State of the industry - Roy Gregory Editorial

[Kingrex]

Analogy doesn’t hold up under scrutiny because what constitutes performance is clearly and measurably defined in cars and not so in audio...that is why 1930s theater speakers can sound at least as real as a modern megabuck speaker...

Is it? Seems to me they use Nuremburg and how fast you got around it. But that doesn't tell you anything about how the car handles when in a corner and the tires are breaking. Add to that pavement and weather condition, tires in use. Driving a car hard is an art. Most can't do it. I can't.

Then there is comfort and fit to the driver.

Also durability. How long does the engine, transmission, suspension etc function as intended.
The old 911SC 3.0 was loved by many because the engine was bullet proof.
The Targa was a nightmare to keep the roof from leaking.
There are lots of ways to measure a car.

 

[Lee]

Is it? Seems to me they use Nuremburg and how fast you got around it. But that doesn't tell you anything about how the car handles when in a corner and the tires are breaking. Add to that pavement and weather condition, tires in use. Driving a car hard is an art. Most can't do it. I can't.

Then there is comfort and fit to the driver.

Also durability. How long does the engine, transmission, suspension etc function as intended.
The old 911SC 3.0 was loved by many because the engine was bullet proof.
The Targa was a nightmare to keep the roof from leaking.
There are lots of ways to measure a car.

Excellent post!

 

[Kingrex]

Well i ll report back on the state of the industry after i ve come back from the MOC in Munchen.
I was a frequent show go er from 2004 till 2010 after that i lost interest .
Shows means mostly mediocre sound with an enourmous emphesize on shiny big cables and monstrous " power condtioners " hardly a thing of music lovers interest .

I of course am biased. But a real audiophile should be concerned about power. All audio reproduction starts here. Behind the wall, and in front connected to your equipment.
If the power is compromised in any way, every piece of gear is compromised. I don't care what the manufacturer or your equipment says. They may claim the input PS in their equipment is impervious to blabla, but I hear changes for the better in every system I have touched where the power is not correct. If you want good sound, power should excite you.

 

[morricab]

Is it? Seems to me they use Nuremburg and how fast you got around it. But that doesn't tell you anything about how the car handles when in a corner and the tires are breaking. Add to that pavement and weather condition, tires in use. Driving a car hard is an art. Most can't do it. I can't.

Then there is comfort and fit to the driver.

Also durability. How long does the engine, transmission, suspension etc function as intended.
The old 911SC 3.0 was loved by many because the engine was bullet proof.
The Targa was a nightmare to keep the roof from leaking.
There are lots of ways to measure a car.

Drive a 1930s Bugatti around that same track...if you dare.... or a late 50s Corvette for that matter...I am pretty sure the experience won't be nearly as fast...nor as much fun...

 

[PeterA]

I think you are citing this friend in support of the idea that people who like vintage cars are enjoying different characteristics, experiences and "feel" than are people who like new cars?

I see the point I made above very clearly with myself. Whether I am listening to a vintage audio system or to a new audio system I am targeting the same high-end audio objective.

But I enjoy my vintage sports car for very different characteristics, experiences and "feel" than for which I enjoy our new sports car.

Ron, I think we’re saying the same thing but I really can’t tell.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I of course am biased. But a real audiophile should be concerned about power. All audio reproduction starts here. Behind the wall, and in front connected to your equipment.
If the power is compromised in any way, every piece of gear is compromised. I don't care what the manufacturer or your equipment says. They may claim the input PS in their equipment is impervious to blabla, but I hear changes for the better in every system I have touched where the power is not correct. If you want good sound, power should excite you

Look you re promoting your business .
There is off course nothing wrong with good no nonse well layed out industrial / home installations which are modern and have up to date specs
M fremers Aluminium home installation wiring was not off course , replacement of those was needed and long overdue

What i m talking about is those small fridges / amp lookalikes they call power conditioners , if those produced good sound id be tempted to investigate , but to the same degree as cabling they never have , they re just dynamics constrictors responsible for producing an overly smooth sound .

David DDK has a good word for them which i will not mention lol

 

[ddk]

I am all in favor of a free exchange of information but the "joyless group" statement I made is true. How can one have joy when you are saying that no new advancements in sound reproduction have occurred? Part of the hobby's joy is the perpetual pursuit of excellent sound. Music reproduction is complex and ever evolving, both in front of the mic and behind it.

Seriously ?
So according to you anyone who doesn't follow TAS and perpetually chase their tail doesn't enjoy this hobby! Being bamboozled and falling down dark rabbit holes might be your model but not everyones sense of joy, certainly not mine!
FYI they've only been reproducing music for over a century, there are many many many excellent recordings that can blow anyone's sock off, but you have to know to how to setup a system!

To believe that no new tech is happening is simply dead wrong. There are provable advancements in this hobby and much of the vintage audio has been left behind. You like horns? Fine but there are better horn speakers because cabinets have improved. Drivers have improved. Tolerances in manufacture have improved. Likewise electronics and sources have improved.

You're only showing your inexperience and lack of knowledge with such comments! You're the supposed guiding light of the industry and the hobbyist yet you don't have clue about high end sound, this is why some of us are critical of the magazines and the industry.

Look at the Vivaldi Apex. That is huge advance in dynamics and resolution and you can measure it. 12 db better linearity.

12 db better linearity zzzzzzzzz! Compared to what? On what type of sources are we talking about? If the source is less linear what's the filler to make it 12 db more linear? What does it even mean aside from the fact that digital is nonlinear which we already knew?

So yes, let's have a real discussion with members of all opinions. But stop the ridiculous comments about there being no new technology.

Technology is just a vague word you like throwing up as if it means anything, please be specific exactly what new technology/technologies you're talking about and what aspect of high end sound reproduction has it improved upon in comparison to established

It's impossible to have meaningful discussions when we're not at the same level of experience, you don't have mine nor of many others here and that's why the exchanges have gone south. I've been at this for almost 50 years 30 of it in the industry at the very top end Lee, we're on the same footing you can't lecture me in this field.

david

 

[MarcelNL]

is it me or am I the only one finding that talking this discussion into the 'personal range' is not necessary?

We can agree to disagree, I do that a lot on audio stuff talking to folks not 'into high end' ;-) (whether that is audio, cooking or espresso etc)

 

[Kingrex]

Drive a 1930s Bugatti around that same track...if you dare.... or a late 50s Corvette for that matter...I am pretty sure the experience won't be nearly as fast...nor as much fun...

Those old Corvette Stingray sucked. They got chick, but that's about all. The new corvette is amazing. My 2009 Cayman S is on a whole other level compared to my 1972 911S. I am not saying cars have not gotten better. My point is more the measurements of better do have a level of subjective to them. Like audio, you can put a scope on something and say its this or that. That does not always mean is sounds better. Maybe you can take a corner tighter with such and such a car, but the ride might be rock hard and unusable on some roads.

 

[morricab]

Those old Corvette Stingray sucked. They got chick, but that's about all. The new corvette is amazing. My 2009 Cayman S is on a whole other level compared to my 1972 911S. I am not saying cars have not gotten better. My point is more the measurements of better do have a level of subjective to them. Like audio, you can put a scope on something and say its this or that. That does not always mean is sounds better. Maybe you can take a corner tighter with such and such a car, but the ride might be rock hard and unusable on some roads.

Yes but old cars are not about performance...the best old audio still is...

 

[rando]

Seriously ?

Between you and tima I'm finding no need to post multiple times a day in here.


I'd like to point out to Tim his recent broad stroke across tech advancements and large leaps in digital should register the immensity of impact cell phones/tablets continue to have. Phone DAC are not a topic that get much attention here and their near cousins may begin to shortly. As will software concerns that prick the senses less than eco-system such as Roon. I'll be watching closely to discover whether intrinsic knowledge of what he's been hinting at continues leaking out.




Now back to ICE cars and other items of nostalgia directly tied to personal assessments of where the industry should be.

 

[Kingrex]

Yes but old cars are not about performance...the best old audio still is...

??

 

[PeterA]

Now back to ICE cars and other items of nostalgia directly tied to personal assessments of where the industry should be.

Very interesting comment, Rando. I am not aware that there has been any discussion on this long thread about where the industry “should be”. I think that is a topic well worth discussing.

 

[PeterA]

Yes but old cars are not about performance...the best old audio still is...

I agree Brad if you qualify both with the word “primarily“.

 

[Diapason]

I wonder will we get/have we got to the point where DSP offers something genuinely new? As somebody who has always been plagued with bad acoustics or tight spaces, I'd like to think there's progress to be made there. I *want* to believe that clever computer modelling can bring me somewhere old school signal purity can't, but I've yet to hear a really convincing demo. Admittedly, I haven't heard many, and this is at least one area that has tremendous potential.

 

[Lee]

Seriously ?
So according to you anyone who doesn't follow TAS and perpetually chase their tail doesn't enjoy this hobby! Being bamboozled and falling down dark rabbit holes might be your model but not everyones sense of joy, certainly not mine!
FYI they've only been reproducing music for over a century, there are many many many excellent recordings that can blow anyone's sock off, but you have to know to how to setup a system!


You're only showing your inexperience and lack of knowledge with such comments! You're the supposed guiding light of the industry and the hobbyist yet you don't have clue about high end sound, this is why some of us are critical of the magazines and the industry.

12 db better linearity zzzzzzzzz! Compared to what? On what type of sources are we talking about? If the source is less linear what's the filler to make it 12 db more linear? What does it even mean aside from the fact that digital is nonlinear which we already knew?

Technology is just a vague word you like throwing up as if it means anything, please be specific exactly what new technology/technologies you're talking about and what aspect of high end sound reproduction has it improved upon in comparison to established

It's impossible to have meaningful discussions when we're not at the same level of experience, you don't have mine nor of many others here and that's why the exchanges have gone south. I've been at this for almost 50 years 30 of it in the industry at the very top end Lee, we're on the same footing you can't lecture me in this field.

david

David,

The personal attack on my experience level does not add value to the discussion. We can have disagreements and different opinions without attacking each other. Indeed, I have tried to extend an olive branch to you and Peter both by suggesting that I write an article on high quality vintage systems for TAS by visiting your room and Peter's. Instead of arguing, invite me to Utah to hear your system and help me understand any areas of knowledge I may be missing.

As for my own experience level, it's pretty damn good. I started 41 years ago in the hobby working on my Dad's system at age 16. I bought my first high end system in 1989. I worked at Sound by Singer for a summer in 1990 and also was hired by David Chesky to help on recording sessions where I learned the pro audio business and mic placement from Bob Katz and Jeremy Kipnis. I was very involved in the very first hired digital recording and playback technology. Ironically, some of the very first dvd-audio discs were called Super Audio Discs by Chesky Records. Later I started a recording business for the Atlanta Symphony, the Atlanta Baroque Symphony, and their various string ensemble offshoots where I learned more about recording from such award-winning mentors as Michael Bishop, Peter McGrath, and (mostly on the equipment side) Todd Garfinkle. During this time I helped Chris Sommovigo start The High Fidelity Report and Headphone.Guru which was later bought by Frank. I have also acted as a consultant to several audio companies and record labels during this time, while also working as a junior Partner at McKinsey & Company. I have seen the industry for decades through the eyes of an audiophile consumer, an equipment reviewer, a business strategist, and President then CEO at Nextscreen.

So I do have an informed opinion.

My replies on audio quality here are my own personal opinions. TAS and hifi+ writers and editors may disagree on some things with me. And indeed, our writing team has people with more experience than I have.

Furthermore, I have been very clear here that TAS is not just about acquiring gear but it's also about enjoying the musical results and being inclusive of all approaches including those who enjoy vintage gear. I've also been very clear on the benefits of system setup. In my view, based on many years of work and gathering knowledge from my friend Jim Smith, proper setup is the highest ROI one can have in any audio purchase.

As for the technology question, my replies here have specifically referenced where advancements have occurred. We simply have a disagreement there. My ears tell me that the new modern reference gear keeps getting better, whether it be Magico M6 and Luxman or Wilson Alexx V and ARC and dCS.

 

[Lee]

I wonder will we get/have we got to the point where DSP offers something genuinely new? As somebody who has always been plagued with bad acoustics or tight spaces, I'd like to think there's progress to be made there. I *want* to believe that clever computer modelling can bring me somewhere old school signal purity can't, but I've yet to hear a really convincing demo. Admittedly, I haven't heard many, and this is at least one area that has tremendous potential.

Eikon seems to be doing some good work there. I think Paul Hales as well.

 

[ddk]

David,

The personal attack on my experience level does not add value to the discussion. We can have disagreements and different opinions without attacking each other. Indeed, I have tried to extend an olive branch to you and Peter both by suggesting that I write an article on high quality vintage systems for TAS by visiting your room and Peter's. Instead of arguing, invite me to Utah to hear your system and help me understand any areas of knowledge I may be missing.

Didn't want to make the exchange personal either but I thought in lieu of your comments your experience is relevant, the joyless part which led to the tone of my reply.

I am all in favor of a free exchange of information but the "joyless group" statement I made is true. How can one have joy when you are saying that no new advancements in sound reproduction have occurred? Part of the hobby's joy is the perpetual pursuit of excellent sound. Music reproduction is complex and ever evolving, both in front of the mic and behind it.

To believe that no new tech is happening is simply dead wrong. There are provable advancements in this hobby and much of the vintage audio has been left behind. You like horns? Fine but there are better horn speakers because cabinets have improved. Drivers have improved. Tolerances in manufacture have improved. Likewise electronics and sources have improved.

Look at the Vivaldi Apex. That is huge advance in dynamics and resolution and you can measure it. 12 db better linearity.

So yes, let's have a real discussion with members of all opinions. But stop the ridiculous comments about there being no new technology.

You're certainly welcome to visit anytime, I'd like that very much. To clarify my position isn't vintage vs modern I mostly use current electronics in all my systems. The turntables are a mix of the best from every era and only some of the speakers are truly vintage. You made two arguments that I disagree with, 1st that sound quality has improved over the years because of whatever technology and accepting perpetual tail chasing as a goal.

david

 

[ddk]

I heard the same PA

vbw,
-a

You didn't !
david

 

[rbbert]

I think this analogy is deceptively complicated as applied to high-end audio. People enjoy vintage sports cars for characteristics and experiences and "feel" conscientiously different than the characteristics and experiences and "feel" of new sports cars. The objective of a vintage sports car is different than the objective of a new sports car.

Most people who enjoy vintage audio systems are not seeking conscientiously a different objective than the people who prefer new audio systems. Both of these groups are trying to solve the same equation -- whichever of the objectives of high-end audio they happen to be pursuing.

If both of these groups are trying to achieve the high-end audio objective of, for example, "create a sound that seems live," then both the vintage audio group and the new audio group are targeting the same objective. People enjoying vintage sports cars probably are targeting a different objective -- different characteristics and experiences and "feel" -- than are people enjoying new sports cars.

I'm not so sure that what you say is true; moreover, there is a lot more to the vintage car enthusiast group than just sports cars. I am suspicious that many vintage audio enthusiasts are after a sound (or sound characteristics) that is in many ways different from what "non-vintage audio" hobbyists or enthusiasts prefer, even if both think they are pursuing the same goal. We all hear differently (objectively) and have different audio processing (subjective).