2. tech-talk
  3. 1067066163

Stereophile confirms new gear is getting worse....

It appears that "high end" audio gear is moving backwards rather than forwards. If you doubt this, take a look at the November 2003 issue and the test results of the electronics reviewed.

As a case in point, the Pass XA160 mono-block amps that were reviewed perform pretty horribly. While most folks that read these forums know that i'm not shy about being a fan of Nelson Pass' work, i don't have much good to say about these over-priced boat anchors. Most will probably remember what a hard time that i gave the PS Audio HCA-2. In effect, most of the comments that i made about that amp apply to this amp. From what i can tell, the comments that i made about the PS may not be strong enough as compared to how poorly the XA160's performed, especially at the price. Lack of current output, high distortion figures, non-linear frequency responses, the ability for the loudspeaker to modulate the output of the amp, etc... were all evident in the test results. To top it off, the input and output impedances will make this unit quite sensitive to the components ( preamp, speakers, etc...) that it is mated with.

Regardless of who's name is on this unit, how "pretty" it looks ( gorgeous ), what it weighs (200 lbs per monoblock) and the parts quality inside, quite honestly, this unit performed like a really crappy "vintage" ( read that as "low tech" ) tubed unit from the days prior to audio civilization. All this "eye candy" and a sore back for only $18K a pair !!!

As we move to the next product review, we look at the BAT VK-51SE. While this unit was more consistent than the Pass, some of the design choices made are obviously not good ones. The most obvious flaw that i see with this unit is that it changes sound / tonal balance as the volume is varied. Even when the gain control is adjusted for the flattest response, the top end starts sloping off gradually above 5 KHz. As you increase the gain, you now introduce low frequency roll-off into the equation also. If really standing on the throttle, the unit doesn't even make it down to 100 Hz within a -3 dB tolerance window !!! Obviously, this is not very good or linear and is poorer performance than one would expect out of a "reasonable" pair of speakers, NOT line level components !!!

As such, you can't expect consistent sonics from this unit unless you listen at one gain setting. If you have only one source component and all your recordings are of the same intensity, you "might" be able to find a reasonable setting. Since i highly doubt that this is the case, especially the part about consistent volume from recording to recording, you can pretty much count this out.

On top of the variations that this unit produces on its' own, one can introduce a whole new gang of variables into the equation once you start factoring in input / output impedances into the equation. I'll just say that this unit isn't going to be very versatile in terms of what components it mates up with in terms of amp selection. All this "high tech performance" for only $8500. Make that $9000 if you want the convenience of a remote.

Moving a few pages further, we run into the "giant killer" AH! Njoe Tjoeb ( pronounced "new tube" ) 4000 cd player. This is a highly modified / hot-rodded Marantz unit with tubes added, a "super clock" and the option of a "plug & play" upsampling board, fancy footers and an upgraded power cord. Depending on what you want to spend, the base unit is $700. If you go for the unit fully loaded with options, you can feel your bank account drained to the tune of about $1200.

Take one look at the frequency response of this unit and you'll see that it is far from "neutral". To top it off, distortions are higher along with a lack of suppression of AC harmonics. Jitter is pretty high for a unit with a "superclock" i.e. higher than other units i've seen with no "superclock". As such, this unit doesn't appear to be a "killer" of any type other than being able to "flatten your wallet in one swift motion".

Obviously, "high end" has come full circle. That is, it would appear that "audiophiles" are more concerned with asthaetics and reputation than actual performance and fidelity. The folks that used to laugh at Bang & Olufsen are now falling for looks at an even higher price. While the sonics may differ from Bang & Olufsen, the end result is that none of these units are "accurate" or capable of being called "high fidelity" units any more than Bang & Olufsen gear of yester-year was. The fact that B&O are now trying to jump back into "high end" with some truly innovative products just goes to show that one can't judge a company or product by its' cover any more.

Having said that, the above mentioned products can't really be called "Hi-Fi components". What they can be called are "flavoured audiophile toys". The funny thing is that J. Gordon Holt had commented on this type of situation arising within the industry and there are letters in this issue agreeing with that point of view. J. Peter Moncrieff also talked about that in IAR Hotline 76-80 quite a while back and found it rather pathetic. Count me in with that crowd too.

I do have to credit JA and the guys for having the guts to print these test results. While there is plenty of "dancing" in all of the reviews along with more than enough "gushing" ( the Pass review in specific ), it was pretty obvious that JA really DID make mention of the technical problems that each of these products displayed. As usual, Stereophile remains consistent in the fact that they continue to test, measure and display the results for all to see. For this, i offer a very hardy pat on the back, vigorous hand-clapping and whistling. THANK YOU from all of us that like reading and interpreting spec's for ourselves. Having said that, JA still tried to down-play these flaws somewhat by giving the "old soft shoe" at the end of his technical comments.

As i've said before, one has to buy and use what they like and makes them happy. With all of the various and BLATANT "flavouring" that is going on with audio gear nowadays, one really must know what they want and how well components will blend together in their system. It would appear that the days of trying to achieve "accuracy" and "musicality" with with each piece of gear are over. Now audio is kind of like Baskin-Robbins i.e. you've got to know what you like before you order what are VERY specific "flavours" for each product selected.

Let the buyer beware.... Sean
>

PS... I've got my flame repellent armour on along with an oxygen tank and a full battery of weapons. After this post and the responses that i think i'll get, i know that i'll need all of that and maybe more : )
sean
sean OP
6,231 posts
 
Zaikesman: Pass knows better and i think that they had a MAJOR problem with quality control. This doesn't speak too highly of them though. What would have happened with the amps that were already out in circulation if nobody had measured / caught these problems? Would the owners have been "good enough listeners" to tell that there was a problem and send them back in OR would they have simply sold them thinking that "Pass ain't all that it's cracked up to be", putting more "junk" ( albeit "expensive junk" ) out on the used market??? Even though Pass stepped up to the plate to correct the problem and admits the flaw, this kind of situation leaves a bad taste in my mouth. After all, it's not like they are building a thousand units a day. QC for a small manufacturer that supposedly builds top flight / mega-dollar gear should be "job 1".

Hovland "may" know better but i'm not sure. The fact that they made changes to the product shows that they are eager to please, but at the same time, didn't do their homework to begin with. Getting an education at the customers expense i.e. "learning as you go" can become pretty expensive for consumers, especially trying to keep up with all of the "Mk II" and "Mk III" revisions. Then again, we are all learning, otherwise products would never evolve and technology would remain the same. Kind of a double-sided coin. One would hope that a company actually tested their products before marketing them though. Some don't because they are afraid that others will "beat them to the punch" and that "every second counts". Too bad the consumer is left holding the bag in that type of situation, especially when that bag used to be full of their own money.

On the other hand, Legacy can tell you everything that you want to know about speaker design if you read their brochures. They obviously have a very astute grasp of marketing their product and telling you what you want to hear. At the same time though, the measurements seem to produce consistent test results that are quite deficient in the same areas. Given the fact that more than one product demonstrates this type of behaviour, i don't think it is a matter of QC, but more-so a "company voice" or "sonic signature" that the designers / engineers think "sounds good". All i know is the measurements that i see for these products demonstrate very noticeable bass bloat ( +5 to +7 dB's at 80 - 120 Hz ). Needless to say, with all of the "know-how" and "technology" invested in these speakers that they keep telling us about, you would think that they could achieve slightly greater linearity out of their multi-thousand dollar products. Sean
>
trelja
3,224 posts
 
While I have gone off on a negative tangent in this thread, I should offer a perspective of a company doing things in what I consider the "right way". Sean is correct in the point of us bringing up these products is not to be argumentative, but to say, "Hey, we are buying this stuff. Do you really want to pay $10K for something that is not to the level is should be?"

My example of a company to admire is Rogue. They seem to do everything right. Rogue began making tube amplification components because they believed in them. Their products, while ambitious(tube) for the time, was priced very reasonably. Rogue did not enter the market with proclamations that they knew more than all of the other manufacturers or that their products were the best. Rather, they offered value, with the good engineering for the money.

Time proved the market was there to support such a company. As things progressed, they felt the consumers would embrace improvements they wanted to offer, and the Magnum line was introduced. The company was profitable, and its survivability and viability had attained some level of certainty.

While Rogue felt that the Magnum series was about 95% of the amplifier they could build(and, at a real world price), people were wondering about the other 5%. From this, the Zeus, their statement product, was developed and introduced. As it is, it retails for "only" $6K, which is far less than the non - statement products of many other companies.

And, rather than continuing to drive their prices up from the Zeus, they pushed the technology back down into their Magnum line - the new 150. While the prices have increased from where they were, so has parts quality and performance.

In the time that Rogue has existed, I have heard nothing but good things about dealing with the company. Customer support has gone further than what most expect.

I would like to mention that I do not own any Rogue equipment, and never have. But, presuming they built a product whose sound pleased me when I was in the market, I would love to give my business to a company such as this. I feel they serve as a model for the rest of the industry.
clueless
763 posts
 
Well I have not read this whole thread but a fair part of it.

In a way it reinforces a feeling I have had for some time. That is, separates are not all that great. Truth is, circuits cannot be hooked up to all loads and operate maximally no matter what you spend. Why bother? There are compromises that must be made. The output impedance of one circuit or input capacitance of the next is what it is. Generally speaking, it is not going to mate with every other load in the same way no matter how much money you spend. It does not work that way.

I used to ride a lot of bicycle. Choosing circuits (amp and speaker for example) is a little like choosing chain-ring and freewheel ratios. You need to know the terrain and the quality of the rider's legs and heart to make the best choice if you want real performance. If you do not know the ride(is it with the wind in the flats or up the rockies)or the riders' abilities (is he a powerhouse or a fly weight climber) you are going to compromise to cover all possibilities. This can be done, but when the terrain and rider turn out to be one or the other, you will not get anything near maximum performance.

To me this represents the state of about 95% of audio today.

Figure out what final load (speakers)you are going to use.
Then get a power supply and amp tailored to do it. Don't even think about an amp that should do it all.

Folks these days get amps that are compromised to "work into any load", they then combine it with speakers that run the entire spectrum re loads and connect them with wire that does the same re capacitance. Is there any wonder why results are all over the place? The analysis seldom goes further than some lame statement about "synergy." They happily pay bookoo bucks for a wire that does not send the entire hap-hazardly arranged package into a death spin.

Give me the days when the folks who made these things knew what the next circuit down the line would be. I've got nice magnavox console for sale if anyone is interested!

Sincerely
I remain,



sean OP
6,231 posts
 
The post below was taken from another thread. Rather than respond in that thread and throw it completely off course, i took the liberty of tranfering it here. After all, the main idea being discussed / commented on was basically derived from the thoughts i presented here and in other similar threads.

------------------------------------------------------------

03-09-04: Stehno
Barry, Now you did it. You went and made Sean angree.

Do you know what Sean did to the last mfg'er that made him angree? Just ask the folks around here or at Legacy.

It was not pretty. {I shudder just thinking about it}.

Well, Barry, it's, um, been nice, um, chatting with you but I really, uh, must go now.

-IMO
Stehno

Here's my response:

Stehno: What should a person do when they are aware of fraud, corruption and lies taking place? Obviously, these actions are done in order to scam less knowledgable individuals out of their hard earned money and have been taking place on a continual basis for years.

Should a person with a conscience just mind their own business and continue to let others less knowledgable fall for the scam? Should this person speak up and try to help those potentially at risk at the expense of possibly being ostracized for being a "goody two shoes", "know-it-all", "internet bully"? Obviously, there are two different paths to take here, each with different repurcussions. Which one would you take?

Here's something else to consider before making that decision. Besides angering those doing the scamming, the person exposing the situation runs the risk of being labeled an "asshole" by those that have already been scammed and don't know it and / or are too vain to admit it. As such, no matter what they do i.e. try to help spare others what they know to be a costly mistake based on verifiable facts OR expose the scam artists for what they are, it is a no-win situation for that person.

Please tell me which path you think is loaded with roses i.e. being a passive observer and watching others get robbed or taking a stand for what you know is right at your own personal risk and reputation. I'm sure that your answer will provide great insight. Sean
>

PS... I'm serious and would like a response. You can do it via email if you like, but i would prefer it be done here. After all, if i am going to pass judgment on industry professionals and their products and you are going to pass judgment on me for doing so, i'd like to have as big and varied of a jury as possible to weigh both sides of the story.
bright_star_audio
179 posts
 

Hi Sean,

Would you please clarify your post above. Which company do you believe had been perpetrating fraud, corruption and lies?

Best Regards,

Barry
More to discover