The Best for the Least

[bigbob]

18 minutes ago, Fluffytime said:

 

Don't forget the cryogenically treated shrimp with directional Quantum Tunneled Nano-Batter.

 

SixMoons gave them a 5/5.

 

 

Don't get me started... The one that takes the cake is the cryogenically treated electrical wire to run from the fuse box to the dedicated electrical outlet, and then another $20K on 'power conditioners' built into the power cord.

[bigbob]

9 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

"The Pragmatic Audiophile" is probably how I would describe myself - the dearest system I used was the one 30 years ago, and I've been going cheaper ever since! Because, if I'm going to hack some piece of gear, much better to do it with something second hand, cheaper - if I "destroy" it by mistake or misjudgement, much less is lost - and I learnt that I could go extremely low priced, while still getting results.

 

"Little things are important" ... something most audiophiles don't want to think about ... and that's their loss, of course ...

Pragmatic or just practical--both work for me. A refreshing change back to the OP=-=-The Best for the Least

[bigbob]

2 hours ago, semente said:

 

The certainly is but why should we care if we can't hear  it?

Tomorrow I'll post the spectral analysis of a few recordings.

My old dog would sing along with Phil Collins, "In the air tonight", and the second cut of Fleetwood Mac 'Rumours'. My new puppy likesto sing along with Thomas Dolby, "She blinded me with Science" and doesn't with Fleetwood Mac...a discerning audiophile dog?

[bigbob]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

Nope, it's was figured out years ago, but as usual, conspiracy theorists ignore it, because they don't like it when their "proof" turns out to be BS.

Turns out the source of the tape of the open mike was from a different motorcycle than the one the conspiracy theorists (and the Congressional panel) based their calculations on. So all those calculations were incorrect, because the assumed position of the source in the calculations was wrong. 

 

"They" are the conspiracy theorists, who are still trying to figure it out.

As to the conclusions of the Warren Commission, that was hardly based on science unless you accept that the 'pristine' bullet found at Parkland was the 'magic bullet' that changed course in flight three times, without any deformation.

It is now established, by recorded conversations,  that LBJ wanted a 'lone nut assassin' to be blamed after the FBI revealed that Oswald might have been a Soviet actor. This was 13 months after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and both Hoover at the FBI and Johnson were concerned that the assassination would lead to Nuclear war with the USSR. But what exactly does this have to do with "The Best for the Least" in stereo?

[bigbob]

12 hours ago, Fluffytime said:

 

Bob, I think we're gonna get along just fine. Cheers!

 

Indeed! Cheers

[bigbob]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

George

 Some years back a friend of mine who is an Amateur Radio person did some pirate FM Stereo transmissions using CDs for the source material. His transmissions were by far the best sounding on the whole FM band !

 Apparently his transmissions were receivable for more than just a few KM , as he was living in a higher area of Sydney, and it was just as well he stopped when he did !

Apparently, the authorities became aware of them, but they were too late to catch him.

Regards

Alex

 

My freshman year in college, I lived in a hall with some radio majors, one of which built a transmitter which was able to jump on the carrier of a high power Country radio station, using the cyclone fence around the dorm as his antenna (I really don't know how this worked, except that his 'transmitter' fit into a shoe box. He called it WKMA Pirate Radio (World Kiss My a**) We actually introduced Indianapolis to Queen--most especially Bohemian Rhapsody. You could hear our broadcasts wafting all over the campus, and many local Country listeners were surprised to hear Queen on WIRE.  Needless to say, the FCC soon triangulated the WKMA transmitter and the intrepid broadcasting pioneers were admonished sternly. It was a fun prank.

[bigbob]

12 hours ago, Emcee said:

Or...maybe I would rather not have to admit that there is mass market gear out there that can deliver the same level of satisfaction or more than the more prestigious audiophile brands.

 

 

Satisfaction.

That is the keyword in Audiophilia. I am driven to want to improve my sound quality, and I am unable to afford the brands which I read about in TAS and Stereophile--unless they are used and over 10 years old. Being poor makes one patient. Used vintage electronics can be given a new life with a good technician. Older speakers can be refurbished with new foam or replacement tweeters.

Having a friend who is hell-bent on buying the new and supposedly better gear can be a valuable asset, getting the 'hand-me-downs' (Thanks again for the Nordost Valhalla Reference speaker ribbons).

I am pleased with the gear I have and won't be 'upgrading' anytime soon. I have Satisfaction.

[bigbob]

28 minutes ago, firedog said:

Uh, you introduced it in a previous post. 

I’m not going to respond, other than to say, you should actually read science and forensics about the Kennedy assassination instead of the “alternate facts” sources you seem to believe in. 

 

Okay, and I suppose you also believe 9/11 caused three steel structures to collapse due to office furniture fires.

 

Despite the fact that the max BTU of burning jet fuel can only barely deform structural steel, and no other skyscrapers have collapsed due to fire, before 9/11, or since...but that is for a different forum.

 

I was cautious to not attribute any validity to the acoustic data from the radio transmission, but it seems that you assumed I too am a conspiracy theorist.

 

Please don't quote me "Popular Mechanics" as your source of your de-bunking.

[bigbob]

54 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

 

No offense, but along with JFK and now 9/11, you also mentioned David Blaine's "levitation", which is a magic trick and well-documented, as somehow unexplainable.  This puts you squarely in the conspiracy theorist camp.

 

 

I mentioned the 'scientific analysis' of the Dallas motorcycle tapes because this is an Audiophile forum, and it was an example of "scientific analysis" which has questionable consequence.

As for 9/11, the internet is filled with theories, but nobody has yet to "prove anything".

I take no offense to be  'puts you squarely in the conspiracy theorist camp.'  I would prefer to be a conspiracy enthusiast, as I don't postulate any theories, but enjoy reading about them, much like I enjoy recorded music, but could not carry a note in a bucket.

One doesn't have to 'believe' in the range of human hearing to have an opinion about it, as this topic has proven.

[bigbob]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Uh, you introduced it in a previous post. 

I’m not going to respond, other than to say, you should actually read science and forensics about the Kennedy assassination instead of the “alternate facts” sources you seem to believe in. 

 

It is funny, for the years prior to the current President, I never heard about "alternative facts" until Kellyanne Conway and Sarah Huckabee Sanders introduced us to the concept, along with 'fake news'.

 

As political discussions are not for this forum, I must assume that even Audiophilia has 'alternative facts' hence this lengthy discussion of human ears, and sampling rates on a forum entitled "The Best for the Least"--which I assume meant-- what was the best value for the least amount of money in AUDIO EQUIPMENT.

 

As the "Computer Audiophile on the Cheap", I extol the virtue of vintage electronics, vintage speakers, and affordable tweaks to make the listening experience better without depriving the listener of all their spare money.

 

You might be surprised, @firedog in just how little I believe in anything, except what I hear.

If my friend brings over a Synergistic Reseach device, and when turned on, makes the music sound more open and airy--that is cool.

 

Twenty minutes later, I am back to enjoying my system, after he has taken the device home with him.

 

I don't lust for things I cannot afford. For practical purposes--if I never spent another penny on tweaks, new gear, or subscriptions to DSD streaming services--I doubt if I have enough of my lifetime left to listen to all the music I already have.

[bigbob]

3 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

Consider a signal that has an infinite amount of singers singing at the same time, and every quanta time (or smallest timeslice possible) that someone changes a note.  without an infinite sampling, it would be impossible to capture every change.

It is not about the normal audible frequency range (e.g. 20hz-20khz), it is about ability to capture every potential change with anything but an infinite sampling rate.

 

Would 9million people singing sound the same as 10 million people singing, most people would suggest it is not distinguishable, where i suggest it may be difficult to discern differences, but in actuality, there is a difference, and that 9million 999th person is me singing.

 

I cannot demonstrate what i am trying to say, but the belief will always be with me, and no one will ever be able to convince me otherwise.

 

It is also ok, if people consider me ignorant.  I am really ok with that.

I don't think you are ignorant. I am curious as what any of this discussion has to do with "The Best for the Least"? Do more expensive equipment sample more or less than a cheaper/older piece of audio gear? Are cheaper pieces less capable of reproducing audiophile quality outside the 20-20 range of the human hearing? 

Other than a dog howling when Phil Collins sings "in the air tonight" on my Cheap system, I figured that hundreds of rounds at Target practice, my Age, and standing in front of the speakers at Rock concerts makes theoretical knowledge of human hearing irrelevant anyhow...

 

[bigbob]

2 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

I wasn't the one who took it off topic...but most threads go off topic that last more than a day or two (wink).

I look forward to it going back on topic.  Conspiracy theory and grateful dead weren't exactly on topic either (grin).

Oh No you didn't go there ? the Grateful Dead is always on topic no matter what the OP concerns ? now it is all a conspiracy... Audiophile music is a psy-op to extract money from people who think that they are 'just' $10k from Audio Nirvana. A hundred posts ago, someone said that... Back when Grover Norquist wanted no new taxes on Hi-Fi gear...

[bigbob]

31 pages of Acute Audiophile Nervosa is prima facie evidence that everyone has an opinion, some are buttressed by evidence, others by force of will. Some folks simply feel compelled to put in their two cents worth- even if they have no idea what is being discussed. Thanks again for letting me be That Guy.

[bigbob]

34 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

Based on my experience of going to high end shows and audiophile "meetups" and hearing the "professed best", and the multitudes of different systems i have had (I have bought and sold probably 200 different speakers and 30 different amps over the past few years), and trying about 20 different DACS and all the different interfaces, I would say in a nutshell:

 

speakers really make the biggest difference and that you can buy

   a used pair for about $3000 that will get you 90% of the best possible.

   a used pair for about $1000 that will get you 70% of the best possible

   a used pair for under $100 that will sound really good with a subwoofer

 

Amplifier

  used for $3k (used mcintosh, yes, i am biased to the mcintosh sound) that will get you 95% of best possible

  used for $1K 90% of best possible

  used for $600 80% of best possible

  really good for just about any amount

 

DAC

  i haven't heard anything that costs over $500 sound less than 80% of best out there

  unimpressed with any wow factor of any dac i have heard, but i still haven't tried a chord in my own environment, but have at shows.

 

Law of diminishing returns is a real reality, and i believe just about any system $2K or higher is capable of pleasing, but best bang for buck imho would include a mcintosh amp and a pair focal or ATC speakers in a $10K system.

 

You know that the more I read your posts, the wiser I think you are. I said if I won the lottery, I would buy a McIntosh. And my friend has a pair of Orfeo speakers which replaced a pair of Hales. I love my Advents because I bought them in 1975 and they sound better than when my source was a budget turntable with a very poor cartridge. The Denon AVR has a pure direct circuit like my Yamaha, plus it has AL24 which upsamples everything to 24 bit waveform. My MP3 @ 192 files sounds good. My 24/96 Hi-Res files sounds better-- but you really have to carefully listen to a cymbal crash on sample to hear any difference from a low-res MP3. I bought into Yamaha 'natural sound' with the silver faced receiver that was my first purchase with the Advents in 1975. I still have the black face Yamaha that replaced the silver. And if money is no object, those DaytonAudio AIR bookshelf speakers fill my bedroom with a holographic sound stage that amazes me for $49/pr. Like you, I don't much care what others think or say. I gave up on other opinions when my leg was amputated and my whole life changed.

Life is precious. And our time is limited, so I please myself, and don't take much time concerning what other's opinions are.

[bigbob]

6 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

If not for my brother, whom i would suggest was one of the most hard core dead heads, I would have never tried a Mcintosh, so there may be some bias there (wink)....but it truly opened up the importance of amps to me....much more so than any dac ever has....not as much as speakers, but more separation of instruments, more depth...I really don't know what the magic juice is, but there is something there.....  One amplifier engineer I met I asked what made them different and he said it was the custom windings of the transformers, for whatever that is worth.

 

I tried like hell to get a sound that compared to the Mcintosh amps, at a fraction of the price and I failed miserably, although i did come close with an old pass labs threshold amp.....so if you want to get close try a used Roger Pass design.  I have heard good things about the nakamichi STASIS amps that can be found for under $1K.

 

Agree, on the real cheap, denon is hard to beat.

Nelson Pass? I agree with the First Watt being the most important Watt. If you can't get it right, then you just amplifing noise, Ivor at Linn said basically the same thing about his LP-12 transcription turntable. If you aren't getting all the information cut into the vinyl groove, nothing downstream is going to sound good. The guys at Schiit say that they want to make your system sound as good as possible, not sell you something new. Pragmatic Audiophile best describes how much is for Sound Quality and how much is chasing a sound you will never achieve.

[bigbob]

56 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

I am not a schiit fan mainly because of their reluctance in DSD.  I understand though being a "one man design" shop, where his forte has been in PCM his entire life and getting older.  I know he made one dsd piece of gear, but I don't feel he ever put his heart into it.  I guess I just have difficulty with anyone that won't accept DSD as being superior.

He is REALLY good at marketing though, and that is what sells.  He shows up on every dac search (grin)....smart man anyway.

3

 

That is the deciding factor in the entry level. If you want DSD and want Bluetooth, then the iFi iOne is the recommendation. I really like the way they exploit the Burr-Brown chipset--very crisp and clean. ( I understand the Pro iDSD is about a week away from market--from my sources at iFi)

 

And if your entire collection is PCM and you have no appetite to replace your favorites at $25/per download to upgrade to DSD, then Schiit works well for me. The Multibit is a very 'nice' sounding product. It seems more analog than other DACs I have tested. They also don't care for MQA or Class D amps.

 

I am not on either company's payroll, and I am as objective as any reviewer. I will leave the decision of iFi vs. Schiit to the buyer. The choice is very clear-cut: DSD vs PCM. Not having heard a native DSD file, and contented with hi-res PCM, I am full of Schiit.

[bigbob]

13 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

I think those posts were unable to overcome my expectation bias, so never made it to long-term memory

 

I scoffed at speaker wire until I was given a pair of Nordost Valhalla Reference. Before that, you could never convince me that $6K speaker wire was anything short of marketing and hype.

[bigbob]

2 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Blowing the entire concept of "best for least" right out of the ballpark

 

 

Well, my cost was Free.

A gift. I would never have spent that on speaker wire--even if I won the lottery.

[bigbob]

25 minutes ago, Teresa said:

 

Yes I do sit in the sweet spot and appreciate good music on my system. If I really love a piece of music I turn out the lights and close my eyes and let the music flow through and over me. 

 

I have read that for the general public music is more of a background to accompany life's other activities. I listen that way also but I require time to give my full attention to the music.

 

Most of the equipment I own I bought clearance, used, open box, and deep discount sales.

 

 

I too am very satisfied with the music my audio system delivers. Audio equipment is a means to listen to music with and I'm not really into the technical stuff, I leave that to the audio designers.

 

For me, audio equipment must:

• Look nice and blend in with my furnishings.
• Be ergonomically designed and easy to use, with an uncluttered look.
• Make my music sound realistic and enjoyable. Not one or the other but both.
• Speakers must have nice grill clothes (acoustically transparent but keeping the drivers hidden) and they must have a nice wood finish and look pretty.
• They must be reliable and built to last a long time.
• I must be able to afford it.

I purchased my Infinity Reference Standard Kappa 7 floor standing speakers in 1992 when they went on final clearance at 50% discount, marked down from $1,400 to $700 for the pair. About six years ago when the woofer surrounds deteriorated, instead of buying new speakers, I replaced the woofer surrounds. I'm  hoping they last until I die, as floor standing speakers with 12 inch woofers are way out of my price range even at a 50% discount. Also, way too many modern speakers have visible drives (woofers, midranges and tweeters) which I find ugly to look at. 

 

 

In short, I too am satisfied. 

 

 

My Advents are sporting a re-used tie-dye tee-shirt I bought at Hippie Fest.

It was a nice pattern, but the shirt was made with a cheapass thin material-- not like those good tie-dyes on Heavyweight tees. The covers were stained from 40 years of spilled wine, candle wax that got loose and dripped over the edge, and dust. I found a pair of replacement OEM Advents on eBay for $70, but I had a staple gun and this pathetic, thin tee-shirt and voila...

[bigbob]

24 minutes ago, jabbr said:

Haha so "best for least" => rob a high end audio shop?

 

No, have a friend that is always upgrading his rig, and not wanting the trouble of trying to sell them on the used market.

Looks like he is going to give me a pair of Rick Schultz's  HFC Titanium single ended interconnects when his new upgrades come in...to replace my Schiit Pyst 6-inch interconnects.

[bigbob]

6 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Sigh, so that we might have a reasonable discussion here, can we agree that "least" refers to a commonly available/market price either new or used?

 

Well, I am the Computer Audiophile on the Cheap, and it doesn't get any cheaper than Free.

 

As for a reasonable discussion-- after 28 pages of argument oversampling rates and esoteric science-- I am glad to be back on the "Best for Least".

Used electronics -and- a technician in the neighborhood who says that he will make it "better than new" for about $30 opens the doors for a very good sounding amp/receiver for under $100. There are all over Craigslist and eBay.

Even the Habitat for Humanity thrift shop is a good place to look for bargains.

Where are all those NAD 3020s? I see a place that sells them, refurbed and recapped for $269.

[bigbob]

13 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

James Watt was the most important Watt

 

if the internet were not a Divergence Machine, I would put garage sales, refurbs, etc.into a separate thread

 

I feel the exact same way about personality conflicts over the sampling rates and arguments over who knows more esoteric minutea about sounds outside the human ear's ability to hear, except if you are submerged in liquid nitrogen and approaching absolute zero.  (Brownian motion of molecules, yeah, that is what I am referring to)

 

This topic is "The Best For the Least" not 'sounds only a dog can hear' --but that memo didn't get through to folks with over 3,000 posts...

[bigbob]

14 minutes ago, mansr said:

Lots of excellent software is actually free. Ain't that great?

 

One of the best reasons for using Linux based OS-- all the open source software.

I use Audacious as my music player.

I was having problems with my AT&T internet service, and their tech support is somewhere where English is a second language.

The guy on the phone asks me if I am using Windows 7 or 10, and I said neither, I use Ubuntu 14.04. He repeats the question "which Windows Operating system is on your computer?"

I asked if he had ever heard of Linux. "Is that Windows?" he asked again.

I gave him a little history, about Bell Labs and Unix, and that in all probability, their server farms were using Linux Server. He puts me on hold, and his supervisor didn't know anything about Linux... I asked if they could transfer me to a person in the United States, and he hung up on me.

[bigbob]

Does the 'sample rate' have any impact on the playback of a recorded song. I find it difficult to distinguish 24/96 from 24/192 when listening. My Denon features an "AL24" DSP which converts any source (MP3 or 16/44) to a 24-bit waveform. Maybe that is why I doubt if I could distinguish 24/88, 24/176, 24/192 recording from 24/96. I can hear some loss of detail in an MP3 @ 192 compared to a 24-bit but I have downsampled the 24-bit to MP3 for use on my phone to save space on the card. Through the earbuds, it sounds fine. On the big rig, there is a difference, but I have assumed that is "Lossy vs. Lossless" like, in photography, a smaller file can be interpolated larger, but that doesn't make it better than a native larger file.

[bigbob]

11 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

If you can hear any difference between 96 and  192 you are at least a cat

 

I wonder if GUTB would post a 'selfie' for us?

 

Thanks, @Spacehound, I suspected as much.