You don't always get what you pay for

Ethan Winer

Banned
Jul 8, 2010
1,231
3
1,425
76
New Milford, CT
Some people think I'm opposed to paying more for "good" audio gear, but that's not true. While I don't think you have to pay huge amounts to get high quality, I'm not a fan of cheap junk either, even if it sounds just as good as products that are more durable and have knobs that feel better etc. But sometimes paying a lot of money gets you a product that is truly dreadful.

This really hit home for me a few years ago at a Stereophile show in New York City. I saw a pair of loudspeakers that cost $16,000 per pair that were noticeably worse than Behringer Truth speakers costing $80 each. Where sensible speaker designers aim to avoid cabinet resonance, this model included vibrating wooden plates on the side to intentionally add resonance, sort of like the sound board of a piano. In fact, that's the analogy the manufacturer used in their marketing material.

In the same room was a fellow hawking very expensive tube power amps. I forget the price, but it was a lot more than, say, a quality amp from Crown or Bryston. The sales dude made a big deal about the fact this his amp had none of that nasty negative feedback that's "known" to sound bad. I guess he thinks 10 percent distortion sounds good. He also bragged that the blue lights that serve only to adorn the tubes were real light bulbs, rather than those nasty sounding LEDs his competitors use.

What prompts this post is a review of a $12,000 CD player in the July, 2012 issue of Stereophile. This CD player uses tubes and transformers to add a bit of that analog distortion some people like. I have no objection to this, even though subtle distortion is easily achieved for a lot less than $12,000. What really struck me about this CD player is that it's hopelessly incompetent, with fidelity far worse than a $40 CD Walkman. According to the review it does not use over-sampling like all other modern CD players, and the D/A has no reconstruction filter. So its output contains all the digital hash and aliasing that should be filtered out. In this CD player the output actually does contain digital steps! Even though the reviewer acknowledged these defects, as did John Atkinson in the sidebar with his measurements, both writers still concluded this is a fine piece of gear that sounds good and deserves your consideration. Wow, just wow.

--Ethan
 
With a lot of magazines these days, both print and web, you have to read between the lines. I review video games in my spare time and I understand the pressue of the almighty advertising dollar. I pride myself on my integrity and have declined to review a poorly designed game or piece of gaming hardware, but have also bowed to an editor's plea to do a write up and to "be kind." in those cases though, I don't trash the game, but neither do I recommend it. I present both it's shortcomings as well as its good points and let my readers draw their own conclusion.
 
Years ago when I wrote reviews for audio magazines, I asked the editor of one magazine why they don't print negative reviews. He told me there are so many good products that deserve a review, it's pointless to waste page space on lame products only to pan them. That makes a lot of sense, and it's a lot more honest than giving favorable reviews to lame products.

--Ethan
 
Ethan - would you care to give a listen to the CD player you mentioned given the fact of the review and technical considerations you pointed out? (I don't know what player is that BTW)
 
all industries have a value curve, where either extreme is questionable. Audiophilia definitely has the high-end of the extreme well covered ;-)

I'm with you Ethan that there are a great many amazing values to be had with non-audiophile brands and products. Losing the 'bling', and focusing on sound quality can lead one to some interesting vendors.
 
Ethan - would you care to give a listen to the CD player you mentioned given the fact of the review and technical considerations you pointed out? (I don't know what player is that BTW)

Sure. But I'm not willing to pay $12,000 to hear it, or even the postage back and forth to audition it. If anyone near me has an Audio Note CD-4.1x please let me know.

--Ethan
 
Years ago when I wrote reviews for audio magazines, I asked the editor of one magazine why they don't print negative reviews. He told me there are so many good products that deserve a review, it's pointless to waste page space on lame products only to pan them. That makes a lot of sense, and it's a lot more honest than giving favorable reviews to lame products.

--Ethan

Not sure I agree with your editor's statement. There are numerous products in audio that have been reviewed with glowing stature that should have been panned, IMO. One example that i like to use are the many glowing revues of the Halcro amps in the past. Not sure that today they are getting this glowing press , BUT IF you read those same revues from days past, you could easily come to the conclusion that these amps are unbeatable at any price and could never be beaten:eek:
 
I saw a pair of loudspeakers that cost $16,000 per pair that were noticeably worse than Behringer Truth speakers costing $80 each.

$16k is midfi in this neighborhood. Stack a couple of Behringer Truths on an Emotiva sub on each side of the room. Feed them a nice clean digital source with no preamp goo in the way, and it would be noticeably better than a lot of speakers at a lot more than $16k. Hide it all in a curvy, forwardthrusting cabinet with a couple of dozen coats of lacquer and you've got yourself a business plan, man.

This CD player uses tubes and transformers... I have no objection to this

You're too kind, Ethan. I personally think a valve in a digital source should be taken every bit as seriously as a feather sticking out of a clown's rear end. MHO. YMMV. :)

Tim
 
Could not agree more - most of the so-called high end is about clever marketing, greedy business plans and clumsy production. As has been noted many times - it is easier to build ten $100k speakers than to build a thousand $1000 speakers - so is it any wonder that so many companies have abandoned sensible, affordable and products that provide real value in favor of irrational nonsense? Speakers for $100k? Please - there is no such thing as value there. Those items are social status items - not rationally thought out purchases.

Though Ferrari has a two year waiting list - and while the car is a rolling work of art have you ever noticed that you NEVER see one on an Interstate away from the cities? Because they are not devices for transportation (engine has to be removed at 10k miles - factory mandated maintenance - have NO reliability at all) - they are art - and art cannot be assigned value in dollars. Same with the "audio SOTA" - it is not about providing musical entertainment - it is about 'art' - and much of it is, unfortunately bad art - very bad art.

As for the device being discussed - I have heard it and thought that it was broken - but alas - it was not broken - it was superior and only the golden eared could hear the obvious sonic superiority. Fine by me.

As for putting tubes on any digital piece of gear? This concept insults my brain - and should insult any rational person. I hold a graduate degree in Computer Science and worked most of my career for various weapons companies - YOU DO NOT FIX DIGITAL PROBLEMS BY GLUING ON ANALOG HARDWARE. You fix digital problems - if they exist - with SOFTWARE. Tubes in a CD player? That is without doubt one of the dumbest concepts I have ever encountered. That is beyond dumb - that is willfully ignorant.

Good friend had a device that was based on a Denon CD player - and some "retro-fitter" installed a tube analog output section (including a tube rectified power supply). I thought it sounded like any other CD player of the era (bad - harsh, sizzling, gritty and just foul sounding.) I bought a Cambridge Audio 840C player - mainly because Cambridge had opted to address digital issues with some software algorithms that they purchased from Anagram (Swiss company - rather legendary in Europe - DcS uses Anagram algorithms in their players). I "think" these fixes were about smoothing the digital response "before" it moved to the analog domain. I do not know with any certainty what Anagram did - for it is proprietary. I guess I could dump the code and then disassemble it - but why?

Anyway we had a "shoot out" between these two players - the "High End" retro-fitted CD player with the tubes versus the mass-market Cambridge unit (designed in England but built in China).

It wasn't even close - the Cambridge unit sounded significantly better (AND we could easily identify the differing sounds of these players in a non-sighted test - this was not about a "power cord" type of difference - this was REAL). The "retro-fitted" unit sounded just like any other crappy CD player of the era - harsh, gritty and sizzling for the most part.

Oh - the "High End" retro-fitted unit? That thing cost 4x what the Cambridge mass-market unit did.

Money has no relationship to sonic quality - any more than a Ferrari's price buys you more reliability than a Kia - it doesn't.
 
Not sure I agree with your editor's statement. There are numerous products in audio that have been reviewed with glowing stature that should have been panned, IMO. One example that i like to use are the many glowing revues of the Halcro amps in the past. Not sure that today they are getting this glowing press , BUT IF you read those same revues from days past, you could easily come to the conclusion that these amps are unbeatable at any price and could never be beaten:eek:

Halcro **** the bed. Belly up.
 
Well i still like halcro , one of the best sounds ive heard on a demo was with peter mc grath showing the maxx 2 in 2005 .
Halcro DM 68 with ml 32 and wadia 27 270 i , the halcros have very good slam and astonishing clarity .
I think they are fantastic amps , and if audiophiles dont like them , who cares

maybe its even a price thing ....
 
Welcome to the wacky world of Audio Note. It is a cult in my opinion. They have a lot of people fooled into thinking 1960s HiFi is SOTA.

A12k CD player with no digital input, ton of jitter,
And Redbook only? What a joke.

Same for 30K flea watt amps and 100K speakers that look
like a school project, and an owner who thinks file playback and
Music servers are a waste of time.

Don't forget Art Dudley is an oddball reviewer and has very esoteric taste.
His ear seems to be tuned to retro, overly warm presentations.

To be fair, Atkinson did hammer them on the measurements.
 
Welcome to the wacky world of Audio Note. It is a cult in my opinion. They have a lot of people fooled into thinking 1960s HiFi is SOTA. (...)

Andre,

I have not owned, do not own Audio Note equipment and I think I have not listened to Audio Note for the last 20 years. Long ago I considered it a bizarre way of achieving sound reproduction, but one day I had the opportunity to listen to an Audio Note system tuned by Peter Qvotrup. Since then I respect Audio Note and understand why there is a cult around such systems. Please consider my use of the word cult as a compliment, not the pejorative sense that you seem to associate with the word.

The sound that was emanating from that system was very different from our typical notion of hifi. It could sound great on some recordings, full of emotion and a feeling of life performance in opera and acoustical music, very poor with others. If you do not valuate the extra that this system could offer in some recordings, it would be a waste of money. But is some aspects it made our classical systems sound mechanical and inferior. After that, later in the same day, I had an interesting talk with Peter Qvotrup. Just to conclude, I did not buy an Audio Note system, but could understand why some people appreciate them and learned that they are much more than 1960s HiFi - they are a way to music. Great systems and great people. I admire them.
 
Buy cheap, Buy twice."
 
Last edited:
Andre,

I have not owned, do not own Audio Note equipment and I think I have not listened to Audio Note for the last 20 years. Long ago I considered it a bizarre way of achieving sound reproduction, but one day I had the opportunity to listen to an Audio Note system tuned by Peter Qvotrup. Since then I respect Audio Note and understand why there is a cult around such systems. Please consider my use of the word cult as a compliment, not the pejorative sense that you seem to associate with the word.

The sound that was emanating from that system was very different from our typical notion of hifi. It could sound great on some recordings, full of emotion and a feeling of life performance in opera and acoustical music, very poor with others. If you do not valuate the extra that this system could offer in some recordings, it would be a waste of money. But is some aspects it made our classical systems sound mechanical and inferior. After that, later in the same day, I had an interesting talk with Peter Qvotrup. Just to conclude, I did not buy an Audio Note system, but could understand why some people appreciate them and learned that they are much more than 1960s HiFi - they are a way to music. Great systems and great people. I admire them.

I appreciate your offering a different point of view and sharing your experience.

I have no doubt many people derive a lot pleasure from AN products.

They are not my cup of tea personally.

With only 15 dealers nationwide,that proves to me they are a rather tough sell however.
 
I'm surprised Ethan started this thread. Take his own products for instance. I purchased some Diffusors from him to put in my studio. I got them and opened the box. WTF?? These are made from cheap thin gauge metal (ring!!) and FOAM BOARD??? come on now..... over $600 EACH! I couldn't get rid of them fast enough.... got RPG diffusors made of real maple instead.... the only wood on Ethan's diffusors are a thin strip in the middle keeping them from falling apart! I can give him props though for taking them back with no questions asked. Cost me in shipping though.
 
Valkyrie try a Zanden player once ,it might change your opinion

+1. In truth, a tube at the output stage just before going analog signal...vs a SS DAC and going into a tubed preamp. I am no techie...so a question: is this in practical terms that much different in the context of an entire audio chain?

I would have thought the old adage some have quoted of implementation is more important than technical approach still stands...particularly in light of high quality tubed and SS equipment. I have read here that some have measured their tubed DACs and not found dramatically higher distortion than on SS DACs.
 
Valkyrie try a Zanden player once ,it might change your opinion

Yes, if you put enough money into it, you can minimize the damage of a tube in a DAC. That doesn't make it a fundamentally good idea, just a good marketing idea.

Tim
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing