Some brands names and some price tags for sure indicated something in the quality design scale ...
But when i look at virtual system, which is very rare , i look more at the room than at the pieces brand names...😊
What someone can say about my actual system sound quality , now headphone based for reason of space in a smaller house, looking at my Sansui Alpha , My low cost battery/bank Hidizs dac and my Headphone AKG K 340 ? NOTHING...😊
He cannot understand nor see all my optimizations and modifications to the audio system parts..
Worst , i did not need an acoustic room , then he cannot disparage as ridiculous my acoustic room now with his ignorant sarcasms as some did ...😊
If you want to know if someone had a good sound , look at his room first, next read his posts to measure his satisfaction level versus his upgrading urgency rthytm , learn if he is obsessed by price tag, and draw a conclusion...
Or be a jerk as the seller who ridicule my peanuts cost dedicated acoustic room and audio component because it was more easy to ridicule my system than to answer my objections about the artificial sound of his main costly room tweak with an artificial soundfield so evident we can hear it through youtube... Acoustic cannot be bought with a costly tweak...
i never bought tweaks , i created the one i used , and i dont need upgrade now more than ever...Even if some upgrade could be possible for me for sure at twenty time the cost of my actual system ..
is it possible to hear top hi-fi at under 1000 bucks for a system ? Yes... It ask for serious work and experiments but it is possible...I did it...
And sometimes miracles happen... I own one of the best designed headphone ever now... To beat it you need an acoustic room and very refined components...
How do i know ?
it is because i know how to define 4 elements in the soundfield after my experiments in my room, most reviewers identify only two of them clearly in their reviews, and this indicated something about their acoustic experience 😊 ...
Four soundfield characteristics as experienced in a good system ( i dont put the timbre experience as one of the soundfield characteristics , because it is so basic , it must be First and LAST criteria.. :
---imaging differentiation between sound sources
---Soundstaging three dimensions VARYING sizes because it MUST BE recording dependant and contain all sound sources together...It must not be fixed once for all...
---the Holographic volume of EACH sound source in his own space, it is called holographic because it is 3-D
---Immersivenes : acoustically defined as the balanced ratio between the sound sources holographic volume dimensions and the listener envelopment, or the way a listener is included in the "extent" soundfield which is represented by this abbreviatons ratio in acoustic ASW/LV ... To do this someone must control reflective surface/absorbing/diffusive one ratios and the timing of all reflective surfaces, some are useful other destructives.. The dimension of the room and his geometry, topology and content is the start point, the timing of the waves the end point... The pressure distribution zones of the sound must be tamed..I used Helmholtz resonators tuned mechanically to do so ...
Then why judging people on some esthetical images and brand names ?
The room acoustic controls , the owner satisfaction as a sign of experience , and the poster explanations are my three indications... For sure some marvellous dedicated room say it all.. the sound must be good... But trust me, an image is not enough at all, the 4 characteristics of a soundfield cannot be evaluated without listenings...
By the way if i had plenty of money my dedicated room would had been very esthetical not a mess.. But i am proud of my soundfield at the end not of the look...
Never judge people on appearance.. never judge system by prices or esthetic...
Judge them by their arguments, and experience and knowledge...
