Your "World's Best Audio System" . . . 2012 Edition

[garylkoh]

Yes, I met the good doctor many times. I always enjoyed visiting Manila because I would be brought to "make the rounds" and thereby get the chance to listen to some really nice systems.... and like you said, they are all unique. Jeff would have a field day visiting the various TWBAS in Manila.

 

[docvale]

Ok, according to my interpretation of what came in this thread up to now, I'd like to propose some criteria (rigorously IMHO ):

- I agree with Steve that having two SOTA systems (one tubed, one SSed) would be great.

- As exclusive technology and impressive measurements are a must, I would exclude some esoteric tubes gear from Far East (independently on how good they can sound). Consequently, lots of issues regarding the matching speakers would be solved (e.g., the VTLs I proposed in my first post in these thread can easily drive everything), so the rest of the system (source and speakers) could be shared. The consequent comparisons between the two amplifications would be actually cool

- Digital source should have no limits with the regards to HD sampling technologies. It should be easily interfaced with a computer or a music server. I would welcome digital room correction (before the DAC stage). In terms of technical exclusivity, I would prefer products that employ proprietary chips rather than OEM chips (so, I would think about dCS, EMM Labs, MSB...)

- Pre- and power amplification should come from the same company, in order to maximize the synergy. Products should excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate... Dual mono design of the preamp (not necessary on 2-chassis) and monoblock design of the power amp should be a must. Power amps should be stable on every realistic load of hi-end speakers (so, they shouldn't go into crisis below 2ohm loads... ).

- Speakers should be the flagship of the picked company. Full range according to Jeff's criteria. Free to consider solutions with a powered sub or not.

- Room is already impressively treated, so it doesn't have intrinsic limits.

- I would strongly consider some amp-speaker matches that tour around in the world. If in Wilson they love Lamm, or if Magico tests its creatures with Spectral or Soulution there's probably a reason... Clearly, the most beautiful eyes, hair, lips, breast and legs don't necessary make together the most beautiful woman...

- Last but not least. The analogue source? Many here (me included) wish the presence of a TT. As a design concept I'd wish a table with direct drive, vacuum hold down, tangential tonearm and dedicated anti-vibration table. Maybe they'll reveal the Rockport Sirius V at the upcoming CES? Otherwise I think that defining technological criteria for a SOTA TT is not as "easy" as it could be with other system components...

What do you think?

 

[dan31]

Has anyone had a chance to audition the Constillation components? They seem to be a shot at state of the art.

 

[Steve williams]

I believe the Sirius V is dead in the water

 

[Jeff Fritz]

Ok, according to my interpretation of what came in this thread up to now, I'd like to propose some criteria (rigorously IMHO ):

- I agree with Steve that having two SOTA systems (one tubed, one SSed) would be great.

- As exclusive technology and impressive measurements are a must, I would exclude some esoteric tubes gear from Far East (independently on how good they can sound). Consequently, lots of issues regarding the matching speakers would be solved (e.g., the VTLs I proposed in my first post in these thread can easily drive everything), so the rest of the system (source and speakers) could be shared. The consequent comparisons between the two amplifications would be actually cool

- Digital source should have no limits with the regards to HD sampling technologies. It should be easily interfaced with a computer or a music server. I would welcome digital room correction (before the DAC stage). In terms of technical exclusivity, I would prefer products that employ proprietary chips rather than OEM chips (so, I would think about dCS, EMM Labs, MSB...)

- Pre- and power amplification should come from the same company, in order to maximize the synergy. Products should excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate... Dual mono design of the preamp (not necessary on 2-chassis) and monoblock design of the power amp should be a must. Power amps should be stable on every realistic load of hi-end speakers (so, they shouldn't go into crisis below 2ohm loads... ).

- Speakers should be the flagship of the picked company. Full range according to Jeff's criteria. Free to consider solutions with a powered sub or not.

- Room is already impressively treated, so it doesn't have intrinsic limits.

- I would strongly consider some amp-speaker matches that tour around in the world. If in Wilson they love Lamm, or if Magico tests its creatures with Spectral or Soulution there's probably a reason... Clearly, the most beautiful eyes, hair, lips, breast and legs don't necessary make together the most beautiful woman...

- Last but not least. The analogue source? Many here (me included) wish the presence of a TT. As a design concept I'd wish a table with direct drive, vacuum hold down, tangential tonearm and dedicated anti-vibration table. Maybe they'll reveal the Rockport Sirius V at the upcoming CES? Otherwise I think that defining technological criteria for a SOTA TT is not as "easy" as it could be with other system components...

What do you think?

I think you've put together an outstanding post, and after first read I can't see anything I disagree with. You've summarized brilliantly!

 

[microstrip]

Ok, according to my interpretation of what came in this thread up to now, I'd like to propose some criteria (rigorously IMHO ):

(...)

- As exclusive technology and impressive measurements are a must, I would exclude some esoteric tubes gear from Far East (independently on how good they can sound). Consequently, lots of issues regarding the matching speakers would be solved (e.g., the VTLs I proposed in my first post in these thread can easily drive everything), so the rest of the system (source and speakers) could be shared. The consequent comparisons between the two amplifications would be actually cool
(...)

- Pre- and power amplification should come from the same company, in order to maximize the synergy. Products should excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate... Dual mono design of the preamp (not necessary on 2-chassis) and monoblock design of the power amp should be a must. Power amps should be stable on every realistic load of hi-end speakers (so, they shouldn't go into crisis below 2ohm loads... ).

(...)

What do you think?

Although we agree in most points, there a few critical aspects in your post that could spoil our fun .

The spirit of your rules would rule out almost all tube amplifiers, independently of power, because they have high output impedance and the interaction with the speaker impedance can lead to poor frequency response - specially with SOTA loudspeakers, famous for being terrible loads.

What do you mean by "excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate..."? If we reserve the "excel" for the best measuring units I doubt that most of the SOTA we are considering will be in this group.

 

[microstrip]

(...) It started when I heard them at CES: http://soundstageglobal.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=111&catid=55&Itemid=88
I had hoped that the setup was poor, and even surmised that on this forum. But I later saw some measurements in one of the British magazines that were, less than stellar, to be kind. So at this point I do not see them as SOTA because of the listening session and examination of the measurements. 2+2= . . .

Jeff,
Do you remember what was the publication? I would like to see it.

 

[Jeff Fritz]

Jeff,
Do you remember what was the publication? I would like to see it.

Actually, I can do better than that:

http://www.absolutesounds.com/index.php?page=17

Scroll down a bit and you'll see it. The measurements are in there.

 

[docvale]

Although we agree in most points, there a few critical aspects in your post that could spoil our fun .

The spirit of your rules would rule out almost all tube amplifiers, independently of power, because they have high output impedance and the interaction with the speaker impedance can lead to poor frequency response - specially with SOTA loudspeakers, famous for being terrible loads.

I see... on the other hand, if electrical performance is a parameter of choice, the "risk" has to be taken... I've listened, once, to a full Audio Note UK system (level 5 or whatever is the name of the top series): I loved it! But I guess that measurements would had not been so great. Same story for many systems based on high-efficiency (despite, again, I have no doubt about the pleasure of their performance). On the other hand, there's tubed gear that has no fear of the load of hiend speakers. Apart of the giant VTLs and ARCs, during the last CES Wilson demoed with 18W Lamms (even without the subs of Steve) or Nagras. In Italy the small company Viva Audio (which seems to be very appreciated here) demoed with the TAD R1. So even those impressive speakers can be matched with tubes.

What do you mean by "excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate..."? If we reserve the "excel" for the best measuring units I doubt that most of the SOTA we are considering will be in this group.

No, I don't mean to pick the amps that set the "records" in measurement, but those amp that, according to their electrical parameters, could "warrant" bombproof performance.
Clearly, this Best System survey is a game. The system, whichever it will be, will be assembled with a theoretical approach, rather than a personal series of attempts. So, I understand the need to set technical criteria that, at least, warrant for the high quality of construction and universality of matching with other components.
Than, not only I'll never think there could be a system considered by everyone as world's best, but I wouldn't be even surprised whether Jeff enjoyed better is own system rather than the Behold+Rockport...

 

[FrantzM]

OT

The measurements from The Sonus Faber are very modest for that "Price Class" The bass is down -6dB at 33Hz ...That is very modest by most measures.
This is from the article if this violates anything , please free to delete it .. EMphasis is mine

measurements With all their outputs combined and diffraction
correction applied, the -6dB rolloff( re.200Hz) occurs at about
33Hz.Both 100 Hz and l kHz distortion figures are a little
higher than expected but only a little

That's what you get for $200,000 ...

 

[docvale]

OT

The measurements from The Sonus Faber are very modest for that "Price Class" The bass is down -6dB at 33Hz ...That is very modest by most measures.
This is from the article if this violates anything , please free to delete it .. EMphasis is mine


That's what you get for $200,000 ...

If you think that they declare a bass down to 18Hz here: http://www.sonusfaber.com/thesonusfaber/pdf/data_sheet.pdf
Anyway, we cannot exclude that some measurements, specially for some speakers, could show have some intrinsic incompatibility with certain speaker design...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

- Digital source should have no limits with the regards to HD sampling technologies. It should be easily interfaced with a computer or a music server. I would welcome digital room correction (before the DAC stage). In terms of technical exclusivity, I would prefer products that employ proprietary chips rather than OEM chips (so, I would think about dCS, EMM Labs, MSB...)

- Pre- and power amplification should come from the same company, in order to maximize the synergy. Products should excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate... Dual mono design of the preamp (not necessary on 2-chassis) and monoblock design of the power amp should be a must. Power amps should be stable on every realistic load of hi-end speakers (so, they shouldn't go into crisis below 2ohm loads... ).

- Speakers should be the flagship of the picked company. Full range according to Jeff's criteria. Free to consider solutions with a powered sub or not.

I think a lot of that is audiophile hobbyist criteria, not SOTA performance criteria. Excellent THD, SNR, bandwidth, etc is baseline. If you think something without great performance sounds great, fine, but it's not SOTA, it's your taste. Dual mono preamp and monoblock design? The performance is there or it's not, regardless of the number of the topology or the number of boxes required. And this is a system. The amp should be stable at the system's load. Every possible load is irrelevant. The same goes for full range speakers. If you accomplish the goal with something that is down 6db at 40hz and sub(s), the goal is accomplished. I'd apply the same logic to "flagship." Is the flagship likely to be the best performer in a manufacturer's line? Sure, good chance of that. But performance is what defines SOTA, not whether or not something is called "Flagship."

Tim

 

[Jeff Fritz]

I'd apply the same logic to "flagship." Is the flagship likely to be the best performer in a manufacturer's line? Sure, good chance of that. But performance is what defines SOTA, not whether or not something is called "Flagship."

Tim

I'd apply the same logic to flagships across brands. People tend to lump all these statement speakers together from different brands because they all cost north of $110k. But the reality is, some of them aren't really competitive with a decent mid-line model from any number of companies. I mean really, if a speaker's midrange driver breaks up so bad that you see the ridge in the FR in the tweeter's pasband, can you really say it is even competently engineered considering the price?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'd apply the same logic to flagships across brands. People tend to lump all these statement speakers together from different brands because they all cost north of $110k. But the reality is, some of them aren't really competitive with a decent mid-line model from any number of companies. I mean really, if a speaker's midrange driver breaks up so bad that you see the ridge in the FR in the tweeter's pasband, can you really say it is even competently engineered considering the price?

Nope. And we can argue THD or jitter all day, but SNR? If an amp has a noise floor that's audibly higher than a decent integrated amp, it ain't hifi. I don't care if its power tubes are blown from the crystalized breasts of fairy princesses.

Tim

 

[RBFC]

I don't care if its power tubes are blown from the crystalized breasts of fairy princesses.

Tim

In this case, the look of the product would be quite significant, regardless of sound.

Lee

 

[docvale]

I think a lot of that is audiophile hobbyist criteria, not SOTA performance criteria. Excellent THD, SNR, bandwidth, etc is baseline. If you think something without great performance sounds great, fine, but it's not SOTA, it's your taste. Dual mono preamp and monoblock design? The performance is there or it's not, regardless of the number of the topology or the number of boxes required. And this is a system. The amp should be stable at the system's load. Every possible load is irrelevant. The same goes for full range speakers. If you accomplish the goal with something that is down 6db at 40hz and sub(s), the goal is accomplished. I'd apply the same logic to "flagship." Is the flagship likely to be the best performer in a manufacturer's line? Sure, good chance of that. But performance is what defines SOTA, not whether or not something is called "Flagship."

Tim

Tim,

My understanding of this thread is to play with audiophile fantasy rather than to make rigorous science.

Here there's my 2 cents in reply to your statement.
I could be in agreement with what you say, theoretically, if I believed there could be a system that said the truth, and that such that truth was accepted by everyone. But I don't believe it. I believe instead that the boundaries between hi-fi and my-fi will always be hard to define: if not, we wouldn't have solid state giants or low-powered tubed amps, which instead co-exist on the marker, even on comparable price levels.
I've never been in a recording studio. In theory, the best way to play a recording should be in the room in which it has been mastered. But many audiophiles complain about the so-called monitor effect that is carried by those systems. Are they right or wrong? Personally I have no idea, but we cannot ignore this issue.

My understanding is also that this game wants to define a system which is also exclusive. That's why I wouldn't pick compact monitors + subs as speakers, but large speakers. This doesn't account the analysis of the frequency response, it's a matter to pick a speaker that, by itself, can approach perfection, without the need of integration.

I specified that I would pick preamp and power amp from the same company. It's actually not a matter of synergy only... In an exclusive system that wants to be the world's best, I'd just find inappropriate to match preamp and power amp in order to compensate potential defects in their performance I'd like to have a preamp and a power amp that don't need corrections

Finally, unless considering active monitors (that I'm sure can play better than many other more typical audiophile solutions), most of the amps are not designed to drive a single specific speaker, so the stability on every possible load is a value that we have to appreciate.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Sorry, Valerio, I know I can be a bit literal sometimes, but I was just taking two things seriously, Jeff's title: "World's Best Audio System," which would mean by definition that it wouldn't need to take into account the load of anything outside of the system, and Jeff's mission statement: "Conditions: The overriding goal is fidelity to the recording," which expresses no conditions about topology, box count or the number of speakers required to attain full-range stereo audio. Of course he also said to "have fun" and asked us to submit our own idea of what's best. If a mono blocks and an amp that could drive an elephant up a mountain are requirements for you, have fun. Personally, I take it a bit further. I require an amp for every driver in the system. We all have our quirks.

Tim

 

[Orb]

Although we agree in most points, there a few critical aspects in your post that could spoil our fun .

The spirit of your rules would rule out almost all tube amplifiers, independently of power, because they have high output impedance and the interaction with the speaker impedance can lead to poor frequency response - specially with SOTA loudspeakers, famous for being terrible loads.

What do you mean by "excel in THD, SNR, bandwidth, slew rate..."? If we reserve the "excel" for the best measuring units I doubt that most of the SOTA we are considering will be in this group.

I agree with you about also selecting a 2nd system and mentioned this also quite awhile in the past in a different thread to Jeff that it would be great if we had two SOTA systems that are subtly different to represent the preferences of listeners; many solid state purchasers but importantly there are also many who swear by tubes.
This also gives us a subtle evolution of the project that benefits in giving an interesting twist to the previous project.
I think some may be surprised just how impressive the performance of some tube products can be even from a measurement perspective.
As an example look to the McIntosh 60th Anniversary (combo that has a C22 Preamp and M75 mono tube amp), and this is one I would recommend as SOTA, even though the price is value for money compared to other statement-top high end gear.
Before anyone comments on this please take a look at the measurements of this product done by Paul Miller:
Scroll down to November 2009 and select the two McIntosh products from there to see their performance-measurements.
Even their output impedance is a match for many very good solid state amps (seems better than McIntosh usual autotransformer tap amps).
http://www.milleraudioresearch.com/avtech/index.html

Thanks
Orb

It is easy to register for the userid and password if never used before.

 

[Steve williams]

It seems that the majority of us who post to this thread are all in agreement with a 2nd system to reflect tubes and analog.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

It seems that the majority of us who post to this thread are all in agreement with a 2nd system to reflect tubes and analog.

i'm late to this thread. however, i have a different viewpoint on having two different systems. for a number of reasons, even at the very tip top of performance, having one system with multiple sources, and multiple amplifiication approaches is better.

the trick, of course, is to have a SOTA speaker system which is flexible in terms of amplification......so low powered tube amps are an option, yet the benefits of higher power full frequency performance can also be enjoyed. currently; it's an approach i'm taking with my own system where i've got 3-4 watt 2A3 tube amps on the way to alternate with my darTZeel amps. there are a number of other speakers, such as the Wilson X-2's, which also can work in this same way. does changing amps require also changing preamps to still be optimized? so far, it seems not.

i do want 2 viewpoints on the music without compromise.....yet i want all the source and media choices equal for both.

i think doing justice to the very best sources is better for one room, even media management is better for one room. of course, i'm assuming 2-channel listening and not HT.