2. misc-audio
  3. 154361-121242

Home Theater Done Right: Millercarbon's System

Dual use, should probably be the title. Oh well. Finally posted my system. Someone’s always asking about how to do a dual use system. Well, here’s how its done.
Cinephile or audiophile, movies and music are the two things I have loved for as long as I can remember. I want my music to sound as good as possible, and I want my movies to look and sound as good as possible. Everything is a compromise and yet when it comes to these two the compromises are remarkably few. If any. At least that is what my system shows. Because it is a first-rate audiophile sound system, AND a top level home theater.
Whether music or movies an immersive experience is the goal. To lose yourself in the experience. To be carried away.
Studies show viewers consistently rate video quality higher when sound quality is high. Unfortunately the Home Theater industry has chosen to pursue quantity over quality. Which cannot ever work. No amount of surround speakers will ever make up for poor quality. Everyone knows this perfectly well. Being able to convince anyone otherwise is a testament to marketing.
But that’s not my main point here. Rather it is that everything matters. Seemingly minor little things like cryogenic treatment, HFT, ECT, Total Contact, fuses, cable elevators, etc when added together actually make so much difference it is almost impossible to build a truly good system without them.

Removing those tweaks from my system would lower it down to merely average.

Anyway, the system is posted. Enjoy the pics. I am not that good a photographer but Steve Clarke was busy. Tried to get the tubes go glow- how’d I do?

The system evolves. Here for reference are some pics from 16 years ago. https://www.theanalogdept.com/c_miller.htm
Comments welcome. Enjoy!


128x128millercarbon
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
This is HT done on a two channel HiFi platform, which does suffer some of the disadvantages of not being set up for a dedicated HT. That is not debatable. 

What is debatable is whether Chuck should have spent prodigiously on Tweaks. The thread is dedicated, imo, to his assertion that the pursuit of heavy tweaks is what is "done right". I disagree, and assert that he would have been further ahead to go lighter on the tweaks and pursue more earnestly superior components, particularly the digital source and the amplification. I have found tweaks to be insipid in comparison to the gains from superior components, cables and speakers.  

That is not to suggest it is not an extreme effort, or that it is not well-loved.  :) 

geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
I have found tweaks to be insipid in comparison to the gains from superior components, cables and speakers.  

>>>>>>There’s one in every crowd.
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
12,964 posts
 
What is a superior component?


There is 3 levels of price quality...

Any components in each rung of this level are almost equivalent, modulo some little differences...
For example the Zotl Berning amplifier is a superior electronic component compared to my Sansui AU 7700, on another rung than it, but I can assure you that the S.Q I create by controllings the 3 embeddings are so much, than my inferior electronic component is not too much backward in S.Q. not equal for sure but at his peak level the Sansui is very good but sound like ordinary in a non controlled embeddings...This Sansui is one of the best Sansui ever made tough...A Berning amplifier in a non treated embeddings will not soud at his peak level either...

I just want to say that when we speaks about "tweaks" people think most of the times about something that accompany marginally the efficiency of their audio system, a tweak being something that increase what is already there...


1-But is the controlled of the mechanical embeddings of an audio system,
2-The varied acoustical treatment of our room,
3-The cleaning of all the electrical grid of a house and of the gear itself,

rightly done and implemented,
are only some tweaks added to the Audio system for a slightly better audio experience?

Absolutely not at all...The methods pertaining to these 3 embeddings TRANSFORM COMPLETELY the audio system, at any price, and does not only increase slightly a S.Q already there by virtue of the electronic component quality by itself. No I will repeat it: it transform it completely. Perhaps there is exception to this rule, but most of the times this rule apply, and I dont know any exception myself...



auxinput
2,920 posts
 
I also share the opinion that HT done right means that you absolutely have to have a center channel.  There is a loss of cohesion when you try to use a left/right for phantom center, and it actually causes the dialog to be harder to understand.  The surround speakers can be optional, but they do add a depth to the sound experience.

I sat in the Synergistic room at RMAF for 20 minutes (trapped in a closed door demo).  The HFT transducers did absolutely nothing to the sound.  Also, while the equipment was purposely chosen to be poor sounding equipment with hiss and ground humm, it actually sounded better with all that other Synergistic equipment "turned off".


audition__audio
1,445 posts
 
I am with douglas on this one. Best components you can afford and then tweak and I will add that Synergistic Research is near the bottom of my list for these items.
More to discover