope for is that our words are of some help or interest to others out there.

So yes, my thanks too to @mid-fi-crisis for sharing his experiences. I’m certain they could be of great benefit to those still at the lower end of the audio ladder.

Or is it just a never-ending merry-go-round?

Think of it . What is music made of . Apart from the obvious which is sound it has tempo , rhythm with melodies , submelodies . All this with a particular tone .
If you can get the playback equipment to play the elements that make up music you'll have a musical system . The capability of comunicating these element does not have anything to do with the price of the equipment but rather the synergy between the parts .

During my life I've had small portable transistor radio capable of comunicating these elements and heard thousands of dollars worth of equipment that has left me cold . 
Its not that expensive equipment sound bad in its ability to comunicate music , they can sound great but the fact that its expensive does not garantee excellence in comunicating music . 

We of course play a role in all of this . Many lose sight that its all about the music and get so involved buying and changing equipment that they end up spending thousands looking for something and never finding it . 
This mentality makes certain audiophile easy prey for unsrcupulous dealers who know that you don't have to spend tens of thousands in order to enjoy good music replay .

You seem to have stumble upon a good combination that makes music , thats great but in the event have learn a valuble lesson . 

cd318,

"For example where, in the miles and miles of column inches can you find a group test review of high end speakers?"


At some point, I have not cheked in some time, British magazines had comparison tests of speakers. I am not sure how believable they were and if they ever had high end, but they existed.

Could nostalgia be part of what you are feeling/hearing with your old equipment?  So I wonder what I would hear and how I would feel if I could hear the LPs on the system I had when I was 25 years old?  I am darn sure it would bring back memories and feelings long since gone (girlfriends parties, friends, etc) ... that are very much missed.  No equipment I have today (no matter how good) could quite bring back the sound that goes with those memories that drive the emotional response to the music.  So listening to Led Zeppelin on a factory FM radio may resurrect the feeling of cruising with all the windows open, my girlfriend at my side and a joint in my hand more effectively and enjoyably than any expensive system ever could.

This is a refreshing thread. When big money meets big expectations, the disappointment can be really hard to swallow. When you realize you've been chasing an ideal that's not attainable and you're poorer for it, hurts. The OPs post is real. The roller coaster doesn't slow down by itself. The hype keeps on hyping. 

I'm starting to realize this in my own pretty new audiophile journey. Trying to avoid early mistakes of big money on unknowns. Buying used where possible. Trusting my ear. Becoming less sentimental about gear I've purchased.

Thanks for sharing, OP. 

     Well said, baylinor!  I agree completely.

     You can either treat and control the room or let the untreated room control the sound.  You're correct, room treatments are as critical for good results just as a good, solid foundation is critical for a building.

Tim

Good point that the room is the part of the system you have least control over so inevitably it’s always about putting the right setup in place for the room and no two rooms are exactly the same. 

Glad you like the sound of your system. If you like what you have, stay away from audio forums, trade mags, and audio shows. I have a half dozen systems in my house ranging from an Apple HomePod, to home theater, an office system, and a dedicated audio room plus others. I enjoy them all, I also enjoy listening to my iPhone with an attached dac thru a nice set of headphones on a plane.But the quality of each corresponds to what you pay for each, meaning, there are big differences climbing the audio ladder So to speak. For example, my $1000 office system sounds pretty good especially for the price, but when I listen to my dedicated audio system that costs 40x more, it sounds 100x better, not even close in comparison. I have heard systems that I like better by a big margin but at a 4x or more the price of mine. When is enough enough?

I am a newbie here, so my word won't carry much weight. But here it is. Upgrading is definitely worth it as long as you keep it within your budget. But starting with the listening room acoustics is the best way to go in my experience.  It took me to turn 65 to get serious about that and a year later my listening experience evolved immensely. It doesn't make much sense to upgrade the equipment if the room acoustics are bad. Too many people completely disregard that aspect in search of their ultimate sound. It will just lead to bad decisions and disappointment. The room acoustics are your foundation. Get that right and things will fall into place much easier.

Trust what YOU  actually hear and spend accordingly

     Some very good points there, mapman, Wise words spewing out of your pie hole, well done!

" We don’t know what we really want a lot of the time. You can’t hit the target until you know what it is."

     True, but I wanted to add that, even if we know the target, there are different methods to achieve it. For example, my target was an overall system experience that was dimensional, with solid and stable images in its stereo sound stage imaging, along with a sound that was on the warm side with a bit of sweetness and bloom. Sorry about the cliche audio terms but I think you and most others understand my meaning.
     From what I learned and heard along the way, I initially thought this type of target would require tubes somewhere in the chain. So I bought a VTL preamp, swapped out its standard tubes for expensive NOS Mullards and combined it with a series of high powered ss class AB amps. This approach actually did provide the target system qualities I sought and I always assumed the tubes were adding these qualities to the music I played.
     Recently, I had the urge to try out a different approach which consisted of pairing a very neutral, detailed, low noise and low distortion ss preamp (a ML 326S) with a pair of very neutral, detailed, low noise and low distortion ss class D monoblock amps (D-Sonic M3-600-M). My theory being that this approach would minimize noise and distortion, add very little if anything to the inputted signals, manifesting itself in a close approximation of the audio ideal of ’a straight wire with gain’.
     thought going in that this neutral approach would likely result in the quality of the recordings becoming the main determinant of the overall sound quality of my system and, therefore, a limiting factor.  However, I was willing to accept this compromise.
     What was the result of all this redundant low noise, low distortion and general neutrality?

     Well what do you know, I now perceive the overall sound of my system as having very low noise and distortion, having a high level of detail and generally being very neutral, like a ’straight wire with gain’. But the main lesson I’ve learned during this approach is that it allows the recording and music to be heard and judged on their own merits. I’ve learned that what qualities I thought tubes were adding to the overall sound of my system, the dimension, warmth, sweetness and bloom, are actually qualities that are inherent in the music itself.
     I no longer believe that adding even ordered harmonics are necessary for musical enjoyment. I now believe high faithfulness or fidelity to the inputted signals is a better approach because it’s a simpler, more conducive to being measured and it results in equally enjoyable musical experiences. It’s also important to recognize that high quality recordings are essential in conveying these qualities with a high degree of fidelity.
     My current opinion is that, once a high quality audio system has been assembled and created, that’s exactly where the focus belongs; on the quality of the recording and the qualities of the music. The more knowledge and experience I gain in audio, the more I believe hi-fi, as in high fidelity, is a very accurate and appropriate name for our hobby.

Tim

It’s much easier to buy integrated gear that works well rather than integrate it yourself.


The Bel Canto c5i digital integrated amp is a good example. Has most everything you need and will work well with most any speaker. 

Why do people with no experience think they can pick the right gear that will work well together? It’s not easy and most reviews are of little value for that.

You people keep equating sound quality with price.  If you would learn more about parts and how they impact the sound you would find your ultimate happiness.  I remember going to a local audio club in New Jersey and one of the guys asked me to look at his $10K power amplifier from a well known manufacturer (probably 40 years in business now) and when I took the cover off, I said unfortunately out loud, what a piece of junk, not knowing the owner was behind me.  Parts inside were just basic caps and resistors, transformer was cheap.  So that is when he challenged me if you can do better go ahead and the rest has been history as they say.

I have a friend I call vintage Joe.  He goes to estate sales and he finds fantastic bargains.  Some of the stuff was very high priced equipment years ago.  For example Harmon Kardon series XX preamp and amplifier for $200 in mint shape with boxes and manuals.  Now that was a find and they sound great.  Old speakers like the KEF 104/2 105s, Sony, Rogers, etc.  All those old box speakers still sound excellent and so much musical in the mid-range makes me rethink everything also.

Happy Listening.

I never upgrade components willy-nilly.  I'm not a trigger-puller.  When I get to a point where I really like what I hear I pretty much get off the carousel for a while.  It doesn't hurt that, ever since I left the mid-fi universe for the tweaky audiophile one, I choose my components as carefully as I can and I seldom have regrets.  I only have upgrade-itis when a component breaks.  I've never been less than 90% at ease with what my audio system delivers at any particular point in the journey.  It's only when a new technology emerges (such as digital downloads, streaming, etc.) that lust truly begins to manifest.

millercarbon 5,108 posts

07-09-2020 11:53am

I’ve proved this more than once. Two of the best most fun systems I ever heard were ones I built for $1200 and $2500. The one for $1200 was set up in my listening room to burn in before delivery. For 2 weeks this little one was so darn captivating I never turned my main system on!

I know that millercarbon and I have different views on what is important in an audio system, but I believe his post reinforces a point I was making above whether he intended to or not. Take a look at millercarbon’s system pictures. I can’t speak to how well optimized his room is acoustically, but it certainly looks like it addresses all the basics well. In my opinion, that is why that $1,200 system sounds so captivating.


With odd exception, I could take friends speakers and amplifiers, hook the speakers up with $1/foot speaker cable, use stock cables, and use an LG V30 as the source, and it will sound not just a bit better, but a lot better in my dedicated custom built listening room, then it will in their homes, no matter the fancy sources, cables, or other doodads they have. It won’t even be close. There may be some minor "imperfections" in the sound, but w.r.t. an immersive experience, it won’t be close.

cleeds,

'Wow, you sound really unhappy. You might consider pursuing another hobby altogether.'

Yes, me and the OP both! This kind of disillusionment almost inevitably awaits every unsuspecting audiophile caught up in the upgrade path.

However, just like the OP, my passion for music has not dimmed. In fact it is as strong as ever. I now can enjoy music on a variety of systems : my phone/ headphones/Bluetooth speaker, my PC, or on my separates system.

The issue here is the way some of us feel we were mislead.

As the OP said,  

'I was listening to about $60 of hi-fi equipment that sounded extraordinarily nice and made me wonder why I'd spent a hundred and fifty times that much "improving" my main system over the years.'

That is the question here, isn't it?

You see when many of us started our journey towards seeking our version audio nirvana we had very little idea of what path to follow, with no map/guide and very little idea of what the end destination might be.

In the absence of both knowledge and experience (two essential pre-requisites before embarking) many of us tended to accept what we had read. After all, these were experienced learned men of the hi-fi world speaking. Weren't they?

There lies the problem.

Today, thanks to the internet, anyone new to this hobby can look around and share others experiences and be far better prepared for their journey than their predecessors ever were.

More skeptical and less gullible, I hope.
As they say, it's always better to think for yourself. Ultimately it's far more rewarding despite the extra effort.



mulveling,

Good for you brother, knowing of that particular all too common 'audiophile demo fodder' trap.

It took me ages and ages to realise why they hated playing mainstream recordings at demos or shows.

In fact at one demo I was even told, "If you're going to listen to that 60s stuff, you may as well stay with the system you've got."

At the time that didn't compute, but I now realise that those words were not very far off the mark.

I still love audio, I still love music, and though I wish my journey had been easier, I still dream of that audio nirvana.

Just not so vividly now.

We don’t know what we really want a lot of the time. You can’t hit the target until you know what it is.

Random upgrades may well get you nowhere fast.

Better to first hear the sound you want and know what it is then pursue achieving it.

You have to listen to a lot of things usually to know. Both live music and recorded.

Then read a lot and learn about how hifi components work and forge out a plan.

Then make changes or tweaks from there until you finally hit the bullseye.

Also be aware along the way that all recordings sound different. They range from really bad to really good. Don’t get caught trying to put lipstick on a pig. Learn what specific recordings sound like on a good system and use that as a reference.

Good things don’t come easy. Good luck!

If you build a high-end setup that sounds like sterile high-tech "hifi", and sounds by far its best on stuff like Diana Krall (and other audiophile demo fodder), then you’ve opened yourself up to the possibility that decent midfi gear from yesteryear that plays "loud and proud" will actually present a better connection to most of the music you actually love, even if it starts rolling off at say 14 kHz and has some boominess in the bass.

    mid-fi-crisi,

    If discovering you don't need to spend big bucks to get decent sounding results in this hobby plops you down on an allegorical emotional roller coaster ride, perhaps you need a new hobby.
     Perhaps you'd find knitting more soothing to your psyche.

Tim

cd318

I think it is largely a sham. One largely perpetuated by reviewers, snake oil tweak merchants, unscrupulous dealers ...all too many other vested 3rd party interests who may want to offload their mistakes ... they know exactly what they’re doing, and where their bread is buttered. (It’s now a part of a greater malaise affecting the whole mainstream media - but that’s another story) ... Tales of disgruntled, disillusioned, exhausted audiophiles who eventually jump off the upgrade train and downsize with great relief and no loss of sonic satisfaction are legion.

I too have many bitter memories / experiences as a consumer. My whole LP12 saga leaves me fragile ... the truth about cables, amplifiers, CD players, MP3 rates, DACs etc has been well understood for decades.

Unfortunately, there are many, many selfish vested interests in suppressing these truths.

Wow, you sound really unhappy. You might consider pursuing another hobby altogether.

Your "truths" obviously aren’t "supressed" because here they are, and I’ve even copied some of those "truths" in this post.

Is that the Magnat with the dome mid-range? I can't remember if they came that way or lots of people upgraded them.  Dome mid-ranges are often good at wider/smoother dispersion, a key element usually of a successful loudspeaker in a typical room.

@mid-fi-crisis, may I ask how much you have spent on acoustic room treatments?  All that tweak stuff is meaningless until you fix your acoustics and then once you do that, you may find you don't need to chase tweaks as much.

While all amplifiers do not sound the same, in a particular style\architecture of amp, the differences when not pushed (by volume or speaker), can be small between competent amps and really good amps.

In my opinion, those that say "everything matters", are plainly wrong or at least miscommunicating. Everything does not matter to the same degree, not even close.  #1 is the recording. #2 is the speakers and #2a is the room. Spend a fortune on great speakers, and little on your room, then your system will never be good. You will probably continuously chase cables, and tweaks, often exclaiming Eureka! ... till the next Eureka!, but alas, the eureka is temporary.  #3 is source  (assuming a competent amp). #4 is amp. We assume at this point you have competent, but not expensive cables.

This concept of sound-stage and imaging, it does not come from expensive cables, nor expensive amplifiers, nor even expensive sources (competent is enough). It comes from the recording, speakers, and room.  There are many who have convinced themselves otherwise, and they will repeatedly claim X greatly expanded the sound-stage, but lets be honest, how many times can you claim that for the same system? I hate to think how bad it was before. 


One well placed acoustic panel will make a larger impact on how your system sounds than changing from any competent cable to an expensive cable. It won't even be close. It will be a bigger change than changing from a competent to expensive amplifier (assuming both similar in architecture/sonic style) in many cases. We are not talking "tweaking" the sound here, we are talking readily apparent and significant change.

Spending big bucks is not a sham. Being told you can't have a great system unless you spend big bucks on "certain" items .. yes, that is a sham.