The Mysterious Case of the Listening Window! By Jeff Day, Positive Feedback

[caesar]

Caesar, how would you describe the process of investigation I have gone through the last year with my experiments with room treatments, isolation products, speaker positioning, the mass loading of my equipment rack, and the various comparisons of power cords and signal cables? The result was a complete rethinking of my entire room/system set up. Does none of that count as intellectual curiosity? Was my reporting on my experiments not done with a modicum of integrity? My whole approach to set up and what I listen for and how I describe it is changing. And I do not think I am alone in what I am doing.

Simply looking at the different systems belonging to my friends and even more so to those on this forum, I do not see the herd to which you keep referring. Sure there are some brands which have strong followings, but I simply do not see this mass herd behavior you keep discussing. I even let my Stereophile and TAS subscriptions lapse.

Hi Peter,
Sorry, I have no idea. I don't find any realism in box speakers. I find them dynamically constrained and tonally bleached. Just plain boring.

So I haven't followed your thread.

This is a hobby, but a rational decision making approach is to identify your preferences, identify as many alternatives as possible, and hear as many different things as you can, think about the full consequences of each alternative, and think about the tradeoffs of the choices...

It is not easy to apply this approach, as time, money, access to dealers' and to fellow hobbyists' systems is an issue, but I believe it is a better, more rational approach that can achieve better results and more happiness.

From what I understand, since I haven't followed all of your steps is that you are primarily using the internet forums instead of actual experiences to find your way. The internet forums are just one source of seeking to understand experiences, and it's dangerous to generalize only from that single source...

Like I said, this is a hobby. if that works for you, great.

Cable-wise, getting a bunch of stuff from the cable company is another option, if that is something you want to pursue.

 

[caesar]

Peter, has there been a "part 2" of this series by jeff day? Or did we scare him off?

 

[ack]

With TAS, it’s not personal – I’m just disgusted by their behavior. Pretty much everything they do , except for some of the work by “Yoda” Valin, is antithetical to the success of the hobby and enjoyment of the hobby by the audio fans. If it weren’t for “Yoda “ Valin, TAS would have been dead a long time ago.

I am just curious, when will your attacks here and elsewhere (read: everywhere) be flagged and deleted

 

[Al M.]

Hi Peter,
Sorry, I have no idea. I don't find any realism in box speakers. I find them dynamically constrained and tonally bleached. Just plain boring.

Yup, your comments are getting boring.

 

[morricab]

I told my gf the reason I spend so much time on forums is it is academic. We do research, discuss, write, keeps the mind agile.

Her reply: I do it so I can have strong opinions on things that do not matter and argue a lot.

I was looking for an appropriate thread to post this and chose this one

She knows you better than you know yourself...

 

[morricab]

​

Hi Ron,
First of all, no one than me is a bigger fan of the potential of what TAS can be. To their credit, TAS isn’t scared of reviewing top gear. Under John Wilson-Atkinson, Stereophile, on the other hand, has had a huge sense of guilt reviewing of the state-of-the-art stuff. Other than, of course, boosting and evangelizing the analytical and colored stuff like Wilson / dcs at the high end, while ignoring and / or crapping on everything else.

Wilson- Atkinson is getting up there in age, but he should finally realize that the world will always have people who are smarter, richer, more hard-working, and luckier than other people. If the world wasn’t like that, we would never have this hobby…

Maybe Stereophile , under the new guy, Austin, will accept this reality... Time will reveal his character… I hope he has character, is not a follower, has smarts about the behavioral economic and luxury realities of this hobby…

With TAS, it’s not personal – I’m just disgusted by their behavior. Pretty much everything they do , except for some of the work by “Yoda” Valin, is antithetical to the success of the hobby and enjoyment of the hobby by the audio fans. If it weren’t for “Yoda “ Valin, TAS would have been dead a long time ago.

Here’s the crux: Most audio fans – and individuals who can afford to play in this hobby are confronted by three very important issues: Money, Time, and Information to make decisions.

• Other than for the ultra rich, there is only so much money available to spend on this hobby
• And hifi is one of many competing activities, and the allotment of time is already scarce
• TAS has gone all out to make things harder for people looking to access information to make rational decisions

The name “The Absolute Sound” , of course, is a “platonic trick” on the gullible, and opens the door for their abuse. Real, live music and hifi are different experiences. Sure, the best systems will mimic reality in some ways, but the two experiences are different - no matter how much platonic gymnastics people do inside their heads. But playing with people’s emotions and false promises of realism is just plain wrong.

TAS should be honest, have integrity, and admit that, so they don’t mislead people. Pro wrestling admitted it’s a fake entertainment , and as a result, it’s more respected by its fans than TAS is by the audio fans. TAS should face up about the reality of the high end audio industry:

• Individuals have personal preferences for audio experiences. Everyone brings different prior experiences, assumptions, perspectives, beliefs about finances, backgrounds, available real estate, different goals, and imaginations of realism etc. There is no “best” experience! (Duh!!!). Anyone except the most clueless audiophiles find a car alarm going off as more credible signal of car theft than Harley and his team calling things “the best” (as he does in virtually every thing he writes)
• Individuals get acclimated to those preferences and judge everything based on those preferences
• Tradeoffs exist in capabilities of technologies and need to be thoroughly described via comparisons. But there’s a lack of intellectual honesty by their writers about the tradeoffs of different technologies (Box speakers do not have dynamics or tone of horns; Nor midrange of electrostats, etc. So again, no “best”, but tradeoffs)
• Bandwagon effects / herd effects drive what people select or enjoy/ don’t enjoy many of the audio brands. By controlling what gets covered, these herd effects get magnified…it’s an ego trip for their reviewers… power and influence over fukking people over must feel Great
• TAS Reviewers rarely compare the differences and tradeoffs, but instead use that vague , abstract language to confuse and obfuscate things, and have that gestapo - stasi attitude that they know the taste of their readers. So they hype up gear whose flavor they like, puking chunks in the face of audio fans, without humility and respect and empathy for the fans who buy the gear. Wouldn’t a trusted advisor at least compare and contrast the 2 technologies to highlight the differences and guide the reader to make their own choice?
• Without comparing , consumers are less able to determine the value and assess the quality of the products. With less information ( but more hype), it’s more difficult to evaluate the quality of each alternative on its own merits. (Because of fear of loss of big money and time, and to reduce frustration, the bigger , established brands win)
• Calling something “the best” in a subjective, experiential hobby shows the TAS guys are either idiots who don’t understand that this is a subjective, experiential hobby or the believe their readers are idiots who don’t understand this. I wonder if the TAS guys are just plain idiots or arrogant idiots... Either way, they lack integrity and don’t care to know the difference between right and wrong
• Their writing is like an advertisement. It that contains information that their favorite brands want to convey to help sell the product. On the other hand, the audio fans are looking to achieve their own personal goals and objectives and need reliable information to do that

The sooner the TAS guys realize acknowledge and admit this, the sooner they will can start becoming “trusted advisers”

So Hell Yeah, Ron, I’m angry as hell for all of the time wasted on the garbage recommendations from these clowns and mother fukkers. I can NEVER get the precious time back …

Having scant free time , the last thing I want to do is listen some syrupy garbage like Wilson / audio research or analytical drek like Magico / most solid state, driven by the “best DAC extant”, the uber analytical Berkeley reference dac

And by failing to compare and describe the experiences as comprehensively as possible , they keep the information away from decision makers. Purchasers are not empowered to make informed decisions. By keeping the cesspool dark, those with established brands (Wilson, magico, dcs, pass, d’agostino, etc.) win, while everyone else loses. Bandwagon / herd effects get magnified. A handful of manufacturers get rich, but overall innovation in the industry suffers .

The original TAS was not about which gear was the "best" but rather a quest to approach the only true reference: Live, unamplified music.

This is not a platonic trick for which the ideal form is not available in the real world. The ideal model is available in the real world. The platonic model is something that never actually exists in the real world but live, unamplified music exists and is something that can to at least some degree, be referenced against. I think it is well understood that the complete suspension of disbelief is likely impossible but that it is arguably (at least this is what TAS's original mission was) a worthy quest that results in a more realistic and therefore (according to their goals) a more satisfying musical experience. I can say that in my own pursuit this is the approach I still take and it has served me well.

With the "changing of the guard" at TAS away from HP's founding ideals to those of RH and JV it discarded the pursuit for simpler and more commercial goals. For a while JV touted "true to the source" as being TAS (the pursuit of it not the magazine itself), which is distinctly not what HP meant by it. RH has no guiding compass as near as I can tell other than "flavor of the month or year". I actually think JV has no real compass and this allows them to have all this contradictory and garbage "reporting".

JV is a pretty entertaining writer...until you realize how lacking in depth he is. He pretends to have some philosophical depth to his writing but it is vaccuous. HP really wanted (maybe ultimately failed) to dig under the surface as to what makes realistic sound and how do we get there...his essays on the subject are quite interesting reads and have a lot of spot on (and some ideas to be discarded) analysis in them. I can still go back to old TAS and read them with interest...both the reviews and the essays. New TAS I lose interest after a few minutes as there is nothing to chew on.

They did not change the name of the magazine but the purpose behind it has lost all resemblance of what it was originally...a quest to bring the real into the home to a satisfying degree for true music lover. Now, did this result in sifting through a lot of gear and system building? Of course and that was the service that HP was trying to provide to others who neither have the means, ability or time to do it themselves.

 

[PeterA]

Hi Peter,
Sorry, I have no idea. I don't find any realism in box speakers. I find them dynamically constrained and tonally bleached. Just plain boring.

So I haven't followed your thread.

This is a hobby, but a rational decision making approach is to identify your preferences, identify as many alternatives as possible, and hear as many different things as you can, think about the full consequences of each alternative, and think about the tradeoffs of the choices...

It is not easy to apply this approach, as time, money, access to dealers' and to fellow hobbyists' systems is an issue, but I believe it is a better, more rational approach that can achieve better results and more happiness.

From what I understand, since I haven't followed all of your steps is that you are primarily using the internet forums instead of actual experiences to find your way. The internet forums are just one source of seeking to understand experiences, and it's dangerous to generalize only from that single source...

Like I said, this is a hobby. if that works for you, great.

Cable-wise, getting a bunch of stuff from the cable company is another option, if that is something you want to pursue.

Hello Caesar,

The approach you advocate seems to be what our member Bonzo is doing. He will someday realize his quest and perhaps post a system video of his results.

I think you misunderstand my approach to the hobby. I have learned what interests me about the hobby through experience: listening to live music, listening to friend's systems, actually talking to people who know much more than I do about music and sound (Jim Smith, my mentor in Vienna, and David Karmeli), and doing experiments with my system to learn the effects of changes and how to make the system more pleasing to me. I am engaged on this forum for exposure to new ideas, and to learn about new gear and music. When travel restrictions are lifted, I plan to return to Vienna, and to listen to various turntables, tube amps and high efficiency speakers to see if they have the potential to offer me more than my current components.

You wrote a few very long posts criticizing the magazines mostly, but also criticizing how many of us approach the hobby. What does any of that have to do with the thread topic which I find to be rather interesting? Do you care to comment about Jeff Day's article and how system and set up contribute to his ability to enjoy a broader number of his recordings?

 

[Elliot G.]

The original TAS was not about which gear was the "best" but rather a quest to approach the only true reference: Live, unamplified music.

This is not a platonic trick for which the ideal form is not available in the real world. The ideal model is available in the real world. The platonic model is something that never actually exists in the real world but live, unamplified music exists and is something that can to at least some degree, be referenced against. I think it is well understood that the complete suspension of disbelief is likely impossible but that it is arguably (at least this is what TAS's original mission was) a worthy quest that results in a more realistic and therefore (according to their goals) a more satisfying musical experience. I can say that in my own pursuit this is the approach I still take and it has served me well.

With the "changing of the guard" at TAS away from HP's founding ideals to those of RH and JV it discarded the pursuit for simpler and more commercial goals. For a while JV touted "true to the source" as being TAS (the pursuit of it not the magazine itself), which is distinctly not what HP meant by it. RH has no guiding compass as near as I can tell other than "flavor of the month or year". I actually think JV has no real compass and this allows them to have all this contradictory and garbage "reporting".

JV is a pretty entertaining writer...until you realize how lacking in depth he is. He pretends to have some philosophical depth to his writing but it is vaccuous. HP really wanted (maybe ultimately failed) to dig under the surface as to what makes realistic sound and how do we get there...his essays on the subject are quite interesting reads and have a lot of spot on (and some ideas to be discarded) analysis in them. I can still go back to old TAS and read them with interest...both the reviews and the essays. New TAS I lose interest after a few minutes as there is nothing to chew on.

They did not change the name of the magazine but the purpose behind it has lost all resemblance of what it was originally...a quest to bring the real into the home to a satisfying degree for true music lover. Now, did this result in sifting through a lot of gear and system building? Of course and that was the service that HP was trying to provide to others who neither have the means, ability or time to do it themselves.

I was fortunate to having been raised in the Audio Industry in the NY/long Island area. I was also fortunate to have met HP and have him as a mentor. I was fortunate to experience TAS the way he saw and heard it and to have heard most of the systems and gear he listened to. I don't know JV or RH or any of the other writers in that way and would not make assumptions as to their motives or expertise but I do know what HP was after and what he was writing about. I went with Harry to Carnegie Hall, Madison Square Garden and other venues to listen to live music. We talked about it, he explained his philosophy and taught me so much about music especially Classical which I knew very little and he knew so much. I showed him a bunch of my music, and our listening sessions included all types of music. He taught me a lot about food and wine and that was usually the precursor to great moments in audio. I seriously miss Restaurant Zanghi and others
FYI we never talked about the gear as gear only what the gear was allowing us to hear and its relationship to the real thing.
The magazines are and have been a business venture and I believe they need to be viewed in that light. Its not bad and its not good its just how it is.

 

[stehno]

Hello Caesar,

The approach you advocate seems to be what our member Bonzo is doing. He will someday realize his quest and perhaps post a system video of his results.

How do you figure? Perhaps you could clarify/recap Bonzo's quest and how his efforts will lead to his one day realizing/fulfilling his quest.

I think you misunderstand my approach to the hobby. I have learned what interests me about the hobby through experience: listening to live music, listening to friend's systems, actually talking to people who know much more than I do about music and sound (Jim Smith, my mentor in Vienna, and David Karmeli), and doing experiments with my system to learn the effects of changes and how to make the system more pleasing to me.

You've mentioned "your approach" in several threads now perhaps implying that your approach is unique or special or superior. How is this approach any different than or superior to anybody else's?

I am engaged on this forum for exposure to new ideas, and to learn about new gear and music.

Are we not all potentially exposed to new ideas and potentially learn about new gear and music? Greater exposure to anything in and of itself is rather meaningless. Would you care to share how even one new idea, product, or music has significantly influenced or impacted your playback system's level of musicality?

When travel restrictions are lifted, I plan to return to Vienna, and to listen to various turntables, tube amps and high efficiency speakers to see if they have the potential to offer me more than my current components.

How is this approach any different even if you were to add Istanbul, Paris, Hong Kong, New York, San Francisco, and perhaps a half dozen other cities to your itinerary, audition 20 more turntables, 20 more tube amps, and 20 more high efficiency speakers than previously planned?

You wrote a few very long posts criticizing the magazines mostly, but also criticizing how many of us approach the hobby. What does any of that have to do with the thread topic which I find to be rather interesting? Do you care to comment about Jeff Day's article and how system and set up contribute to his ability to enjoy a broader number of his recordings?

As I recall, Jeff Day's article was sophomoric at best and ultimately a big nothing burger. Moreover, I think he concluded by saying we have to wait one year for him to reveal his remedies. Which based on Day's article should also be another nothing burger. But if Day has the solution to the dilemma he presents, why would he delay revealing his remedies for one year? This makes no sense to me.

Sorry Peter, but without clarification I'm just not seeing anything new with any of this.

 

[caesar]

Yup, your comments are getting boring.

Happy Holidays to you too, Al. You know, this site has an ignore feature that you may want to use, if you want to limit your perspective on the breadth of ideas.

As far as box speakers go, the $400.00 Klipsch horn speakers I use for my home theater dynamically blow away box speakers that cost $30K, $50K, $75K+. And being high efficiency, they have more realistic tone than those same box speakers when used with low powered tube amps...

 

[caesar]

I was fortunate to having been raised in the Audio Industry in the NY/long Island area. I was also fortunate to have met HP and have him as a mentor. I was fortunate to experience TAS the way he saw and heard it and to have heard most of the systems and gear he listened to. I don't know JV or RH or any of the other writers in that way and would not make assumptions as to their motives or expertise but I do know what HP was after and what he was writing about. I went with Harry to Carnegie Hall, Madison Square Garden and other venues to listen to live music. We talked about it, he explained his philosophy and taught me so much about music especially Classical which I knew very little and he knew so much. I showed him a bunch of my music, and our listening sessions included all types of music. He taught me a lot about food and wine and that was usually the precursor to great moments in audio. I seriously miss Restaurant Zanghi and others
FYI we never talked about the gear as gear only what the gear was allowing us to hear and its relationship to the real thing.
The magazines are and have been a business venture and I believe they need to be viewed in that light. Its not bad and its not good its just how it is.

Hi Elliot,
Thanks for sharing that story, but how does all of this jive with practical reality? You sell Borressen now, I saw. Gorgeous design! Should work really well in Miami condos for those with class and modern taste. And, of course, you also have the Bending Wave design, as well the larger Göbels. If everyone listens to "real, live, unamplifed", shouldn't one of those win, instead of being purely subjective?

 

[caesar]

Hello Caesar,

The approach you advocate seems to be what our member Bonzo is doing. He will someday realize his quest and perhaps post a system video of his results.

I think you misunderstand my approach to the hobby. I have learned what interests me about the hobby through experience: listening to live music, listening to friend's systems, actually talking to people who know much more than I do about music and sound (Jim Smith, my mentor in Vienna, and David Karmeli), and doing experiments with my system to learn the effects of changes and how to make the system more pleasing to me. I am engaged on this forum for exposure to new ideas, and to learn about new gear and music. When travel restrictions are lifted, I plan to return to Vienna, and to listen to various turntables, tube amps and high efficiency speakers to see if they have the potential to offer me more than my current components.

You wrote a few very long posts criticizing the magazines mostly, but also criticizing how many of us approach the hobby. What does any of that have to do with the thread topic which I find to be rather interesting? Do you care to comment about Jeff Day's article and how system and set up contribute to his ability to enjoy a broader number of his recordings?

Hi Peter,
Thanks for explaining your approach. If it works for you and helps you enjoy life more, I am all for it.

In regards to your question on staying on topic, my argument is that in the last 25 years, we have had speakers designed based on measurements. This is where the market has gone. This is where the magazines have gone. But these box speakers are too brutally (and analytically) honest to allow folks to enjoy a broad range of music, especially the streaming revolution.

Instead, they force one into listening to several hundred well-recorded, but musically pathetic, recordings.

 

[caesar]

...

Simply looking at the different systems belonging to my friends and even more so to those on this forum, I do not see the herd to which you keep referring. Sure there are some brands which have strong followings, but I simply do not see this mass herd behavior you keep discussing. I even let my Stereophile and TAS subscriptions lapse.

Hi Peter,
As I mentioned, not everyone is like your friends or guys who hang out on this forum. Talk to some folks in the lobby at shows, visit some guys who are only casually into the hobby, and many guys are clueless and most systems suck. I have an acquaintance has been selling gear for over 20 years, and he is still surprised but how many bad decisions are made. Unfortunately, it is the reality.

As for bandwagon effects on this forum, the obvious recent one is the new SGM Extreme server (and fairly recently we've also had stage footers and lampizator dac and msb dac). Having heard drek like Aurender and Lumin, I have no doubt the new SGM is excellent. But If it weren't for people recommending it on this site, it wouldn't have taken off as fast. Friends, acquaintances, experienced hobbyists, and early adopters are all sharing their experiences , shaping "the messaging", and advocating for this product . This is the reality of how this hobby works.

 

[spiritofmusic]

How do you figure? Perhaps you could clarify/recap Bonzo's quest and how his efforts will lead to his one day realizing/fulfilling his quest.


You've mentioned "your approach" in several threads now perhaps implying that your approach is unique or special or superior. How is this approach any different than or superior to anybody else's?


Are we not all potentially exposed to new ideas and potentially learn about new gear and music? Greater exposure to anything in and of itself is rather meaningless. Would you care to share how even one new idea, product, or music has significantly influenced or impacted your playback system's level of musicality?


How is this approach any different even if you were to add Istanbul, Paris, Hong Kong, New York, San Francisco, and perhaps a half dozen other cities to your itinerary, audition 20 more turntables, 20 more tube amps, and 20 more high efficiency speakers than previously planned?


As I recall, Jeff Day's article was sophomoric at best and ultimately a big nothing burger. Moreover, I think he concluded by saying we have to wait one year for him to reveal his remedies. Which based on Day's article should also be another nothing burger. But if Day has the solution to the dilemma he presents, why would he delay revealing his remedies for one year? This makes no sense to me.

Sorry Peter, but without clarification I'm just not seeing anything new with any of this.

Stehno, maybe Ked will get that system when you finally sort your ideas for the market. My money is on Ked first Lol.

 

[Al M.]

Happy Holidays to you too, Al. You know, this site has an ignore feature that you may want to use, if you want to limit your perspective on the breadth of ideas.

As far as box speakers go, the $400.00 Klipsch horn speakers I use for my home theater dynamically blow away box speakers that cost $30K, $50K, $75K+. And being high efficiency, they have more realistic tone than those same box speakers when used with low powered tube amps...

Happy Holidays to you too, Caesar. I have heard such high-efficiency Klipsch horn speakers, but while their dynamics were certainly good, they were nothing special. My 92 dB efficient Reference 3A Reflector monitor box speakers (combined with subs) blow them away dynamically. The owner basically conceded that when he, well, was blown away by the dynamics of my system. And no, the tone of those Klipsch speakers wasn't more realistic either, on the contrary. They did sound nice; I was impressed, certainly given the price.

So yes, I do have a reason when I smile about your box speaker comments.

 

[stehno]

Stehno, maybe Ked will get that system when you finally sort your ideas for the market. My money is on Ked first Lol.

I perceive tho art quite the optimist, Marc. Hey, your not still upset that I decided not to do business with you, are you? Imagine if we had done business. Wouldn't it be nice if you were actually able to substantiate your performance claims instead of whining about so many inferior recordings sounding so bad?

 

[spiritofmusic]

Stehno, your snipey response to me and tbh everyone else you've sprayed insults with only harms yourself. Feel free to keep at it, but the only result you achieve is to keep digging yourself in a hole. This is your private dealings with me writ large.
Others will come to their own conclusions.

 

[tima]

This is not a platonic trick for which the ideal form is not available in the real world. The ideal model is available in the real world. The platonic model is something that never actually exists in the real world but live, unamplified music exists and is something that can to at least some degree, be referenced against. I think it is well understood that the complete suspension of disbelief is likely impossible but that it is arguably (at least this is what TAS's original mission was) a worthy quest that results in a more realistic and therefore (according to their goals) a more satisfying musical experience. I can say that in my own pursuit this is the approach I still take and it has served me well.

Yes. One of the things I thought HP was about was listening and assessing through listening rather than through measurement. I suspect we always will be able to distinguish live music from its reproduction, at least unassisted. Within the moment of disbelief, happily, we're not occupied with such or the degree of replication.

With the "changing of the guard" at TAS away from HP's founding ideals to those of RH and JV it discarded the pursuit for simpler and more commercial goals. For a while JV touted "true to the source" as being TAS (the pursuit of it not the magazine itself), which is distinctly not what HP meant by it. RH has no guiding compass as near as I can tell other than "flavor of the month or year". I actually think JV has no real compass and this allows them to have all this contradictory and garbage "reporting".

Based on what I read nowadays, both in magazines and here, I'm beginning to believe that some people have the view that taking a position on reference, having one, talking about what should be 'a reference' or even (goodness gracious) 'the reference', is ideological to the point of uncomfortable controversy. Discomfort or controversary are to be avoided in the 'everyone wins an award' world of audio journalism. Thus the migration away from 'measurement is king' to 'use your ears' ends up a neutered destination. And for some writers or publications that neutered destination is a happy place where all goodness is relative. That's certainly a commercially tenable spot. And it supports the position that one only needs compare unit X with unit X minus 1 to have done one's job without shaking any trees or challenging the vacuous norm of 'musical' aka 'I like it.'

 

[tima]

New TAS I lose interest after a few minutes as there is nothing to chew on.

A nice turn of phrase. I like that.

 

[PeterA]

How do you figure? Perhaps you could clarify/recap Bonzo's quest and how his efforts will lead to his one day realizing/fulfilling his quest.


You've mentioned "your approach" in several threads now perhaps implying that your approach is unique or special or superior. How is this approach any different than or superior to anybody else's?


Are we not all potentially exposed to new ideas and potentially learn about new gear and music? Greater exposure to anything in and of itself is rather meaningless. Would you care to share how even one new idea, product, or music has significantly influenced or impacted your playback system's level of musicality?


How is this approach any different even if you were to add Istanbul, Paris, Hong Kong, New York, San Francisco, and perhaps a half dozen other cities to your itinerary, audition 20 more turntables, 20 more tube amps, and 20 more high efficiency speakers than previously planned?


As I recall, Jeff Day's article was sophomoric at best and ultimately a big nothing burger. Moreover, I think he concluded by saying we have to wait one year for him to reveal his remedies. Which based on Day's article should also be another nothing burger. But if Day has the solution to the dilemma he presents, why would he delay revealing his remedies for one year? This makes no sense to me.

Sorry Peter, but without clarification I'm just not seeing anything new with any of this.

Hello Stehno,

You have quoted a bunch of my comments that were responding to Caesar's earlier post, but I will try to answer the questions you asked.

First, I was responding to Caesar's comment and the approach he seemed to be advocating which is to get out, listen to as many available options as possible to reach an informed opinion, and then to select the components/system that satisfy him the most. This seems to be what member Bonzo is doing when he flies around to visit various systems. Bonzo seems to be narrowing his search and focusing on specific typologies and components. He indicates that this will eventually lead to him buying and setting up a system.

Second, "my approach" is perhaps similar or inferior to most approaches, and certainly not superior in any way. I have never suggested that it is superior. I refer to it as my approach because it has changed from the way I used to make decisions about my system. That is all. Nothing special, and this is not the thread to discuss what I am doing.

Third, traveling around to hear different components is no different and I am not suggesting it is. Where one goes to listen does not change this.

Fourth, if you think Jeff Day's article is sophomoric at best, why are you reading this thread and posting comments?

Lastly, it is fine that you see nothing new here. To me, your approach is about clamping components to provide a pathway through which vibrations can exit the components and to mass load the components. That seems like an interesting approach. You seem to shun isolation. I have recently removed all pneumatic isolation platforms from my system. However, I do not understand what any of that has to do with this thread about Jeff Day's article in which he discusses expanding his listening window.