Epiphany, have you had one in audio?
- Thread starter DaveyF
- Start date
1 H2O monos powering Apogee Scintillas make it possible.
2 H2O Fire preamp helped tremendously.
NOS DAC the heart of the system.
3 My weird cables were my first epiphany.
4 The 47 lab Flatfish Transport was my second epiphany leaving the sound an epiphany in itself.
2 H2O Fire preamp helped tremendously.
NOS DAC the heart of the system.
3 My weird cables were my first epiphany.
4 The 47 lab Flatfish Transport was my second epiphany leaving the sound an epiphany in itself.
Mark, what you posted is IMHO, a perfect example of achieving synergy in a system. The amp and preamp along with your front end are now working well with your speakers. The question is, can one come to a valid conclusion about the quality and ability of the components that are now seemingly less able to compete with the preferred gear
I am a little surprised that so many of you have had an epiphany in the hobby
Thinking back, my closest to that was on a couple of occasions in the past....1) The first time I heard Stacked Quad 57's....in the early 80's. A sound that I had not heard before..and 2) My first exposure to the original B&W Nautilus speaker..... a superb sound stage and great dynamics. ( Wonder if anyone actually owns these today?)BUT, I don't think I would classify either experience as an epiphany
My friend with the amp is very pleased with his acquisition. ( which is a good thing considering the price he had pay
) But, my feeling is that he has attributed some of his glee to the fact that he did pay such a price and conversely now attributes value to that
Last edited:
I have had several including:
1. My first real high end audio experience with soundstage in 1991 at the NYC Stereophile show with David Wilson demonstrating his Wilson Watt/Puppies with audiophile classic Bang, Baroom and Harp. The part where the guy walked off the stage was incredibly realistic. Close behind this was hearing Maggie 3As and ARC tube gear playing Ana Caram Rio After Dark at Lyric Hifi in the early 90s. I fell in love with Maggie then and there and we are still dating.
2. The Technical Brain and TAD room at RMAF last Fall. Amazingly lifelike performance of Jun Fukumachi's piano XRCD.
3. The first 24/96 recording we did while I was working with Jeremy Kipnis at Chesky Records in the early 90s. I had never heard really good digital until then.
4. My installation of the Modwright phono stage and Lyra Argo(i) cart on my VPI deck. Once I cued up Neil Young's Massey Hall, I was floored.
5. Last week playing the SHM-SACD of Sonny Rollins Saxophone Colossus. Breathtaking realism on my SCD-777ES even beating my reference Mofi Blues in Orbit.
6. Recording two weeks ago for my classical record label a trio of local classical musicians at Northside Baptist church in Buckhead live to 2 track in 24/176 on a Sound Devices 722. We nailed the balance perfectly of the piano, violin, and cello. After the recording we went back to my friend Nick's house and heard the Sound Devices file straight into a modded DAC1 to Musical Fidelity amp and Tiny Dancer speakers. After the first few notes, we knew we had something for our upcoming download deal.
1. My first real high end audio experience with soundstage in 1991 at the NYC Stereophile show with David Wilson demonstrating his Wilson Watt/Puppies with audiophile classic Bang, Baroom and Harp. The part where the guy walked off the stage was incredibly realistic. Close behind this was hearing Maggie 3As and ARC tube gear playing Ana Caram Rio After Dark at Lyric Hifi in the early 90s. I fell in love with Maggie then and there and we are still dating.
2. The Technical Brain and TAD room at RMAF last Fall. Amazingly lifelike performance of Jun Fukumachi's piano XRCD.
3. The first 24/96 recording we did while I was working with Jeremy Kipnis at Chesky Records in the early 90s. I had never heard really good digital until then.
4. My installation of the Modwright phono stage and Lyra Argo(i) cart on my VPI deck. Once I cued up Neil Young's Massey Hall, I was floored.
5. Last week playing the SHM-SACD of Sonny Rollins Saxophone Colossus. Breathtaking realism on my SCD-777ES even beating my reference Mofi Blues in Orbit.
6. Recording two weeks ago for my classical record label a trio of local classical musicians at Northside Baptist church in Buckhead live to 2 track in 24/176 on a Sound Devices 722. We nailed the balance perfectly of the piano, violin, and cello. After the recording we went back to my friend Nick's house and heard the Sound Devices file straight into a modded DAC1 to Musical Fidelity amp and Tiny Dancer speakers. After the first few notes, we knew we had something for our upcoming download deal.
Mark, what you posted is IMHO, a perfect example of achieving synergy in a system. The amp and preamp along with your front end are now working well with your speakers. The question is, can one come to a valid conclusion about the quality and ability of the components that are now seemingly less able to compete with the preferred gear
Davey-No doubt synergy is at play here even though using the word synergy can start another food fight on WBF. My speakers definitely love being driven by a SS amp with a high dampening factor and lots of power. One thing you have to remember, my tube gear was my reference components in my system for quite some time and nothing else I inserted could displace them. And there have been lots of preamps and power amps over the years. That doesn’t mean that in someone else’s system with different speakers that they wouldn’t love this gear as much as I have over the years. So, I guess the answer to your question is no.
2) My first exposure to the original B&W Nautilus speaker..... a superb sound stage and great dynamics. ( Wander if anyone actually owns these today?
I’m sure you wonder more than you wander, but I’m quite sure that people are still listening to the original B&W Nautilus speaker. I seriously doubt they were chopped up and used for firewood.
The epiphanies for me were twofold:
1. I had given up on SS and never thought it would find a place in my system.
2.I never thought that I would replace my gear with far cheaper gear and actually increase the quality of my system. The mindset is that improvement to our gear and thus our sound always cost more piles of cash to obtain-not smaller piles of cash than what you have already paid out.
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Mark,
I think that this sums up what's wrong with the high-end industry. None of us can even imagine what joy and excitement a $199 iPod and a good pair of ear buds can bring to a music lover who has never been exposed to high-end music reproduction. I still remember the goosebumps I got when I first hooked up a $200 M-Audio Audiophile USB to a laptop and played a ripped CD through my system. At that time (2001), I was over 99% vinyl and had just a couple of SACDs and CDs.
The hobby is mostly about recreational spending for many audiophiles.
These two sentences seem to be contradictory. You remember. I remember. We are down to (None-2).
Bill
Not sure if this is an epiphany or simply reinforcement of prior observations...
I was at a bar (where most great epiphanies occur) listening to a set by Garage A Trois when it struck me...no stereo system I have ever heard even comes close to the experience of live music. Our stereos are at best pale imitations of a live event and no stereo can ever hope to capture the dynamics, pressurize a room or recreate the electricity of a live performance. Chasing the recreation of the live event is a mirage and destined to be a largely unfulfilling waste of time, money and psychic energy.
I believe what we should be aiming for (and what is achieveable) is an auditory 'suspension of disbelief', akin to the emotional involvement I sometimes experience while watching a movie. A stereo should help us reach an emotional connection to the artist and their music, similar to how a movie connects us to a character on the movie screen.
Then again, the music was really great and I'd had quite a few beers....
I was at a bar (where most great epiphanies occur) listening to a set by Garage A Trois when it struck me...no stereo system I have ever heard even comes close to the experience of live music. Our stereos are at best pale imitations of a live event and no stereo can ever hope to capture the dynamics, pressurize a room or recreate the electricity of a live performance. Chasing the recreation of the live event is a mirage and destined to be a largely unfulfilling waste of time, money and psychic energy.
I believe what we should be aiming for (and what is achieveable) is an auditory 'suspension of disbelief', akin to the emotional involvement I sometimes experience while watching a movie. A stereo should help us reach an emotional connection to the artist and their music, similar to how a movie connects us to a character on the movie screen.
Then again, the music was really great and I'd had quite a few beers....
'Course that's the half empty glass of water way of thinking
Have too many friends like that and they never enjoy their systems, despite sinking a considerable sum of money into their gear. OTOH, I like to focus on as you said, as well as JGH, on the system giving me that occassional glimpse of reality. And after all, isn't that in large part what high-end audio is all about? It's getting that last 20% that makes the recording, be it digital, analog or God knows what, sound more like live or real music 
And after all, isn't that in large part what high-end audio is all about? It's getting that last 20% that makes the recording, be it digital, analog or God knows what, sound more like live or real music
I do agree that we want it to sound like REAL music, however I think I have finally gotten to the point of recognizing that it is NOT EVER going to sound like a LIVE performance - not even close. But that is a relief. Because now I just get to listen to music.
I still, on occasion, get hung up in things like perfect image placement (doesn't exist in the audiophile sense sitting ten rows back, dead center at Symphony Hall because I'm not up where the microphones are) but I am doing much better --- and as result, the hobby is becoming more fun again.
I used to run home after a symphony performance and put on the same music I just heard. BAD idea. Really BAD idea.
Exactly what I was trying to convey. Giving up the pursuit of the impossible immeasurably increases the enjoyment of what is possible and what I already have.
I believe if we would aim for accurate reproduction of the recording we'd still fall short of recreation of the live event but, perhaps, eventually get better recordings and better playback gear. It's worth a shot anyway. And by the way, what a great name for a band!
I enjoy my system tremendously, while completely agreeing that chasing the original event in audio reproduction is futile. My glass is full of revealing the recording instead of attempting to re-produce something that was never produced in the first place.
Tim
Stop your whining
You want to totally lose enjoyment? Be a reviewer and use the same six or ten reference LPs all the time when auditioning equipment. After that, who wants to listen to music? Stop your whining
Now that's funny and possibly a definition of hell!
My first epiphany in high-end audio (and I had many after that one) was in a friend system having Jeff Rowland electronics and big Infinity speakers listening to the classical Cantate Domino in an Oracle based LP playing setup.
The system has such a sensation of space and continuity in the choir that music flowed big and powerful, but we could almost feel the singers as individuals. They were not the usual mass of voices we associate most of the time with this recording, but we could almost listen to each contribution, sucha as the sensation of space and micro dynamics in loud choir parts.
Anyway I think that the few words are appropriate to describe my feelings.
"Not all reproduced sound is very refined, and it is clear that much of the time we are willing to suspend criticism of the sound itself to just enjoy the music, movie, or whatever program instigated the sound. All of us at one time or another have felt that chill running down the spine – that tingling sensation that tell us that we are experiencing something special and emotionally moving. Was it “real”? Was it “reproduction”? Good sound or bad? Does it matter? The feeling that these feelings happen confirm that the system works.
But – and this is the motivation of this book - if any sound is rewarding, better and more spatially complex sound may be more pleasurable. (…) If there can be some assurance that customers will hear a facsimile of the art that was created, the greater are the rewards for innovative musicians and recording engineers. "
From F. Toole “Sound Reproduction”, Chapter 1
The system has such a sensation of space and continuity in the choir that music flowed big and powerful, but we could almost feel the singers as individuals. They were not the usual mass of voices we associate most of the time with this recording, but we could almost listen to each contribution, sucha as the sensation of space and micro dynamics in loud choir parts.
Anyway I think that the few words are appropriate to describe my feelings.
"Not all reproduced sound is very refined, and it is clear that much of the time we are willing to suspend criticism of the sound itself to just enjoy the music, movie, or whatever program instigated the sound. All of us at one time or another have felt that chill running down the spine – that tingling sensation that tell us that we are experiencing something special and emotionally moving. Was it “real”? Was it “reproduction”? Good sound or bad? Does it matter? The feeling that these feelings happen confirm that the system works.
But – and this is the motivation of this book - if any sound is rewarding, better and more spatially complex sound may be more pleasurable. (…) If there can be some assurance that customers will hear a facsimile of the art that was created, the greater are the rewards for innovative musicians and recording engineers. "
From F. Toole “Sound Reproduction”, Chapter 1
Have to agree with you Gary.
There does seem to be a prevailing "understanding" in the hobby that if something is newer and more costly, then it is 'better'.
I have disagreed with this thinking for many years now, but I have always thought that I was in a very small minority. I cannot even remember when was the last time that i read anywhere, where a reviewer in any audio mag compared the current crop to yesterday's gear and came to the conclusion that any/some of the older gear is 'better'; never mind competitive.
BTW, Mark, now I no longer wonder why I try not to post before, or after a certain hour
I shouldn't have wandered down to the computer at all at that hour'Course that's the half empty glass of water way of thinking
Myles,that's my way of thinking as well. The realization that we really cannot re-create the sound of a 'live' symphony orchestra in our listening rooms is fairly evident if you visit the real event and then compare. ( This area was discussed at length in my thread- Live vs.Reproduced)...
Therefore, the best I hope for, is a system that can occasionally give me a glimpse of reality ( or maybe a 'glimmer'
)