Time for a little audiophile myth busting
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 окт 2024
- The audiophile hobby is loaded with myths, like the one about crazy expensive audio isn't worth it. That's true some of the time, but trust me on this, a well set up MBL101 X-Treme system that costs $250,000 will stomp all over any $20,000 speaker on the planet. Obviously most of us can't afford it, but it's fun to dream about. What can I say, it's good to be rich. Other myths will be tackled here.
![FNAF vs TF2 - Episode 2 [SFM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z5b3V2-VLb0/mqdefault.jpg)
Being an audiophile is similar to "photographers" that invest small fortunes into camera gear. Their real hobby is camera equipment and not photography. For people that like to listen and just enjoy music, the gear is much less important. A reasonably good amp and set of speakers is all that someone needs to truly enjoy music for the music.
@@tonys4396 Hit a little close to home there eh sparky?
@@tonys4396 You probably think Beats are "audiophile" and a Nikon D810 is "pro". Lawl
@@MuahMan I don't shoot Nikon but if you're in some way arguing that D810 isn't a professional camera...... I like his analogy, being a pro shooter myself. I think I would have worded it differently. As in a lot of people don't spend the time and effort maximizing the gear they already own before spending money on more expensive gear. In doing so they fail to reap the rewards of the more expensive gear because they failed to figure out how to set up the basics that prove most important no matter what gear you use.
I agree. I couldn’t afford a Roleiflex so I got a decent Rolleicord, and I have had more fun with that camera, taking it all over Europe. Technique and passion make a big difference. You can have a $20,000 lens and if your thumb is in the frame it’s still not going to be a nice photo. Haha
@@cosmic-fortytwo I've had both those cameras back in the day for medium format and Nikon and Canon for 35mm. ALL great cameras. But what you are saying is that it's a waste to have a more expensive camera and better to get a cheaper one. Wrong. There are consumer level cameras and professional level cameras. It all depends on what you need. If you;re a profession back then, you needed a Nikon F versus a Nikkormat. You needed the Rolleiflex versus the Rolleicord. What the Rolleicord did, it did great, but it couldn't do many things that a professional needed a camera to do. Let me ask you, what good is a Rolleicord if your thumb is over the lens? I find your analogy as ignorant as you.
I once heard $100,000 speakers that I swear only sounded like $74,500 speakers.
Did you treat the midranges with the optional King Cobra venom? It totally opens up the soundstage.. A bargain at $20k per oz.
That's $97,533.91 CAD
@@brazillm10 Elf's blood is better but it takes at least 3 elf's per speaker which brings up the cost to 200 K . Don't get me started on Brazilian smurf love juice . You can't put a price tag on Magic but you can on smurfs . Hey maybe they can do something with white rhinos ?
I call Bull Shit. It was more like 73.850$
That's because the speaker cables were probably on the floor. You need dedicated cable stands to keep the speaker cables off the floor. It has something to do with MPE (Magnetic Polarity Effect) when speaker cables are near the ground. Each stand has a built in CPTM (correcting phase time modulator) that adjusts for the air drag inherent due to the earth's rotation or more commonly known to audiophiles as SATW (sonic atmospheric tidal waves) correction for high and low tidal airwaves that affect the sound or air in the hearing space. This set up costs only about $5K and is a bargain for people who are serious about sound. Just be sure to make your cables-on-the-stands run parallel to the earth's equator. Sit back in your sweet spot and enjoy.
You are making all of us THINK!! I love it. Thanks for the excellent videos. I don’t know where you come up with the subject matter but it works for me!
That's it, making folks think for themselves, that's the best I can do.
Hi Steve, I just wanted you to know that I am just starting up as an audiophile and I am so glad I found your channel :) You strike me as such a genuine guy, and the world needs more people like you :-) keep up the good work! Best regards from Norway
Check out A British Audiophile
Greetings from United Kingdom! I have only recently discovered this hobby, just picked up my first set of audio equipment ever... After months of research I landed on a pair of PSB Alpha P5s and a NAD D 3045. Couldn't be happier, but I can totally see how this hobby can suck you in to a very expensive rabbit hole!! Anyway, just wanted to say that I've been really enjoying the videos. Thank you.
I just bought the PSB Imagine XBs- only bc they were on same for $50 less than the alpha P5s. Haven’t set them up yet- I’m so excited!
I hear amazing separation and timbre and a palpable sense of presence in your cough!
One of the most astounding tweaks I've used cost nothing but time. All parts of my hi fi are set from top to bottom. The icing on the cake was my free tweak and that is RSP. Rational Speaker Placement. It bought everything together. It focuses on bass note, toe in and rake angle. Get it right and you can make any hifi in any room sound great.
As someone with a music and recording education who also is getting into HIFI, I'd say the most important factors are the recording, position of your speakers, where you are in relation to the speakers, and the acoustics of the room.
I'm having a lot of fun building my system and researching equipment. But some of the audiophile stuff simply reminds me of tonechasing that is common among guitarists. In guitar so much of your tone is from your fingers, but lots of guys get caught up in buying expensive gear because they think it'll make them sound like someone else. A instrument of good quality helps get that timbre you prefer, and the same appears to be true with HIFI. But so much of your sound is your source recording. Garbage in, garbage out. Good speakers certainly help, but don't waste your money on diminishing returns or no return at all.
I freaking love this show bro. Because of your age, when you talk about things, I remember them, and I swear it's like I'm back in 1982 reading Stereo Review. I remember ordering speakers at the age of 12 cuz I had a job, and so I would build speakers to play on my Dad's turntable. That's what this reminds me of.
Dude do you remember the Wisconsin Discount Stereo ads? Almost bought a system from them.
I would go further and say 90% of great audio is a great recording.
I would say 90% of great audio is a great performance by a great artist. The Edge demonstrated during an interview, some excellent, early U2 demos he made on a small cassette recorder. Louie Louie, by The Kingsmen, was recorded with one take and one overhead mic. Bad recording, priceless performance. Keith Richards insists that 4-track recording is all that is needed for excellence and that one can separate the good bands from the not good bands by how well they can make a simple 4-track recording, Enya notwithstanding. Just my perspective.
I would say 50% because even lesser quality recording can be more much more listenable on a better system. The thing is it CAN be but also the opposite is true sometimes. It all depends on what is meant by a Poor Recording and where the shortfall is . Home made recordings I have of family members from 1970 transposed to CD on a home computer have inadequate quality but the feeling of reality is still there making them "Great recordings" They sound much better on a high resolving system despite the lo-fi nature of the recording
Ado topp actually a poor recording would sound worse, it’s like a saying a bad make up job looks better in 4K than in standard definition
SayUptown . It depends on the recording, and what we mean by a poor recording. As I have got better HiFi over 40 -50 years ,some "less quality"recordings are now playable and enjoyable. If we think about vinyl records then a better quality "record player" actually makes records play better and brings out the music rather than surface noise. I agree with you that in terms of a poor recording being one that is being made too loud as in the "loudness wars" then yes a better system won't make them any better and can sound worse on a better system.
Absolutely.
Most people will never experience the huge variety of emotions that audiophiles and music lovers experience while listening to music when you get your system right. Even the comfy chair is part of my emotional rollercoaster ride that makes me love this hobby.
I agree. I have crappy sounding LPs and great sounding ones. The same with CDs. I have nice bookshelf speakers on stands and a old Kenwood amplifier, CD player and turntable. The whole thing cost about $300 and the sound is pretty good for the room it’s in.
I'm in favour of the ultra high end pushing back the boundaries of what is possible. I enjoy hearing about it too. Jealousy regarding high end audio stuff is not one of my vices.
The problem I see is the high end in audio is often so full of woo it can't be taken seriously, especially at the prices much of the equipment goes for.
Meanwhile, companies like Bose that actually do produce innovative products get panned simply because they design affordable mass-market products.
i totally agree that the recording is everything in determining sound quality. a bad mix is a bad mix regardless of format.
A $hit recording sounds fab on a GR8 system. U R a simple dummy seeking a 'mantra' 2 'solve every question'. Reality isn't like that. There R many factors, & a good system can make N E thing sound GR8... just not as GR8 as it COULD B if they didn't trash it 'up the chain'.
You're right. A great mix played over a boom box is better than a crappy recording played through a big powerful set of speakers with EQ & other goodies... HAHAHAHA =)) Tell us next how the taste of a sandwich is determined by it's weight LOL!!!
Will absolutely agree with the quality of a recording. The recording is your true front end to amazing sound if the rest of your system us setup well.
CD, Vinyl or pure digital transfers from digital masters 🎼🎵🎶😎👍
This is a very good and informative video.
I appreciate the time you took to make this and inform us.
I think your commonsense approach to audio is certainly refreshing
The best system I've ever heard, cost less than £2,000! However the first 'Transcendental' experience I had was with a system that cost well under £1,000.
McIntosh, Focal Utopia, Wilson, I've done some big price gear, and I've never had a lightening bolt moment with any of it.
Very enlightening, Steve. I gave your helpful, very informative video a thumbs up.
It all comes down to what sounds good to you no matter what the cost is. I just love good sounding music. I just have to deal with what I can afford I have saved up 400 dollars so far for a new stereo system I am saving for the Fluance Rt 81, Emotiva PT 100 Pre amp the Emotiva A 300 Power amp and for speakers The Elac Debut 5.2
Graham Douglas
Yes...and there is nothing like finding and enjoying that sound you love..
I couldnt agree more! I have a 1990's Kenwood reciever and CD player, connected to 2 1985 bose bookshelf speakers with a BSR Quanta 500 turntable from the 70's. I also have 2 early 2000's Kenwood subwoofers hooked up. Each thing individually cost less than $100. Sounds like the best setup on the block to my ears!
The problem is saving up for "new" equipment! When you have no money, or simply refuse to part with much, USED is where the value is! Guys like Guttenberg, Stereopiles, & The Absolute Joke ragazines have such a vested interest in whoring the new CRAP that they go out of their way to pretend like used gear doesn't exist! I don't live in their alternate universe, filled with racks of FREE headphones given to me by manufacturers who don't want my ear jam back; chances are neither do 99.44% of us (probably more!). New turntables are especially crappy. Cartridges are largely unimproved since Analog's previous demise in 1985, everything under $1000 is the same shit with a different model name, or even the same name (Hello Gradog, Ortofart, Crapaoka...). Amps are mostly worse because we didn't have this Class D digital RUBBISH back in the '70s & 80's. Anyone who shills for Class D amps is either deaf, a whore from the review "press", or a deaf whore from the review press. Speakers ARE better (mostly...), but unless they are made in a corrupt totalitarian communist SHITHOLE country called China, they are a complete ripoff & no sane person can afford them, much less justify them. Get an old Dual turntable, the older the better. Put an Audio-Technica AT95E on it. Make your own interconnects & speaker cable from minimum 16ga MIL-W-16878 Type E or EE silver-plated & teflon-insulated hookup wire. Buy an old Sansui integrated amp or receiver, or a Lux RX-100 series receiver from 1984. Or for tubes, a Musical Paradise MP-301. Or an Audio Analog 8W/ch. job (sorry, don't have the model # handy, but it's under $500USD). For speakers, get a pair of Dynaco A25's, an old pair of Advent/1's, or any number of EPI, Genesis, Burhoe speakers with the inverted-dome tweeter. Boston Acoustics A70's &A100's are a tasty choice as well. If you insist on new for under $500, I hope you like TINY! Oh, one more thing: YOU'RE WELCOME.
I've heard the MBL Extreme system a few times and it is magical. I'd be happy with just the 101E's. I don't need to be greedy, haha. I'll never understand people who will bash something just because it's expensive. I hear all sorts of comments "I know you're just paying for the name with X brand", or "I could build a system that sounds twice as good as X, for less than HALF the price!" and so on. I don't go on Ferrari forums and bash people who can afford them or the cars and say that "I could build a Chevy X that's faster than that for 1/10th the money!" because it would be stupid to do so. But this is what we get in the Audiophile world. There's a lot more Anti-Audiophiles than audiophiles me thinks. Lot of hate for a hobby that's viewed to be extravagant by most unfortunately.
Clint the Audio Guy
Your last sentence addresses the problem.
The reason for so much rancor as prices go up is due to the perception of high-end audio equipment being outright lies.
Think about it: How many people are satisfied with highly compressed music streamed over Bluetooth or otherwise from a low quality source?
How many people listen to music as background noise?
How many people, this time including audiophiles, have had the chance to even listen to a megabuck, Hi-Fidelity system anywhere, ever?
Now, go out and try to tell these same people how much you love the sound of your new $300K whatever, and watch what happens.
Clint , I too have heard the MBL system at audio shows . It sticks in my memory as it was so good . in the room there was the MBL system AND an aural hologram of a jazz pianist it was brilliant.
Actually you CAN build a way better performing car than a Ferrari 4 like 1/10 the price or less. One example that comes 2 mind is the 'Atom' = street legal, but basically all frame, so very light & agile =) It's a glorified go cart, but outperforms Ferraris because of it HAHA
You have the correct approach....this hobby does not have to be terribly expensive or complicated to be enjoyable. My personal philosophy has always been to devote a good chunk of my audio budget to a good phono cartridge, and speakers. It`s never failed me....
The best audio upgrade for the money …. getting your ears syringed .
Or getting your hearing checked for starters haha! great point David Jay
Yeah! Absolutely! Better highs, improved resolution and extended bandwidth 🤗
fill your speaker stand up with cat-litter; the cheapest upgrade there is!
@Jordan Murray How so???
or have another beer
I spent $800 on speakers, the experience was great for a week, after a few years it just sounds normal. What I'm listening to makes a bigger difference than what I'm listening to it on.
@@kingchakazulu7762 Taga Harmony, from Poland.
Can you explain why a state-of-the-art Steinway Model 'D' as used in the finest concert halls will set me back a mere £125,000 but some speakers I've seen to reproduce it might cost double that? I own the best clarinets money can buy at £6k. Should it not be possible to reach the best sound without spending the kind of money you'd spend on a house or luxury car?
Spot on comment. I was just thinking, if I had that money to spend on music I'd have season tickets to all the best concert auditoria and operas and money to travel between them and visit cozy jazz bars in between.
That's right all recordings sound different. Rock.jazz hip hop.edm.country.etc
I usually have 8 cds for testing sound.that I have had for 30 years. And if I stick to these.the difference between systems( when purchasing). Setting up .(moving)
Especially when moving from house to house.was very helpful
Is a big help for me. Doesn't have to be a quality recording (but a familiar one).
I use 1 CD for testing every piece of equipment, every cable change for many years, if IT sounds right then everything else will sound right, Tubular bells 2
This was good 4:15 ish. I am so loving that you are talking about how stuff/electronics can get in the way. I would say, when not used very, very carefully.
Decades ago heard a great system with Infinity IRS Line Array Towers (I think that was the name). Still remember the incredible, life-like sound. I think today those speakers would be multiple 6 figures.
Danny Hoffman The speakers you're referring to is the Quantum Line Source that Infinity released in 1977. The idea behind them was great, unfortunately the quality control was lacking resulting in loose components inside the enclosures. I was interested in these speakers, but had to pass on them because of the spotty quality problems. Consequently, in 1987, I purchased a set of Polk SRS units ($3000/pr) and never looked back. These speakers were SUPERBLY crafted with sound that totally blew me away. The bass response was "down" only 7db @ 12Hz with distortion at the lowest that HI-FI/Stereo Review had EVER measured. I still have these speakers TODAY. I love them so much that I COVER them after EVERY time I am done playing them. I use them only in 2-channel stereo because for MUSIC they sound best in this arrangement. CHEERS!
I currently have a limited budget due to early retirement (taking care of relatives). I may be in a better position when my pensions kick in. So I'm mostly coasting on audio that I bought when I had a good income. I never bought headphones after my Sennheiser HD 414s gave up, until a Black Friday when I bought some HD 598SEs. Even though their published frequency response isn't great, they sound good to me. So you can conclude that I have damaged hearing or damaged nervous system. I used Neutron on my LG V20 to even-out the response, but found that I preferred the native sound. I haven't been able to figure out why. I bought a Snikerdoodle Black FPGA board with the intent to experiment with my own DSP designs. There is enough real estate to implement fairly long FIR phase-linear filters. I will have a three-way crossover, but now I'm wondering about my need for room compensation DSP. Maybe I'll like the sound of my system the way it is! I prefer the perfect imperfections of rustic furniture. Maybe it's that way with audio too. Maybe rustic sound compensates for imperfections in my soul.
I guess I just want to say that the average American "Joe" makes just $32,000 a year. If you speak on lower priced audio equipment...You are speaking to the masses. Every year I buy maybe, just one piece of audio equipment (200.00 - 750.00) because that's all I can afford. I would assume most of the people that watch your videos are just like me and earn less than the average $32,000. Thanks for all your wisdom and keep plugging the great, innovative, and reasonably priced audio equipment.
Thanks, I love covering a wide range of gear. Reading about stuff we can't afford, like Ferraris, seems interesting to folks who will never own or even once drive a Ferrari. I hope the same is true for expensive audio.
And that's what I love about Steve. He covers a wide variety of high end and very affordable but high fi gear. Thanks Steve. And I love it all! I love reading and hearing about the crazy expensive audio gear and the stuff that I can afford. It's a great hobby and its like my subscription to Car and Driver and Motor Trend. I actually read the articles on the Ferrari's and Lamborghini's multiple times and read the article on the Subaru Forrester once.
Richard, the truth of the matter is that a relatively modestly priced can sound wonderful if you take the time to set it up properly and pay attention to room acoustics. I've seen six figure systems set up in an absolute echo chamber and I've seen $3000 systems that worked like magic it a proper room.
@@brazillm10 - Yes! I agree. There is some "magic" in a well-treated room.
Steve: I agree with most of what you say except for the first item about expensive gear. A $250K amp does not sound better than a $10K amp. A $90K DAC does not sound better than a $1K DAC. No amount of lipstick Stereophile puts on the expensive gear changes that.
Alan Shaw, owner/ designer, of Harbeth speakers has a challenge that says if you can identify your amp from his while auditioning his speakers, you can have the speakers for free. I would think there would be a parade of reviewers going to Harbeth to collect their free gear. He has yet to pay out. In fact, he has had zero takers on his offer. I wonder why?
Mike Witkowski
If you forget the price though, some amps are better than others aren't they?
I believe in the sufficiency argument: Once you get to a certain level of design and material quality, there is little to no difference in sound between amplifiers. You can still have a mismatch in amplifier and speakers based on load, loudness requirements, etc., so all those considerations are valid.
This is an interesting read from the late Tom Nousaine. www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_19_r.pdf He has published several of these tests.
Bottom line: Spend your money wisely.
Agree. (As someone who's participated in amp blind tests) It's all about the speakers and room.
Mike, But regardless of price, some amps are better than others in a given system aren't they?
Maybe it’s because Harbeth speakers aren’t that good and therefore you wouldn’t be able to tell much difference
Digital vs. Analog. You are correct. I'm a musician, recorded on over a thousand albums, and countless jingles, etc. You are absolutely correct.
For me, it's the music and the equipment, being a musician and an electronics engineer. I literally built all my stereo equipment, and this is a labor of love that has been evolving for like half a century. Really, at this level, one is NEVER truly satisfied for any extended period of time. I love music, I also love engineering and will tinker and tweak till the soldering iron goes cold and they nail the damn coffin shut (please somebody, put a couple good CDs and some vinyl in there, no cassette or 8-track, thank you).
Footnote:
"Expensive" is a relative term, and it alao relates to your musical expectations in a period of time. Given the myriad of dynamics at play, it does not disqualify one from achieving a great sounding system, regardless of circumstances, if one properly manages their expectations and be be creative. Above all, enjoy the music.! ....lol
Some nice common sense reflections Steve. Comments section will be toxic for this one! Common sense and hifi are like oil and water.
I'm glad I stumbled into Steve. Love his channel.👍
My buddy has some Zenith 49cz852 speakers (that I own 4 of) and we run them in an open baffle configuration and his sons build incredible tube amps. He compared his sound system running the Zeniths to a $250,000 pair of speakers and he said they are right up there with them.
Well he would wouldn't he
Good stuff.
Of the three requirements you listed: well-chosen equipment, set up, correct acoustics, it is the acoustics which is most important, imo.
I have found that adequate bass traps and side reflections treatments with electronic room correction works very well for getting accurate sound reproduction.
I'm using Sonarworks Reference 4.2 for room correction. I'm using high-quality foam for sidewall reflections and various thicknesses of glass wool, mineral wool, and recycled cotton wool for front wall and ceiling. I'm using a variety of diffusion on the rear wall.
I'm using a PC-based DAW for all my audio. The Sonarworks room correction is a plugin. I also use ARC 2.5 plugin for room correction on my other PC.
Of course, it would be better if no electronic room correction was necessary, but it would cost me about two years worth of Social Security checks to correct the room with only passive physical devices.
With physical treatment and electronic correction, I've gotten to the point where I no longer feel compelled to tweak something because it "just isn't quite right". It only took me 20 years to get to the point of "reasonably satisfied" for a relatively low cost. It sounds lovely.
It is funny that you cover your mouth for coughing but you actually turn to the mic, increasing the coughing for us haha
You're right, I'll try turning the other way!
Israel Branco
Why is this funny?
@m riggs you are absurdly paradoxical
@m riggsHey good come back Thanks babe.
Better speakers definitely, better amps usually - But there are pitfalls and alleys we need warn new people to avoid, although maybe experience is the very best teacher.
Strange observation - my big stereo was down for 8 years. Now "I can not tell any difference" between a highly reviewed pricey "stereovox" coax cable and a BJC coax (zero, not-ta, zip). Back then I "heard better better better" now I hear the same.
I am making a plea - to steer new people away from low low value expenditures like wires. Audio memory like color memory lasts maybe milliseconds. Our brain's work in concert with our ears & eyes. They do most of the work to parse and organize the information we receive .
To the newer people careful this whole thing can turn into "an addiction" where we constantly "desire better" and charlatans will sell you the wire drug. Then our anticipation of better becomes a self for-filling illusion.
Year one "boy she sure is sweet, kind, honest and loaded with integrity". Year two "OMG she might be a sociopath". Our perceptions are not "reality", they are our reality which is temporary tied to desires, expectations and host of things that skew our perceptions.
There R massive differences between cables, mostly E Z 2 tell in the highs, especially between bright, clean-sounding gear. U will notice differences in 'smoothing' effects =) As 4 clarity, very thin stuff of 'coax' style design with thin copper stranded core & solid aluminum sheet outter wrap sounds best. Somehow the difference in materials 'evens out' things. Speaker wire 2 = aluminum on 1 lead & copper on the other.
I have over 300 Vinyl albums. For the longest time, I was always told all vinyl will sound better and more natural. I found myself trying to hear that "warmth" vinyl had over the digital counterparts (I have over 54,000 digital albums) and found that the clearest vinyl tended to be more of the acoustic or even orchestral as opposed to, say metal. That being said, I bought OneRepublic's Native on vinyl and was blown away at the stuff I could NOT hear on the digital version. It's hit or miss. Led Zepplin, IMHO, will always sound better on vinyl as does Santana. But what really melted my brain was Metallica AND Megadeth vinyl albums. Holy cow what a difference.
There's an obvious reason Metallica sounds better on vinyl. That band (along with the Red Hot Chili Peppers) are infamous for brick walling their albums to maximize loudness. That kills all the dynamics, smashes down peaks, makes everything sound equally loud and introduces digital distortion. You can't do that on vinyl, the album would be unplayable for various technical reasons. So in those cases the vinyl is going to sound a lot better. But the vinyl format itself is definitely not better.
Always loving your videos Steve.
Ok, I have to respectfully disagree with your myth at 5mins. I have found that in general a three way speaker will sound better than an equivalent two way speaker eight times out of ten. Yes there are exceptions but they are less common, not more common like you suggested. Speakers with a dedicated mid driver and bass woofer have an advantage over an all-in-one driver.
I've slowly evolved my system from entry up to £10,000 over 20 years and made pleasant hi-fi improvements along the way, such as better definition, detail, richness, presence, ect. None of this add up to a better 'connection' to the music, only a better appreciation. Only when I spent real money on supports and mains quality did I finally 'connect' to the music.
😂
Steve you said it
“ it all depends on the quality of the recording”
So so true, remember the days of analogue only when one vinyl pressings blew you mind away with the quality of sound then another by the same label was awful.
Stop taking sense😜
Definitely depends on the recording. I don't really like country music, but I'll be the first to admit that they do one hell of job recording music. Hats off to country.
@2:18
"Better" is subjective. There are too many variables.
However, when all of the variables line up, then analog sounds better.
Bang for the buck, digital wins. It costs less, easy to set-up, and will usually sound good (assuming the content is reasonably good).
But if you spend enough $$ on matched gear (meaning turntable, tone-arm, cartridge that all gel) , and professionally set it up, and also match it with a phono-amp and pre-amp, and amps that also gel, in a treated room, with speakers that are precisely positioned, and white-hot vinyl pressings are used, you will be transported into a world that digital cannot touch (although some MQA, when done right, comes close).
Vinyl is very difficult to get right. Most music lovers have never, and will never, hear it at its full potential (or even close to its full potential).
Cheers!
Nonsense, with analogue it is always a fight against endless limitations: The grain size of the lp, dust, wow and flutter, electric signal degradation, motion dynamics of the needle. One simple truth remains for all those limitations: it is impossible to get right. Even a professional dust free lab isn’t totally dust free, even the best motor will have some wow and flutter, left and right channel separation is never perfect.
With digital it is much simpler: concerned the quality isn’t perfect? Just double the bitrate. There is no limit. Channel separation is perfect, it is simply a separate set of bits. Only difficulty is making it analogue. But the digital part is perfection, only limited by your choice.
Vinyl is enjoyable because of the physical aspect, not because of it’s technical aspects. It even needs the RIAA equalization just to get past the basic fundamental limitations of what the needle can physically do.
@@SanderSmit77 You wrote about vinyl in terms of this or that never being perfect. True. Even Ferrari's flagship LaFerrari is not perfect. Why would anyone ever want one when the roads are never perfect, and the weather is not always ideal, and you have to clean it, and you get stuck in traffic? Nothing in life is perfect. But every item you mentioned about vinyl, with the right quality components, and in the hands of expert installers, is near-perfect. Any misalignments are so minuscule that they are imperceptible. And the playback sounds spectacular.
Digital can be very good -- even great. But song after song after song almost never sounds great. Very good? Yes. Great? Rarely.
If digital is the holy grail of musical reproduction, then why is there one re-master after another, year after year, decade after decade, for the exact same songs?
Why is there digital equipment that costs $25 and digital equipment that cost $25,000?
Why do the best digital playback systems have dedicated transports?
Why does the sampling rate almost never make any difference, in terms of sound quality?
Why does the MQA process correct timing issues that were introduced by the studio's equipment, if digital is so state-of-the-art?
Why does the MQA process correct timing issues, on MQA certified DACs, if a great DAC is already designed to do such a great job?
Measurements are for scientists.
I'll take the stereo that sounds like heaven, yet has lackluster measurements, over the stereo that does not hold my interest, yet has impressive measurements.
My ears are my only measuring tool, and my ears have heard some dream-level stereos, where the vinyl sounds so good that you realize how sterile digital is.
I am curious as to what is the best analog set-up you have heard. Please describe in detail. Because if you have not heard a great set-up, dialed in by professionals (not the guy at BestBuy), then I can understand your not believing in vinyl -- because you have never really heard vinyl's potential.
Note that stereos do not have needles.
Mastering.
I have compact discs and other digital files that sound better than the vinyl counterparts due to proper digital re-mastering. Careless/bad analog mastering or even bad vinyl pressings can ruin an audio experience for me. On the other hand, I have vinyl records that blow digital files out of the water for much the same reasons. It does not pay to be an audio snob just because someone prefers one format over another. It should always be about finding the best sounding recordings of your favorite music. Having said that, I still prefer a good vinyl record over a compact disc anytime!
Audio extremes! My system is VERY modest. In fact most components have been given to me by friends and family. I strive to get the best possible sound with what I have to work with. I would love to hear some of my favorite recordings on a half million dollar sound system. Maybe one day....
I enjoyed this posting Steve and just subscribed.
Peace...
I completely agree....the most important component to good sound is well recorded and well mastered material. That being said, I think vinyl is slightly more forgiving of less than good recordings that is digital.
Let us just admit that digital recording and media is objectively better than analog recording and media. They are however both of sufficient quality for us to use and listen to them.
oddboxTopper
I share your philosophy of getting the most out of your system. Therefore allow me to recommend Mapleshade Records. If you go there and do your research, read carefully and follow the advice and technical principles found there; I believe you will be able to improve the sound and performance of your current system to a surprising degree. Even if you employ DIY versions of some of the products (which is even mildly encouraged), I think you will hear an improvement.
I could say more, but I don't want to sound like an infomercial. Cheers!
One of the biggest issues CD had in the early days, was bad mastering and RIAA curve., They were harsh, tinny and bright coming from Japan. German pressings got it right and the fidelity was VASTLY improved.
Scott Lowell CD does not employ any kind of RIAA. Vinyl does. I think what you meant was brick wall filtering.
mmm, I'm not too convinced by these arguments. A piano in my room sounds like a piano, and doesn't blow my mind. No stereo system reproducing a piano should be able to do something the piano doesn't do.
Now, a guitar, a drum... ok, those are closer to blowing minds. But still, the guitar plays through a thousand dollar amp and cabinet, recorded by a 400 dollar microphone? I don't think you need to spend 200k in gear to render an accurate reproduction.
Actually, you should be spending at LEAST $200K on power cables alone to even have the right to call yourself an audiophile. And who cares about how realistic it all sounds? It's not about the music and it never has been. It's about the equipment, specifically about using it to express your OCD and autistic tendencies. Also it's about snobbery.
@@russellhamner4898 Yes snobbery but these audiophools are such fools that they don't realise most of the world laughs at them.
Why wouldn't a piano be as impressive as a guitar or drum set?
@@charleshuguley9903 impressive? yes, but in a different way. The guitar, via the amplifier, moves a lot more air than the piano can move. That's why you will feel it in your gut. Same happens with the drums. Both instruments live can knowck your socks off. I think those two instruments benefit a lot more from a good (not just loud) stereo system than the piano which, at best, will sound like a piano.
"I'm going to bust all these myths!" and then "well maybe, I mean it might, or might not, it depends, but you know maybe..."
That's some serious myth busting going on there.
Believe it or not I had that mind blowing experience in a car . It was like being on stage with the band, not distortion at full volume , I wish it could have been louder . You could feel the music , not just hear it. The problem was it only lasted a month. Turned on the system one day and instantly knew it had changed. I spent the next few years trying to get it back but never could.
i'm glad you didn't mention those things that connect all the hardware together. Very touchy subject! (not for me) :D
mrpositronia , do not get into discussions about religion or politics...........or audio cables
I did!
You can get into politics or religion, but please DO NOT start on $100/ Ft interconnects. THANK YOU.
I've seen a group of (PHILIPS employed) audiophiles do a blind test with a Mackie MR624 studio-speakers set against 3 sets of horribly expensive Class A high end speakers and accompanying tube amps. They picked the Mackies as the best sounding ones, all of them. Oh and yes, the Mackies were connected to a Lynx Hilo. They listened to the same 24bit 96kHz analog recording and a few well-known reference songs, like 10cc's I'm Not In Love and the like. So yeah, there's that. I'm never paying more than 3000 euros on just the speakers AND amps, simply because it's a sheer waste of money. And yes, those Mackies are amazing for their price range. Especially in small rooms.
I totally agree that it's almost entirely down to the quality and care taken with the recording but also the sort of sound some studios and artists go for will appeal to me more than others and suit my set up more than others. For instance there are analogue recordings that I Keep going back to because the sound so so good and others I rarely revisit not because the content is not good but the mastering is disappointing and there is nothing that a well sorted system can do about that other than to expose this failing or difference depending on your preference. I would just say this about analogue v digital in my case CD. I have had great breathtaking listening experiences with both formats but truly, the most moving and life enhancing experiences of all my hifi life have come from well sorted vinyl LP's playing on a really good turntable. Not only did it blow me away, it frequently moved me to tears and made me sit there totally emotionally emptied. I don't know if this is snake oil or the true magic of vinyl but try as I might, I have never been able to reproduce this state of consciousness with CD. I have a great player and use it regularly alongside my Turntable so I don't have a banner to fly about either but this is just my experience. I would say that one of my worst listening experiences came from the same turntable but my misfortune to have purchased a "back to black" remastered version of Bob Marley which was totally flat and unlistenable. I removed it in total disbelief and Frisbee'd it across the room in disgust. There is a great deal of vinyl ruin going on out there, killing a possibly life changing experience for possible new to vinyl listener as the accountants exploit the renaissance of vinyl for profit over quality, its sad and makes me angry. However I think this goes on with CD mastering also.
Steve, I used to work for a high end a/v company and I couldn't agree more with everything you have said.
I installed several Meridain speaker systems (+$100K) and they all sounded awful until tuned in.
I also installed many Audiology DSP systems, before they sold out and every Marantz included the basic firmware...did they work well? Yes they did if properly setup but they can't fix everything and never once did the software get it right out of the box.
In my time the industry I learned that 70% of a given system's performance came from tuning alone...a bout in the car audio (not bass boomers, real deal SQ stuff) realm reinforced that thinking as well.
Three way speakers are hit and miss for me...my mentor told me once (and I still agree with him to this day) that more drivers equals more distortion. I never heard a bad pair of 3 ways in home audio, but never heard a good pair in car audio.
I dig the content and please keep it up!
Steve the main reason why vinyl sounds different to CD or digital streaming is because digital can only play back exactly what you provide at the source, a mirror image. When you listen to a CD or Apple Music, you are listening to an exact replica of the artists final master. Vinyl on the other hand colours playback, depending on your set up. Every variable with your record player comes into play, mostly your tonearm and cartridge. The tonearm becomes your microphone and this will define the sound of the playback. So turntables give the enthusiast and individual hands on experience, depending on their set up. That is much more interesting to some.
When my dad sold gear there was a crazy myth going around about marking the inside ring of a CD with a green pen. They swore up and down that it made the CDs sound better, and when I explained how CDs worked and that the Data on the disc was either read correctly or it wasn't they just scoffed at me.
Love your show. Share your love for records.
Maybe! The best system I ever heard was about $6k total. (2) Voight homemade speakers, (8) Homemade 2'x4' panel speakers, 2 subs (not loaded, moderate hz but sharp) (1) Yaquin Tube Amp. I've Been in $500K rooms at SoundDesign. If we're taking "Audiophile" most realistic live-sounding sound I've heard. That said, music is an art - If someone wants to pay $200k for a painting, a sound, a sculpture that's a wonderful thing to support the arts. The people who put $200k into speakers is an artist and they spend a LOT of time and money creating their art SO, to each his own.
It would be cool for you to show us around your system Steve.
chris guy right. I’ve watched some of his videos and it never gets to sound like when will we ever see him enjoying sound vs talking about some theoretical system? Blah blah blah expensive blah resonance when will he show what he’s talking about
Nearly all recordings are digital nowadays since 2” tape master recording no longer happens, copying tapes to vinyl involves modifications to the signal to accommodate the playback cartridge.
Hello steve, I couldn't have said it better myself, your so right👍
Went to a talk last year by Bob Ludwig. His comment was, all things being equal, digital is obviously far superior to analog. This is before any compression etc that they do. He was almost dismissive of the idea that analog was superior. If anyone should know I guess it would be him. That being said, I still love my LPs and will never get rid of them.
I also recommend the Real HD-Audio site for discussion of the advantage of properly recorded digital...I also like my vinyl, even though it is not superior in most cases.
I read somewhere he said he could never get the sound he wanted from analogue until digital came along . but I find born in the USA by Springsteen that bob Ludwig produced sounds way better on vinyl than it ever did on CD
And every step along the analog path is a degradation.
Hearing is subjective so I don’t know how someone can be an expert and tell others what will or won’t sound ‘good’ to them I’ve listened to same music on lp CD and computer (Beethoven’s 5th performed by Royal Philharmonic Decca, Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd) and the lp’s sounded better to me. Sorry but a thousand Bob Ludwigs can’t change that😊
@@EddyTeetree I checked out Joni Mitchell Court and Spark on my new Rega 3 with the Elys 2 vs. my Rotel RCD 1070 HDCD player. That CD is in HDCD. The volume on the cd was way higher than the album. The album sounded better but having less background noise of the CD does have pluses. It is nice to walk away and not have to think about the needle hitting the end over and over and over.
I buy as expensive as I can afford, have done this since I started this fanatical journey, and my enjoyment has grown everytime! I'm sure at some point up the price scale it becomes "as good as it gets " but I won't have to worry about that because very doubtful I'll reach anywhere near that point.
I wholeheartedly agree with what Steve G. said about this, so I applaud your strategy. But the endpoint depends on your budget; chose extra-carefully, include used components, & I put the..."event horizon" at no more than $10-15kUSD.
Thanks for your input on DSP Steve, because I felt like I was missing something by not having access to it.
Agree, no in-ear hp, never! As for getting a system that is good/great, it is all that you say. Starting with, one can not just throw any ole gear together and hope it works. One needs to give some thought to the synergy of the components being used. I've heard some really bad amp/speaker combos.
And the room. Very few rooms would fit into the perfect category. Only in one room did I find the perfect speaker location right off the bat. That room was as good as it gets. All the other rooms, try it, move it, try it, move it multiple times. 2-way; 3-way; I've had both, all 3-ways for years. But 9 years ago I sold three 2-way speakers I had for decades for LCR use to a guy I knew. After he got them home and got the system all setup, he said to me, "these as the best speakers I've ever heard" so obviously he was very happy. And they were nice speakers.
Over forty years I spent less than 50 thousand dollars on my system, but I've been told the experience is far better than a 6 million dollar system near me. It's all about the knowledge of the system builder.
6 million dollar systems exist?
@@1337wafflezz did. Look up Jeremy Kipnis and Kipnis Studio Standard. He was a friend of mine, but passed away a couple of years ago.
Bose is good - there is a myth right there
They make one good thing, noise cancelling headphones. Not audiophile but better on NC than anything else by a wide margin.
Andy Cohen I have to admit their noise cancelling headphones are good but the lifestyle home theatre systems are a rip off
lizichell2 if someone likes bose they are quality to them
lizichell2 - bahahahaha. Love it. That’s gold
Jacin Shardlow Haha yeah what do you listen with? I have a pair of grados 500
Yes, you really are right in your statements about these things.
And Yes, it also really depends on many factors that need to be taken into account.
The Dansette theory: "if it don't sound good on a Dansette, it won't sound good on anything"
I think the work Orrin Keepnews did in the recording of Bill Evans Trio at The Village Vanguard back in 59 shown the value in GREAT audio capture.
You bring up an interesting point that I was pondering about yesterday. Can "high resolution" audio be worth anything if a song was recorded on old equipment? Or perhaps equipment that had much lower resolution than the format one listens to?
Also, DSP is totally necessary in car audio. I consider myself a semi-audiophile, and I'm noticing all these audiophile videos seem to only pertain to home audio. Do audiophiles not listen to music in their cars?
I'd day that a 3k system setup well in a well treated room will sound better than a 30k system setup badly in a bad sounding room.
(even if you used 10k cables) :)
Price does not determine sound quality, so both or neither setup can sound better. It depends what design U buy, not the price.
@Crazy - YES! I agree, very much.
I keep telling my friends to put up some acoustic treatment to upgrade their system. It seems equipment without flashing lights and LCD displays is considered "low-end".
The only equipment U ned N E more is amps & speakers =) Do the rest with computers =D Room treatment U can do yourself cheap, but the best treatment is actually 2 physically change the shape of the room by putting big & tall pieces of furniture in it to break up the 'boxy' nature of the sound. U can fiddle around with 'traps' all U like but you don't even need that $hit if the space is no longer so 'resonant'. It's like sabotaging a flute by stuffing legos into it LOL
@@Deathrape2001 - Not quite an accurate analogy.
No, it's totally accurate. U R stuffing a room with various big furniture pieces to break up the shape. U R just contradicting because U R a weak stupid jakazz afraid 2 admit U wasted your $$$. Try the furniture thing out. U can get big furniture FREE (or close 2 it) on Craigslist 4 frax sake.
No audio system sounds better then the way the audio is recorded. Looking at the quality of a lot of studio equipment compared with the multi zeros audio stuff, is see myths growing.
A bit late to this discussion, but I think he's nuts on CIEMs. The Fiios (FH5/7) or super high end universals like the Solaris are just as big. And I'd bet if you weighed the Solaris against a comparable CIEM the custom would weigh much less. The great thing about a well fitted custom is that you don't feel it, you can press hard, and it doesn't pinch or hurt your ear. Bought my first pair a couple of years ago and wouldn't go back.
So I think a better question is given equivalent pre-processing stages, which has the potential to be better, analog or digital?
Steve, I'm from the DSP world, as in deep deep deep, for decades and reay i have an Analog rig along with Digital etc etc. I think your comment about DSP is not untrue but too simple. I think the best analogy is how you said how production is more important than whether it's A or D. Same with DSP, it's how it's used that is key and really, correcting transducers is it's real power, if done by a professional, someone who can derive convolution theory from 1st principles ;).
I thought his comments were kind. Digital sucks total AUDIO DEATH, & exactly ZERO of the digital recordings in my otherwise VAST music collection (3500 LP's, 300 CD's, 1000 cassettes & 100 open-reel tapes, 100 VHS-HiFi tapes recorded in glorious FM- Analog) come even REMOTELY close to the fidelity to source of an analog recording, no matter how badly done! Digital just DESTROYS any fidelity of sound; regardless of bit-depth, sampling rate, or whether it's DSD pulse-width modulated or plain ol' PCM pulse coded. MQA is just MQ3, from what I've heard so far of this, yet another, latest'n'greatest DIGITAL AUDIO FRAUD. Yet another, of soooo many, toooo many to count, of "breakthroughs" in digital audio CRAPNOLOGY. More bits & higher sampling rates does noticeably decrease the metallic graininess, but the utterly synthetic musical timbres, depressing lack of low-level sound & the resulting 2-D imaging & "airless" electronic synthesizer NOISE-YELL remains...So if I have room problems, or my speakers are boomy pieces of crap, I want ANOTHER layer of digital AUDIO DEATH processing to "correct" my poor speaker setup skills? My inane choice of crappy speakers? My dumb choice of listening room, or my lazy-ass unwillingness to use passive room treatment? Sure! Add more digital to my shitty stereo! PLEEZ!
guys I just bought an adamantium infused cables for my audio & video connection. I was told it would upgrade my Sanyo TV to output 16K resolution, and all my audio would be up sampled to where you can here a pin drop as if you had the ears of a bat
all for just $150K
I have just under $4,000 in my system and went to a high end dealer and their system stomped all over mine. The thing was though that they had over 12k into power cables not even getting into the system cost. Nice stuff just out of my price range. I won't even pretend, no matter how much I like my system, that it is even close to a "high" end system.
I should also state that I have around $400 in cabling etc getting power to my system.
Steve, you are by far the most interesting person to listen to,,,
Too funny Steve, I'm paying attention to you and I've gotten up 3 times to see who is honking outside.. lol.. I'm listening on my Swans nearfield and it in your back ground.. just thought it was funny..
I have my own method to keep cost down and still get perfect high end sound. I want clear sound but also hard cruel bass since I,m a fan of metal. So .. buy i.e klipsch rf 280 wich are reasonable cheap and deliver great sound.( In my case i boght Heco revolution 9.) If you are not happy with the sound just add an equalizer til youre happy with the range no matter what audiophiles might say 😉 And most important tip of all... Never listen to any other speakers. Stick to what you have . Without the possibility to compare with other speakers, there wont be any reason upgrade 😁
You must LOVE distortion.
@@tonys4396 Sometimes yes. It all depends on the type of music and the quality of the recordings. To only listen at all kind of music and recordings at a straight line thinking Its the " right" way is foolish to me
@@vildebill2000 any king of equalizers or tone controls add distortion. Unfortunately, the masses of asses who are now listening to music are buying surround sound equipment for music. I leave that to movies. The basics of audio reproduction is listen to it in stereo with no tone controls in the mix. Equalizers and tone controls went out in the 70;s on high end equipment.Unfortunately, it's coming back because the midfi heads make up most of the audio market. They want surround sound and equalizers. I find it pathetic.
good content and proper speaker placement is a large chunk of the battle.......
So glad on analog vs digital debate...really depends on the actual quality of the recording.....guess that is mastering? Not sure...but...i agree how the music was recorded, engineers taking the time to achieve best sound quality. Lol.....30 yrs ago, i used to search for cheap CDs of the classical genre to get into it more...man some of those recordings were terrible, same with cassettes....imho....quality overall is better than 30 yrs ago, but there are still clunker recordings on all formats. Dire Straits and the Stones come to mind as artists who care about recording quality, shows when u listen to recent albums....early 60's Stones albums not so much...Great discussion Steve!
Steve, what's your opinion of the Klipschorn speakers? I had a pair back in the 70's paired with a Pioneer turntable, Shure cartridge and Marantz 20/20 receiver which I sold after about 10 yrs.
Steve, as always , thanks for shedding light on some albums ( that are off the beatuloôen path (other than the Clapton/Melencamp /Davis). Two . questions
ABSOLUTELY a good sound is determined by a good recording, not whether it's analog or digital, or what kind of transfer is done.
Hey Steve, I have been following your channel fo about a year now, really enjoy your look on the audio world. I actually purchased a pair of maggie .7's because of your review. Also the fact that they are built 15 miles from my home, and the fact that our Audio Society of Minnesota club has a pair of 3.6's pushed me into trying them. I retired my DIY Cornscalla's to the garage. I started out playing the .7's with my PrimaLuna Prologue 4 tube amp. Which sounded great but after a couple of months started to sound a little limited. Then I dug out an old Yamaha P-2200 amp that I had been trying to sell, and man did that make the .7's open up with better soundstage and better detail. The bass also improved. I then plugged in a Rel Zero sup into the mix and really gave me the full range experience. What do you think about going to an Emotiva XPA-DR2, it's a class AD amp, can output up to 1K into 4 Ohms. Actually is there any chance you would review the XPA amp or even the XPA2-Gen3. Both are crazy good spec for the money, 1600 and 999. I know a lot of your followers would be interested in your opinion on Emotiva. Thanks
Hi Steve,
Please suggest a few well matched, well set up systems that are within the regular (ie not millionaire with dedicated 10000 sq ft listening room) audiophile's means. Like amp X with speakers Y.
Another myth similar to DSP would be the sub myth. Some swear by them, some despise them.
I had a system that was so realistic, noise police showed up with popcorn.
also full range drivers are so much better in my opinion. The zeniths I keep raving about can play up to 12-13Khz, and they only need a tweeter to accentuate the highs. The zenith runs with no crossover and the tweeter rolls off at around 14Khz. After that, they need a subwoofer, usually an open baffle one that runs off of a plate amp. I think having a single driver that covers as many frequencies as possible is the best. The zenith gives the best, being able to run down to 150-160 hz, and being able to play up to 13Khz while only requiring some accentuation on the very highs and very lows.
nick parkin
I'm not familiar with the Zeniths, I will have to look them up.
I am familiar with the full range driver concept from Gallo speakers (roundsounddotcom).
I have been fortunate enough to audition some of those at a friend's house and found them to be very nice indeed. : )
Edit: I just looked up the drivers you're talking about. Wow, *that* Zenith!
Ha-ha, very cool. : )
im telling you they sound better than anything you could imagine. They make every recording sound so different and have such a good timbre to the sound and they have incredible balance. I have one pair and one speaker has a small hole from a pin in the cone. I was lucky enough to snatch a mint condition pair for about $200. I just can't get over how good they sound! they don't sound like speakers at all they just sound like music.
nick parkin
I believe you, after having heard a similar thing in the Gallo's.
Full range speakers have the advantage of having no crossover, which always has a detrimental effect on the sound.
The other advantage to your Zeniths is running them open baffle. This somewhat gets around the cabinet diffraction of the sound waves coming from the drivers.
The Gallo speakers I keep talking about use a spherical enclosure to eliminate diffraction.
These two things provide a huge improvement in naturalness of sound, making the speaker much more open and transparent, much like a flat panel speaker.
So yes, it is not your imagination; they really do sound that good! :D
I'd love to hear 'em.
It's a pitty there aren't more full-range speakers out there. I have a pair of "4 Pyle that has a whizzer cone in it, and it doesn't sound half bad. People love to hate on Pyle but the speakers have the fundamentals right. It's good enough for Prologic type surround sound, which was what I was using it for.
On the other hand, 2-ways with silk tweeters can be like laser-beams, and I don't care for that effect. I want better dispersion.
To comment on the part where you said room correction can sometimes sound worse. I think in my case it was. I use Denon receiver and used Audessey's room correction. I always feel that the system sounds better without the room correction on that it does with it on. Correction often masked a lot of the sound that I would pleasantly hear with it off. Anyway, that was just my humble experience.
When I want to hear great audio, I invite some friends over, pickup my guitar, banjo, saxophone, mandolin, or fiddle, and we play some music together.
Then you're missing the whole point of high end audio! It's not about the music, it's about the $$$ spent on the equipment! Hell, it could all just be empty metal and wooden boxes as it won't be listened to anyway. It's all about satisfying the OCD urges and having status symbols.
That’s fine but you aren’t listening to anyone else’s music so whilst I am sure it’s a great experience it is only one of many possible ones. I played in bands for years and of course the soundstage a musician gets is very different from the audience
@@russellhamner4898 Do you honestly believe that ?????
I find the MTM or the WTW sound the best,,but ive always loved the subwoofer from home theater since i tried one in the early 90s. What do you think?
Steve that sneeze needs to be remastered so we can enjoy it even more
Here is something to think about. The amplifier that is driving the cutter to make the mother stamper for vinyl is the last link in the chain. SO...the MOST you can hope to achieve in vinyl is the final sound characteristic of that amp. That is why digital ( IF the master tape is was originally analog then remastered ) is better. Moving coil cartridges sound so nice becauce they exaggerate the high frequencies that is why they sound "sweet" Digital IS better than analog but only if it is done RIGHT
Exactly.
Not better. Ever. You started with analog. So you cannot get “better” by switching to digital. It’s just different.
Right. That's like saying oranges are objectively better than apples because you prefer it's flavor. Preferring one of two different things does not make it objectively better. Vinyl has pleasant distortion and is incredibly mid-centric with noticeably less bass and highs making it sound overall very warm, while digital is sharper, more accurate and neutral, and detailed.
DeltaWolf X well, I’m not sure I agree with that either. Who gets to decide what “accuracy” is?
I have the Eva Cassidy set of her entire live performance at Blues Alley on both vinyl and CD. The vinyl has more depth, nuance, texture. It moves me emotionally. The CD feels precise, but it doesn’t feel like a real person in space. It sounds great, but it doesn’t feel “complete”.
The tables are VPI HW MK IV for the Vinyl, a Rega Planet for the CD.
Arm is a Sumiko MMT. Cartridge, the Koetsu Onyx.
For good vinyl releases, the technician take those effects into mind and compensate for them during the mastering process.
Vinyl has other quirks as well, which the sound technicians have to work around, and you can argue that it is these limitations that give classic albums their unique characteristic sound. These characteristics are difficult to recreate for a digital release, as you now have to digitally recreate both the limitations and the workarounds to achieve the same sound.
Hence most music intentionally produced for digital formats strive for a completely different sound than music produced intentionally for vinyl. When people complain, it's usually this "sound" they have strong preferences about.
I guess I'm confused about what "blowing one's mind" entails. I have a very modest system, technics TT, technics amp and a pair of AR-2axs. My listening room is not ideal but not bad. I can lean back in my chair and listen to music for hours. I hear brushes on cymbals I hear the plucking of a bass I hear the breath of the singer. It sounds great. I'm not sure what I am missing that could justify spending 10s or 100s of thousands of dollars on audio equipment. And BTW I could probably afford a $10,000 system if I prioritized it. But my $750 system sounds great and I really don't foresee upgrading it just to be disappointed.
Steve is my new audio guru.
at the end of the day how good your hearing is the best guide post for purchasing gear or expecting great sound in other words have your hearing tested.thanks steve great video
I thumbs up your videos before I even listen to em my man!
DSP can't correct a room resonance. In your scenario, a 110Hz resonance can be mitigated with trapping in the places where that frequency node exists. Simply reducing the frequency via DSP might make it sound better in that particular spot, but it will sound deficient elsewhere in the room. If you use DSP to play with the timing to induce cancelation of that frequency you'll end up with all kinds of smeary phase issues. Using DSP to correct for a bad room only results in compromised audio in a compromised room. DSP has its place in accounting for timing differences caused by asymmetry of the speakers' locations or uneven speaker frequency response, but you should be able to correct for that by buying better speakers and moving the speakers to where they ought to be in the first place. Unless the room can support critical listening all the money and DSP in the world won't fix it. I have three times as money invested in the design and construction of my listening room than I have in gear, and as much as I love my equipment, the room is the only thing that makes it possible to enjoy it.
Spot on. I have a reasonable pair of active speakers I designed and built myself. Not high end but OK. In our rather lively sounding dining room they are a bit coloured but you get used to it. Then one day I took them into the TV room (carpets, sofas and thick curtains) and hitched them up to watch a movie (La La Land I think) They sounded incredible, I couldn't believe they were the same speakers! Tight bass, rock solid image.
Hi Steve, I would like to delve a little into your analog vs digital statement. Does that extend to the recording medium? When I was younger and I played with a 2" Studer Revox tape recorder, we would record he drums and then mix the 12 tracks down to 2, left and right, and you would lose 16 to 20 percent of your signal due to analog signal loss. When using digital however, it is 90db in and 90db out. That was a breath of fresh air in the studio. I remember old school studio engineers bright eyed and bushy tailed over the possibilities ;-)