2. analog
  3. 1075929650

"Trickle up" theory

I notice that while all my cheap 'tables time well, many expensive ones do not. I'm tired of this "trickle-down" crap the audio press feed us, thus implying that all the more expensive equipment is intrinsically superior to the budget equipment, and in the process training us to want all that expensive equipment which is so "superior." The fact of the matter is, that most budget equipment gets the music right, if with various distortions (for instance my sister's cheap Sony ghetto-blaster always makes me want to dance), and that what is actually needed is "trickle up", a preservation of the essential timing of music which budget components so often get right. I am not saying that all high-end equipment is crap - some, like Conrad-Johnson, excel at this musical magic - but the fact is a large number of high-end manufacturers need to examine what makes the budget equipment so musical (that magic which came from the first quality budget components which got us hooked on this hobby in the first place), and apply it to their cost-no-object creations! We need that musical magic to go along with all that tonal correctness and detail. Raise your hands all those who bought expensive equipment only to end up missing their cheaper components. My only purpose in writing these things is to advance the sate of the art, by encouraging a re-examination of the way we think about things. Looking at things from different angles is how to gain the fresh outlook needed for new ideas, and an improvement of the art. And also ensure that the next peice I buy will have the magic first, and all the audiophile goodies after.
johnnantais
twl
3,251 posts
 
Ozfly, no disrespect intended for equipment such as yours.

Quite often, it is important to satisfy many requirements such as the ones you mention, and the choices I made do not qualify in many other applications and environments. In fact, my choices would be very poor where maximum SPL and deep bass response were the most important factors.

So please accept my humble apologies if there was any offense taken. It was just my awkward way of trying to make a point about simple sometimes being better.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,150 posts
 
To a large extent it's all a matter of design trade-offs and personal preferences. Few if any individual audio products or systems truly excel at all areas of audio reproduction and we as listeners are attracted to those products that match our personal tastes. Some value coherence, others harmonic integrity or PRaT, dynamic capabilities, etc. I don't know of any system of thought that places any of these factors as primary to another. It all comes down to personal preferences.

As an example, in many ways the Quad 63/988 is a "perfect" speaker, yet it's not the universal choice of audiophiles. It's perfectly reasonable for someone to desire greater dynamic capabilities or deeper bass from their systems.

Can simple designs outperform relatively complex designs. Of course! But at the same time there are numerous complex designs that can outperform their relatively simple design counterparts. Somewhat surprisingly many of the simplest designs (i.e., Audio Note or Lamm) are quite expensive products. High performance, simple designs seem to require very high quality, high cost parts. Forgive me for not even knowing whom I'm misquoting, but things should be kept as simple as possible, but not simpler than necessary.
ozfly
887 posts
 
No offense taken Twl. I am a great admirer of you and your system. Simple is often good; complex can also be good if done right. I was simply taking up the banner for two things: 1) It is the music that counts (that's the whole gist of this thread and I was simply adding my voice) and 2) Many approaches can work if executed correctly.

Please accept my apologies if it appeared I took umbrage. My comments were aimed to correct a general school of thought (i.e., large power supplies are not good) and were certainly not meant to cause you regret or concern. On with the music, however one enjoys it! ;-)
Ag insider logo xs@2x
drubin
3,267 posts
 
Unsound, I don't think the timing thing is about speed, or at least not speed alone. It is about correctness of timing, or its coherence, or something else,though I'm not sure I know what it means. You know it when you hear it, I suppose. Johnnantais, how would define it?
dan76
3 posts
 
Continuing with Nrenter's explanation, many systems we hear are either in showrooms or set up in the home as though they were showrooms. To my ears, this often provides a more sterile, less intimate sound as the rooms have an unnatural feel, damped and empty. It provides a good environment to listen to the detail generated by the equipment but not necessarily to connect with the music.
The type of music also determines our need for detail in the presentation. When I listen to rock I want to literally feel the music and whether I hear every note by every instrument is inconsequential. When I listen to classical, I need the details, the air, but not the bang.
Our expectations are always at play when we listen to music. In the car or a friend's basement we are not concerned with the presentation, just the music. When we see and hear a high end system we expect to see and hear a high end system. Sometimes that gets in the way of hearing the music.
More to discover