Epiphany, have you had one in audio?

[Old Listener]

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.

Maybe not so small a minority. However, the people who are hearing new differences every day and who swap gear often have more to say. I'd guess that most of the people who have old gear that they still love don't post on audiophile forums.

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.

A magazine like Stereophile serves the market for news and reviews about new stuff. That readership is of value to manufacturers and dealers. References to used gear and especially recommendations for gear that is out of production don't fit.

It is a bit harder to figure out a financially viable formula for a magazine about gear that is out of production.

Bill

 

[Lee]

Excellent, Lee Have you any experience with Nagra recorders, either analog or digital Thanks.

Not much experience with Nagra although we did have one for a Chesky session once in the early 90s and I vaguely remember it sounding good. The Korg DSD units are surprisingly good. Most of the learning has been in microphone placement and selection. That's 80% of the battle.

We do plan to try a Cardas Clear mic cable soon so I will have some thoughts on that. One observation is that Mogami and a lot of pro cable is just not that good in my experience. The other thing that matters is power. We run everything on the Sound Devices battery. You would not believe what dirty ac power can do to a recording chain.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Therefore, the best I hope for, is a system that can occasionally give me a glimpse of reality ( or maybe a 'glimmer' )

Why only occasionally? Why not very often? This should be the task of an high-end system - to increase the probability you have enough clues of the real think to give you that "glimpse".

 

[flez007]

Hearing my first "serious" audio system at a friend's place (actually it was his dad's system) marked me forever (which I am not sure if this relates this experience to an epiphany) - then listening a tubed amp at my room, my system (a Fisher 500 if I recall right) that smoked my Classe separates (which I was still paying!) and quite recently exposing my ears to RtR.... the musical event was recreated almost flawlessly.

 

[DaveyF]

Why only occasionally? Why not very often? This should be the task of an high-end system - to increase the probability you have enough clues of the real think to give you that "glimpse".

Microstrip, 'Very often' would be better without doubt, BUT I'm pretty happy with the occasional glimpse

Fernando, that's a interesting coincidence::my first amp was a Fisher 500....which I later modded to act as just a preamp. The Fisher was able to punch way above its league. Embarrassed many a friends rig at the time

 

[garylkoh]

Mark,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.

These two sentences seem to be contradictory. You remember. I remember. We are down to (None-2).

Bill

I should have put a paragraph break between the two sentences.

As audiophiles, we routinely have great music in the home. But for the ordinary music lover who is probably completely unaware of high-end gear, the iPod/earbuds is often an epiphany.

I got goosebumps with the Audiophile USB because I had previously dismissed anything digital.....

 

[garylkoh]

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?

Haha!! or be a designer and listen to the same 20 seconds of a track 100 times a day....

But, I seem to be blessed with the ability to suspend disbelief and immerse myself in music. So, I guess I'm not one who feels disappointment that my system is far from "live", and yet while I know that the reproduction is far from live, I can suspend that and enjoy myself with what I have.

 

[mep]

But, I seem to be blessed with the ability to suspend disbelief and immerse myself in music. So, I guess I'm not one who feels disappointment that my system is far from "live", and yet while I know that the reproduction is far from live, I can suspend that and enjoy myself with what I have.

+1

 

[Old Listener]

Haha!! or be a designer and listen to the same 20 seconds of a track 100 times a day....

Once when I was working on audio device driver software in the late 90s, I need to play a short music file over and over. I picked an MP3 file with Paul Badura-Skoda playing the next-to-last waltz in the Brahms Op. 39 set. I never tired of listening to that performance and it remains my favorite for that piece of music.

But, I seem to be blessed with the ability to suspend disbelief and immerse myself in music. So, I guess I'm not one who feels disappointment that my system is far from "live", and yet while I know that the reproduction is far from live, I can suspend that and enjoy myself with what I have.

Someone who likes music but does not have a good system was in our house the other day while I was playing piano music on my home office system. This system is not high-end but sounds quite acceptable to me: a PC running J. River MC software, PCI soundcard and Audioengine A5 powered speakers. This visitor was in another room out of sight of the office. She commented that the music sounded so real that she thought that my wife or I was playing a piano.

Bill

 

[FrantzM]

<snip>

But, I seem to be blessed with the ability to suspend disbelief and immerse myself in music. So, I guess I'm not one who feels disappointment that my system is far from "live", and yet while I know that the reproduction is far from live, I can suspend that and enjoy myself with what I have.

+2 ..

 

[mep]

Tom-I think you have set the bar so high that everything is always going to disappoint you and cause your unhappiness with what we have to work with. The illusion is not perfect, but it certainly is an illusion and sometimes a real damn good one. I spend more time with a smile on my face than a frown.

Mark

 

[c1ferrari]

Not much experience with Nagra although we did have one for a Chesky session once in the early 90s and I vaguely remember it sounding good. The Korg DSD units are surprisingly good. Most of the learning has been in microphone placement and selection. That's 80% of the battle.

We do plan to try a Cardas Clear mic cable soon so I will have some thoughts on that. One observation is that Mogami and a lot of pro cable is just not that good in my experience. The other thing that matters is power. We run everything on the Sound Devices battery. You would not believe what dirty ac power can do to a recording chain.

I'll have to research Korg and would agree with the import of mic placement and selection. Kinda curious regarding your observation pertinent to Mogami...what does pro cable commit/omit that offends, if you will

Thanks for your reply, Lee

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

But, I seem to be blessed with the ability to suspend disbelief and immerse myself in music. So, I guess I'm not one who feels disappointment that my system is far from "live", and yet while I know that the reproduction is far from live, I can suspend that and enjoy myself with what I have.

+3.

Tim

 

[MylesBAstor]

Why only occasionally? Why not very often? This should be the task of an high-end system - to increase the probability you have enough clues of the real think to give you that "glimpse".

I'm on your side. That's why got into 15 ips tape! There are some jazz recordings that are jaw dropping. And it's not hard to suspend disbelief with the best of Wilkinson either.

 

[DaveyF]

Tom, does it not seem to you that listening to headphones is a far less realistic rendition of the event than a good system in a room?

I listen to 'phones when I don't want to wake the family, but it always leaves me with the same impression.. That of being less immersed in the music, I'm sure YMMV

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Realism again? Whatever that means? Google mastering studios and look at their equipment lists. You'll find very few that look like anybody's high-end audiophile system. Find the few that do. Narrow it to the systems, if any, that use the speakers you own. Tweak your room like...well, let's hope there isn't more than one of them. Now, buy recordings mastered in that room, you've got something approaching relative "realism."

For everything else, it's seeking accuracy and accepting systemic strengths and weaknesses. The strengths of a really good headphone system are good ones -- elimination of room resonances and ambient noise. You can struggle for years, spending thousands of dollars to minimize that stuff. Pop on a good pair of cans and it's gone, resulting in a resolution of detail and an isolation from distraction that cannot be achieved with speakers outside of a darkened anechoic chamber with a silenced HVAC system.

I go'cher immersive right there.

The weaknesses? Imaging and slam. At the quiet end, dynamics don't get any better, because a quiet, isolated background doesn't get any better. At the other end, headphones obviously can't deliver the chest-thump that big bass drivers moving air can. And the imaging is, well, very different. You can either get used to it or not. The soundstage, what headphone geeks call headstage can, on the other hand, be huge. The room becomes a moot point. It is no longer a limitation. You're pumping the recording right to the eardrums so the only spacial limitation, other than the inability to lay instruments out in a horizontal plane in front of you - pinpoint imaging - is the recording. It can be a stunning illusion. I got'cher wall-disolving expansive soundstage right there, too. And I can get it ina closet if I need to.

Headphone listening can be a revelation, but before you can appreciate it, you've got to accept that what were seeking is varieties of an illusion. Then you can accept the strengths and weaknesses of the various illusions for what they are, and enjoy them without chasing some "realism" that only existed in the mastering suite. Seek accuracy, if that's your thing, tone if that's your thing. But spatial realism? You can only imagine it.

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

Realism again? Whatever that means? Google mastering studios and look at their equipment lists. You'll find very few that look like anybody's high-end audiophile system. Find the few that do. Narrow it to the systems, if any, that use the speakers you own. Tweak your room like...well, let's hope there isn't more than one of them. Now, buy recordings mastered in that room, you've got something approaching relative "realism."

For everything else, it's seeking accuracy and accepting systemic strengths and weaknesses. The strengths of a really good headphone system are good ones -- elimination of room resonances and ambient noise. You can struggle for years, spending thousands of dollars to minimize that stuff. Pop on a good pair of cans and it's gone, resulting in a resolution of detail and an isolation from distraction that cannot be achieved with speakers outside of a darkened anechoic chamber with a silenced HVAC system.

I go'cher immersive right there.

The weaknesses? Imaging and slam. At the quiet end, dynamics don't get any better, because a quiet, isolated background doesn't get any better. At the other end, headphones obviously can't deliver the chest-thump that big bass drivers moving air can. And the imaging is, well, very different. You can either get used to it or not. The soundstage, what headphone geeks call headstage can, on the other hand, be huge. The room becomes a moot point. It is no longer a limitation. You're pumping the recording right to the eardrums so the only spacial limitation, other than the inability to lay instruments out in a horizontal plane in front of you - pinpoint imaging - is the recording. It can be a stunning illusion. I got'cher wall-disolving expansive soundstage right there, too. And I can get it ina closet if I need to.

Headphone listening can be a revelation, but before you can appreciate it, you've got to accept that what were seeking is varieties of an illusion. Then you can accept the strengths and weaknesses of the various illusions for what they are, and enjoy them without chasing some "realism" that only existed in the mastering suite. Seek accuracy, if that's your thing, tone if that's your thing. But spatial realism? You can only imagine it.

Tim

Hi

SOmewhat OT ... I believe any audiophile should have a good pair of cans. If only to understand the limitations of their systems in particular the Room speaker/Interface. A good can system (Headphones + Amplifer) south of $1000 easilysurpass in fidelity any most any speaker / roomcombomost audiophiles will have ever put t gether ... Level of Distortion is very amplifer - lke ... I have been on headphones for now a year, a changed forced by my relocation... it takes a while gettig used to but if only for the education , a must for any person who think of themselves as auiophiles

 

[microstrip]

Realism again? Whatever that means? Google mastering studios and look at their equipment lists. You'll find very few that look like anybody's high-end audiophile system. Find the few that do. Narrow it to the systems, if any, that use the speakers you own. Tweak your room like...well, let's hope there isn't more than one of them. Now, buy recordings mastered in that room, you've got something approaching relative "realism."
Tim

Tim,

It seems you are not understanding what realism means for some audiophiles ... Realism doe not mean having a facsimile of the control room, but having the capability to recreate the perception of the original event.

"Descriptions like pleasantness and preference must therefore be considered in ranking in importance as ranking with accuracy and fidelity. " Do you know who wrote it?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Hi

SOmewhat OT ... I believe any audiophile should have a good pair of cans. If only to understand the limitations of their systems in particular the Room speaker/Interface. A good can system (Headphones + Amplifer) south of $1000 easilysurpass in fidelity any most any speaker / roomcombomost audiophiles will have ever put t gether ... Level of Distortion is very amplifer - lke ... I have been on headphones for now a year, a changed forced by my relocation... it takes a while gettig used to but if only for the education , a must for any person who think of themselves as auiophiles

Frantz,

formerly i thought as you do, that decent headphones will expose any system as lacking. this year i purchased a couple of state of the art headphone amps and headphones, including top of the line Stax electrotats looking for another level of resolution.

nope; they can't really do anything better, and most things not as good, as my system. detail, tonality, textural nuance, even low level detail.....not as good. and forget about bass or imaging as headphones are at best dismal at those things.

i guess the discovery that my system was better than the best headphones was a sort of an epiphany, in any case it was a surprise.

it's possible that what i've heard is the difference between my darTZeel amp and the Stax SRM-717 amp and the Woo Audio 6SE Maxxed amp, and that the headphones were not optimized.....so.....

i've ordered the best stat amp, called a BHSE (Blue Hawaii Special Edition), and the new stat cans, the Stax SR-009......to see where that gets me. i'm determined to give headphones every possible opportunity to show me something.

but, so far.....headphones can't quite compete...

i will agree that good headphones are 'bang for the buck' an unsurpassable way to get the best sound for the least investment. and i've enjoyed meeting many of the young aspiring audiophiles that are in the headphone scene.

 

[DaveyF]

Tim,

It seems you are not understanding what realism means for some audiophiles ... Realism doe not mean having a facsimile of the control room, but having the capability to recreate the perception of the original event.

"Descriptions like pleasantness and preference must therefore be considered in ranking in importance as ranking with accuracy and fidelity. " Do you know who wrote it?

I totally agree with both Mike and Microstrip To me, 'phones are just not able to allow me to believe that I am recreating the perception of the original event. Oddly enough, IMO one of the biggest problems that I see, is that they DO take the room out of the equation....which leads my ears to believe that the presentation is in fact less real and not more
Tim, can you really tell me that you prefer 'phones to a good in-room system