State of the industry - Roy Gregory Editorial

[the sound of Tao]

The box and cone cult guys give everyone else a hard time… wow that even looks stupid as I write it… insert horn… and that’s in very a non threatening way lol. The differences between us become harder barriers the more we choose to make them.

As a guy with a few horn speakers who’s also got panels (Maggie 20.7) and box and cones (Harbeth 40.2) I live with and also appreciate the differences. But I don’t see the speaker type I choose defining who I am but rather the nature of the differences help give me understanding perhaps where I am in the development of my aims.

Is the state of the industry actually just in senescence. The majority of us have matured (kind of ) and the industry has matured along with us. We’ve got more differentiated, more defined in who we are and what we do. But maturing isn’t always about being across the board better but having simply different aims.

Our chosen speaker types or amp types or source types aren’t just about an idea, they function to create a way of perceiving and so being able to identify from your choices the way you perceive is an even greater asset perhaps.

So is the pursuit moving towards an imminent end (I don’t think so) or perhaps a change point in its life cycle (I feel this could possibly be the case). In terms of identifying the most essential way the industry has changed I’d suggest it’s mostly for me about recognising what direction it has taken since beginning and then perhaps what phase it is in. In terms of direction of the system I’d suggest most systems (talking big systems like movements, civilisation and cultivation, ecological systems, planetary systems) either tend to move from complexity to simplicity or vice versa from simplicity towards complexity and then also in terms of expanding or in contracting. These are process phases that seem to follow and balance each other in terms of greater life cycles much like a Möbius.

I figure the early audio gear like Forest’s amplifier back in the start of the 20th century started simple as did the speaker systems and the first sources. It all started simpler and has moved through time to increasing complexity. I guess if you’re chasing the sonically correct dragon and chasing more perfect measurements and greater linearity and greater extension breaking things into more and more parts and ever greater specialisation so more drivers, more complex crossovers, a greater range of components within the system, biamping, chasing more bits resolution, doing more measurements etc is a way to try and perfect all the parts.

In terms of identifying the most essential way the industry has changed I’d suggest it’s mostly for me about looking at the whole system in its history and defining it’s overall movement. Most systems tend to move from complexity to simplicity or vice versa. These are two phases that follow and balance each other as a Möbius. I figure the first audio gear started simple. It all started simpler and has moved through time to increasing complexity. (Edit for accidental cut and paste of a paragraph twice, shouldn’t post so early in the day )

The greater movement of the 20th century has been completely this. It is the overwhelming trend to complexity and fragmentation… but then when you’ve broken things down as far as you can go bringing this all back into a mutual undifferentiated wholeness and through synthesis into seamless sonic coherence becomes increasingly problematic… what tends to gets lost in the chase for the fragmention of some idealised sonics and in all the parts of the sound can just be the easy simple whole connection to music which had been a fundamental core of the initial purpose of the movement itself. This may well be mirrored in our individual journeys as well since we are also part of this movement.

So I’ll take a punt and propose we are perhaps not at the end but merely halfway along in the journey. The move to complexity has perhaps just been the outward bound leg of the audio journey but the return back to simplicity may be the homeward return. The hobby and the attached industry may even need to return to simpler ways. Time will tell.

In greater ways this reflects in culture as a whole. In life over the last century we also have been moving (exponentially racing) towards increasing complexity and increasing fragmentation and with more differentiation between many parts and as a result of more parts we increase the number of recognisable boundaries. Perhaps finding the ways back to simple wholeness and togetherness is about dissolving boundaries and moving back towards unity. In our systems, in our selves and even with each other.

 

[microstrip]

You guys are killing me...just let it be. Let it go....put a song to it (whether it be funny or serious)

My word man....78 pages of this?

Tom

What could be expected from such article? The article referred in the OP was an invitation for a bloody discussion - all poisons are allowed, this thread became a real homage to Lucrezia Borgia ...

 

[rbbert]

What could be expected from such article? The article referred in the OP was an invitation for a bloody discussion - all poisons are allowed, this thread became a real homage to Lucrezia Borgia ...

Yet I think most would agree that except for the increasing cost of the highest priced equipment, there has never been a wider variety of high quality audio components available. The acrimonious part of the discussion centers around whether the highest priced pieces are worth the money, whether someone's idea of "new" or "better" technology is being pursued with enough vigor (by the "industry"! whatever that means), whether the media is better serving the manufacturers, the dealers, the distributors or the consumer (certainly not the last, almost all agree).

 

[awsmone]

"a wrong turn".....ok, i guess the forum has to be in that space and process it. right and wrong. too bad.

Surely Mike to understand where we are headed we need to understand where we have been and wrong turns
There is very little critical evaluation of the industry and too much new and blingy written imho

 

[Al M.]

Surely Mike to understand where we are headed we need to understand where we have been and wrong turns
There is very little critical evaluation of the industry and too much new and blingy written imho

What wrong turns?

 

[awsmone]

What wrong turns?

Please read previous post Al M

• Today at 10:24 AM
• Add bookmark
• #1,579

PeterA said:
The irony, Mike, is that the title of my system thread is a direct response to the "righteousness of the dogma" that I read on all the blatant brand ambassador threads and from the audio establishment approach that leads to a very different sound. Last May, on my own system thread, you told me to own it and to stop trying to please everyone. Here you have it. I am adding my alternative to the discussion while lacking your skills at diplomacy.

We have to admit, whether we like the horn sound or not, there has been something about the direction the industry took in the past, where Peter’s speakers, are so good, yet an extremely old design, this suggests to me , that we took a wrong turn somewhere in the past , possibly the first transistors which moved the industry towards compactness , which although desirable , the trade off was inferior sound, the industry has taken a long time to reattain

the same could be said for early digital, where the very name “compact” was the seller, and it was only a few lonely voices that kept saying but but but, the lps sound better

 

[howiebrou]

Another video with Peter Q from Audio Note UK. The discussion talks a lot about the industry particularly pertinent to this thread when he says we never compare new products with what they replace. I guess this could pertain partly to the new technology is better camp promoted by some VS vintage sounded just as good if not better than modern stuff and modern doesn't equate to better sound camp.
His comments at 34min are particularly interesting.

 

[Al M.]

Please read previous post Al M

• Today at 10:24 AM
• Add bookmark
• #1,579

We have to admit, whether we like the horn sound or not, there has been something about the direction the industry took in the past, where Peter’s speakers, are so good, yet an extremely old design, this suggests to me , that we took a wrong turn somewhere in the past , possibly the first transistors which moved the industry towards compactness , which although desirable , the trade off was inferior sound, the industry has taken a long time to reattain

the same could be said for early digital, where the very name “compact” was the seller, and it was only a few lonely voices that kept saying but but but, the lps sound better

Thanks.

From your profile it seems that you do not have horn speakers. Do you think you made a mistake?

 

[bonzo75]

Another video with Peter Q from Audio Note UK. The discussion talks a lot about the industry particularly pertinent to this thread when he says we never compare new products with what they replace. I guess this could pertain partly to the new technology is better camp promoted by some VS vintage sounded just as good if not better than modern stuff and modern doesn't equate to better sound camp.
His comments at 34min are particularly interesting.

Maybe start a thread: State of the industry - Peter Qvotrup talk

Will be interesting to hear what people think

 

[howiebrou]

Maybe start a thread: State of the industry - Peter Qvotrup talk

Will be interesting to hear what people think

That thread wouldn't last very long lol. Just consider it as adding to the discussion.

 

[bonzo75]

That thread wouldn't last very long lol. Just consider it as adding to the discussion.

Sorry I was being sarcy

 

[howiebrou]

Sorry I was being sarcy

Not like you......

 

[ddk]

Another video with Peter Q from Audio Note UK. The discussion talks a lot about the industry particularly pertinent to this thread when he says we never compare new products with what they replace. I guess this could pertain partly to the new technology is better camp promoted by some VS vintage sounded just as good if not better than modern stuff and modern doesn't equate to better sound camp.
His comments at 34min are particularly interesting.

I’ve seen this one before, don’t dismiss his earlier comment on current technology; “digital technology has developed in such a way that it’s really squeezing the life out of the music in a way that’s highly undesirable…” !
His Halcro comment is another classic, I hear myself in that too!
david
PS. HK citation 16 was my first “high end” amp, he’s right on the money with that too!

 

[wil]

the same could be said for early digital, where the very name “compact” was the seller, and it was only a few lonely voices that kept saying but but but, the lps sound better

By all means, keep dragging the the old mule, "Early Digital," out of the barn for a good kick in the shins. Don't bother to consider how good the stallion in the other stall, "Really Good Digital," is today. (sarcasm emoji).

 

[MarcelNL]

I switched it off (the AN video) when he praised his ability to build systems that represent a certain sound.

 

[microstrip]

(...) We have to admit, whether we like the horn sound or not, there has been something about the direction the industry took in the past, where Peter’s speakers, are so good, yet an extremely old design, this suggests to me , that we took a wrong turn somewhere in the past , possibly the first transistors which moved the industry towards compactness , which although desirable , the trade off was inferior sound, the industry has taken a long time to reattain

Since you refer to directions, why not remembering that horn/ not horn is a misleading tittle - IMHO it should be highly directional speakers/ not highly directional speakers. The different pattern radiation creates a completely different experience, in part responsible for the preferences.

the same could be said for early digital, where the very name “compact” was the seller, and it was only a few lonely voices that kept saying but but but, the lps sound better

Even some early digital was better than most LP's of that period. People were tired of pops, clicks and distortion. Although some audiophiles can survive with a diet of chosen old LP's, most audio consumers want recent music and recent performances.

The real disgrace of early digital was that stupidly many CD's were issued from tapes processed for vinyl cutting, not from the original masters.

 

[howiebrou]

I switched it off (the AN video) when he praised his ability to build systems that represent a certain sound.

Don't. There are some gems in there if you are willing to keep watching. He doesn't mince words so you're bound to disagree with stuff he says.

 

[howiebrou]

Even some early digital was better than most LP's of that period. People were tired of pops, clicks and distortion. Although some audiophiles can survive with a diet of chosen old LP's, most audio consumers want recent music and recent performances.

Those pops and crackles are the only thing that remind me I'm still alive.

 

[PeterA]

Since you refer to directions, why not remembering that horn/ not horn is a misleading tittle - IMHO it should be highly directional speakers/ not highly directional speakers. The different pattern radiation creates a completely different experience, in part responsible for the preferences.



Even some early digital was better than most LP's of that period. People were tired of pops, clicks and distortion. Although some audiophiles can survive with a diet of chosen old LP's, most audio consumers want recent music and recent performances.

The real disgrace of early digital was that stupidly many CD's were issued from tapes processed for vinyl cutting, not from the original masters.

Francisco, I agree with you that it is not a horn or not horn thing, but I’m not sure it only comes down to radiation patterns. I think it is more likely a combination of factors.

Admittedly, my exposure is limited and I was not around paying attention in the 70s to these changes. I will say that the 16 ohm Mitsubishi Diatones sounded really wonderful driven by those SET 18 watts. I don’t think they have the same radiation pattern as David’s horn speakers. And even his horns have different shapes which may or may not affect radiation patterns.

I think efficiency is a factor and the type of amplification that certain designs allow. But most importantly, I think it was the values and knowledge of the designers who created products that sound different and reflect different goals.

Your comment about certain audiophiles being able to survive on a diet of chosen old LPs is quite peculiar. Many hobbyists who listen to original vinyl LPs are doing much better than merely surviving. They seem to be enjoying their choices. And they can get exposed to modern music in other forms. Surely you are aware of this and chose to write what you did.

 

[microstrip]

Those pops and crackles are the only thing that remind me I'm still alive.

You are joking, but the experience was carried in the late 80's or 90's - the noise of a blank LP with some pops and crackles being played at a decent turntable was summed to the signal of a CD player at the input of the amplifier. After optimization of the level, it was found that some people preferred the sound with the pops and crackles.