newbie 1st post 2 channel reccomendations.


hey guys:
putting together a 2 channel system for the bedroom, wife and kids took over MY downstairs theater and banished me to the bedroom. at first distraught, i was relegated to ht forum surfing and arrived here. since i had been mainly using the theater for listening to music anyway, i eagerly surfed the auidiogon waves all hours of the evening. a few days ago,the warden (my wife) gave me permission ( am i p-whipped or what) to put together a stereo system in the bedroom. i have home theater experience but have never put together 2 channel system and know nothing about tubes but will soon be enlightened
a little info:
room size: 18'x14'3" with 8' ceiling (flat)would prefer speakers on long side of room cannot be more than 2.5' from front wall lot's of room from side walls, bed in middle of room but can be rearranged.
musical preferences: classical all types, jazz, pink floyd, eagles, elton john
budget: 4k not including accessories
system: intergrated amp or seperates, cd or sacd or universal player, monitor speakers with possible later addition of sub.
mostly moderate occasionally loud listening levels

i have access to almost anything since i live relatively close to la and san diego but everything is also 1-2 hours away. therefore, all help in narrowing down options is appreciated. i have set up an audition of proac studio 100 with jolida jd502b integrated amp and jd 100 cd player next week. will possibly audition thiels on monday. also looking at taylo ref monitors and classe', plinius and possibly bryston. may later use this in new theater so may chuck budget and purchase good multi channel amp eg. BAT vk6200 or bryston or something similiar.
all input will be greatly appreciated including equipment and room setup/speaker placement suggestions. basically, tell me anything you want because the kids just got a bunch of dvd's and i'll be here all night.
i know this encompasses alot so just do your best.

aloha keith
Ag insider logo xs@2xatagi
Natnic:

Who can disagree with "garbage in garbage out?" Not I. I suggest that a competent "modern" digital front end will not reveal its more modest price point, consistently or reliably in a double blind test.

At the bottom of this post I have copied some criteria for a double blind test which I found at http://www.pcabx.com/#ten_req

The #8 "requirement" is crucial. Volume levels must be checked closely and matched exactly. Preferably by instrument using a test tone. (You can't properly match volume with music because it is a "moving target.") Very slight differences in volume play havoc with any attempt at subjective comparison of hi fi components. The oldest "sales trick" in the hi fi biz is to have slightly more gain coming from the purportedly better component. It makes it "sound better" to the customer. You will need a switching box (Radio Shack) so that the test subject (you in this case) can choose between source "A" and source "B" as explained below.

At the same time, the subject must not know which digital source is CDP "A" and which one is CDP "B." That means that someone other than you and any other test takers has to do the set-up. We’ll chauvinistically call him the set-up man. The two components must be run through the same electronics at the same time to the same speakers. Sure, match the wires too, just to cover all bases. Make sure that the length of the wires is the same.

The test takers enter the room one at a time. A tester is present to help but the tester can't
know A from B either. Two identical music CDs need to be cued up and started at the same time.

The test taker(s) (you and as many other "trained listeners" who you can gather) can then switch from “A” to “B” and back and forth as many times and as often and at whatever intervals he wishes (with the switching box) while listening to the type of program material described below. I personally think it helpful if it is program material that you are very familiar with, too. Keep a log in which you commit in writing (or the tester does, based on what you say) whether "A" or "B" is better. Maybe make notes as to why "A" or "B" is better. The tester should preserve the notes, and when there is time, record the results for each individual and for the entire group. Then, finally, the set-up man "translates" the results with the use of his record of which CDP was "A" and which was "B" in each round of the test.

Now round #1 is over. The set-up man comes back to the room and either switches "A" to "B" or doesn't switch “A” to “B” according to a random sequence previously written down. No one else knows if “A” is still “A,” or if now “A” is in fact “B.”

Then proceed to round #2, following the same procedures that were followed in round #1. Do this for a reasonable and fair number of rounds. Say, twenty. Tally the results. Has the more expensive component been identified as “better” significantly more frequently than the laws of probability allow for?

With as many emotional factors removed as possible (the $20,000 Zapmaster looks gorgeous and is SOTA and it, therefore, MUST, sound better) and the crucial volume levels matched, your job is really in front of you. Hard work, but fun.

Which speakers you use to conduct the test is not crucial as they will be a constant. To be as fair as possible, to your point of view, the speakers should be as good as possible, as revealing as possible, as transparent as possible, etc. Do it in your own home with your own gear or at the home of a friend. It is not likely that any dealer is going to let anyone in his/her Salon to commandeer it for the several hours the test may take, especially if the high priced spread they are selling may fall victim to the procedure.

I don't have any specific suggestions for the digital front ends but I think fair criteria would be a well regarded $2,000 CDP and a well regarded $400 - $800 CDP. We are not looking for "giant killers" here. Just fairness.

(quote from http://www.pcabx.com/#ten_req)

"Ten (10) Requirements For Sensitive and Reliable Listening Tests

(1) Program material must include critical passages that enable audible differences to be most easily heard.

(2) Listeners must be sensitized to a audible differences, so that if an audible difference is generated by the equipment, the listener will notice it and have a useful reaction to it.

(3) Listeners must be trained to listen systematically so that audible problems are heard.

(4) Procedures should be "open" to detecting problems that aren't necessarily technically well-understood or even expected, at this time. A classic problem with measurements and some listening tests is that each one focuses on one or only a few problems, allowing others to escape notice.

(5) We must have confidence that the Unit Under Test (UUT) is representative of the kind of equipment it represents. In other words the UUT must not be broken, it must not be appreciably modified in some secret way, and must not be the wrong make or model, among other things.

(6) A suitable listening environment must be provided. It can't be too dull, too bright, too noisy, too reverberant, or too harsh. The speakers and other components have to be sufficiently free from distortion, the room must be noise-free, etc..

(7) Listeners need to be in a good mood for listening, in good physical condition (no blocked-up ears!), and be well-trained for hearing deficiencies in the reproduced sound.

(8) Sample volume levels need to be matched to each other or else the listeners will perceive differences that are simply due to volume differences.

(9) Non-audible influences need to be controlled so that the listener reaches his conclusions due to "Just listening".

(10) Listeners should control as many of the aspects of the listening test as possible. Self-controlled tests usually facilitate this. Most importantly, they should be able to switch among the alternatives at times of their choosing. The switchover should be as instantaneous and non-disruptive as possible.”

HAVE FUN. Keep us posted! ;)
Sorry buddy ,thats just a bunch of Audio Speak that makes as much sense as George Bush.

Reality is
when presented with all constant, a Digital volume control that brought the sound to same level for each test. Consisistently the bettr source made the same 850.00 Sound better.

The sources where alternated in no particular order.

Everything was constant.

all he did was swich back and forth and even left same source attached to see if he could catch us. Never did.

SOURCE SOURCE. READ WWW.UHFMAG.COM

There are some awesome articles on that issue.

Reminds me when I replaced a 179.00 Costco Nikko Player 5 years ago with a Mcintosh 7008, Everyone who came over asked if I had new speakers.

They where 20 year old speakers that had been heard by same folks for years.
Point made.


Music is like Process control. total system error is key, the less error you start with the better the system accuracy will be.
Nantic: Sorry you feel that way about it.

I think you are totally ignoring (among other things) the possibility of psychological influences in an environment not under your control. Believe it or don't: your expectations of how something will sound can influence how you think it sounds. Especially during a short "test" situation in a dealer's showroom where you are not intimately familiar with all the other components and the acoustics of the room. The most valid subjective "test" of the strengths and weaknesses of a component is: live with it for a few months.

How do you know that the volume levels were the same? I hope you are not saying that you know the levels were the same because the volume control on a pre-amp was set to the same position! Odds are the levels were NOT the same if that was your "control"---because of differences in voltage output from the various CD players

I urge you to reconsider, if not now, at least at some future date and go through a double blind, or at least a single blind test. (in a single blind test the tester knows what the source is but the subject does not) I think you will be shocked at how differently you will hear or not hear differences in the components.

I ain't exactly calling you Chicken, but. . . you picked up the gauntlet and said that you would subject yourself to a blind A-B test and report the results. What happened? Is it scientific method that you object to?

I have never before been accused of sounding like George Bush.....;)

Not to hit below the belt, your reaction to the application of just a little scientific method to subjective evaluation reminds me of Dubyah hurling the epithet of "Fuzzy Math" at Gore to indicate that all them thar’ numbers and statistics wuz jes’ fancy talk designed to befuddle and confuse the Common Man. In this case, since we are discussing digital components, I can't resist the rejoinder of, "Fuzzy Logic!" right back at ya.

I'm glad that we appear to agree on politics.....if not hi fi.
Get over yourself My Friend.

All one needs is a sound meter to insure the Levels are same.

And as I said the test was done with same MFG CDP all having the identical output levels.

We live in a real world.

Double blind testing is for Engineering geeks with no personalities and no real Lives.
hello all;

demoed thiel pcs (didn't know they were pronounced teel so i thought the guy was talking about colors) and dynaudio contour 1.4 yesterday in santa monica through krell electronics. thiels had huge soundstage sound filled up the whole room, piano was ok but really excelled berlioz. dynaudio's sounded soooo good with the piano (bach) that i was sure that i had found my speaker then put in berlioz and they didn't sound so good. much smaller sound stage than the thiel and easily localized. thiel's were alot more invisible.

left the store happy that i had listened to a couple more speakers but knew i had to do more listening.

went to optimal enchantment also in santa monica and randy the owner showed me the vandersteen 5a which was incredible. i thought i was listening to live. was blown away. we talked alot about the different speakers in the vandersteen line as well as jm labs models but i didn't have time to listen to anything else. he offered to set up a demo of high end vs. lower priced systems as well as tube vs. ss the next time i came which is exactly what i need. he wasn't as outwardly enthusiastic as vince the sales guy mentioned in previous post but was seriously into music, and gave me alot of food for thought.

this brings me to a new dilemna. how do we justify buying used gear here or new gear online when we receive great service from the brick and mortar. this was not a problem for me when i purchased my ht because alot of the places i went to didn't expend much effort on me and i bought alot of gear from an online dealer who happened to have his shop locally. i want to support these dealers, but should i do this at the cost of thousands of dollars. right now, my inclination is to buy local and after i have more experience purchase used gear online and sell it if i don't like it, which doesn't seem very practical to me but will allow me to upgrade at a lower cost, and purchase locally when if necessary. how do you deal with this issue. as always, all input is greatly appreciated.

aloha keith