2. digital
  3. 1009209295

Has anyone else ever reached an audio impasse?

Perhaps I should explain -

A friend of mine has a VERY high resolution system which would retail close to the $100K mark. Each component upgrade he has made over the years has been based upon comparison between components. He has built a fantastic system.

Now here is the problem -
Recently he and I compared his source CD player which is the top model currently available under 15K, against a Sony 9000 ES SACD/DVD player. We A/B compared them.

After extended listening, we found the differences to be so minor that it was difficult to detect which was better. We did the comparisons with Redbook CD vs SACD, RedBook vs. Redbook and still the 15K CD player was only marginally (.05%) better.

The 15K CD player had better more expensive interconnects and power cords than the Sony which was using a stock power cord an old Audioquest Topaz (cheap) interconnects.

In previous listening sessions over the past year we had compared the same Sony 9000 CD/DVD/SACD player against MANY other CD players ranging in price from 2000 all the way up to 7000 and on redbook CD's the Sony always got it's butt kicked! It sounded hollow - with a recessed midrange - electronic - over emphasized highs, etc.

Then - I took a 100 Toshiba DVD player to his house and tried it against his 15K CD player. It sounded the same as the Sony. In fact, the 100 Toshiba sounded as good if not better in some ways than the Sony DVD player but...still was .05% out classed by the 15K CD player.

With each source component in these auditions, the soundstage remained VERY large, images were perfect and tonal balance couldn't be better. The subtlety of the changes between the various source components would be best described as perceived rather than actual.

I am curious to know if anyone else has experienced this type of an impasse. I know the $100 DVD player should not sound like the 15K CD player (at least it never did before)
but it does now. Why??

Could there be a bottle-neck somewhere? Could the character of an pre or amplifier be so strong it restricts performance of a source component? What could cause this to happen?

Help please...
bwhite
sean
6,231 posts
 
YOW !!!! You bring up a good point about checking our electrical systems and checking what our insurance policies will cover. While i just changed a few outlets myself, i can imagine how fast your buddy's jaw dropped and heart sank when he saw what he did. Let's hope everything is okay. I'm kind of leary of that though, as it would take one helluva lot of juice to actually melt down an interconnect. Sean
>
bwhite OP
807 posts
 
My friend had two new dedicated circuits installed. So far there has been no smoke or fire. The electrician wired his system with 10 gague Romex strung to a pair of PS Audio Power Port AC recepticals. I have not listened yet but he claims this made a modest difference regarding the bandwidth of his amplifiers. He says the system seems "cleaner" but still notices no significant differences between source components. Bummer.
detlof
1,899 posts
 
Look, I don't mean this as a joke at all: But when did he last have his hearing checked and his ears cleared out? I've had this happen to an audiophile collegue, whose ears had truly clogged up. Well, I thought of bringing this up, though improbable, nothing is impossible and I feel sorry for your friend and the plight he is in.
P.S: if nothing else helps, I would still try the speaker thing.....
audioguy123
40 posts
 
I did not read every post, but little was said about the room.

I am not impartial on this subject as I used to sell the product, but it would be very interesting to have someone "SigTech" (digital room correction) the room. I performed thousands of room measurements (and corections) and one of the many benefits of digital room correction is the ability to better hear differences in components up stream. Many of the folsk for whom I demonstrated (on their system) the SigTech were sort of where your friend was/is. That is, they were spending gigantic sums of money and not really moving forward --just got "different" sound.

A specific example which was always easy to demonstrate was the difference in a live recording in a SigTeched versus un-SigTeched room.

One of the ways we can tell a recording is live is because we can hear the recording venue --specifically the delayed/reflected sounds in the recording venue. In most rooms (even those passively treated)the recording venue relections are masked (at least to some degree) by the reflections in the listening room.

So, if one of the differences in two components is, for example, air/space around instruments, the room could be masking some of that. Furthermore, depending on what the room does to the frequency repsonse, the room could be masking subtle frequency variations as well.

I can say this: if your friend has not heard his system with digital room correction APPROPRIATELY DONE, (either with the SigTech or the Tact), he has not heard what his system really sounds like. He may not like what he hears (he would be in a tiny minority) but he would at least hear what he has purchased.

As to why the less expensive pre-amp seemed to highlight the differences, I can not comment.

Anyway, further food for thought.
bwhite OP
807 posts
 
This evening we removed an AZ power cord from the preamp.
We had forgotten it was back there.

Anyhow - when we removed that power cord from the preamp and replaced with an NBS Statement, things started to open up. We were beginning to hear differences between the CD12 and the $100 Toshiba DVD player. Actually - we heard significant differences. It's amazing how that power cord really disguised things.

Another thing I noticed in this recent audition of many preamps is that the more liquid the preamp, the less inner detail seems to be resolved. Has anyone else ever noticed that? Presuming liquidity is textureless sound, inner-detail often presents itself with a slight texture.

Differences in various CD players are at times subtle but I have found that the best CD players have a certain way of presenting inner-detail which is better than low end CD players. For instance, my Mephisto II is as analog sounding a CD player as one could hope to get (tonight it bested the CD12!) But most of those characteristics take form within the domain of inner-detail.

The liquidity of a good tube preamp seems to diminish the texture required to present the inner-detail hence removing the character of the CD player and thus making it more difficult to notice subtle differences.

I figure this is why the cheap solid state preamps were capable of conveying more of each CD players true character.

The flip side of this is that the cheap CD players which typically sound hollow, have limited focus, are harsh or electronic sounding, benefit tremendously from the better preamp as it will mask the nasties with liquidity.

Make sense?
More to discover