Archive through October 20, 2004

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1648
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 12:49 am:

jan:

"There seems to be no argument as to whether mc is good for you IF you are happy with the sound mc produces. As Kegger has stated in his preference for mc, if it sounds good to him that is all that matters to him. I don't remember anyone raising serious objections to that idea. If that was all we had to agree upon then this thread could have logically stopped about six months ago."

agreed and i also want to see multichannel get better.
maybe more channels!

the point that i keep trying to make is when people say that "multi
channel is not worth it because it does nothing for "me""!

then I point out how many people like the format and appreciate what it is.

I personally have seen multichannel grow and improve in the last
3 years more then it has for the last 50. so i feel it's on the
right track. and will only improve, but Right now think it's pretty dam good!

FOR ME!

so your probably right this debate can stop because there realy is
no longer a need!

we all know where that state of multichannel is and what each other
think about it.

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1649
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 12:56 am:

keep hammering that someone doesn't like multicahannel or it's not done right.

then the others that say they like it and have no
problems with center
channels or rear speakers, your right gets us nowhere!

so what should we do now?
keep stating our oppinions over and over?
keep telling each other i like it or i don't?

you got me!

any suggestions?

John A.

Gold Member

Username: John_a

Post Number: 2301
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:42 am:

Jan wrote Maybe John will pick up on this and raise a few cockles before I get back.

Just to say I agree. The claims made by sections of the industry have often been absurd. Now, some of the claims made for multichannel are absurd, and we know we are being offered snake-oil.

The bottom line in all this, in my opinion, is this, whether we a discussing Vivid or multichannel, or Iraq.

"Whom can we trust?" Ourselves. Especially not advertisers, nor politicians - everything they say is for a reason, often hidden, and we know they can and do lie if they think they can get away with it. When they do, it is sometime amusing to see how they have hidden their tracks, sometimes tragic.

"How can we know whether something is snake-oil, or if it really will work?" By trying it, thinking about it, making sure things are as they seem, and we are not fooling ourselves. There is a queue of people asking us to do that, from disc enhancements ("we know they alter the molecular structure etc") to Middle-East enhancements ("we have seen overwhelming evidence for WMDs, poised, ready to strike in 45 minutes").

Lary writes "Hope you understand that difference, and respect my more "casual" approach to life and its aspects regarding Stereo/HiFi/Audiophilia."

Of course, Larry. It sounds like you've earned it. But that may go for a lot of people who still can't afford it. Write some more on music, please. I loved the Santa Fe stories from some months ago.

But then, Ojo writes (and I agree with him on pretty well everything as far as I can see) What you hear is just as valid as what the next person does.

And my reply is a question.

What, then, do we do when the next person says that what he hears is not what we hear?

Is he lying? Is he mistaken? Are we lying? Are we mistaken? Are we all really talking about the same thing?

"Yes, we are all entitled to our point of view" is not good enough if we want to know how things really are. And action depends on that, whether it is spending $45 on some vivid or invading Iraq.

I'll tell you who I do NOT trust. People who make claims and then try to hide the details and the evidence, and will not allow questions. They have something to hide. Simple as that.

Also, a man who hath not music in his soul....

So let's call it truce, if you like, and then give the only truthful reply to questions on vivid and multichannel: "I don't know". That's an honourable position. It is all we can say on most things.

But I still have this feeling it is more interesting, and fun, to try to find out. Probably safer, too, in the long run. Not to mention cheaper.

Cheers. I cannot contribute much on wines, Wales is not famous for its vineyards, though the Romans clearly has some there (see "global warming").

But keep posting, friends. I promise to turn down the self-importance, and crack a few jokes. As Jan points out, Asimo, for one, will probably not be amused, and report me to admin.

Silver Member

Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 902
Registered: Aug-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:54 am:

Yes I have a suggestion Kegger. Lets just give it up. It doesn't matter a hoot what we say. We may as well keep flappin our lips just to make wind. For example. I made the comment that I didn't think I heard these "ghosts" unless they were sounds necessary for effects for when effects were the point. But Jan just come back with:

"Why make a recording that captures the me/there/them/here sound when a DSOTM will sell more copies?"

So to Jan:

THEY DO - or close as the engineers capabilites as far as I'm concerned because I've only heard about two dozen out of about four thousand or more recordings. So it's quite conceivable there are hundreds upon hundreds that will fit your requirements - it's JUST something that's not all that important to people like Kegger and myself to want to evaluate for others who wish to maintain an opposition to MC and keep ignoring anything anyone states in response to their damn continuing silly us/them, we/there, you/here, I'm/fed-up, this is way it should be done crap.

If you ever looked at the catalogues, you'd see that the majority of available recordings would reflect on the tastes of people like John, Asimo, Class 1, Larry R, and yourself etc. The effect laden recordings like DSOTM are very few. So please get off it for Pete's sake!

So Kegger, enjoy the music for what it is to you and I'll be doing the same. In fact much more of that and less of this.

Cheers

John A.

Gold Member

Username: John_a

Post Number: 2302
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 02:21 am:

MR,

Great. I can see the strong appeal of DSOTM to "anything goes"; there wasn't an anywhere to be. Nothing wrong with that, of course. From the songs, I imagine PF were not exactly the most laid-back bunch of guys, themselves, at that time. That's one of the reasons I like it. Ummagumma, too, is tremendous. Careful with that axe, Eugene.

Jan,

Knowing your view on censorship and so on, this is a tough request.

As co-partner-in-crime in instigating this fun thread, which I did warn you would "run and run", I now appeal to you to join with me in declaring one subject completely unsuitable, and off-topic.

This subject is the effectiveness of vivid in the new application which you and Larry have discovered. If I were you, I would send these findings to vivid dot com, instead; I am sure they will be most interested.

Silver Member

Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 903
Registered: Aug-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 02:40 am:

And perish the thought that some of the record companies make a little money - even if it takes a few recordings like DSOTM to get people to understand what MC is capable of. OOOOOOOOOOhhh it's a big conspiracy. The thing is that most are pushing these formats in the name of putting the listeners closer to the performers or performance - just like you want see?. It's not an idea to rip off the consumer - they are not turning big profits from it yet, but it is making the bigger RC companies sit up and take notice (no not necessarilly Catholic companies). I for one hope they all make a massive fortune eventually.

That's it!

So long!

Bye Bye!

No more . . . . . . sailin'!

Silver Member

Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 904
Registered: Aug-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 02:45 am:

Sorry John,

We crossed over posting - the target was J.V.

Larry R

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 07:01 am:

Thoughts whilst tending sheep (instead of counting them) As a light-to-almost-non sleeper, I oft ponder the wonders of this forum and its give-and-take in the dark hours.
Jan - how dare you make lurid suggestions as to what my wife and I REALLY do with Vivid! It's none of your danged business, guy! I mean, reeaalllyyyy! You put Vivid where you want, and we'll put it (grin) where we want, OK? (double grin) But yes, it is DESIGNED to go on CDs!!!
Then I began to wonder - are there more uses for Vivid than meets the eye? Eh? Hmmm. . .
No - if Vivid makes things more transparent. . .fahgedaboudit!!!!!
John A. - too bad that you are not in a cultural position to claim some vintage or label as being "part of my history." Here's Jan, with Italian blood oozing chianti, and My Rantz, whose blood is fortified with shiraz - and me, with family history of chardonnay and bordeaux. Pity the soul whose lineage does not bear witness to the Noble Grape! Sigh. Poor John A. . . . . .
I love wine, but not beer. Kegger loves beer, but maybe not wine so much. Aha! Fight brewing here! (pun intended) The same with 2-ch and multi-ch sound. I read and read and read until my head spins, but I feel that few opinions have been or are being changed. Am I right in this view?
I'd think the over-used phrase: "to each his/her own" more than applies here.
OK - N O M O R E about Vivid from me until Jan gets his "Care package" and tries out the stuff for himself - Jan, you should get it by Thursday or Friday.
BTW - in reviewing this forum, whatever happened to Aninymuss? I read that he was going to "disappear off the radar," and I guess he meant it. Oh, well. . . I was hoping to hear more about the C4-C5 controversy. As a sometimes-editor of articles I find it helpful to know about such esoteric things. So step in here, Rick, and clear this up? IS there C5? Or not.
Classical 1, I hope to join you soon in an informal CD-enhancer test. I hope that your Siesta Key home was untouched by the hurricanes. We have friends in Sarasota, and their house suffered minor damage, though they lost a couple of trees and their backyard "garden shed."
Merri and I love Siesta Key - and have often driven out there on days when we "stay over" for the opera. Are you a fan, by the way? Always looking for fellow travelers, music-wise.
We are hoping to make this year's "adventure" a trip to London - but now Mer has two teeth that need crowns, and at $950 apiece, they rather drastically cut into our vacation "hope-chest." Sigh. Is that what they really mean when they refer to growing older as the "golden" years? Hmmm. . .gold crowns, indeed!
Have any of you seen/heard the DVD-video of Mozart's Requiem? The one with Solti, et al. Reading some ravey comments. . .
Which one of you was in San Francisco for the Mahler II performance/recording? Envy you that. Looking forward to the SACD!
Too bad about SACDude - he must live in Chicago's "Hyde Park" area - down by the University of Chicago. A beautiful old part of town, but heavy with crime, as it is nearly surrounded by ghetto-land. If you are reading this, SACDude, I wish you good luck, and hope you find happiness in Colorado. Merri and I have friends in the 'burbs there. Just don't move into the Northeast part of town - you'll find same-oh problems to what you now have.
Well, Mer is just getting up to ready herself for teaching a sculpture class - so I'm away for now. It is "ciao," isn't it, Jan?

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 440
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 08:48 am:

AL,

I listened to DSOTM in hi-res stereo and the results....withheld as it appears some are weary of the debate.

In regards to the questions about Hotel California, I will test that today. When I first played HC in stereo, I did so with only the player set to stereo and it seemed to be missing something. But, when I started HC with the video playing, I found a selection for a stereo track in the menu. When it was selected in that manner, the sound was much fuller. In your tests, did you select the stereo track from the DVD-A menu?
Hopefully, that's not an insulting question. I only ask it because it took me a couple of months to figure out I could select that from the menu. I'm still getting used to the idea of looking at a TV screen when I put on a music disc. lol.

JohnA,

I ordered both Porgy & Bess and Rattle/Mahler #5 DVD's. Instead of shopping locally, I remembered I had a gift card to Barnes & Noble so I used it to order online (the local store doesn't stock music just books.)

Kegger,

I'm 8 points behind going into tonight's MNF. Should I start Isaac Bruce or Michael Clayton at WR? Bruce has advantage of home game but going against tough pass defense (and being secondary target after Holt). Clayton has advantage of soft pass defense (and being primary target) but playing on road in STL dome. If I win, my team will be 5-1 and retain sole possession of first place (much to chagrin of the guys in the league.) Losing, will drop me into a tie for first.

LarryR,

Welcome back!

MR and Kegger,

From my perspective, it seems Jan is stating his stereo preference without raising absolutes about the validity of MC. To my knowledge, he has never told anyone they are "wrong" about MC but he does offer up compelling questions - which few seem to want to hear let alone answer. To me, these questions are just part of the debate and are not an indictment or judgement of anyone who prefers MC. But, it seems to be received that way when comments such as, " keep ignoring anything anyone states in response to their damn continuing silly us/them, we/there, you/here, I'm/fed-up, this is way it should be done crap" are made.

Hopefully, this will come across in the spirit it is intended. It's not an attack on anyone. Just an observation that both sides have an opinion and it is not necessary to dismiss one side by accusing them of ignoring your viewpoints. Obviously, there's no right or wrong position but there can be lively debate. Without it, this thread will have run its course.

Have a good day, everyone!

Larry R

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 11:35 am:

Ghia - thanks for the welcome - I need all the kudos I can get these days! Retirement is not as easy as one might imagine.
I've GOT to ask a couple of questions here. First, do you really experience that much of a difference with the McIntosh amps? I ask because my doctor-friend has not one, but two listening/viewing areas - and in the second (a closed room, unlike the living room) he has a setup with McIntosh amps. He prefers that I keep "hands off" when he's not here - so I do. (mostly) If the Macs are that much better, I look forward to his return, and our forays into listening/viewing in his "special room."
Second - you have mentioned several times about your speaker-changing. Have you decided that one brand does better than the other - main speakers I'm talking about, not surround. I'm VERY partial to B & W and Kef - so I admit a bias, though I can't afford the B & W 705s I really, really want!
Third - with the Macs, I assume (maybe I didn't read as much as I should have) that you listen in 2-channel with them? I don't know much about them, other than to bow down to them (!) My doctor-friend has three of them in his "special" room - powering various sets of speakers - one amp for mains - second for mid-room - third for back-wall surrounds. He has 12 built-in speakers in the room - and it is simply overpowering when he puts on multi-channel movies such as "Master and Commander."
As I recall, you have a very "classy" home, and from what you have posted, the combination of sound and sight must be very calming (alternately exciting?) and enjoyable.
As to my take on the multi vs. 2-ch - well, I usually listen to music in 2-ch, and watch movies in surround. Only my choice, and certainly not for everyone. My wife, Merri, agrees, and says she finds the surround music "awkward." Never felt that way myself - just like the ambiance of good ole 2-channel.
Of course, I have barely-acceptable Polk RTi6 speakers - upper mid-range is rather harsh and congested, but until I can afford the B & Ws, I struggle along.
Hope all is well with you "working person." Just remember, age creeps up, and you'll be retired before you know it. Save, save, save, save - repeat after me now. (GRIN)

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1651
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 12:16 pm:

ghia I would have to start bruce!

I'm down by 2 going into tonight and I've got holt.

also ghia when I stated:

"keep hammering that someone doesn't like multicahannel or it's not done right.

then the others that say they like it and have no
problems with center
channels or rear speakers, your right gets us nowhere!

so what should we do now?
keep stating our oppinions over and over?
keep telling each other i like it or i don't?

you got me!

any suggestions?

so your probably right this debate can stop because there realy is
no longer a need!

we all know where the state of multichannel is and what each other
think about it."

was not an attack on jan but actually more of a your right.

this going back and fourth as we've done now for "how many months"

hasn't gotten us anywhere, so do we really need to continue? is valid!

personally I see no point. we either move on or well hate to say it
but let the thread fizzle.

I don't think we need to let the thread fizzle but we need new topics.

what those might be I don't know at this point.

but rehashing something that's been so hashed is pointless
and weary!

If you can't understand enough about 2 channel versus m.c by
now you probably never will.
"not meaning you but anyone"

have you tried the mac as an amp in your surround setup yet?

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 442
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 12:38 pm:

Kegger,

All good points. In fact, after rereading some of your and MR's previous posts, it appears my statement in the 8:48a post was in error: ....which few seem to want to hear let alone answer. My apologies for that.

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 443
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 12:39 pm:

LR,

I'm working on a response to your questions but need to run a few errands. Will have something for you later today.

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 444
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 12:43 pm:

Kegger,

How is your all tube surround coming along?

No, I have not tried the Mac in the surround yet. I have vacation time this week (being spent at home) so I may try it out. I'm concerned that the setup may "color" the output. The one thing I know for certain is I've got to get all this equipment off my living room floor and soon! lol

J. Vigne

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:06 pm:

I, for one, would be interested in Ghia's report on DSOTM. I don't think this thread has to die but just move on. We had some input from several people (other than the regulars) that wanted to discuss the mc/2 debate but then never gave any input. If those folks are out there please give a response to the issue. New ideas may bring forth new information. As is I can only assume that my dinner suggestions finally made all others move on to which subwoofer cable is the best when I have the volume set at 9 on my reciever; and what happens if I turn it to 10? Any suggestions would be appreciated. Hey, I've waited 10 minutes and nobody's answered!!!

I don't know about you guys but I would rather rehash suasage before I got into that.

I didn't see any answers to my question about speaker placement that told me what you are doing to accomodate the different set ups that are suggested by the various formats and manufacturers. How do you all feel about the variablity of the expectations? Were you aware of them? Do you just ignore the suggestions? Or don't you own any Telarc or Chesky discs? Am I incorrect that the suggested set up for SACD and DVD-A is different that the set up for DD or DTS, especially when running a 6.1 or 7.1 system?

Any suggestioms would be appreciated.

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1652
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:06 pm:

ghia I'm cool with your responses and it let me clarify what I meant.

________________________________________
tube surround:

I'm still wotking on the last amp.
I just bought a b&k ref. 30 prepro. they were $2000 when new
and this one has the ref 31 upgrades which has to be sent to b&k for
a $500 charge. intails new processor and updated software.
so it would cost about $2500, I got it from audiogon for $955 shipped.
should be here by friday. If I get my other amp done
I'll have to try and get the system up over the weekend.
the other cool thing about the ref 31 upgrade is the blue readout, so
it matches all my amp lights I'm changing to blue.
---------------------------------------------------
I'm very interested in your impressions of the mac in the surround.
I think you will be pleasently surprised.
and yes get that stuff off the floor! lol

J. Vigne

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:06 pm:

J. Vigne

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:08 pm:

Kegger - You messed with my brilliance once again!

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1653
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:28 pm:

jan:

"I didn't see any answers to my question about speaker placement that told me what you are doing to accomodate the different set ups that are suggested by the various formats and manufacturers. How do you all feel about the variablity of the expectations? Were you aware of them? Do you just ignore the suggestions? Or don't you own any Telarc or Chesky discs? Am I incorrect that the suggested set up for SACD and DVD-A is different that the set up for DD or DTS, especially when running a 6.1 or 7.1 system? "

I've stated before what my placemeant is for speakers
and find it works very very well for movies and music.

I run 7.1 for both movies and mc music.
both my speaker placemeant and reciever connections have been stated before
but i will give a quick rehash.

I run a pair of splitters from the rear output of my universal player
because my reciever has 7.1 input not just 5.1

now my front speakers are slightly closer to me then my center.

my surrounds are just slightly "did I mention slightly"
behind me and out to the sides.

Then my rears are spread apart about 4.5 feet near the back wall.

I play all my movies and my mc music in 7.1.

I have tried many different speaker placemeants and find this works
best for me no matter what I play. and I have both Telarc and Chesky discs!

so I have no problem playing any source without having to move speakers.

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1655
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:32 pm:

jan:

what is meant by?

"Kegger - You messed with my brilliance once again! "

you've lost me.

J. Vigne

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:44 pm:

It wasn't your problem, the forum just posted my last response twice and split the responses. It was your post that got in between and took the forum several minutes to get it all sorted out. I just thought I'd assign blame to somebody, though, and you were the closest I could find.

Just a question on your listening, Kegger, why do you ignore Telarc/Chesky suggestions for placement? Have you ever tried their connections?

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 445
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:50 pm:

LR,

do you really experience that much of a difference with the McIntosh amps?

In my experience, yes. This is all subjective, of course. I knew from first listen that something almost magical was happening. The music took on a naturalness I never realized was missing before. The depth of the soundstage was astounding. I remember making a post about feeling as if I could walk between the piano, guitar and bass on an India Arie recording - if only I could see them. That's a concept I never understood before the Mac. The effect was so powerful, that the NAD amp/surround system remained unused for over a month. For me, there's no turning back and, if MC is to be a part of my future, it will have to be powered by a Mac - if I can afford it. I cannot afford a new Mac so will have to keep an eye out for used equipment that will serve the purpose.

Speakers...Have you decided that one brand does better than the other...

It's been awhile since the B&W's were hooked to the NAD. When I first got the NAD & MA's, the MA's were the clear preference. But, with the Mac, the B&W's have taken over as the preferred speakers. This adds to my dilemma since the MA's would have to be used as MC speakers (since I have an MA center) if I add the Mac into the surround system instead of running as a separate system. Given this plus the space limitations in the living room (for both) I suspect I'll end up keeping the Mac in a different room as a strictly stereo only system. Just need to decide which room I want to spend the most time in. lol I believe I'm experiencing a little analysis paralysis. :-)

For your musical preferences, the B&W's would be perfect. I've never heard Kef speakers so can't speak about them but I know John has a very favourable opinion of them. Another speaker you may want to consider, is Spendor s3/5. Rick has been blown away by them and everything I read indicates they have incredible imaging and voice presentation. Like B&W, they are British. A used pair can be had for $600-700.

BTW, over the weekend, Mr B and I paid a visit to the audio salon....had to drag him along kicking and screaming...hehehe....anyway, we heard an $8k B&W speaker (believe it was the 802 model) paired with a $5k Mac amp (400 watts x 2) and a $15k Mac CD w/ external Mac DAC - playing Steely Dan (!) - and it was pretty incredible. With temptations like this, it's hard to "save, save, save, save" for retirement! At least, in this case, I know it is unobtainable and can focus on what I have and make "adjustments" to it within economic reason.

with the Macs, I assume (maybe I didn't read as much as I should have) that you listen in 2-channel with them?

Yes, in my case, I do. My amp is about 25 years old so surround isn't an option - but, you can run 3 pairs of speakers off it! But, Mac has 6 and 7 channel amps. At the audio salon, the 7 channel amp (200 watts per channel) was $7k and you could hook up a $6k Mac surround processor to it that would add DD, DTS, etc. Or, you could let your source player provide the MC processing and save a little money by adding a $3.5k 6 channel preamp instead of the surround processor. If you wanted to save even more money you could go the A/V receive route instead of the amp/processor route. They have a $6k A/V 7.1 receiver (140 watts x7) that would do the MC trick. See how flexible this is? lol. It would be nice to be able to afford any of those options.

Just to give you a little perspective, my used MA6200 amp cost $750 (including shipping - but excluding the fallout from the first damaged amp fiasco) so that's the only reason I was able to afford to get into the Mac arena.

When you go to your doctor friend's "special room" be sure to take Merri with you! It will be an aural treat for both of you!

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 446
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:52 pm:

Good lord! Kegger and JV have been busy - and I still haven't run my errands. Must do that and will come back soon to see what's going on!

You guys are the best! All of you!

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1656
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 02:05 pm:

jan the only speaker placemeant I haven't tried is a height channel.
"my ceiling in the basement is only 7.5 feet"

I have put speakers everwhere,recomended and non recomended.
what I have now seems to better then anything else i've tried.

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1657
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 03:49 pm:

ghia: if you remember we both agreed at one time on our sound aproval.

"do you really experience that much of a difference with the McIntosh amps?

In my experience, yes. This is all subjective, of course. I knew from first listen that something almost magical was happening. The music took on a naturalness I never realized was missing before. The depth of the soundstage was astounding. I remember making a post about feeling as if I could walk between the piano, guitar and bass on an India Arie recording - if only I could see them. That's a concept I never understood before the Mac"

where you experienced it with a mac and I with tubes.

so my guess would be it's not neccasarily a mac thing but what
some of the older technology can offer to the sound of music that newer designs seem to lack.

obviously there are newer tube units but the tech is basically
the same. the tubes and the transformers are the heart of the amp
then the resistors and caps top it off.

I find it interesting that if output transformers can make a difference
in sound for the good that noone seems to use them anymore
except in tube equipment.

Larry R

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 04:18 pm:

Ghia - thank you so much for your comprehensive answers - appreciated, fer shore.
Yes, I did take Mer with me when my friend last "performed" several movies. Poor Mer actually got frightened and asked him to turn down the sound in the Master and Commander "big storm" scene - she was truly scared! But please remember, for those of you whom I've told the tale, Merri and I once took off in an ill-equipped sailboat with an ill-equipped captain and an ill-equipped crew (us) and "drove" right into a four-day storm that left poor Mer so seasick she couldn't move, left the captain drunk, left the boat in tatters, and left me with the scare of my life! 12-foot waves are nothing to mess around with!
So - the storm scene was all too real for Mer. I'd never heard surround sound like that - and coupled with a 6-foot screen, well, it WAS terrifying!
Well, lady, you're talkin' way, way over my head when you refer to B & W 802s (the "Nautilus" I think they're called?) and all the up-scale Macs. Slobber slobber and all that stuff when I see or hear equipment such as that! I'm very happy for you that you found affordable equipment that you desired, and that it is working out so well for you! OK - save, save later! (GRIN)

Jan V. - "the package is in the mail."

Kegger - I applaud you for all of your incredibly hard work on those amps, etc. - long ago I dabbled in such things, but have now settled in with "geezer gear" which I hook up, smile, and turn a few knobs. Probably never get the kind of sound you enjoy - but then I have an "alternate lifestyle" which doesn't hinder you, my friend. It's called "marriage," and while I recommend it, it does tend to put a damper on whole-house tinkering! (grin)

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1658
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 04:29 pm:

lar agreed!

I got yu buddy.

J. Vigne

Unregistered guest

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 04:45 pm:

Kegger - Just in case you didn't know, Mac still uses output autoformers on most of their equipment. The integrated and reciever are the only Macs that don't have output transformers. And, of course, Mac is making tube gear again.

Gold Member

Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1659
Registered: Dec-03

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 05:00 pm:

jan i knew that the newer recievers didn't but i thought that the amps
"multi channel anyway" didn't either!

have you looked at the multichannel amps?

and do you know of anyone else using them?

Ojophile

Bronze Member

Username: Ojophile

Toronto, ON

Post Number: 85
Registered: Jun-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 06:18 pm:

Interesting article from AudioEnz magazine.

http://www.audioenz.co.nz/2004/archive_mybackpages.shtml

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 447
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 06:45 pm:

I'm back from my errands. The car insurance is paid, Jan's gauge is in the hands of the USPS, got a new vacuum (a British one that never loses suction), bought some new American made socks, ate some quasi-Mexican food and picked up some tunes and even a couple of movies.

First, the tunes. I picked up the DVD-A and the SACD of Steely Dan's "Gaucho. So, will proceed to do the following tests:

- DVD-A stereo vs SACD stereo on the Mac paired with Monitor Audio speakers
- DVD-A surround vs SACD surround on the NAD pair with Monitor Audio speakers

Additionally, I'm going to retest DSOTM in stereo vs surround. My recent stereo listening was very positive and I came away feeling that no value was lost in stereo vs MC (as opposed to the value lost with say the Eagles or Beck in same test.) However, it has been a couple of months since I last listened to DSOTM in MC so maybe I've forgotten what it offered. Hence the retest.

Now, the purpose of this is not to put forth some argument of which is "best". Merely to offer some observations on what each has to offer and which I preferred.

I also picked up SACD recording of Atlanta Symphony performing Vaughn Williams "A Sea Symphony". This is a Telarc CD produced "exclusively from DSD masters made during the recording sessions...."

For the movies, I picked up M&C and Pirates of the Caribbean. Hmmm....there seems to be a theme going on here. Kegger, can you believe I have only watched one film since setting up the surround system? That was the "Dark Side of the Rainbow" pairing of "Wizard of Oz" and DSOTM. Not sure when the movies will be watched. Will probably wait until Mr B is over here.

LR,

Wow! That's a harrowing sailing story. The only time I've been on a sailboat was in Nantucket. We were supposed to go out into the Atlantic. But, 3 ft waves in the harbor made the captain turn back. Doesn't sound like much but you can get tossed about pretty well in that small of a wave.

Kegger,

I, too, admire what you are building. It sounds like you got a great deal on the B&K preamp. It also sounds like you are entering the home stretch. Will you kick back after all is said and done? Or will there be other pursuits?

BTW...I may regret it but I'm starting Clayton. I just have a feeling STL's D will not be strong against the pass. And, if I'm wrong and lose the game...well life goes on.

Silver Member

Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 906
Registered: Aug-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 07:06 pm:

Jan stated:

"I didn't see any answers to my question about speaker placement that told me what you are doing to accomodate the different set ups that are suggested by the various formats and manufacturers. How do you all feel about the variablity of the expectations? Were you aware of them? Do you just ignore the suggestions? Or don't you own any Telarc or Chesky discs? Am I incorrect that the suggested set up for SACD and DVD-A is different that the set up for DD or DTS, especially when running a 6.1 or 7.1 system? "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------

From Sunday, October 17, 2004 - 06:08 pm:

"And I do think the quality of speakers/source/amplfication would make a difference. Same with speaker placement, but that applies to stereo also. My set up is somewhere between the ideal for HT and MC and I find that's okay. I have not spent enough days, weeks, or months to ascertain whether there is "the" magic setting. I'm happy with the status quo of our entertainment room"

More info:

I don't have any Telarc or Chesky discs but the Denon 2900 has a different filter/setting for playing the Chesky discs.

SACD info suggest all speakers should be full range of the same type/style and placed on an invisible circle with the mains and center on the forward arc and the rear on the hind arc of the circle. Maybe, but I don't think it suffers if you have reasonably good mains, center and rears. Tiny rears that might be okay for HT imo, will not cut it with MC music. As for the circle set-up, that depends on the room whether that is viable or not, but at least the forward arc setting can usually be accommodated if not the rears somewhat close to the suggested position. The circle set-up in our room is pear shaped with the wider arc at the front.

The loudness levels for HT the rears are usually set at a few DB's lower than the mains and center. For hi-rez formats they should be set the same all round. and that I absolutely agree with. And at risk of flame throwing, I use the SPL meter - it's surpising how innacurate the ears can be with set-up tones and the difference the correct setting make.

Silver Member

Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 907
Registered: Aug-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 07:16 pm:

Ghia,

I'm glad you got both versions of Gaucho. I promised John A I would do the same if I could find a DVD-A version and do the comparison. You saved me the money. Will look forward to your assessment. And turn it up - it's an excellent album - formats aside.

Cheers

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 448
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 07:49 pm:

Ojo,

Thanks for that link. An interesting perspective, no doubt. It is easy to get caught up in what's delivering the music (and how) and lose touch with the experience of the music. I think that is what was so inspiring to me about the Mac. For the first month, I literally did not do anything more than listen to music. No thoughts about tweaks, no thoughts about comparing formats, etc. It's only been in the past week that I've started doing comparisons and that's mainly out of curiosity as well as trying to determine whether I could actually chuck the surround system to go to a simple stereo setup. At one point, I was literally ready to sell the NAD and the MA's. So, this is an effort, in part, to determine if that is a dumb, short-sighted decision - or - if it is a smart move to "simplify". Not to imply that anyone with a MC system is living with too much complexity (?). I just have to determine do I really need more than one system?

Along the lines of the thoughts the article's author shared, there are a few childhood memories I have in regards to music's role in my life:

- I remember my first sytem, an all-in one 8-track, radio, turntable with speakers (the original boom box?) that Santa brought me. My mother recently sent me a photo of me with that system. My favorite 8-tracks? John Denver, the Carpenters, Sonny & Cher....

- Eight tracks were also my first exposure to "downloading". There was a local record store that created its own 8-tracks with 10-12 hit songs by various artists and sold 'em for $2.50 each. Why be forced to buy a whole tape of songs by a single artist when you only like the single? lol. Illegal? Highly. This particular store was also a head shop (which I didn't understand) and I remember being highly intrigued by the velvet blacklight posters of na-ked negro women.

- When I was even younger, I had one of those portable record players and have recollections of playing 45's at my cousin's house.

- Sometimes, I recall the fun I had riding with my best friend and her sister and her mother in her dad's Chevy pickup truck and singing along with the AM radio songs like "Take This Job and Shove It" and "The Devil Went Down to Georgia"....

- My first drive-in movie without the parents was to see a double-billing that included "The Rose", a music oriented movie. Five of us in a t-top Trans-Am. Perfect summer evening. I don't remember the other film but was blown away by Bette Midler and "The Rose" - this was my first R-rated film too. Even today, I can still recall the monologue leading into the "When A Man Loves A Woman" even though it's been years since I last saw the movie.

- I remember evenings sitting in the dark in my bedroom at an open window with a cool breeze blowing in, and "The Doors" spinning in the background.

- I remember my friend Mark, the drummer, who loaned me jazz albums that first introduced me to artists like John Coltrane and Thelonius Monk. I also listened to those in the dark in my bedroom at an open window with a cool breeze blowing in.

- I remember the homemade speaker stands my Dad built for me out of 2x4's and plywood.

- I remember the demonstration to my aunt JoAnn, the amazing effect of an equalizer. What little I knew, eh?

- I remember listening to Casey Kasem every weekend. I even cried at some of the dedications he'd read.

- I remember "Seasons in the Sun"....

- and "Afternoon Delight".....ironically, one rememberance of this song was listening to it on a church van on the way to a swim party....and at the swim party falling in love with an older "man" - he seemed like a man to me but he was really only 15 or 16.

- I remember my cousin's cousin, Kelly, with his big blonde afro do, platform Chuck Taylors, bell bottoms and silky green/purple paisley shirt with the flowing sleeves and his green Maverick and his love of David Bowie. Back then, I couldn't figure out whether David Bowie was a man or a woman with a man's name....but it never really mattered when the music was playing...

- have I mentioned Sonny & Cher?

Whew! Things sure are different now....I wonder if they are better?

Silver Member

Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 449
Registered: Apr-04

Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 08:17 pm:

Oh my God. The power. The fury. The pure simplicity. The simple elegance. The unquestionable and undeniable results. This new vacuum cleaner is amazing! I'm almost tempted to put off my audio testing so I can vacuum all the rugs. Those Brits certainly know how to make good speakers, good toasters and now, it seems, vacuum cleaners.