The Best for the Least

[Ralf11]

We will optimise two parameters that exhibit a somewhat inverse relationship by creating an indifference curve, not by arguing about a single point.

 

One point on the indiff. curve:

$6k Maggie 3.7i speakers

$2.4k Schiit Yggy DAC

$0.7k Schiit Vidar amp

- 0 -  your existing computer onto which you rip your existing CDs

$0.1k cables

--------------

call it $10k for a really fine system; toss in some DIY QRD and absorbers, bass traps if you want

 

...no it is not quite full range

 

[Ralf11]

ok, now we need a point or two to fill in the $1k to $10k space...

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'd look at something from Schiit and Elac. 

 

 

a Joffett system...

[Ralf11]

can people lay out the total system cost?

 

might help someone looking to buy

[Ralf11]

9 hours ago, semente said:

 

...

What would you suggest for a 1 or 2k system?

 

 

other than the above posts?

 

Elac on either - but there are tons of very decent speakers at the $400 to $1,200 price ranges

 

nad or maybe the lower end Schiit gear?

 

iFi for DAC?

[Ralf11]

but it is cheap

 

what do you prefer over Schiit for any price point?

 

vs. Vidar? $700

 

vs. Yggy?  $2,200

 

Personally I prefer my $89 Phasure DAC...

[Ralf11]

Beats Headphones 

[Ralf11]

18 minutes ago, TubeLover said:

I'm guessing this was clearly meant to be satirical, these clearly fall into a different category, "the least for the most"!

 

JC

 

No.  They win the thread, as they were free.

[Ralf11]

11 hours ago, Spacehound said:

It's  not in the least arrogant. We make them from scratch, we don't pick them off a tree and try to figure them out.

 

I've seen you mention him often before. Every chance you get. So often that I was surprised he was missing from your first post. He seems to be the captain  of your tiny 'Praetorian Guard', though probably an unknowing one.

 

And a lot of the time you tell us how useless most EE's are. But when you find a rare one that happens to agree with one of your findings   about something he becomes  a 'valued expert'.

What's "many" C. A. members? There are 100,000 plus I believe. I don't see many of them  agreeing with you.

 

Anyway, this WAV  which, incidentally, we invented,  and checksum stuff  has got zero to do with this thread.

 

You are kind of new here, and may not know about the religious devotion of the sandmen and their Audio Ayatollah.  The worst Fatwahs are reserved for those who refuse to worship the The Colloms, which are tall, uh... Collomnar... structures that were placed astride the 6 or 8 or 48 Holy Files to guard them from the Demons of Deviation.

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, TubeLover said:

Outstanding $10k system there. And I'm a great fan of what Schiit does, but can a pair of Vidar's really drive 3.7i's well? If so, I may well recommend this system to a good friend I'm helping put one together.

 

JC

 

Thx!  I am an Audio Cheapskate but like decent SQ within that framework.  More details in the Giant Black Things in my Livingroom thread...

 

Rumor has it that you should only use a single Vidar.  I plan an amp upgrade form my 19990s Sunfire but am unsure what to do right now.

 

BTW, I am using an Audio Research LS25 Mk II as a euphonic Tubicizor ...

[Ralf11]

oh yeh - thx for that reminder!

 

BigB, you "have deduced that the DAC is the centerpiece of a Computer Audiophile system" but I have to wonder if a DAC, or a more expensive DAC, is always the place to add $$ for a consequent increase in SQ?

 

(for the record, I have an old DacMagic (not the + version) and am about to test it against an Oppo 205 Dac built in to their disc player)

[Ralf11]

I always think of speakers and room tmts as the most important items.  

next, source material: mastering/recording

 

maybe DAC before amp...

[Ralf11]

anyone with an Ambiphonics system will put a high priority on the room

 

- some of these ranking are difficult as they change once you reach a certain overall level

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

You cannot be more wrong than this. Room acoustics affects Ambiophonics much lesser than other setup due to the repeated signals. 

 

A paper is in progress on this subject. 

 

you misunderstand my point

 

anyone with an Ambiphonics system will put a high priority on the room ---> you care about the sound 'effects' from time delays

 

not that room acoustics have a greater or lessor effect

[Ralf11]

Yes, you have it solved.

 

or nearly so -- maybe nothing is ever solved

[Ralf11]

12 hours ago, STC said:

 

That's a myth. I don't think we will ever "solve" in this hobby. Now, I am itching to buy high quality speakers for the surround ambience that are capable of micro details decay. This is audio satyriasis and cannot be cured.

 

 

that's why I quickly added "or nearly so"

 

There is a cure however.  Just buy an old sports cars (esp. if it a high-buck Italian one) and "restore it" - you will soon be relieved of any audio addictions.

[Ralf11]

Maggie 1.7i meet your $3k criterion.  Add subs if you want to make Wendell cry...

 

My 3.7i cost $4k used but I had to settle for black.

 

Then there is Vandersteen...

[Ralf11]

3 hours ago, Spacehound said:

Regarding Chord I can only speak for the Mojo, which is excellent (I mostly use it in my car attached to an iPod running the  Onkyo HF Player app, which reduces the iPod to just a 'drive', does PCM up to 192 and converts DSD  to PCM (which is pointless with the Mojo as that does DSD fine  but it does no harm).

 

 

What head unit and amp do you have in your car?

[Ralf11]

Thanks - I am looking for some aftermarket items to drive Focals & play files well + AM/FM.

[Ralf11]

4 hours ago, patagent said:

Not sure how Brownian motion is related to audible sound.  Brownian motions is the mechanism for diffusion and has little to do with sound.  When you speak of Brownian motion, you typically look at the random walk of a particle in a sea of other particles (e.g., dust in air).  

 

the human ear can almost detect Brownian motion of air molecules

[Ralf11]

5 hours ago, botrytis said:

 

Brownian movement? You mean - "The erratic random movement of microscopic particles in a fluid, as a result of continuous bombardment from molecules of the surrounding medium." The key is, IN A FLUID. Air cannot be described as a fluid, unless liquefied. Air itself, is not dense enough to have Brownian movement.

 

OK the biochemist in me got the best of me. Sorry - Back OT.

 

slight mis-stmt on my part - particles are not moving as Browni found from bombardment; the ear drum is tho

 

except air is a fluid

 

Are you in the wine industry?  Good botrytis (Sauternes), or bad?

[Ralf11]

54 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 

Did my doctorate on Botrytis biochemistry 

 

 

Good - we have some grapes for you to "process"...  We want a quickie instead of waiting decades for Sauternes to properly age...

 

GMO that sucka!

[Ralf11]

I'm curious what he has for a $300K system  

[Ralf11]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

That agrees with firedog's assertion that it doesn't work for airborne sound.

 

Irrelevant.

 

This is about a device in direct contact with the head, i.e. not sound arriving as waves in air.

 

many other animals are known to hear at ultrasonic (to human) freq.s  - I would not be surprised if humans can do so to some degree using the ear drum > 3 bones, etc.

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, bigbob said:

Considering that my system was a 1980s Yamaha RX-135 and a pair of 1975 Advent speakers before I was given Denon and Nordost Valhalla Reference speaker wire, I could put the value at $200 With Schiit Modi 2 being worth half that.?

 

best upgrade: stacked Advents