Only your stuff does this dump it ASAP.
Are audiophile products designed to initially impress then fatigue to make you upgrade?
If not why are many hardly using the systems they assembled, why are so many upgrading fairly new gear that’s fully working? Seems to me many are designed to impress reviewers, show-goers, short-term listeners, and on the sales floor but once in a home system, in the long run, they fatigue users fail to engage and make you feel something is missing so back you go with piles of cash.
- ...
- 145 posts total
"Stereo" was designed for 3 speakers, not two. The entire 2 channel system most people use today is flawed which is why two channel stereo is a money pit. Very wise of the electronics industry to roll out a hopelessly broken system that requires regular cash infusions from sound starved customers hoping they will finally attain the promised result. STOP, just switch to immersive/spatial audio and keep your two channel system for nostalgia. |
@kota1 sort of correct….it was initially implemented with three speakers but it was always a two channel format where some manufacturers utilized a sum of both channels as a mono center. It was a primitive “implementation”.
Its all good if you are into immersive/spatial audio. I’m sure its awesome. |
@kota1 Wrote:
Then this speaker came out in 1957 no more hole in the middle. See below: Mike https://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/home-speakers/1957-paragon.htm |
I love the JBL/Lansing Paragons I see on youtube, stunning. It's said Frank Sinatra used 3 of them (L-C-R) channels in the studio. . There are rumours that Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin acquired three Paragons each – one for each of left, center and right channels – with which they used to monitor their recordings from master tapes.[4] |
- 145 posts total