I heard my first 200k vinyl system today

[Alrainbow]

Good morning all.

While on a small vacation in NC. I have downloaded some of what Myles was kind enough to let me hear on his system.
Now given the DAC I am using down here is a mytek and hardly at the level of quality that Myles has in his system. But it is clear as great as the recordings are of Elvis and opus 3. Weather with speakers or my hd800 headphones I do not get the magic that Myles has. The cLarity and even the smoothness is there. But there is something missing. Part might be the micro dynamics. But the truth is Myles system is truly a extremely revieling setup. That allows not only one to hear immediately the changes in one track to another but details that I can only attribute to the analog sound so many speak of.
Listening to Elvis voice quiver so , laughing and the other members along with his banter is cool. But even with this banter the sound is apparent giving away to Myles setup In a big way. By the way I am hooked on Elvis at least the hi Rez stuff anyway.
Now opus 3 the one Myles played is truly a delight to hear , I have a about 6 or so from them . Again as good as they are it's not like Myles setup. The level of detail his system shows is beyond mine for sure.
When I get back I will be checking them out on my office rig. One last thought about buying music. It apears to me many of the albums I want to buy are already on vinyl not DSD or high Rez . It seems to me there are plenty of vinyl junkies out there and how many reel to reel I have no idea. But cost of music seems very reasonable for the sound one gets from it. And now that I know it's not noisey as I thought . I am wanting this even more. Hopefully some time this year I'll be ready to start buying and yes Myles please help,me spend my money hahaha. What I do not know is how much to spend. I am not sure if I should go with a preamp or just a phono stage . I think I might be better with a stage as it could more tuned to match the cartridge . As for TT I do not see any point it changing what what Myles has. In the end it might be his whole analog chain . Phono pre, TT arm and cart . Not sure if Myles is ok with that. Either way this will be something I need guidance in. I am fine with used too. Again thanks Myles and all the rest and I look forward to meeting my koh some day too.
Al

 

[mep]

Al-You need to make another trip back to Myles' place while he has the Magico speakers in for review. I think the resolution knob just got turned up a couple of notches.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Al-You need to make another trip back to Myles' place while he has the Magico speakers in for review. I think the resolution knob just got turned up a couple of notches.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Hello AL,
When I listen to my setup I tend not to think about how much better it could sound on a system like Myles'. I already know that it could...well, more like does, and the thought of not being able to reproduce that at home would drive me bonkers. So I don't. I listen to what I have and enjoy it for what's its worth. Regardless of the differences Myles' system and mine exhibit, I take no back seat to my good friend in the enjoyment department!

 

[mep]

Resolution and detail IMO are best checked with intense, full ranged orchestral music, with a lot going on at the same time. Pick anything that sounds like that and listen for delineation of instruments. Are you a member of an audio club? If you were, and have been to many folks houses and listened to their systems, with your source or theirs, you will find they all sound different, some you prefer more than others, each has its strong points. I like a lot of different guys systems for different reasons and could live with many of them. In the end, its the "sound" you like at the time usually that you build a system around, and later, you change it for a new sound. Its the reality for many audiophiles. Since no system sounds real anyway, the reality is folks go for tone that they like. You will no reproduce the sound you heard without at the very least using the two most significant components beside the room, that's the speakers and amplifier. For most, its a journey, not a destination.

It's about so much more than just "tone." How about listening to a system at a friend's house and suddenly hearing things in recordings that you didn't even know were there? That has nothing to do with tone, but rather information retrieval that escapes what your current system is capable of.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Resolution and detail IMO are best checked with intense, full ranged orchestral music, with a lot going on at the same time. Pick anything that sounds like that and listen for delineation of instruments. Are you a member of an audio club? If you were, and have been to many folks houses and listened to their systems, with your source or theirs, you will find they all sound different, some you prefer more than others, each has its strong points. I like a lot of different guys systems for different reasons and could live with many of them. In the end, its the "sound" you like at the time usually that you build a system around, and later, you change it for a new sound. Its the reality for many audiophiles. Since no system sounds real anyway, the reality is folks go for tone that they like. You will no reproduce the sound you heard without at the very least using the two most significant components beside the room, that's the speakers and amplifier. For most, its a journey, not a destination.

Actually in my book, those are the last two qualities one uses classical, large scale music for. YMMV....

 

[Alrainbow]

I am with you Myles. Large scale classical is good for testing digital music from small and slow to complex and fast. It should remain the same. Lesser dacs exhibit changes. Blurring backing up or lower detail. Now analog does not do this on Myles system. It stood steady and remained focused . Even a pink Floyd song that when it became complex it did not change the recording became full and you do loose micro detail of the in idividuals . Myles system to me was of the best digital reproduction but has qualities that so far I have not heard in digital. Not saying it does not exist just not me as yet.
And Myles let me know if and when I am back on in NYC Friday and on working . The music Myles played was to me reference style and showed me the very best that could be heard. I am not a reviewer nor do I consider myself all,knowing . Except I do know what I like and how most systems have changes in genre and staging where Myles system was remarkable how the recording changed but not his presentation. As I am sure there is better but I cannot imagine something cleaner or more detailed . Headphones bring out details in recordings that speakers may miss or present differently . And Myles was the headphones in this as it gave more deTails . in a Relaxing way easy to hear. Now what this means to me is no,listening fatigue . Myles played one recording with Paul simon with echo and plenty of it . That drives my ears crazy trying to lock on to the music. Even with that I was relaxed , not likening it but nothing like most systems .
Now as for clubs ask and I am there . Also I have a ok office rig and would be very happy to entertain people at. I learn everyday in this entertainment Mecca . So a big yes to all show me , help me. I am really good with headphones that's where I can help others. So ask and offer I am cool with it.

Al

 

[mep]

Do you actually have that experience today? What things do you hear, that you know are now being "correctly" played at your friends system that your system does not amplify "correctly". How can you say that without knowing the entire system FR etc. You are just hearing tone differences and making assumptions, but you are not alone in that. Tell me what it is so much more about will you? (and then tell my why its "more correct at your friends house")

How about hearing musical parts such as a guitar that is playing underneath other guitar parts and you never realized it was there? How about hearing and recognizing voices that were buried in the mix before and which escaped your notice? What the hell does that have to do with tone? I'm talking information retrieval from the source and not tone coloration added afterwards.

 

[Alrainbow]

Please pose your question. As I am understand up to the part they sound different , you say why they are to you.
As Myles was a ESP Martin Logan summit. So closest I own is a stax 009. It has about the same note texture and thickness
And fast like his. So what us your question please .
l

 

[mep]

Is this your experience now, going to a friends house and hearing these things on his system and not yours?

No, I'm speaking in generalities. For instance what happened to Al when he visited Myles' house. The same thing can happen in your own home when you buy a superior component to one that was in your system.

That is what we all discovered a long time ago when we heard a more revealing system , when we first found out what hi-fi was about, it should not be the case at the level of hi-fi folks on this forum are at.....should it?

You're kidding right? Look, if you are still listening to mid-fi gear from the 1980s and haven't upgraded anything since then because you believe you are still on the cutting edge of the art, of course you aren't hearing any new information because there is none to be had for you. This hobby isn't all about "tone" and "harmonic spray" as you like to break everything down to with a heaping helpful dose of POS thrown in for good measure. Part of the joy of this hobby is when you do make a worthwhile upgrade and you are able to retrieve more information that is encoded into your source material of choice.

 

[mep]

Al, as I understand things, you like Myles system, overall it sounds great to you. And you earlier thought if you bought the front end including the pre-amp you would more get that sound. I said you need to get his amp and speaker and really, his room too to get his "sound"

So, given a same source and amplifier, what makes two different headphones sound different when you ignore the differences in how they sit on your head each time you put one or the other on?

Are you seriously trying to argue that all headphones sound the same??

 

[mep]

No, I am not kidding, I asked a question about your experience at your friends house. Why change the subject?

What part of speaking in generalities don't you get?

 

[mep]

What does it have to do with then? What specific thing is allowing better resolution on your friends system vs yours?

It's called information retrieval from the source. The better the gear, the more information you can retrieve from the source material. Since you are mostly a SS guy except for your home-brew SE amp, you should borrow a Krell KRC-HR preamp from someone and compare it to your Hafler DH-110 and maybe, just maybe you would know what I'm talking about. But then, maybe not.

 

[mep]

Ok, sorry, missed that. So, what are we discussing about exactly?

Did you re-read the bold in post 219?

The ability to hear new information from source material you already own when heard through better components than what you currently own. It's pretty simple.

 

[mep]

And what special preamp might that be Tom?

 

[Robh3606]

Just because you hear something you have not heard before is no guarantee that the system you heard it on is more resolving than what you are using now. It could be as simple as just not noticing it before.

Rob

 

[mep]

Just because you hear something you have not heard before is no guarantee that the system you heard it on is more resolving than what you are using now. It could be as simple as just not noticing it before.

Rob

Yep, could be. It might also be possible to pick up an instrument and start playing it like a virtuoso even though you have never played an instrument in your life. Does anyone seriously want to argue that higher-resolution systems don't allow you to hear more detail/information that is encoded into the source material?

 

[mep]

With judicious use of a parametric equalizer, you can bring stuff up that you did not notice or hear very well, or you can just up the volume way up and hear stuff you never heard before, its not always attributable to the system per se. If you are 50 year old, you do not hear the highs you did when you were 20, they are there, but to hear them, you need to really crank the volume, or EQ, so in this case, its not necessarily system resolution, but ear resolution. Many examples abound, but I think everyone here knows that a lesser level system as far as reproduction would not reveal every detail. But those at this level, details should be revealed on all gear if its really hi-fi. Problem is, many don't understand what they mean by putting flesh on bones, that's adding harmonics, adding stuff that was not there to start with, IF, compared to real hi-fi quality. Many designers openly claim to "voice" their units after designing to "sound" good, ie they put a tone to their unit. its no longer hi-fi, but it surely can sound good to many, but if your whole system is composed of these "voiced" components, you got some serious confusion when you change out one of them with something else. Electronics should not be "voiced" unless it is made clear to the consumer it has been so manipulated IMO.

All you need to make any system state of the art is a parametric equalizer. Even if you have mid-fi gear from the early 1980s that sold for a couple of hundred dollars when new, all you need is a parametric equalizer to even the playing field.

If you have low resolution stereo gear, you can turn it up until your ears bleed (and they might start bleeding before you turn it up very loud anyway) and it is not going to uncover information it's simply not capable of retrieving.

 

[mep]

A measurably better system, from source to output of speakers, will provide a more accurate reproduction of the signal wiggle. That does not mean it will sound more revealing to an individual audiophile at all. Stereophile test reports are awash with gear that is not accurate but reviewers find the latest and greatest all the time.

The moral to the story here is that you should always buy gear based on how it measures on the test bench and because true measurements are hard to come by, you should make all purchasing decisions based on the manufacturer's spec sheet. Never use or trust your ears to tell you which component sounds best because that would be a waste of time.

 

[Robh3606]

Hello Mep

Sure I will argue it. You have never heard of masking as in how MP3's work as an example. Just because you have a Ah Ha moment doesn't mean a damn thing beyond the fact you had an Ah Ha moment. You mean to tell me you have never heard something new on one system and once hearing it you were not able to hear it on your other system where you didn't notice it before??

I have 3 different set-ups and depending on what I am listening too I have had that happen many times and also when using headphones where you can hear subtle details that you swear are not there only to go back to your system and hear them plain as day. With complex music it is very easy to miss things and then hear them on a second or third listen. It all depends on what you happen to be listening for and how attentive you are when listening.

When you come up with a definition of what a higher-resolution system that we can all agree on let me know.

Rob