Lee, you have just returned from hearing Hugh's new system in his dedicated audio barn. Perhaps you have also heard MikeL's system in his dedicated barn. I would be very interested in your opinion of the sound of these two systems, some might argue current SOTA, compared to any of the vintage systems in ddk's house, let alone his mighty Bionor main system. They must surely sound different. The important question, however, is whether or not these modern advancements in materials and designs actually results in better sound.
State of the industry - Roy Gregory Editorial
- Thread starter Elliot G.
- Start date
Lee, you have just returned from hearing Hugh's new system in his dedicated audio barn. Perhaps you have also heard MikeL's system in his dedicated barn. I would be very interested in your opinion of the sound of these two systems, some might argue current SOTA, compared to any of the vintage systems in ddk's house, let alone his mighty Bionor main system. They must surely sound different. The important question, however, is whether or not these modern advancements in materials and designs actually results in better sound.
Hugh's system is among the best I have heard. Right up there with Dave Wilson, Robert Harley, and Jacob Heilbrunn's systems, also in well-engineered dedicated listening rooms. I have not heard David's system so it would be unfair for me to speculate.
But on balance, in my own personal life experience, and in my humble opinion, the newer SOTA gear does sound better than the older SOTA gear. Perhaps a visit to David's would change my mind. Might also make for a great TAS story!
I am not aware of one, except to keep the traditional model and tightly enforce the "Chinese wall" between the editorial staff and the commercial side of our sales force.
And thanks for the kind words, I am doing my best here to be candid about how we do business, how we want and are reaching new customers, and how we make high end audio a more consumer-friendly environment.
Thank you for trying to reconcile the diverging views expressed here. (I always like it when members discern elements of agreement and weave overlapping views together rather than pulling the discussion further and further apart.)
I agree with much of what you write here. The only point I think that cannot be reconciled is your last paragraph:
But technology doesn’t stand still. We are the recipients of better sound because of these advancements.
Some of our members believe that some vintage high-end components sound better than some of the newer competing components which incorporate these recent advancements.
Back in the seventies i ran a Altec Voice of the Theater system in college powered by Crown amps. Have very found memories of the sound which would rock the neighborhood. Not exactly micro level detail but tremendous presence. Also loved a friends Khorns, its what got me into the hobby. I would like to hear the JBL Everest line.
Crown is disaster for Altec. Though they were used in live rock show and clubs with Altec. If you didn't like them that was because 50 plus years ago you might not have been as developed on set up about your gear as you are today. Put them up properly and they will likely kill what you own today
Yes, and I respectfully disagree. In both analog and digital, I have found that new technology has taken us far closer to realism and musical involvement.
Just look at all the advancements in digital technology. Compared to 1982 when I first started collecting CDs from Japan, we have seen better ADC and DAC technology and masterings as well, at least in certain quarters.
David criticized me for selecting favorite gear in response to his question on what has changed in analog in 50 years…but those are indeed great examples of new technology being applied to analog playback. Also, look at the better capacitors deployed in R2R. We are far better off leaving the worked of Frako capacitors in Revox.
Look at loudspeakers…Wilson cabinets just don’t vibrate due to phenolic materials that must be cut with a diamond bit on a CNC machine. We did not have any of that 50 years ago.
Circuit design on amplifiers has evolved as well. Look at one of the best phono stages out there, the Ref Phono 3SE from Audio Research. This component allows all the dynamics and resolution flow from the better cartridges we have today.
This is the real Golden Age for audiophiles!
I listened to the WE room at the last Munich show. It was good but not great.
I love the TAD gear and speakers.
I didn't criticize you only pointed out that it's still the same old technology and standards used today by your favorites that were established early on by the industry. You mention "new technology" but never actually define what it is exactly, you only mention brands. 3D printing is a way of cheap manufacturing as are resins but it doesn't change or redefine record playback technology in anyway. The only thing which could be argued as somewhat new to vinyl playback is the optical cartridge but that's also debatable since it works within the same structure of a mechanical cartridge and at it's core it's 60's tech.
david
I went back a couple times looking in my content to find that thread but never could. I thought it was deleted.
I am sure they can sound much better with new equipment but it fatigues me after a few hours. I have heard and like Avantgard Duo Mezo and JBL M2. Dynamic and clear but taking some getting used to. We all hear differently
Basically, nothing! You’re both only listing gear you like that wasn’t the question.
You can still play a 50’s LP on any of your modern systems without any problems as well as playing a modern recording on a vintage system.
Gear I like is a top studio tape machine in top condition that was used for cutting vinyl - one step closer to the source than any LP, except direct cuts.
Some designers prefer using air bearing just for the platter, blending it with a mechanical bearing supporting a low weight. They explain why and people can read it, just one of the many valid options. Anyway these people discuss and show the details about their turntable bearings, you have never shown us any photos of the bearing of the AS2000 or its details - some thing I respect - but prevents any discussion on it.
I had the same idea as you when I read about the optical cartridge first time, only later I realized it is really a revolutionary device as it suppresses any kind of counter electromagnetic force between the cantilever and the cartridge body. Considering that these forces are highly non linear, I consider it a fantastic achievement. But surely some people can tell us that light is not natural in stereo!
Well if you didn't think that 2019 WE room was great it is a good thing I don't subscribe to TAS. I thought that room was phenomenal and whatever subjective etc it tells me a lot about people who don't understand that sound and the music they play
I still subscribe to TAS Lee. I end up reading most of it. I find much of it predictable and skip around as I read it.
I think something that is missing from print it support. I was at Marty's last week doing work. One big take away for me was the room. It really drove home the importance. But the room is really only 1 piece. Our stereo are not an Amp. A Speaker. A DAC. They are multiple components working together in an environment.
I would like to hear more about systems. What systems work in what rooms. Which are more forgiving. Which function higher when optimized. How different manufacturer or topology may compliment each other. How these systems relate to music preferences. What works well for a family environment.
And so on.
I find forum threads enjoyable as people talk about tuning their systems. The racks, footers, power etc. I feel magazines leave people wondering blindly trying this and that. Maybe that is the intent. Keep them confused and buying. Robert wrote once, or was it twice about his room. That was that. Fremer wrote about his power upgrade. I believe I saw one good explanation of setting up the digital backbone and house infrastructure to support it. But these articles are few and far between.
To me a magazine is like a brochure. I look at it a little, then toss it in the trash. If I want to know something, I go to the forums. I feel if there was meat on the bones, I might spend more time in the magazines. I probably give TAS a full hour. I probably give Whatsbest and hour or more every day.
If I were to see repeating theme in a magazine month after month, I would rather it be room optimization, equipment racking, speaker placement, power supplies, digital infrastructure, cartridge setup and so on. And I see no reason your favorite advertising partner would not be pleased, because your taking the time to set up their gear.
Rex
I think something that is missing from print it support. I was at Marty's last week doing work. One big take away for me was the room. It really drove home the importance. But the room is really only 1 piece. Our stereo are not an Amp. A Speaker. A DAC. They are multiple components working together in an environment.
I would like to hear more about systems. What systems work in what rooms. Which are more forgiving. Which function higher when optimized. How different manufacturer or topology may compliment each other. How these systems relate to music preferences. What works well for a family environment.
And so on.
I find forum threads enjoyable as people talk about tuning their systems. The racks, footers, power etc. I feel magazines leave people wondering blindly trying this and that. Maybe that is the intent. Keep them confused and buying. Robert wrote once, or was it twice about his room. That was that. Fremer wrote about his power upgrade. I believe I saw one good explanation of setting up the digital backbone and house infrastructure to support it. But these articles are few and far between.
To me a magazine is like a brochure. I look at it a little, then toss it in the trash. If I want to know something, I go to the forums. I feel if there was meat on the bones, I might spend more time in the magazines. I probably give TAS a full hour. I probably give Whatsbest and hour or more every day.
If I were to see repeating theme in a magazine month after month, I would rather it be room optimization, equipment racking, speaker placement, power supplies, digital infrastructure, cartridge setup and so on. And I see no reason your favorite advertising partner would not be pleased, because your taking the time to set up their gear.
Rex
Duo mezzo is one of the worst speakers around, after Wilson and Magico probably a bit better than Raidho. Altecs are fatiguing the way you set them. There are many good Altec videos in the videos thread, you can choose to visit those systems in Bulgaria or Vietnam to learn, or you could stick to the impression of the way you set them up 50 years ago.. And yes, there are many bad Altec systems around today too
We can establish we hear differently provided we have heard the same gear. In Lee's case he has heard the same WE room in Munich and doesn't like it so he and I hear differently. But you are listening to a crown driven Altec vott. I am sure it sounded awful
OT; there was a thread on High End 2022 at some point, I cannot find it (it's ON)
I'm sure that we all listen through our very own interpretation of what we hear, as discussed here; https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/the-language-of-reproduction-and-the-language-of-music.34242/
For me the magazines focus way too much on commercial stuff, leaving out the tinkering part and making people thing that the newest and latest and most expensivest gear is best...I understand the commercial aspects to some extent yet that should not clash with the interest of readers hoping to extend their knowledge and understanding of what makes their kit sing; once people understand that some things have a clear effect on how gear sounds they may be more willing to shell out money to purchase 'goodies' and upgrade.
I'm sure that we all listen through our very own interpretation of what we hear, as discussed here; https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/the-language-of-reproduction-and-the-language-of-music.34242/
For me the magazines focus way too much on commercial stuff, leaving out the tinkering part and making people thing that the newest and latest and most expensivest gear is best...I understand the commercial aspects to some extent yet that should not clash with the interest of readers hoping to extend their knowledge and understanding of what makes their kit sing; once people understand that some things have a clear effect on how gear sounds they may be more willing to shell out money to purchase 'goodies' and upgrade.
Similar threads
