Sanity Check

[mansr]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

covetousness causes stress

I'm picturing a mandatory warning label with a grisly image of a stressed-out audiophile on high-end equipment.

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, Ron Scubadiver said:

That assumes everyone is working towards the exact same thing, which I sincerely doubt.

Most people say their goal is accurate reproduction.

[mansr]

10 minutes ago, plissken said:

That the signal that is encoded on the source is messed with in the least damaging way possible. 

 

So I would like a chain that I can go from source to the output of the amp, at the very least, capture that and compare back to the source with as little deviation as possible. 

An ideal record/playback chain would allow placing a microphone in front of the speaker and looping a signal through it arbitrarily many times without degradation. If we remove the transducers, we can achieve audible transparency for a dozen or more iterations at a modest cost. The main remaining problem is the speaker.

[mansr]

Just now, Ron Scubadiver said:

I agree that is what they say, but people have different ideas about what that means.  There are those who want to produce a pleasing sound with pleasant distortions.

That's not necessarily accurate. Nevertheless, that's still what they say they want.

 

Just now, Ron Scubadiver said:

Some strive for a highly detailed sound.

This usually means emphasised high frequencies or high-order harmonic distortion. In other words, not accurate. Once again, however, the adherents claim they are getting accuracy.

 

In other words, what people think they want and what they actually like are not necessarily related.

[mansr]

Just now, Ralf11 said:

BTW, what are your speakers?

B&W CM6 S2 with a REL subwoofer.

[mansr]

25 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Thx - just one sub?

For now. I've thought about getting another, but it hasn't happened yet.

[mansr]

43 minutes ago, adamdea said:

Purely accurate sound reproduction will not necessarily lead to greater verisimilitude because in the real world we don't rely exclusively on our ears; so maybe the sound needs to be goosed up a bit to make it seem like there's a real person there without the necessary visual, tactile, olfactory, time continuity back up to support that idea. 

This is a possibility. However, the starting point should still be accurate reproduction with tweaks added to taste. Also, such tweaking is best done in a controlled manner, these days probably through DSP, not by combining ever weirder cables in the hopes that the cumulative effect will resemble the desired outcome.

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, mourip said:

My guess is that as someone stated above improvements come pretty quickly until about $10K but by $20 we are left with "a hundred shades of great". When we call it quits is a product more of pocketbook and personal preference than oscilloscopes.

I would never buy a component that didn't measure well, seeing as moderately priced gear achieves this with ease. What I ultimately choose then comes down to aesthetics, availability, and price.

[mansr]

44 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

And again, yes, the amps sounded different when moved to different speakers due to the complex load that a speaker (and it's cable) represents.

Any difference heard is probably mostly due to the speakers alone. To tell the amp and speaker influences apart, you'd have to record the signal at the speaker inputs. A good amp will deliver the same signal to any reasonable load.

[mansr]

4 hours ago, Ajax said:

I would urge you to seriously consider auditioning a second subwoofer. Like you I have good quality large bookshelf speakers, with excellent mid and highs (ACT SMC 19). I recently purchased two SVS SB 2000, which I hooked up to my Devialet 220 in stereo. These are not expensive and very much "mid range" as far as price (2 x US$600), but not sound. They are rated down to 19hz at -3db, which I think is a stretch but even if they only get down to say 25hz they have captured 99% of the base in most music I listen too.

A sub is a must with stand-mount speakers. The question is how much difference a second sub will make.

[mansr]

3 hours ago, Spacehound said:

I fail so see how standmounts, if they have the same 'foot' area as floorstanders, are easier to place.

A separate sub lets you place it in the best location, which might be some distance from the main speakers.

[mansr]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Overpriced is a term I use for products that don’t sell because the price is too high. If people are willing to pay for something that means the price is right.

That's oversimplifying things. A product can be overpriced even if some people still buy it.

[mansr]

14 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

Take the commonly mentioned  'aircraft grade' aluminium. Aircraft aren't ever made out of aluminium.

Now you're nit-picking. Aircraft are largely made of aluminium alloys with less than 10% non-Al content. Whether those audio enclosures actually use one of the common aircraft alloys, I have no idea. There's also the question of why this would be desirable in the first place. I can't think of a single thing an amp and an aircraft have in common.

[mansr]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

I struggle to comprehend the cost of something like the Master Chronosonic ~$650,000 when compared to something like a Ferrari at the same price or much cheaper. The car seems so much more complex. 

 

However, I understand pricing and setting a price that people will pay. If you have happy customers paying $250,000 and equally as happy customers willing to pay $650,000, it’s probably a no-brainer to charge the higher price. 

The optimal price is whatever maximises your profits, not the maximum amount you can manage to sell one unit for. If by doubling your markup, you reduce sales (in number of units) by 75%, that's a bad move, even though the profit per unit has gone up. One strategy to exploit both volume and high margins is to paint, say, 25% of your units a different colour and sell those at twice the price.

[mansr]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

where it gets ridiculous is when people just pass the product on. Example, customer orders expensive speaker, dealer places the order with distributor, distributor places order with manufacturer. The dist is just collecting a bunch of money to place the order in some cases ( not all).

In these cases the factory probably ships the item directly to the dealer too, so the distributor literally does nothing but click a button on a web page. I wish I could charge $100k for doing that.

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

I was exposing the phoniness of it - 'aircraft grade aluminium' doesn't exist. And an aircraft grade aluminium  'machining' alloy would be a bad choice as they 'ring' like hell. and most expensive speakers use machined materials  rather than cast as low number castings are very expensive..

If you are referring specifically to the phrase "aircraft grade," I agree there's probably no such term used in the metal industry.

[mansr]

6 minutes ago, GUTB said:

A quick google search shows that "aircraft-grade aluminum" refers to a 6061 aluminum alloy, a high quality alloy developed in the 30s. I guess "aircraft-grade" is a cooler way of saying "high-quality".

Wikipedia says this alloy is also used for beverage cans. I guess saying the amp chassis is made of recycled beer cans doesn't have the same marketing effect.

[mansr]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

But the audiophile grade recycling trucks required to collect the cans, so the final sound quality is best, could increase the cost :~)

The best-sounding items are made from cans that once contained fine Belgian beer.

[mansr]

10 minutes ago, rando said:

Wasn't aware any of the Trappists operated a cannery.

Exactly.

[mansr]

20 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

Now it's gone nuts.  A pair of 'top' speakers costing as much as a mid-range Ferrari even though they are knocked up by a few guys in a shed.

It's bling and expense for expense's sake, just like with the Ferrari. You'll get the same performance, or better, at 1/10 the price.

[mansr]

6 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

New thread?  What is the least $$ for great HiFI?  Maggies + Shiit?  $10k?  less?

I'd say you can get a respectable system for a lot less. $5-6k should suffice.

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, Cornan said:

Less, if you spend $$ on the AC mains and DC regulation!

That's not where I'd start my spending.

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, Danaudio said:

Amazing how some of you criticize people who spend lots of $$$ on audio equipment yet when you look at it these guys who spend that much might be spending less than the average person on here if you base it on income or net worth. It is all relative. To say that someone who spends $200,000 on speaker is crazy or just showing off is moronic if you don't know that persons situation. What if he /she makes $10 or $100 million each year. That $200,000 means nothing it would be like someone spending $1000. 

It is never cheap to buy the best or very very high end of anything and it is no different with speakers or electronics. Difference is there but might not be enough of a difference for the average joe to dish out but for some it really is not even a concern and to say theses guys are dummies are totally incorrect. 

I avoid giving money to charlatans and con men, even if I can afford it.

[mansr]

11 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

The main reason why so much 'high end' stuff costs so much is they decide what they can get away with  and put just about enough spurious stuff inside  and finish it with a fancy veneer which also helps  to 'justify' the price. It's basically willy waving - Honda once made a 70,000 dollar (at today's prices) motorcycle. People didn't  'get used to' that but a year later they accepted the new  30,000 dollar motorcycle as 'reasonably priced for what it is'.

That's like the well-known restaurant trick of putting a single high-priced item on the menu in order to make the remaining dishes appear cheaper.

[mansr]

1 hour ago, Fluffytime said:

I know a guy who builds DIY arms, and he gets all his tubes for free going to sport fishing stores and asking if they've got any broken rods they want to get rid off.

Good idea. I've been getting the feeling that my usual arms dealer is ripping me off.