All that is wrong with "HiFi"

[Rensselaer]

No doubt you’ve heard bad digital setups that have formed your opinions? But I can tell you my current system with digital source sounds completely natural with none of the tired cliches mentioned above. And the music is “musical.”

I think it’s time to start looking elsewhere for why so much hi fi sounds bad.

Did you just say that your “current” system with digital source sounds completely natural with none of the tired cliches mentioned above? Have you ever owned a different digital source than that which you say sounds completely natural? If so, what was it about your previous digital source that made you upgrade? Was that reason one of the now tired cliches you spoke of? I’ll bet that neither the manufacturer nor the reviewers mentioned that “cliche” when you bought your first (second, third?) digital front end, did they?

 

[TonyW]

The main issue I see is that somewhere a majority of both manufacturers and audiophiles seem to have gotten to a point where they are missing a reference to how music sounds.

The quest for 'detail, more detail' coupled to the misconception that 'newer is always better' seems to have gotten in the way of 'involvement, more emotion' and 'horses for courses'.... something like detail IMHO is a means to a goal, not a goal in itself.

A few days ago I heard a very nice turntable, linked to a great tube phono and triode power amp into some decent Tannoy speakers, it sounded HIFI/High-End....until the designer wanted to try the SUT at 1:15 rather than 1:30....all of a sudden it was magic, spooky....easily the best analog I heard to date. A different set using an EMT 927 setup (the 'travel kit'), a tube phono stage and a flea powered triode 'power amp' and some vintage multicell mid horn in a newly designed speaker set was most convincing and involving.

Both sets definitely will not come close to the sort of sets that frequent shows like High End Munich (all north of 100K, boy now that is inflation) but for sure both sounded FAR better than anything I heard there.

The key factor not discussed so much here is PRaT- the magic that makes the music musical. I have found PRaT to be elusive. It can be found in more modest systems as well as in very expensive systems. But not all systems have it. There are many facets to audio playback; the highs, the lows, the midrange magic, imaging and then there is PRaT. It doesn't seem to be tied to the room. Instinctively, I always looked for it in the Turntable but I since learned the electronics and speakers matter just as much. I'm thrilled that I have PRaT in my system on both the vinyl side and digital side but I simply stumbled onto it on the digital side. Until last December I never considered Digital could have PRaT. I thought it is just digital-no pace like a turntable, no wow and flutter to deal with.

At the other end of my system I was amazed at the improvement in PRaT when I got my current speakers. The music just flowed and I was loving it. My vinyl rig was at the best it had ever been. Digital sounded good too but I didn't realize at that point so much that PRaT was not so good. I was just focused on the sound of digital.

Then last December I got my current DAC. The sound was marvelous. But I was listening through my previous music server and after about two weeks I thought to spin a CD on my Transport through my new DAC. Suddenly, the music was so great. It was flowing, foot tapping rhythm great. I listened to 6 CDs straight through that night. The next day I was trying to understand why the CD sounded so much better than streaming. With this new DAC I could hear that the streamer was not as clear as a CD. But then I realized the streamer was lacking PRaT. I talked to my dealer and he recommended a streamer/player for me; not cheap but good. Real good. My digital has that elusive PRaT like my vinyl now.

I remember the first time I heard the difference in PRaT. It was at the 1989 CES in Chicago. I'm listening to various setups in the hotel rooms and I noticed that in some rooms the music really rocked. The rhythm sounded so natural that I hated to leave the room while other rooms just seemed ok. And the great rooms didn't have massive turntables or giant speakers. That's the part that confused me back then. I learned a few years later from an Audiophile buddy that the term is PRaT. Like I said before, I have heard very expensive systems that sound good but lack that magical PRaT and modest systems that rocked because they have PRaT.

If someone knows the recipe to insure a system will have PRaT, please share. I worked for years in the 80s and 90s to get PRaT with my vinyl setup. Until 2021 I used digital for background music and to warm up the stereo but serious listening was always with vinyl. Now I'm thrilled to have it all with both vinyl and digital.

 

[MarcelNL]

I can sell you a box of PRaT.... ;-)

I'd say it comes with proper timing as found in the original music, aka time coherence, both in speakers as well as in components.

 

[wil]

The key factor not discussed so much here is PRaT- the magic that makes the music musical. I have found PRaT to be elusive. It can be found in more modest systems as well as in very expensive systems. But not all systems have it. There are many facets to audio playback; the highs, the lows, the midrange magic, imaging and then there is PRaT. It doesn't seem to be tied to the room. Instinctively, I always looked for it in the Turntable but I since learned the electronics and speakers matter just as much. I'm thrilled that I have PRaT in my system on both the vinyl side and digital side but I simply stumbled onto it on the digital side. Until last December I never considered Digital could have PRaT. I thought it is just digital-no pace like a turntable, no wow and flutter to deal with.

At the other end of my system I was amazed at the improvement in PRaT when I got my current speakers. The music just flowed and I was loving it. My vinyl rig was at the best it had ever been. Digital sounded good too but I didn't realize at that point so much that PRaT was not so good. I was just focused on the sound of digital.

Then last December I got my current DAC. The sound was marvelous. But I was listening through my previous music server and after about two weeks I thought to spin a CD on my Transport through my new DAC. Suddenly, the music was so great. It was flowing, foot tapping rhythm great. I listened to 6 CDs straight through that night. The next day I was trying to understand why the CD sounded so much better than streaming. With this new DAC I could hear that the streamer was not as clear as a CD. But then I realized the streamer was lacking PRaT. I talked to my dealer and he recommended a streamer/player for me; not cheap but good. Real good. My digital has that elusive PRaT like my vinyl now.

I remember the first time I heard the difference in PRaT. It was at the 1989 CES in Chicago. I'm listening to various setups in the hotel rooms and I noticed that in some rooms the music really rocked. The rhythm sounded so natural that I hated to leave the room while other rooms just seemed ok. And the great rooms didn't have massive turntables or giant speakers. That's the part that confused me back then. I learned a few years later from an Audiophile buddy that the term is PRaT. Like I said before, I have heard very expensive systems that sound good but lack that magical PRaT and modest systems that rocked because they have PRaT.

If someone knows the recipe to insure a system will have PRaT, please share. I worked for years in the 80s and 90s to get PRaT with my vinyl setup. Until 2021 I used digital for background music and to warm up the stereo but serious listening was always with vinyl. Now I'm thrilled to have it all with both vinyl and digital.

I believe timing, flow, (Prat) is perhaps the most essential element between musical reproduction that delivers the experience in completeness and that which only delivers it in a string of pieces.

 

[Al M.]

The key factor not discussed so much here is PRaT- the magic that makes the music musical. I have found PRaT to be elusive. It can be found in more modest systems as well as in very expensive systems. But not all systems have it. There are many facets to audio playback; the highs, the lows, the midrange magic, imaging and then there is PRaT. It doesn't seem to be tied to the room. Instinctively, I always looked for it in the Turntable but I since learned the electronics and speakers matter just as much. I'm thrilled that I have PRaT in my system on both the vinyl side and digital side but I simply stumbled onto it on the digital side. Until last December I never considered Digital could have PRaT. I thought it is just digital-no pace like a turntable, no wow and flutter to deal with.

At the other end of my system I was amazed at the improvement in PRaT when I got my current speakers. The music just flowed and I was loving it. My vinyl rig was at the best it had ever been. Digital sounded good too but I didn't realize at that point so much that PRaT was not so good. I was just focused on the sound of digital.

Then last December I got my current DAC. The sound was marvelous. But I was listening through my previous music server and after about two weeks I thought to spin a CD on my Transport through my new DAC. Suddenly, the music was so great. It was flowing, foot tapping rhythm great. I listened to 6 CDs straight through that night. The next day I was trying to understand why the CD sounded so much better than streaming. With this new DAC I could hear that the streamer was not as clear as a CD. But then I realized the streamer was lacking PRaT. I talked to my dealer and he recommended a streamer/player for me; not cheap but good. Real good. My digital has that elusive PRaT like my vinyl now.

I remember the first time I heard the difference in PRaT. It was at the 1989 CES in Chicago. I'm listening to various setups in the hotel rooms and I noticed that in some rooms the music really rocked. The rhythm sounded so natural that I hated to leave the room while other rooms just seemed ok. And the great rooms didn't have massive turntables or giant speakers. That's the part that confused me back then. I learned a few years later from an Audiophile buddy that the term is PRaT. Like I said before, I have heard very expensive systems that sound good but lack that magical PRaT and modest systems that rocked because they have PRaT.

If someone knows the recipe to insure a system will have PRaT, please share. I worked for years in the 80s and 90s to get PRaT with my vinyl setup. Until 2021 I used digital for background music and to warm up the stereo but serious listening was always with vinyl. Now I'm thrilled to have it all with both vinyl and digital.

Totally agree.

PRAT (pace, rhythm & timing) is definitely a real and very important thing in musical reproduction. Here is an article by Peter van Willenswaard that explains it in terms of perception of the music in the context of digital gear:

Pace, Rhythm, & Dynamics One listener's lament

Pace & Rhythm: one listener's lament Some years ago it struck me that British writers were increasingly discussing the "rhythmic" properties of the components they reviewed. (I now see the issue coming up slowly in Stereophile and The Abso!ute Sound as well.) Although I understood all the words...

www.stereophile.com

Since that time in the Nineties, when the article was written, digital has made great progress in that regard,, but it really was a major problem back then as Peter van Willenswaard describes. I have heard it myself many times, it was painful.

You can currently still get a, sometimes shocking, taste of it when you compare the poor rhythm of some jazz or rock on YouTube music videos (not system videos), featuring the lossy AAC algorithm, with the same track on competent CD playback.

When it comes to early digital, reviewers like Ken Kessler rightfully observed at the time that "digital can't rock". My first digital rig that really could rock was my fifth one, with the Berkeley Alpha DAC 2, purchased in 2013. Before that I rarely played rock on my system, only jazz was passable. But even the Berkeley DAC is vastly bettered in rhythmic performance by my subsequently acquired Schiit Yggdrasil DAC, currently in its LIM (Less Is More) incarnation.

That DAC is a rhythmic animal, and one of the best rhythmic performers that I have ever heard, regardless if it's a turntable or digital (it also beats some high priced digital gear in that respect). The rhythmic prowess is not limited to pure visceral drive, it extends to subtleties.

Yet as you point out, it's not just the DAC that matters, but how it is fed the digital signal. I also use a CD transport for physical CD playback, with reclocker between transport and DAC. And of course it is the rest of the system as well.

 

[wil]

Did you just say that your “current” system with digital source sounds completely natural with none of the tired cliches mentioned above? Have you ever owned a different digital source than that which you say sounds completely natural? If so, what was it about your previous digital source that made you upgrade? Was that reason one of the now tired cliches you spoke of? I’ll bet that neither the manufacturer nor the reviewers mentioned that “cliche” when you bought your first (second, third?) digital front end, did they?

My experience has been a long, steady slog (mostly upward) over the last 12 years. I've been fortunate to have good sounding systems all along the way, but I will say that the progress gained in the last year, (if I allow myself to indulge in hyperbolic language), has resulted in a paradigm shift.

To put it simply, I think it's ultimately due to the combination of Aries Cerat tube pre and amps along with major source advances from Taiko Audio.

 

[A-Line]

What's wrong with hifi?

My casual observations.
With the intro of digital in 1982 lots a gimmicks, weird tweeks, false claims, ridiculous pricing...

CD playback claimed perfect sound forever. I got into digital in 2006. CD players didn't sound right to me prior to 2005/2006 so I kept playing records and tape.
In 2024( about 2 months ago) I purchased my 3rd and final 1 box CD/SACD player. I now have a CD/SACD player that I can live with as my final player. My previous 2 players always left me wanting more in the way sonics.
Multi box box players started showing up on the scene in the late 1980's. Some companies are still producing multi box digital players: 3-5 box component setups for digital playback along with a 6 figure price too...lol.

A popular gimmick in the late 1980's/early 1990's was the "green dot" using a green marker to place a green dot on the edge of a CD would sound better vs without. This is a really good example of a gimmick, at least to me.
The biggest gimmick these days is with interconnects & and speaker cables. Pricing in this category is just silly. Some companies charge 5 figure prices per meter...lol
I get that IC's, speaker cables, & power cords make a difference but within a reasonable price.

False claims of "the best". That's open to human interpretation as there's no scientific way to definitively prove that claim thereby making the claim of "the best" to be false.

Glossy Mags: Every product review is a positive review. This should be a red flag to everyone yet many still purchase these useless publications.

These days there are many more brands to choose from. Some products offer a good value while others don't. To be clear good sound in a hifi system isn't cheap but there's a point where the pricing is just too expensive for what is being offered.

I purchase components based upon sound first.
The product must be well built and require little maintenance. Some of my components are vintage and some are newer like digital which is a evolving and changing technology.
I've now reached the end of the road regarding all things in the upgrade realm so I just enjoy my music.

There are other areas that I could mention but I'm tired of writing now...

Just my thoughts and opinions.

Happy Listening

 

[Charles S]

You make interesting points, but where is the evidence?

You say:
"In the right ultra high end system, there would be no comparison of a MCD12000 to a Varese or other top line DAC's."

Have you heard one of the super-expensive DACs in your system? Apparently you didn't.

"In the right ultra high end system, there would be no comparison of a MCD12000 to a Varese or other top line DAC's. Ditto for other 10K to 20K DAC's. I mean you have to put the system together in its entirety and when you put these ultra expensive DAC's with the appropriate gear in the right room, IMO they will very significantly outperform lesser DAC's."

Again, how do you know? By looking at the price tag?

A/M you are 100% correct that I have no supporting evidence from a personal standpoint. And I would very much like you to be correct. I'm not looking at the price tag but the complexity and engineering of the dCS or Wadax. I have said that in my system I wouldn't even remotely consider a dCS Varese or Wadax. But these as well as a few other DAC's, Esoteric Grandioso'sfor example come to mind, are state of the art, no holds barred the best technology, these highly reputable companies can manufacture. That's a fact.

Take Robert Harley's system. He has the Wadax reference and is a great believer in digital. He has an XVX/Subsonic fully decked out reference system. His long standing weakness of not paying enough attention to his subwoofers has recently been corrected. If you inserted my MCD12000 into his system I would be greatly surprised if you would not hear a significantly different and inferior sound. But you could certainly be right and I have no proof.

I really love the sound of my system. I would not trade mine for his. The question is: are you immensely happy with your sound? Do you look forward to hearing your system on all types of music everyday. I have a hard time turning mine off. I stay up all hours of the night listening to it. It produces beautiful music to my ears. I think that most of you deep down inside aren't satisfied with your systems. You are constantly looking for that "magic". If you find it you are very lucky. I have.

 

[Lagonda]

A/M you are 100% correct that I have no supporting evidence from a personal standpoint. And I would very much like you to be correct. I'm not looking at the price tag but the complexity and engineering of the dCS or Wadax. I have said that in my system I wouldn't even remotely consider a dCS Varese or Wadax. But these as well as a few other DAC's, Esoteric Grandioso'sfor example come to mind, are state of the art, no holds barred the best technology, these highly reputable companies can manufacture. That's a fact.

Take Robert Harley's system. He has the Wadax reference and is a great believer in digital. He has an XVX/Subsonic fully decked out reference system. His long standing weakness of not paying enough attention to his subwoofers has recently been corrected. If you inserted my MCD12000 into his system I would be greatly surprised if you would not hear a significantly different and inferior sound. But you could certainly be right and I have no proof.

I really love the sound of my system. I would not trade mine for his. The question is: are you immensely happy with your sound? Do you look forward to hearing your system on all types of music everyday. I have a hard time turning mine off. I stay up all hours of the night listening to it. It produces beautiful music to my ears. I think that most of you deep down inside aren't satisfied with your systems. You are constantly looking for that "magic". If you find it you are very lucky. I have.

Some people are just easier to please than others. And you did not even spend a million.

 

[Rt66indierock]

Come on guys we are so much better than this !

Actually, you guys aren’t better. Take PeterA, he arrogantly argues about grammar and usage. Worse, when confronted with dictionary posts showing my usage was appropriate, he couldn’t let it go. I saw his edited or deleted post take your pick.

That post was so hurtful that I can’t even imagine he has the words to apologize.

 

[Al M.]

I really love the sound of my system. I would not trade mine for his. The question is: are you immensely happy with your sound? Do you look forward to hearing your system on all types of music everyday. I have a hard time turning mine off. I stay up all hours of the night listening to it. It produces beautiful music to my ears. I think that most of you deep down inside aren't satisfied with your systems. You are constantly looking for that "magic". If you find it you are very lucky. I have.

I have found it too, on all types of music.

For my experience just yesterday, see post #217. Indeed, hard to turn off the system.

 

[Lagonda]

Actually, you guys aren’t better. Take PeterA, he arrogantly argues about grammar and usage. Worse, when confronted with dictionary posts showing my usage was appropriate, he couldn’t let it go. I saw his edited or deleted post take your pick.

That post was so hurtful that I can’t even imagine he has the words to apologize.

My post was dripping with irony. We are all a bunch of old fellows with to much testosterone and time on our hands.

 

[ssfas]

How does the CTC 301 compare with the Brinkmann (I considered those high mass turntables when I went for the high mass brass platter and panzerholz plinth, though I’ve not heard one).

The system was fully pimped top end Brinkman and valve power supply, £15,000 Lyra cartridge and SUT, Brinkman phono, Trilogy 995R amps and Sasha DAW. They were even playing some copper masters.

It really was very pleasing, it's what put Wilson speakers in my brain. They had just been launched, so it was end 2018/early 2019. I didn't get the CTC until early this year, but it doesn't disappoint. I had a high mass belt drive before, I also have the CTC brass platter.

 

[Charles S]

Some people are just easier to please than others. And you did not even spend a million.

No, but close to it, my true estimate would be around 900K.

 

[morricab]

My post was dripping with irony. We are all a bunch of old fellows with to much testosterone and time on our hands.

Actually, I don't think there is so much testosterone here...

 

[Lagonda]

Actually, I don't think there is so much testosterone here...

I think the testosterone turns to estrogen and makes you loose your hair, and your patients apparently !

 

[morricab]

I think the testosterone turns to estrogen and makes you loose your hair, and your patients apparently !

It's testosterone that makes you lose your hair...bald is manly...

 

[Lagonda]

Patients, or patience?

Not sure how it makes sense unless the latter.. unless you meant to say “literally patients”. That would somehow justify the first spelling (even if baldness is not the physiological changes that oestrogen causes).

Had to leave something for Peter to correct !

 

[Bruce B]

Let's look at it this way...

Recorded many instruments in the studio. Microphone (Neuman) -> Mic pre (Digidesign) -> Mixing board (Digidesign) -> Focal speakers.. The whole outfit couldn't have cost more than $20k.... I walk in the room where the instruments are playing... sounds the same. You don't need a $100k system....

 

[Rensselaer]

Had to leave something for Peter to correct !

Oh, sorry Lagonda, I’ll delete my post.