Inside High End Equipment

[STC]

And yet again he managed to side track this thread. Anyone who claimed that the sound from laptop or Sharp speakers represented good sound cannot be taken seriously. So please bring this discussion to your own thread @fas42 .

 

7 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

I agree. 5691 posts since you joined on April 27, 2017 is impressive.

[fas42]

Yes, we all know that lots and lots of money has to be handed over, to achieve good sound - I mean, it's The Way Of The World ... 😉.

[STC]

Not money. Not lots of them. Just a little common sense will do. 

[fas42]

43 minutes ago, STC said:

Not money. Not lots of them. Just a little common sense will do. 

 

And common sense tells one that manufacturers don't produce "rubbish", for a huge number of reasons - they want a competitive product in the marketplace, for the money it costs to produce it. But they're not going to make it better than they think the market is interested in - "good enough!" will be the motto.

 

The interesting aspect is in understanding what has been compromised - and whether the product can be "rescued", for a low enough cost and effort ... you see, the NAD gear I tweaked was more compromised by 'junk' parts than the Sharp speakers - but Sharp doesn't have the street cred of NAD ... QED ... 😉

[Ralf11]

common sense tells one that manufacturers are not all profit-maximizers

 

some want to make a profit while making the very best and pushing the envelope as technological advancement allows

[STC]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

NAD gear I tweaked was more compromised by 'junk' parts than the Sharp speakers

Not the Sharp speakers I know of. You cannot make a silk purse of a sow’s ear. You cannot make a speaker to sound better than its physical limitation. For someone who is talking so much without offering an iota of evidence, here I offer you the Saturn player. Tell me which part modification could improve the SQ?  If you answers entail the followings, it will be deleted.

 

1) it is a combination of tweaks. 
2) rechecking the solders. 
3) replacing the mediocre parts. 
4) the magic happens when the speakers disappear. 
 

 

[Hugo9000]

As far as I can recall, the only positive thing Sharp was ever known for was their televisions a number of years ago.  Certainly not their speakers, although they may have been "decent" in the context of low-budget boomboxes.

 

Back on topic:

@STC Thank you for this fascinating thread.  It's interesting to get a look inside some of the gear I remember from audio boutiques in the past.  Some of these have guts that are appalling to look at, underneath a gorgeous exterior.  Sometimes beauty really is only skin deep?  lol  

[fas42]

1 hour ago, STC said:

Not the Sharp speakers I know of. You cannot make a silk purse of a sow’s ear. You cannot make a speaker to sound better than its physical limitation. For someone who is talking so much without offering an iota of evidence, here I offer you the Saturn player. Tell me which part modification could improve the SQ?  If you answers entail the followings, it will be deleted.

 

1) it is a combination of tweaks. 
2) rechecking the solders. 
3) replacing the mediocre parts. 
4) the magic happens when the speakers disappear. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Gosh ST, you're fast ! My response was deleted as it hit the server at the other end - I can't keep up with you, 😉.

[STC]

32 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

As far as I can recall, the only positive thing Sharp was ever known for was their televisions a number of years ago.  Certainly not their speakers, although they may have been "decent" in the context of low-budget boomboxes.

 

Back on topic:

@STC Thank you for this fascinating thread.  It's interesting to get a look inside some of the gear I remember from audio boutiques in the past.  Some of these have guts that are appalling to look at, underneath a gorgeous exterior.  Sometimes beauty really is only skin deep?  lol  

Thanks for the kind words.
 

I used the Sharp speakers/ minicompo at one point of time. They are good but it cannot replace a proper speakers.  FWIW, here is the Sound Lab and Sharp speakers compared. This was an attempt to match the sub to the Sound Lab and I was doing room measurements. It did sound pretty good. 
 

 

[STC]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Gosh ST, you're fast ! My response was deleted as it hit the server at the other end - I can't keep up with you, 😉.

Chris can confirm who is lying here. 

[fas42]

58 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

As far as I can recall, the only positive thing Sharp was ever known for was their televisions a number of years ago.  Certainly not their speakers, although they may have been "decent" in the context of low-budget boomboxes.

 

Back on topic:

@STC Thank you for this fascinating thread.  It's interesting to get a look inside some of the gear I remember from audio boutiques in the past.  Some of these have guts that are appalling to look at, underneath a gorgeous exterior.  Sometimes beauty really is only skin deep?  lol  

 

The Sharp boombox drivers can take a lot of power - which is a key reason I decided to use them; they laugh at the max output of the NAD. Their greatest weakness is the fliminess of the cabinet - but I've got nowhere near that aspect being relevant to the SQ as yet; the NAD combo are by far the weakest links, so far - a lot to be done there, still.

 

And yes, component interiors are where neatness and "beauty of implementation" do count - a super-clean construction can be the vital difference for getting the best performance.

[fas42]

17 minutes ago, STC said:

Chris can confirm who is lying here. 

 

It was a joke, maaaan ... 😝

[STC]

6 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

It was a joke, maaaan ... 😝

Hard to tell the difference. Your perceived reality seemed more like a joke.

[sandyk]

9 hours ago, STC said:

Tom Evans Audio Design The Vibe preamp. Replaced tantalum capacitors which are of high failure rate.

 You are not wrong !

 Worse still, their failure often results in other damage including to voltage regulators.

[fas42]

Talking of component failures, I've had the original Perreaux amp fail in both channels, at separate times; and the NAD was dead when I got it - wouldn't power up. And each circumstance involved a very ordinary resistor, the penny a dozen variety used everywhere, going open circuit. Zero visual indications, zero heat stress usage or position - just old age?

[fas42]

12 hours ago, STC said:

Hard to tell the difference. Your perceived reality seemed more like a joke.

 

You are being silly, ST 🙂 ... I hear the same sort of things with gear playing as others do, and appreciate the specialness of a rig that's been got in a good zone, by the efforts of others, just like the other listeners. The difference for me is that I don't choose to continue to live in a fantasy, la-la land about what is needed to get that happening - in the end, it's all common sense, and engineering ... when you understand what's required, you're going to be sensible about things, and only do put effort and money into what is actually truly important.

[STC]

After 35 years I managed to figure out what was wrong with this Copland.  if the owner could wait another 35 years I could make this sound to be real enough where the speakers and room disappear. 

 

 

[fas42]

And after another 35 years again, even the listeners would disappear ...

[STC]

The Copland was hand carried from Melbourne. Obviously, he has not heard you, Frank. Otherwise he would have waited for you to do the magic. 

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

That CD player gives me the blues...

[STC]

Naim CDX2 player now after replacing a PCM1704 DAC chip.

 

 

[STC]

Exposure CDP.
 

but apparently all these are nowhere to the the Sharp and Nad combo. 
 

 

 

 

[STC]

All Naims, Denon and Audiolab

 

 

 

[sandyk]

On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 2:34 AM, kumakuma said:

 

I agree. 5691 posts since you joined on April 27, 2017 is impressive.

 

But not as impressive as >12,000 posts in 3 years.

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

But not as impressive as >12,000 posts in 3 years.

 

Hard to say which is more impressive. We would need to look at overall word count.