Last edited:
The Long Memory of Audiophiles
- Thread starter Lee
- Start date
I'm not sure cars are a great analogy to audio. Unless one builds a kit-car, I think the biggest difference is that audio comes in kit form* (the purchase of an amplifier requires the coordinated purchase of numerous other products in order to play recorded music out of the speakers), whereas a car is a completed product that can be used for intended purpose at the time of purchase.
A consequence of this is that I think a lot of the frustration, consternation and resulting ego sensitivity and opinionatedness among many audiophiles comes from the fact that (unless one delegates the system purchase decision to a dealer or the purchase decision is an aesthetic decision or a brand show-off decision) a lot of work and effort and thought and introspection and mistaken purchases and sound-->component path decisions and then reversals and cognitive dissonance, etc., often are part of the process of "putting a system together."
*Karen Sumner
I believe I do this. I think that if I am not at least somewhat open-minded I would not have heard and perceived subjectively the XVX as a loudspeaker achievement, or maybe I would not even have wanted to bother to listen to it, given my life-long history of finding unlistenable over decades every Wilson Audio product with a metal dome tweeter.
I also think that part of the opening post here is guilty of what I am sometimes accused of doing: wrapping my personal subjective preference in an interesting and plausible theory. (Not that there's anything at all wrong with doing this!
)
Last edited:
^Change the tires on your car and it will behave differently.
The fascination for both cars and Hifi is similar in the way that you can have it readymade (Kef LS60 or your premium family car) of full tinker (my system, my neighbor’s Volvo Amazon). One interesting aspect of both is that the expensive stuff, both cars and Hifi, is not necessarily what’s best.
The fascination for both cars and Hifi is similar in the way that you can have it readymade (Kef LS60 or your premium family car) of full tinker (my system, my neighbor’s Volvo Amazon). One interesting aspect of both is that the expensive stuff, both cars and Hifi, is not necessarily what’s best.
Isn't it rich. Isn't it queer. I said it once, you since last year.
Have you ever had a piece of tin-foil in your mouth?
Isn't it rich. Isn't it queer. I said it once, you since last year.
Hear hear
I don’t think car analogy suited best here.
It’s easier to compare old and new cars. You simply race them. On the other hand it’s almost impossible to make same kind of objective comparison of audio components cause good sound is pretty subjective. It differs according to personal preferences. I think manufacturers exploit that subjectivism pretty well.
It’s easier to compare old and new cars. You simply race them. On the other hand it’s almost impossible to make same kind of objective comparison of audio components cause good sound is pretty subjective. It differs according to personal preferences. I think manufacturers exploit that subjectivism pretty well.
I still remember boomy bass of those Wilson Watt Puppy series and Grand Slamm. First and second series Sophia were much better in this regard as far as I remember. The dark character and slowness of Mark Levinson amps was not easy to forget. Actually I found a fix for my Mark Levinson 333 back then but don’t regret getting rid of it cause they’re famous for capacitor failure.
I didn’t have a chance to listen Linn cd12 but used to own a Bow zz8 which has identical transport, digital filter/processor and dacs. Bow is a top loader and it relatively has a good sound. Mark Levinson cd 39 is a very close design but drawer was causing malfunction.
Last edited:
My point with cars were when in the 60’s one could build a super car with parts (Authorised and after market) bought from the parts store. One could set it up with parts designed to give maximum torque off the idle for drag racing, or horsepower at high revs and suspension/tire changes for road racing. Then there is parts to build an off-road racer, for Baja, or rock climber, or mudder. I see a lot of similarities with researching different components/speaker combinations to produce the type of sound that will complement your tastes in music.
I don't wish to be contrarian -- but I might suggest the same open-mindedness when it comes to certain vintage products. A few examples of exceptionally good sound (my anecdotal opinion): what's wrong with a Goldmund Reference TT? Golden Mimesis 6 preamplifier, the first CAT pre, what about active Cabasse Albatross with alnico mid & woofer?
That said, of course we all carry memories of exciting sound reproduction from our formative years -- at least I do!
Speaker manufacturers nowadays have software simulation & design support and components that that didn't t exist 50 years ago; and precision measurement devices. Engineering approaches -- I'm not so sure. Electronic design -- certainly: there wasn't any digital worth mentioning until about 10 years ago (give or take, IMO, YMMV etc ad nauseam
)
I have a very long memory in audio and it doesn t change much , i heard these speakers for the first time in 2003 and they left a very good impression .
After hearing a qazzilion of other transducer over the years they are still the one i would buy today , audio is indeed static for me
The speakers Looks great , have a classic look .
Amps are like ice creams , pick your flavour .
Audio hasnt changed for me ove the years , most of the so called " advancements " are marketing hype made up by manufacturers / reviewers .
Wadax has done a digital advancement , but for the rest ....
c
After hearing a qazzilion of other transducer over the years they are still the one i would buy today , audio is indeed static for me
The speakers Looks great , have a classic look .
Amps are like ice creams , pick your flavour .
Audio hasnt changed for me ove the years , most of the so called " advancements " are marketing hype made up by manufacturers / reviewers .
Wadax has done a digital advancement , but for the rest ....
c
Isn't it rich. Isn't it queer. I said it once, you since last year.
Have you ever had a piece of tin-foil in your mouth?
I don't wish to be contrarian -- but I might suggest the same open-mindedness when it comes to certain vintage products. A few examples of exceptionally good sound (my anecdotal opinion): what's wrong with a Goldmund Reference TT? Golden Mimesis 6 preamplifier, the first CAT pre, what about active Cabasse Albatross with alnico mid & woofer?
That said, of course we all carry memories of exciting sound reproduction from our formative years -- at least I do!
Speaker manufacturers nowadays have software simulation & design support and components that that didn't t exist 50 years ago; and precision measurement devices. Engineering approaches -- I'm not so sure. Electronic design -- certainly: there wasn't any digital worth mentioning until about 10 years ago (give or take, IMO, YMMV etc ad nauseam
Greg, one good example of modern engineering approaches is the Klippel device I saw in action at Magico. It’s only been around recently.
There are numerous advancements in digital as worthy as Wadax. Apex was huge for dCS. The Digital Director connected to my friend Jimmy’s MSB Reference DAC was a huge improvement. Every year in audio, dozens of new advancements occur in audio. Same on the pro side, at least with the ADCs, mics, and recording boxes I am familiar with.
I would also give credit to Dagostino for their new MXV circuit. My favorite room at Axpona was their Momentum version paired with Wilson’s Alexx V. This was just wonderful lifelike sound. There was definitely some synergy going on with these two.
Well if i take Munchen last year Wadax was able to deliver in show conditions .
The rest is just mediocre digital not worth the high prices .
I heard the Apex set up as well off course
If i find a good quality recording on YT and stream it over my old dac , the SQ aint that much different
Me too. However, if we would hear some of this stuff today, it might not nearly sound as good as we thought it did. That is because our standards have changed, mostly for the better I assume, and what may have sounded great to us then might not live up to our current experiences. Also, memory may embellish things, and as more recent science tells us, memory is malleable, not static.
For all those reasons I don't trust my long-term memory of audio sound quality too much, and so shouldn't anyone trust theirs too much either. But of course, some will disagree on this point.
Similar threads
