What Matters and What is Nonsense


I’ve been an audiophile for approximately 50 years. In my college days, I used to hang around the factory of a very well regarded speaker manufacturer where I learned a lot from the owners. When I started with audio it was a technical hobby. You were expected to know something about electronics and acoustics. Listening was important, but understanding why something sounded good or not so good was just as important. No one in 1968 would have known what you were talking about if you said you had tweaked your system and it sounded so much better. But if you talked about constant power output with frequency, or pleasing second-order harmonic distortion versus jarring odd-order harmonics in amplification, you were part of the tribe.

Starting in the 1980s, a lot of pseudo scientific nonsense started appearing. Power cords were important. One meter interconnects made a big difference. Using a green magic marker on the edge of a CD was amazing. Putting isolation dampers under a CD transport lifted the veil on the music. Ugh. This stuff still make my eyes roll, even after all these years.

So I have decided to impart years and years of hard won knowledge to today’s hobbists who might be interested in reality. This is my list of the steps in the audio reproduction chain, and the relative importance of each step. My ranking of relative importance includes a big dose of cost/benefit ratio. At this point in the evolution of audio, I am assuming digital recording and reproduction.

Item / Importance to the sound on a scale of 1-10 / Cost benefit ratio

  • The room the recording was made in / 8 / Nothing you can do about it
  • The microphones and setup used in the recording / 8 / nothing you can do about it.
  • The equalization and mixing of the recording / 10 / Nothing you can do about it
  • The technology used for the recording (analog, digital, sample rate, etc.) / 5 / nothing you can do about it.
  • The format of the consumer recording (vinyl, CD, DSD, etc.) 44.1 - 16 really is good enough / 3 / moderate CB ratio
  • The playback device i.e. cartridge or DAC / 5 / can be a horribe CB ratio - do this almost last
  • The electronics - preamp and amp / 4 / the amount of money wasted on $5,000 preamps and amps is amazing.
  • Low leve interconnects / 2 / save your money, folks
  • Speaker cables / 3 / another place to save your money
  • Speakers / 10 / very very high cost to benefit ratio. Spend your money here.
  • Listening room / 9 / an excellent place to put your money. DSPs have revolutionized audio reproduction
In summary, buy the best speakers you can afford, and invest in something like Dirac Live or learn how to use REW and buy a MiniDSP HD to implement the filters. Almost everything else is a gross waste of money.
128x128phomchick
Good discussion except for the occasional silly snark. The OP opinion/style seems fine to me. Personally I (also) have a strong background in EE as well as being a musician This informs my opinions but doesn't make me The Oracle obviously. . Reasonable but limited funds for audio. For me the most fun is had getting the most sound for my dollar and "sweat equity" as well as learning along the way. So I recap and adjust bias on old equipment and consider tweaks as they come along based on my interest, the cost and the fun factor. I am predisposed to being skeptical to things that seem to violate laws of physics. I understand and do not denigrate the human nature of expected outcomes. To me certain claims seem more like belief systems akin to religion or the Paranormal etc, which is also a big part of the human condition.  Nothing wrong with that as long as not hurting other people.  I think it is valid for "skeptics" to warn other interested parties, which is part of what this forum is about, that, based on science and/or experience, certain claims SEEM improbable to them, preferably without insulting others beliefs and experiences. The reader can decide if such arguments are convincing to them, or not, as they can do for the comments by those with other perspectives.
I tend to work toward a sound that makes my classical and acoustic heroes and folk-rock, sound most realistic, usually involves a mandolin violin and/or a female vocal. The process is a big part of the fun, obvious I know to most of you.
Choosing and placing/adjusting speakers and modding the room when possible is productive and fun.(Walked into a showroom expecting to buy KEF's, walked out with Rega RS3 speakers because the seller correctly though they might do better for what I told him I was after) Re-doing the guts of older electronics is fun and sometimes musically  productive, always educational. I like to solder.
I have tried hard to hear differences in speaker cables and can't.

A quality SVS sub helped refine the sound in a big way. Not miraculous, or jaw dropping, just better. I never notice "phase" or "crossover" issues affecting musical enjoyment. And the individual parts are easier to move around for this old back. (Compared to ginormous main speakers)

Ultimately the best way to get the best acoustic sound is to play it yourself with pals, and/or see it live in a "sound friendly" environment.
I got as much "emotional support" and almost as much aesthetic pleasure from recorded music when I was younger and broker as I do now.
Enjoy the ride because soon, you know, we will all be dead.

(and maybe someone else will a get our stuff in a killer deal at auction and carry it on!)
As an addendum, I read the Daniel Drasin referenced by Geof. I appreciate the link and the perspective. It seems to try a little too hard to debunk the debunkers. Most of us and especially those of us in science and medicine know that last years  impossibility is this years fact and sometimes vice versa. BUT the bar is, and should be pretty high to support unlikely or unique claims.  So issues of reproduciblity especially by those who have no financial or profound personal stake in the results is important as is a potential theoretical framework, or at the very least lack of a violation of well established fundamental laws of physics. Sure you can propose those violations also but it helps to be a genius.  A good skeptic DOES listen to and consider unusual  or unlikely proposals and experiences but is fair for them to be...rational and...skeptical.

+1 playmore

To me, the central issue coming out of this thread is the process of improving your system versus getting ripped off. All has become more difficult as audio transactions become "over the Internet" as opposed to selecting/auditing from a local dealer who stocks a large number of products (no longer the norm).

So, product threads and reviews are essential to increasing the chances of making a good decision and I reiterate the necessity for being able to identify owners who provide honest assessments of the item. This worked for me for the Tekton Double Impacts AND did not work for the Nord Stereo UP amplifier.

You pays your money and takes your chances...

There has never been an audiophile tweak that was found to be a hoax or a fraud. Obviously there have been some preposterous ones, I won’t hot dog you about that. We already know blinding testing is not going to reveal the hoaxes. Nor is science or medicine or mathematics. Why? Because many audiophile tweaks are out of reach as it were of textbook explanations. Thus it’s becoming more and more difficult to figure out just what the heck laws of science have been broken here OR how to measure it. Here are some examples of what I’m talking about. Silver Rainbow Foil, the Tice Clock, Ultra Tweeters, fuse directionality, The Teleportation Tweak, Mpingo disc, Marigo Dots, demagetizing CDs, demagnetizing LPs, isolating solid state amps, the Red X Pen, Morphic Message Foils, the Original Intelligent Chip.
Thanks Craig159. I might try those Herbie Feet as my wood floor is quite uneven and the spikes on small wood slabs method is a pain to keep in place and level. And if improves my detail or imaging, great!
And I am leaning to switching from AIMP to JRiver as Media Player. I play ripped discs from PC to Schiit Bitfrost in one set up. Seemed like a pretty good way to get "pretty darned good" sound for rational money. But I am not sure if I am getting the best version of output bits from the PC. Will be interesting if I can "hear" any difference from playback software assuming "flat" settings.