Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About DigiPete

  • Rank
    Digital Provocateur

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Anyone know where DigiPete went? I'm curious about his take on the B&W Formation speakers... Active, finally, just like DigiPete said they should do with an 800 series Diamond to make it more competitive with a Genelec 8260.

  2. You've ruined me: All I want is a flat coincident coaxial three way speaker that gets into the 20hz region without port chuffing... And the Elac Navis just can't cut it without a sub, and neither can the Kef stuff. Drivers are too small and the ports are too skinny. Time to save $10k+ for a Genelec 8260 setup and calibration kit. Who needs a down payment on a house anyway?

  3. Thanks Chris @The Computer Audiophile, glad you enjoyed our little showcase for a happy sustainable way of living. Dynaudio is a nice little export, but I lack intelligent use of DSP for room compensation. Dynaudio actually recruited Jan Abildgaard Pedersen as CTO but I fear they didn't let him spread his wings. AES past president and responsible for many patents in the digital / DSP area. Dynaudio recently lost him to Amazon - Audio Hardware Technology. :-( Some nice key deliveries: Bang & Olufsen - ABC room correction for Beolab 5 Bang & Olufsen - ICEpower Lyngdorf Audio / Steinway Lyngdorf - RoomPerfect Dynaudio - ??? It seems Jan jumps ship when the company doesn't have the balls to use DSP to it's fullest. Now the US brain drained us, and we deserve it :-(
  4. I wholly recommend the SAM™ Coaxial Studio Monitors to serious audiophiles. They offer more bang for the buck than anything else I have found. On top of everything, the 8351 and 8260 offer unprecedented imaging through the use of the MDC™ driver (Minimum Diffraction Coaxial). Read this short blog for a more in depth analysis of why you get true high-end at upper mid-fi prices.Genelec - What is the rave about? I've had my Genelec 8260 5.1 surround rig for 5 years, so I know most of the quirks and benefits of SAMs and going 100% digital. Feel free to ask specific questions. All the best Peter PS. If you are used to a true audiophile system, you will not find the SAM series analytical, just precise and acoustically invisible.
  5. The Beolab 5's were quite good - nice imaging with the acoustic lenses but the room correction was somewhat limited. Despite being expensive lifestyle speaker, BL5 are cost efficient compared to old school audiophile products. However, they can't compete with active digital input monitors like Genelec Coaxial Studio Monitors or Steinway Lyngdorf's entry model S Bang & Olufsen usually does not have my attention. I'll be looking forward to reading your review of the Beolab 90's from a technology point of view. It'll be interesting to see how it stacks up!
  6. Thanks for letting us know! Interesting and awesome new Danish product. 18 drivers, 18 DAC's & 18 amps - talk about going all in.
  7. I admit it's slim pickings of high end pure digital systems, but I have actually auditioned both sides of the fence before I drank the Kool-Ade. There was no comparison. How many here can truly say that, rather than just voicing their untested bias? The modular active digital input speaker may help push over some old-schoolers, but isn't it just another version of the "we amateurs know better than the educated professional engineers with the big labs at the manufacturer's"? Chris, I would love to audition your TAD CR1's with all the trimmings up against Genelec SAM Coaxial Studio Monitors and Steinway-Lyngdorf equipment. I'm sure everybody would get a run for their money.
  8. Thanks Eloise, I was just about to mention the WiSA standard. (Wireless 7.1, up to 24/96, Rapid error detection and recovery, 5 ms fixed latency, ± 1 µs speaker-to-speaker delay) Members includes: Bang & Olufsen, Fostex, Kipsch, LG, Martin Logan, Onkyo, Pioneer, PolkAudio & TEAC. If your sound is stored in digital form, why would you translate it to analogue before absolutely necessary? Digital transfer can be made 100% lossless, nothing else can. And why would it improve matters to force the amps to drive speakers through a filter Also, why be so arrogant and think you know better than the professionals how to combine amps and speakers? I.e. actives are the way to go ;-) I run AES3 digital speaker cables (the professional version of S/PDIF), but the wiring kaos is killing me - even for my little 5.1 rig (6 signal cables + 6 control cables). WiSA is the best bid for now, but let's hope they expand the number of channels to 16. I do get 10m absolute high end & 100% lossless speaker cable for EUR 30 / USD 34 ;-) PS. I don't think Bluetooth is anywhere close to audiophile standards. (despite being named after the Danish Viking King Harald Blåtand, that claimed the terrible deed of christening the Danes).
  9. You are welcome :-) This is CA, where we push for the advantages of technology. I'd love to hear your argument as to why I'm wrong.
  10. Good one, kilroy ;-) Technology actually gets outdated in different ways. Yes, Firewire in my Rig is getting dated as we now have Thunderbolt2 & USB3 offering higher transfer speeds = lower latency and more channels. The quality of the transfers are however the same, i.e. completely lossless and up to 24/192 Converters from USB3 and Thunderbolt to Firewire will be around for a long time. Would I choose Firewire today? No, I would go with Thunderbolt2 as I'm a Mac (USB3 if I were a PC). I don't need more channels, lower latency or more channels for now, but I'll likely upgrade the connection when I increase the channel count from 5.1 to 9.1 or 10.1 (My DDC is only 8 channels). A Lynx Aurora 16 with a thunderbolt interface card would do the trick. The future may offer a better and/or cheaper option. Next question would be: "Why still run on AES3 cables". Predictable & low latency, robust and cheap, lossless up to 24/192 and 100m cable runs, broadcast standard, very EMC resistant all seems good arguments for the time being. But the WISA standard could become the wireless multichannel audiophile standard of the future. Square wooden box speakers full of passive X-overs are so extremely outdated, that the above considerations are mere ripples of current technology. These products are pushed by people ignorant of acoustic knowledge or (worse) by people who don't give a shit as long as they can extract enough money from the consumers peddling whatever crap. The sad truth is: Most audiophiles are lemmings Most manufacturers are happy to sell the lemmings underperforming overpriced polished turdes
  11. The current best practice audiophile speaker solution is: a) Active b) Full range (20-20khz minimum) c) Digital input if at all possible d) Digital X-overs d) Digital room compensating e) Anything but a square box CA members should be wise enough to choose modern & predictable, cost efficient technology, based on knowledge and science, rather than bad habits founded the dark 1970ties. Unless you are running a museum for ancient and wasteful technology. Or if it is your specific hobby to mess around with outdated tech. /Rant end/
  12. Chris, did you find any news or novelties in computer audio? I had hoped to be there, but I was unfortunately stuck across the pond in NYC.
  13. Digital interconnects I do use to carry sound signals: - AES3 (aka AES/EBU) - Thunderbolt - Firewire Digital interconnects have no loss or coloring, so why would I use analoge? # # Assuming correct implementation, filtering, buffering, EMC suppression etc.
  14. France officially adopted the metric system on 10 December 1799. By 1872 the only principal European countries not to have adopted the metric system were Russia and the United Kingdom, and by 1875 two thirds of the European population and half the world's population had adopted the metric system. In 1927 several million people in the United States sent over 100,000 petitions backed by the Metric Association and The General Federation of Women's Clubs urging Congress to adopt the metric system. The petition was opposed by the manufacturing industry, citing the cost of the conversion. (Not much changed there - following the lead of conservative older brother the UK) The root cause of the loss in 1999 of NASA's US$125 million Mars Climate Orbiter was a mismatch of units The spacecraft engineers calculated the thrust forces required for velocity changes using US customary units (lbf·s) whereas the team who built the thrusters were expecting a value in metric units (N·s) as per the agreed specification. Source: Wikipedia
  15. I do support the notion that it is stupid for people to keep using measurements that went out of use decades or centuries ago in most of the world. Whether they be half a billon or not. Why? - It is standard in all countries, only US, Myanmar and Liberia have not adopted the metric system (according to the CIA Factbook). - Lowers cost, as you buy from a standardized worldwide market. - Makes you competitive, as you sell to a standardized worldwide market. - Makes equations in science and engineering logic and easy to learn & calculate, thus also implemented in the US. - It reduces risk, thus even the US military has adopted (most of) it through the NATO STANAGs from the Military Office for Standardization established in London in 1951. So help yourselves and stop using hp, miles, gallons, inches, psi, am & pm and other outdated measurements. And YES, you do look stupid in the eyes of the world - sorry. FYI. The correct way to write a local date & time is: 2016-04-19T17:34:26Z+1 The Z+1 is so that you know it is in the UTC +1 timezone.
  • Create New...