Article: Review | McIntosh RS200 Wireless Speaker

[ShawnC]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

For those who believe that, say, YouTube clips can't tell the listener something about the system playing - try this for size. Unfortunately in Thai, but go to 7:15, for the meat ...

 

 

I had to chuckle when I heard Alan Jackson playing.  Seemed so out of place for any audiophile review, I liked that.  If I were reviewing it, you may have heard something from Slayer's, Reign In Blood album 😉

[ShawnC]

8 hours ago, bbosler said:

 

why?

 

A lot of country music along with folk and bluegrass is extremely well recorded not to mention many superb musicians. Alan Jackson's like red on a rose is a great example. I don't see how anything that well recorded would be out of place in an audiophile review. Tim and Molly O'brien's Away Out On the Mountain, most anything in the past 20 years or so by Roseanne Cash, Most of Blue Highway's stuff, and on and on. Check out "Rider on This Train" on Chris Stuart's Mojave River  and "Pallet on Your Floor" on the Krüger Brothers' Remembering Doc Watson... oh, and most of Doc Watson's stuff.

 

most if not all on Tidal and Qobuz

 

if unfamiliar with these..... you are welcome

 

 

 

 

Why, because I almost never hear country music in general at the trade shows or at dealer being played.  It wasn't a rip on the music choice, I enjoyed it.  I 100% agree with the recording process.  When It's mostly acoustic guitars and clean voices, It's hard to screw that up on a recording, thus making it a fantastic music selection.  But most demos are classical, jazz or some guy playing a bongo or a flute ect..  It's sometimes hard to show appreciation in a post and not sound sarcastic at the same time.   My bad.

[ShawnC]

38 minutes ago, bluesman said:

I respectfully disagree with this.  Accurate capture and playback of acoustic guitars (and human voices) is one of the more difficult tasks for a recording engineer.  Presenting a lifelike acoustic guitar sound and image (ie not too big and not too small) is not that difficult.  But an accurate recording sounds like the guitar that was recorded, rather than a generic instrument.

 

A Gibson J200 sounds quite different from a Martin O-16NY, and a big archtop with a carved spruce top (eg an 18” Gibson Super 400 or an original Epiphone Emperor) sounds quite different from a 16” laminated maple box like the ES175 that Wes Montgomery played on his first few albums.  Similarly, a single cone resonator guitar like a National Style 0 sounds very different from a tricone.

 

There are many well known and widely loved recordings on which it’s not at all clear what’s being played.  This often reflects the general belief that they all sound alike, which becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

Good single unit speaker systems like the reviewed unit are actually well suited to acoustic guitar reproduction. The sound source is similar to a guitar, with different parts generating different spectral segments and projecting the sound from what’s really an effective single point once you’re at least a few feet away from it.

 

I do think it important to consider the cabinet on which you place it.  A big wooden box with 10+ cubic feet of interior space and unbraced flat surfaces can add a lot of unwanted resonance. It’s not dissimilar to an acoustic guitar of similar size.

 

I’d also add that the latest BT AptX HD sounds decent+ and is not your father’s Bluetooth.  But if you want to use a BT device in a home theater or MC system, you have to use the latest low latency codecs - and I can hear a slight degradation in definition and presentation between HD (better) and LL.  The LL smears everything just enough to hear it in better systems.  
 

OTOH, I haven’t found a MC distribution system that lets me send individual channels over a network.  So I don’t know how we could use one or more of these units for HT or MC audio - and this Mac piece would probably be an excellent rear pair.  You can use LL BT driven by a MC DAC to drive powered speakers in decent synch with acceptable (although sometimes barely audible) delays among them, if you can’t run wires and want bigger sound in a particular space than your TV or stereo system will provide.

 

I really like this McIntosh device, and the review is stellar - informative, easy to read, and enjoyable.  I won’t be spending 3 large on such a device, but if I wanted one this would be high on my list.  It’s great to know that the sheer physical pleasure of McIntosh products persists unchanged through all these years and ownership changes. I think Frank would be pleased.

I didn’t say anything about being accurate. Just that a human voice and or an acoustic guitar or combo has a fantastic sound quality to listen too. You could say the same for a violin and vocals or whatever. But any decent engineer should baby able to recreate the human voice and an acoustic or whatever without an trivial problems. Now to listen to a portion of music and pick out every detail like what model of guitar and guitar strings, pickups, amps and mics that were used are beyond the scope of this thread and wasn’t what my post was about. 

[ShawnC]

1 hour ago, bluesman said:

Wow - I'm sorry you took umbrage at my post. To be honest, I didn't (and still can't) imagine that it brought so negative a response.  To me (and, I bet, to most audiophiles), a recording that masks or alters gross differences in SQ to the point at which they become inaudible is screwed up by any definition.

 

The differences I'm describing are not so subtle that it takes any knowledge of guitars to hear them, and it doesn't matter whether or not you know which is which.  What matters is that you can hear the differences I'm discussing - they are big and should be clearly audible over any half decent system.  

 

The usual subject of sound quality discussions is over vague and subjective subtleties like harshness, clarity, warmth, balance, etc.  The sonic differences between a Martin D28 and a Gibson L50 are huge - they dwarf harshness, clarity etc in audibility and in importance to the musical program.   Any audiophile should be able to tell that they're different instruments when hearing them side by side.  Of course you don't know which instrument is which - there's no reason you should, and it doesn't change what I'm saying at all.

 

Listen to the difference between these two guitars played solo.  Each is ideally suited to the music being played and the way in which it's played.  Neither performance would sound the way the performer or the engineer intended it to sound if played on the other guitar.

 

 

 

I only said that because, I think you took what I said out context to what I was referring to in my post.  I didn't think I'd have to type out in detail in both my original post and then again in my post 2nd post what I meant. 

 

First post -  I chuckled because I heard Country music on an Asian reviewed Youtube post.  It  just made my smile, loved the sound.

 

Second post -  In trying to explain what I meant in the first post, I was referring to that the simple sound of a human voice and guitar is usually very satisfying.  And was just adding that it a simple process to do. One voice, one guitar.  How complicated some recording engineer wants to make it, is up to them.  But I never thought it would have warranted a response. 

 

I apologize for offending you and any other recording engineers out there.  I shouldn't have posted that hastily remark to you.  I l'll stop posting for awhile and make sure I'm clearer in my respones in the future

 

@The Computer AudiophileIf you want to edit out my posts, so this stays on topic, you have my wish

 

Again sorry, @bluesman