Fas42’s Stereo ‘Magic’

[kumakuma]

48 minutes ago, fas42 said:

I'm pointing out that there is an alternative, to people who are fed up with spending big bucks, and never reaching "audio nirvana" ... all that it requires is that one starts changing the attitude as regards what's needed to get there ... 😉.

 

Chris says it better than I can.

 

34 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Thank you for attempting to save those grown men who don’t know they want to be saved. They’ve made it their entire, likely successful, lives without anonymous people on the internet there to save them.

 

[sandyk]

33 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Chris says it better than I can.

 

 

 

If you are going to quote other people, at least have the courtesy to post a link to the thread where you took the quote from, so members and readers can see if it applies to the present thread. 

 Chris also advised that members should avail themselves of the IGNORE THIS TOPIC button

 Perhaps you should try that ?.

[kumakuma]

19 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

If you are going to quote other people, at least have the courtesy to post a link to the thread where you took the quote from, so members and readers can see if it applies to the present thread. 

 

Thank you for your concern and your service.

 

In my opinion, posting a link would have been redundant as the little arrow in the upper right hand corner of a quoted post serves the same purpose:

 

 

 

[sandyk]

I repeat :

 

Chris also advised that members should avail themselves of the IGNORE THIS TOPIC button

 Perhaps you should try that instead ?

 Although I often disagree with Frank, I do find some of his posts of interest.

[Racerxnet]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

Although I often disagree with Frank, I do find some of his posts of interest.

 

Repetitive Obfuscation from Frank and the dissimilarities of the playback mechanism/chain that most of us have, gives us reason to call out the foolishness. 

[tmtomh]

4 hours ago, Racerxnet said:

 

Repetitive Obfuscation from Frank and the dissimilarities of the playback mechanism/chain that most of us have, gives us reason to call out the foolishness. 

 

I take no pleasure in agreeing with you here, but I do have to agree.

 

Frank does seem like a very nice and cheerful guy. But the content, repetitiveness and ultimate non-responsiveness of much of his posts here...

[semente]

1 hour ago, tmtomh said:

 

I take no pleasure in agreeing with you here, but I do have to agree.

 

Frank does seem like a very nice and cheerful guy. But the content, repetitiveness and ultimate non-responsiveness of much of his posts here...

 

It's his thread.

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, semente said:

 

It's his thread.

 

 Agreed .

 Those who disagree with what Frank is saying can always ignore the thread, as there isn't much you can really add to what many others have already said, and the thread will then eventually disappear from view .

 Ever considered that Frank may just need to talk to somebody ?

Frank does seem like a very nice and cheerful guy.

[Teresa]

14 minutes ago, semente said:

It's his thread.

 

Actually it is not, this thread was started by @Blackmorec . Here is the first post.

[fas42]

Awww, shucks ... 🤪

 

Racerxnet is correct when he says that "dissimilarities of the playback mechanism/chain" make it difficult to provide what some would see as "responsive" posts - as I have said many times, the situation is as if some driver comes in to a mechanic, and says, "I want you to make my car go better" - "What are the symptoms, then?" - "Symptoms, whaddaya mean, symptoms??!! I'm just not happy with how it goes; I reckon the bloke across the road has got a better rig! ... You work it out!" - - - "Siggghh ..."

 

If you just want to have eye candy, and play with new gizmos to your heart's content, I'm of zero use to you ... but if you want every recording you have to take you to a magic place, where you enter and are immersed in the world of passionate music making, then what what I'm talking about may be of value ... 😉

[Racerxnet]

Again Frank, you say jackshit on what is going to make our system better. As a matter of fact, you don't have a system to work with. While you are at it, why not stop trying to degrade people who can afford the better equiptment.

 

You're  right to a lot of people; you are zero use to us. 

 

MAK. 

 

 

[fas42]

If you just settle down a bit, you'll get a lot further ... 🤨.

 

How to get a system better depends on getting feedback, from you or whoever, on what ails it - a mechanic doesn't need to own, and drive each day, a high performance vehicle to be able to diagnose when a sick puppy happens to drive into his garage. I mentioned using Boney M. tracks, above, to "diagnose" the state of play - and you've given zero response ... operating in a vacuum is not helpful, for anyone.

 

"Better equipment" has nothing to do with insults - unfortunately, it means you, and everyone else is gonna get nervous if I, or others, say that expensive components have to be hacked to "make them better" ... I have always used gear that I might hack to death, to prove a point - if it dies in the cause, then little has been lost, 😀.

 

[fas42]

As an example,

@Blackmorec, who started this thread, has left a trail of posts which identify his approach, and gear, starting with this one,

 

The Innous server has been changed, I believe, but key here is simplicity. And integration. Could it do better? Highly likely ... he has already stated that altering vibration damping alters the sound - the clue is right there that further exploration would likely benefit. His Magico speakers could possibly be tweaked if he got inside of them, but then he would be very nervous in touching anything, in case he damages resale value - this is a tricky area ... does one say, go for broke, and do what has to be done, to build the vital last ounce of integrity - or accept that compromise is always going to be part of the equation? 🙂

[semente]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

you, and everyone else is gonna get nervous if I, or others, say that expensive components have to be hacked to "make them better"

 

I agree with this bit: the performance (or ability to accurately reproduce the signal) of any commercial equipment can be improved, though the magnitude of those improvements varies and is case-dependent.

There's no such thing as "state of the art" in commercial products.

[Blackmorec]

The key for me is buying gear that synergises .....stuff that is known and recognised as working well together. There are thousands, hundreds of thousands of audiophiles and dealers who try an incredible number of combinations and find that a few work “REALLY’ well together.  Bring that gear together and you’ve got a great foundation....but you’re way off finished if your goal is to have near perfect sound without anomalies to constantly spoil the picture .

 

Firstly setting up the speakers and setting up the room to get the right balance of reflections and diffusion to ensure that room early and late reflections aren’t obscuring musical detail, that would prevent you hearing a reproduction of the true recording venue in your listening room. Then making sure that your network that feeds your system isn’t picking up and transmitting noise or vibrating and creating jitter to mistime the bit stream.  Ensuring that your power supply is adequate, noise free and offers a good and quiet earth. Making sure that your components are cabled together adequately and that your cabling is preserving the maximum amount of information and isn’t losing you a lot of detail 

 

When you’re finished, you should be extracting the maximum your system is capable of. Instead of 2 speakers you should be hearing a room full of music  a soundscape that renders the sound engineers work in all its immersive glory (if that’s what’s on the recording), 

[semente]

39 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

The key for me is buying gear that synergises .....stuff that is known and recognised as working well together. There are thousands, hundreds of thousands of audiophiles and dealers who try an incredible number of combinations and find that a few work “REALLY’ well together.  Bring that gear together and you’ve got a great foundation....but you’re way off finished if your goal is to have near perfect sound without anomalies to constantly spoil the picture .

 

Firstly setting up the speakers and setting up the room to get the right balance of reflections and diffusion to ensure that room early and late reflections aren’t obscuring musical detail, that would prevent you hearing a reproduction of the true recording venue in your listening room. Then making sure that your network that feeds your system isn’t picking up and transmitting noise or vibrating and creating jitter to mistime the bit stream.  Ensuring that your power supply is adequate, noise free and offers a good and quiet earth. Making sure that your components are cabled together adequately and that your cabling is preserving the maximum amount of information and isn’t losing you a lot of detail 

 

When you’re finished, you should be extracting the maximum your system is capable of. Instead of 2 speakers you should be hearing a room full of music  a soundscape that renders the sound engineers work in all its immersive glory (if that’s what’s on the recording), 

 

I think that when you say that are finished that is only the start.

 

My knowledge of electronics is limited but I've listened to (and own or owned) a lot of electronic hi-fi equipment that a friend of mine has modified/optimised (things like grounding, component quality, circuit simplification and redesign) and sometimes the improvement in performance (accuracy) are/were significant.

For most of us though that approach is unfortunately off limits. And it also voids manufacturer warranty and may reduce equipment value outside of the restricted circles of those who have been "initiated".

[Blackmorec]

1 hour ago, semente said:

 

I think that when you say that are finished that is only the start.

 

My knowledge of electronics is limited but I've listened to (and own or owned) a lot of electronic hi-fi equipment that a friend of mine has modified/optimised (things like grounding, component quality, circuit simplification and redesign) and sometimes the improvement in performance (accuracy) are/were significant.

For most of us though that approach is unfortunately off limits. And it also voids manufacturer warranty and may reduce equipment value outside of the restricted circles of those who have been "initiated".

Frankly I doubt there’s many people on here with sufficient skill and knowledge to out-think and out-build the likes of Magico, Innuos or Devialet. And frankly, when the system continues to thrill and amaze at every listen, I think the idea of opening it up for some unqualified modifications is fraught with dangers. The danger of damaging something, changing something that unbalances the sound, voiding warranty, reducing resale value and making it hard to re-sell etc. Magico get their speakers sounding as good as they know how, using SOTA drivers, cross-over design components and cabinet. The only 2 risk free elements that will improve on that are better footers (available from Magico) and better speaker cable.  The same applies to Devialet.  Better vibration control and better cables to and from the units will enhance sound without making internal mods. By the time you’re  extracting all the current design offers, in terms of SQ I guarantee you will have lost your appetite for home mods entirely for fear of damaging what is incredibly good sound quality, with absolutely nothing identifiably wrong. Its hard to fix something that isn’t broken and is already performing at SOTA levels. 

In my experience not every piece of hi-fi hardware has easily identified weaknesses that an amateur can easily redress. Far from it in fact.  PCs, NUCs and Network devices on the other hand, which were never designed with audio I’m mind are wide open to such mods and bring huge rewards, so that’s where my focus would be.   Low risk, high reward stuff, whereas modifying purpose designed and built hi-if gear is really high risk and relatively low reward. Cables, power cords, vibration control will all bring improvements and are again low risk, medium reward, so still better to focus there than on than the hi-fi gear itself. 

[semente]

33 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

Frankly I doubt there’s many people on here with sufficient skill and knowledge to out-think and out-build the likes of Magico, Innuos or Devialet. And frankly, when the system continues to thrill and amaze at every listen, I think the idea of opening it up for some unqualified modifications is fraught with dangers. The danger of damaging something, changing something that unbalances the sound, voiding warranty, reducing resale value and making it hard to re-sell etc. Magico get their speakers sounding as good as they know how, using SOTA drivers, cross-over design components and cabinet. The only 2 risk free elements that will improve on that are better footers (available from Magico) and better speaker cable.  The same applies to Devialet.  Better vibration control and better cables to and from the units will enhance sound without making internal mods. By the time you’re  extracting all the current design offers, in terms of SQ I guarantee you will have lost your appetite for home mods entirely for fear of damaging what is incredibly good sound quality, with absolutely nothing identifiably wrong. Its hard to fix something that isn’t broken and is already performing at SOTA levels. 

In my experience not every piece of hi-fi hardware has easily identified weaknesses that an amateur can easily redress. Far from it in fact.  PCs, NUCs and Network devices on the other hand are wide open to such mods and bring huge rewards, so that’s where my focus would be.   Low risk, high reward stuff, whereas modifying purpose designed and built hi-if gear is really high risk and relatively low reward. Cables, power cords, vibration control will all bring improvements and are again low risk, medium reward, so better to focus there than on than the hi-fi gear itself. 

I'm sure that your Magicos, Innuos or Devialet can be improved, though perhaps the amplitude of the resulting benefits would not be identical for the three. And I agree that it wouldn't be without risks and that some equipment is very complicated to work with.

 

My friend hardly ever touches very expensive stuff unless it is an older preferably used model, and he prefers equipment which is already very good as a base to start with and easy to work on (no tiny cases full of surface-mounted components, or very complex stuff).

But you can't seriously compare the effects in performance of his modifications with low-impact tweaks like footers or cables.

His system which consists of partly modified and own design equipment was developed over a couple of decades and is my reference for what can be achieved with reproduced sound.

@PeterSt holistic approach is a bit like that, his equipments/system probably became commercial by accident and is under constant developement because Peter is not bound by a price point, unlike those of more business-oriented manufacturers. (he'll correct me if I'm wrong)

 

If you don't mind the car analogy, there are several companies specialising in modifying/optimising high-end supercars for road use like Ruf, AMG or Brabus. And then there are companies like Prodrive who pick up road cars and prepare them for the race or rally track.

[Ralf11]

On 12/8/2019 at 7:57 PM, sandyk said:

 

 Although I often disagree with Frank, I do find some of his posts of interest.

 

 

The signal to noise ratio is incredibly low.  But it is amazing when he pops out a well-reasoned, factual bit of advice, because you've been lulled into a state of rejection by all the other ones.

 

Moreover, these "signal" posts seem to be increasing lately - I saw 2 just in the past week.

 

I'm not sure what is happening to cause this change, maybe it is Hawking radiation?

[fas42]

11 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

 

Firstly setting up the speakers and setting up the room to get the right balance of reflections and diffusion to ensure that room early and late reflections aren’t obscuring musical detail, that would prevent you hearing a reproduction of the true recording venue in your listening room. Then making sure that your network that feeds your system isn’t picking up and transmitting noise or vibrating and creating jitter to mistime the bit stream.  Ensuring that your power supply is adequate, noise free and offers a good and quiet earth. Making sure that your components are cabled together adequately and that your cabling is preserving the maximum amount of information and isn’t losing you a lot of detail 

 

It's a very rare person that doesn't worry about the room ... 😉. History, of the person's experiences, plays a big part here - for me, the first convincing SQ snapped out of nothingness - one moment I had conventional sound; the next, the "recording venue was in the listening room" - since I had done a big fat zero in terms of fiddling with the room, it had obviously nothing to do with that 😛. In fact I had done very little of what you just mentioned; in my mind I was just tidying up loose ends which were clearly impacting the sound, although in relatively subtle ways.

 

I lucked on getting pretty sharp components for the time, which only needed a few smoothing of rough edges to get them over the line; simplicity of the setup was the other major factor.

 

11 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

When you’re finished, you should be extracting the maximum your system is capable of. Instead of 2 speakers you should be hearing a room full of music  a soundscape that renders the sound engineers work in all its immersive glory (if that’s what’s on the recording), 

 

Which bowls you over the first time you hear it. What I then worked on was maintaining that quality, and learning how to build that up from lower and lower grade equipment; and the accompanying learning was realising that "impossible recordings!" could be brought to life - they in fact are extremely valuable because they brilliantly illuminate where there are shortfalls in the replay capability, still - make it easy to assess whether true progress is being made.

[fas42]

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

The signal to noise ratio is incredibly low.  But it is amazing when he pops out a well-reasoned, factual bit of advice, because you've been lulled into a state of rejection by all the other ones.

 

Moreover, these "signal" posts seem to be increasing lately - I saw 2 just in the past week.

 

I'm not sure what is happening to cause this change, maybe it is Hawking radiation?

 

Most likely the dense smoke from the suite of bushfires running rampant at the moment ... 😛. This morning, the worst it's ever been - can only see to the first ridge of the Blue Mtns view we have ...

 

Gotta point to the good ones, Ralph - so I know how I can suck you in, 😀.

[gmgraves]

On 12/9/2019 at 7:19 AM, Racerxnet said:

 

Repetitive Obfuscation from Frank and the dissimilarities of the playback mechanism/chain that most of us have, gives us reason to call out the foolishness. 

While I definitely agree with you about the dubious nature of Frank’s claims. I do find him entertaining to read, and some of his points are interesting. Just take his methodology with a very small grain of popcorn salt!

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Most likely the dense smoke from the suite of bushfires running rampant at the moment ... 😛. This morning, the worst it's ever been - can only see to the first ridge of the Blue Mtns view we have ...

 

Gotta point to the good ones, Ralph - so I know how I can suck you in, 😀.

 

fires will get worse - sad to say

 

now lemme see... was it one about speakers?  maybe cone speakers, and a couple of days ago

[fas42]

1 hour ago, gmgraves said:

While I definitely agree with you about the dubious nature of Frank’s claims. I do find him entertaining to read, and some of his points are interesting. Just take his methodology with a very small grain of popcorn salt!

 

I take it that you haven't noticed that a couple of other members here are using language very similar to myself, about what's possible ... 😉

 

My method has evolved over the years, to go immediately to the heart of the matter - zero trimmings, just get the good stuff happening ... everyone who approaches achieving a higher standard of SQ has done so from a certain direction, so things they consider most important will figure highly in what they mention.

 

At the heart of all these efforts is the understanding that integrity of the playback chain is key, and that the slightest misstep undoes what has been gained elsewhere. But - and it's a very big but - get it right, enough of it right, and the rewards are fabulous ... 🙂.

[Ralf11]

38 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

integrity of the playback chain is key 

 

my  playback chain got indicted on a morals charge