Archive through April 21, 2008

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 23
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 07:42 pm:

MR, I don't know how having confidence in the product I sell is "arrogant". I wouldn't sell it if I didn't believe it was as good as what the competition has to offer. And I do believe that is better than *most* things. I know in advance not everyone will love it or even respect it, but that's life. Arrogance is believing your stuff is better than everything else. I often tell people "I can't sell all the best gear, I can only sell some of it". Integrated amps are one of NAD's fortes. And have nothing but respect for Bryston (making fun of the power and transformer size was really only to get a rise out of people - there's rarely a need for massive power or over the top transformers and one of my favorite amps is a big wuss compared to the B60)

Keep in mind that PRaT in a speaker can be easily achieved with some cone resonance in the upper midrange and a mid bass peak. Voila, PRaT. Never mind that it's screwed up in time and phase by hundreds or thousands of degrees and quite a few ms.

Relevant Product Info

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 24
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 07:47 pm:

Loc, I'd put in more like NAD = VW and Audi, compared to a Mercedes, a BMW and a Porsche, the Masters being Audi.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 25
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 07:55 pm:

David, I fully support the rationale of buying home built stuff! Of course, things are what they are, so I'd far rather sell American (including Canadian or Mexican) built in China than sell European or Japanese stuff largely built there as well. Although I've had my flings with them, I've never found them satisfying in the end and keep coming back to what we do. European gear, even when it is good, is way overpriced for my ears, except for Cambridge or Arcam on some products and maybe one or two others. I also have often considered selling Bryston, but didn't feel there was enough demand for it - most people here flat out need better speakers and room acoustics before they need to spend more money on amp.

The funny thing is, I think really old NAD has that "PRaT" sound, but isn't nearly as refined as the current stuff. So, some people's punchy, dynamic, fast, etc sound is just something completely different to many of us. It's the sound we're trying to ditch, not get into. I think the sound should flow naturally from an amp, not come over and slap you in the face, unless the music absolutely calls for it.

Nuck

Platinum Member

Username: Nuck

Post Number: 10069
Registered: Dec-04

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 08:26 pm:

I think John is Wiley...again...but with better medication.

David Mitchell

Silver Member

Username: Dmitchell

Ottawa, Ontario
Canada

Post Number: 857
Registered: Feb-07

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 08:45 pm:

I was waiting for that...

Art

Gold Member

Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon
USA

Post Number: 6707
Registered: Feb-05

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 08:58 pm:

Unfortunately so was I...

Nick K

Gold Member

Username: Nickelbut10

Post Number: 1391
Registered: Jun-07

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 09:04 pm:

He makes some good points though. Unlike Wiley. Stick around John, the audio world is just one big opinion, and different opinions are welcome in my book.

Dave- I am with you all the way on buying stuff made in Canada if possible. Keep er in the economy EH!?

David Mitchell

Silver Member

Username: Dmitchell

Ottawa, Ontario
Canada

Post Number: 858
Registered: Feb-07

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 09:24 pm:

You got that right, Nick.

Although I'm more than happy to buy stuff made in the good ole USA or Mexico.

I guess you could say I'm a supporter of NAFTA.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 26
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 10:09 pm:

What's a "Wiley"?

Art

Gold Member

Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon
USA

Post Number: 6708
Registered: Feb-05

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 10:29 pm:

Don't ask, it just gets folks around here worked up...

JAW

Silver Member

Username: Jaw

Post Number: 201
Registered: Mar-06

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 10:56 pm:

...as in Coyote.

JA, you expressed yourself perfectly.

To me, you done good.

Platinum Member

Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 12468
Registered: May-04

Posted on Friday, April 18, 2008 - 11:27 pm:

.

"Keep in mind that PRaT in a speaker can be easily achieved with some cone resonance in the upper midrange and a mid bass peak. Voila, PRaT. Never mind that it's screwed up in time and phase by hundreds or thousands of degrees and quite a few ms."

Keep in mind you don't have that right, JA.

Cone resonance doesn't affect "time" within a single driver. If you can explain how a speaker can get "hundreds or thousands of degrees" out of electrical phase, I'd kinda like to hear that. And what's screwed up by "quite a few ms"? What's that mean? What's it do to the sound? And how does a designer accomplish it?

I have always felt people who deny PRaT and it's value are people who've never really heard it. They might think they have because someone once said, "That's PRaT", but they never heard it. Which is OK but they shouldn't be telling me what I should be hearing. Certainly not when their argument is a measurement plot.

JA - Your nose is growing because you are either not telling the truth or you don't know the truth. How old are you, JA?

A speaker and an amplifier are like a pair of pants. You can't put on only one leg and expect not to get laughed at. They work together and they sound together. I will admit the "watts are cheap" school of speaker design has turned out crap that cannot let a decent amplifier sound good. But this line you want to sell me is just stupid.

There are classic speakers such as the Quad 57's, Altec Voice of the Theatres, Lowthers, Magnepans, Spendors, Rogers, etc. that have been good enough for the last half century or longer in some cases to always be better than the amplifier they are connected to. Hook them to a good amp and they sound great. Twenty years later hook them to a better amp and they still sound better. Same with classic amplifiers. Keep them for fifty years and they'll always sound better with a better speaker.

The "no 'audiophile' has speakers good enough to resolve all of the transparency of any amplifier" is pure BS and you're pretty full of that, JA. But you probably got some measurements and a DBT you can pull out to prove me wrong.

A DBT?!!! You're gonna bet people money on a DBT? Man, that's the kinda "hey, you got balls big enough to challenge me" BS I expect to hear from some punk on the South Side of Chicago. That's cheap BS, JA, that's cheap BS.

Stu - You got the square wave thing all wrong. "The M3's 10hz square wave barely goes above 1, and below -1. The B60's goes almost to +2 and -2."

The only thing the numbers on the side indicate is scale. It's a relative thing and not what you're looking at in a square wave.

A square wave test indicates the amplfier's rise time and tendency to ringing. If the leading edge of the wave is straight and stops at the top of the sqaure wave, that's all you're concerned with as far as rise time goes. If the leading edge is tilted toward the right or curved rather than straight, the amplifier does not exhibit good rise time. The rise should stop abruptly and shift to a 90° angle at the top. If it shoots past the top of the square and then settles down to complete the square, the amplifier exhibits overshoot. Most amplifiers that overshoot the mark also ring which will be a squiggly line rather than a square top. The downside of the square wave should always be straight down.

Here's some overshoot and slight ringing; http://stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/1006sonic/index4.html

This is not a good looking square wave; http://stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/805cia/index4.html

Kinda shaky; http://stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/304adcom/index4.html

What square waves looked like fifty years ago; http://stereophile.com/integratedamps/606eico/index4.html

The 10kHz here is what tube amps often look like due to the output transformers; http://stereophile.com/tubepoweramps/306yamamoto/index3.html

Not much of this has anything to do really with how these amplifiers sound. Anybody who tries selling you something because it measures like something more expensive should be selling washing machines.

.

Silver Member

Username: Unbridled_id

Chicago
Usa

Post Number: 224
Registered: Mar-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 12:26 am:

"BS I expect to hear from some punk on the South Side of Chicago".

Wow, Jan you spent time on the south side of Chicago? Small world indeed, I see where you acquired and honed your interpersonal skills.

Forgive me Reichsmarshall Vinge.

Platinum Member

Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 12469
Registered: May-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 12:56 am:

.

Wrong side of the tracks, son. Don't make me get Vito to straighten this out.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 27
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:47 am:

Jan,

I didn't say cone resonance affects time. I said it affects the perception of "PRaT" and is an easy way of faking it. Kevlar, for instance. I guess you haven't ever seen an impulse response of a speaker either. I've heard lots of systems that are supposed to have "PRaT", but they just sound bright and unnatural to me. The speakers you list, except maybe *seriously updated* 57s are just old, crappy speakers that, while maybe sounding better than most old speakers, still are a nowhere near today's better stuff, no matter what you put in front of them. You're a funny guy. I'm still young enough to hear well. You?

Silver Member

Username: Hawkbilly

Nova Scotia
Canada

Post Number: 233
Registered: Jul-07

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 10:17 am:

"The speakers you list, except maybe *seriously updated* 57s are just old, crappy speakers that, while maybe sounding better than most old speakers, still are a nowhere near today's better stuff, no matter what you put in front of them."

There are many, many respected people in the audio business and just plain music fans that would disagree with that statement. But I get the feeling you're not particularly interested in keeping your argument to anything other than a series of absolutes, when, of course, in audio there are very few.

Albuquerque huh. What shop ?

Silver Member

Username: Unbridled_id

Chicago
Usa

Post Number: 225
Registered: Mar-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 10:44 am:

I for one would like to welcome the addition of Mr. Ashman to the board. His perspective while at odds with most on the board has revitalized this thread. I do not understand the ad hominem attacks? Jimmy Carter can meet with hamas so why not take that as an example. If he prefers the M3 to the B60 than so be it, and if you do not that is ok too. Perhaps we can learn something from each other. I have a feeling that before this thread ends shall all be holding hands and singing kumbaya.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 28
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 11:26 am:

Well, fortunately for most everyone here, i'm probably just visiting. I spend too much time on forums as is, just ask my wife! I just thought this thread was irresistible and it's been a lot of fun

I think people have just lost sight of the whole goal here, worrying more about brand names and the implications of those names rather than music. The whole concept of "I listened to it at some store with some speakers in some room and liked it more THEREFORE it is BETTER" concept is the exact type of illogical, emotional thinking that allows Bose to be the biggest speaker company in the world. Just because you hear a difference, doesn't make it better. Just because you *think* you hear a difference doesn't mean you did. Most of high-end is a combination of exceptional marketing and a magic act. And 95% of all your sound is your speakers, your room acoustics and your setup. I know a lot of people that have really expensive amps and horrible sound. Fortunately, it wasn't my fault.

Platinum Member

Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 12471
Registered: May-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 11:42 am:

.
.

"Keep in mind that PRaT in a speaker can be easily achieved with some cone resonance in the upper midrange and a mid bass peak. Voila, PRaT. Never mind that it's screwed up in time and phase by hundreds or thousands of degrees and quite a few ms."

"I didn't say cone resonance affects time."

?

I guess I read your post differently than you intended. You appeared to be implying that B followed A in your first post. But now you've got me curious how time is involved in your conception of PRaT. You do know what "PRaT" stands for I assume.

You tend to ignore questions that don't come with a glib reply. How about explaining that "thousands of degrees out of phase" remark? How's that possible? And the "ms" thing is still murky. Some help? I'm sure you've explained this to your customers hundreds if not thousands of times.

I wouldn't be too cocky about who can hear what. Like all of us, after age 25 hearing starts to go. But, if someone in their fifties wanders into your store and says he's looking for soemthing with PRaT, you might want to use that
"still hear well" line on him. It's a winner, punk.

Fortunately for me, I've never had a problem hearing PRaT while at age 44 you've never heard it once. Makes me wonder what you do hear? All I've seen so far is selling NAD by measurements. You don't know much about audio if you think those speakers suck. You must be one of those salesmen who knows what the reps have told you to say, throw in some thousands of degrees out of phase junk and, as you say, Voila!

You say you sold your Krell. I would have too. If things you don't like are "bright and unnatural", I can see why you landed on NAD. You never did tell me whether your shop sells anything better than NAD.

.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 29
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 12:24 pm:

Punk? Hah. So logical and well spoken. I guess i'm not old enough to look back at old, technologically impaired speakers as though they are competitive with today's stuff. Yamaha 1000s would take out most of those pretty handily and even those are dated sounding.

12000 posts and you don't know how to read an impulse response graph? Never heard of group delay? Most speakers have huge time/phase delays in them. So, talking about their 'PRaT' is kind of funny. Amplifiers, on the other hand, don't. So saying one time/phase accurate amp has 'PRaT' and another doesn't is also ridiculous. A Quad ESL might be able to have PRaT because it is so time coherent it can reproduce a square wave at small volumes, but what you call 'PRaT" is just coloration to me.

As for other brands, i've sold a lot of things more expensive than NAD, but I'm not sure how much better sounding any of it was than the new Masters stuff. Of course, C-J and YBA stuff was excellent but it doesn't have that "PRaTTy" sound either, so i'm sure you hear it as 'lacking'. There is already enough expensive electronics on the used market at reasonable prices, I don't need to add more to the pool.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 30
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 12:40 pm:

BTW, Chris I largely agree. I think there are some absolutes in audio, but when it comes to taste, there certainly aren't. That's what i'm trying to argue. One person, or even a few saying "I like it better, therefore it's better" doesn't make it so. Because you'll get one or even a few others saying the opposite, canceling it out. You can say that there are preponderances of evidence, but if one product is clearly better than another, it will also measure clearly better. And even then, people will often prefer the one that measures poorly. Just like the sound of "PRaT" does with music, the people that like that sound seem to like to beat it over other people like a weapon.

Silver Member

Username: Unbridled_id

Chicago
Usa

Post Number: 226
Registered: Mar-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:08 pm:

I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?

J. Jarvis

Silver Member

Username: James_the_god

Doncaster, South Yorkshire
England

Post Number: 660
Registered: Jan-05

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:12 pm:

Lol, lol, lol!

My next thread is going to be "Modern Marantz sound vs old Marantz sound".

"Like all of us, after age 25 hearing starts to go."...

So I only have 6 years left of good hearing. Now thats dismall.

-I think John is Wiley...again...but with better medication.
-I was waiting for that...
-Unfortunately so was I...
-What's a "Wiley"?

I couldn't help laughing at that one.

Right now I should be revising for my exams coming up May/June. Instead I spend all my time thinking about audio, reading stuff, buying stuff, this forum and getting bollocked by the porters for having it too loud. If I fail this year at university I'm off to work for a hifi dealer. Maybe even set my own shop up! Hmm the possibilities.

Silver Member

Username: Hawkbilly

Nova Scotia
Canada

Post Number: 235
Registered: Jul-07

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:13 pm:

"but if one product is clearly better than another, it will also measure clearly better."

Again with the absolutes. Again, there are a great number of people that would disagree with you. Many tube amps will not measure as well some SS amps, but some prefer them. Does that mean they prefer an inferior sound ? No. It's really about making music. Sure, measurements are important, and a critical tool in designing and developing an amp, speakers, or anything else. However I don't believe you can point to any one measurement and say it proves superiority. Or the size of the transformers, or the brand of caps, make of drivers, etc, etc. The beauty is in the sum of the parts, the overall execution, and the optimal mating of components.

Platinum Member

Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 12474
Registered: May-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:37 pm:

.

"reproduce a square wave"

ROTFLMAO

Nothing on the thousands of degrees out of phase, eh? No "ms" explanation?

Yamaha 1000's!!!!!!

Geezobeezo! You got a lot o' BS in you and you just can't help but let it spill out, eh, JA? Try again on the phase and ms stuff. This is getting good.

kinda funny really
.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 32
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:40 pm:

Chris, that's the whole point. People disagree about sound. It's like saying "I like blondes, therefore blondes are better than brunettes". And someone else says "you're high, brunettes are clearly better because I like them". Or arguing over which is 'better', Pepsi or Coke, McDonald's burgers or Burger King burgers. If one product were clearly better, *everyone* would agree on it! In order to be truly better, then you have to be scientifically better and that doesn't happen that often as even then there are so many variables. You can't have 100 different products that are all "better" simultaneously! All you have in that case is "I like it better", not "better". If everyone on the planet lines up and says "this sounds better", then we have a winner, everyone else can go out of business, call it a day and get a job at 7/11. You can prefer any product you want, regardless of how it measures, but you can't say that it is therefore intrinsically better. People have such frail egos. None of the stuff that I own is "the best" or even necessarily "better" except to me, I picked it because I liked it.

When I recommend an NAD AVR to someone, it's not because it's "the best sounding receiver". No, it's because it's designed well, has a modular chassis w/card slots, is extremely easy to use and setup, has oodles of power, a nice remote, an room correction system with improved response curves and I know it really well so I can talk them through most any issues over the phone. And then they tell me whether any of that is even important to them or is worth it.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 33
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 01:48 pm:

Jan,

Most speakers are only hundreds of phase shift, but some are worse, which is obvious in the impulse response. And much of the bass lags several *milliseconds* (for those that don't understand the scientific abbreviation), which is why subwoofers are often pegged by auto setup algorithms as being 10 or more feet further away than they really are.

I may be getting funny, but you're getting pathetic!

Silver Member

Username: Hawkbilly

Nova Scotia
Canada

Post Number: 236
Registered: Jul-07

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 02:34 pm:

"You can prefer any product you want, regardless of how it measures, but you can't say that it is therefore intrinsically better. "

Then stop saying it. Go through your posts and count how many times you've said "this is" or words to that effect. Absolutes. You can't argue on both sides of the issue. If you're really saying that it's all about preference, then you've picked an odd way to make that point.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 34
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 02:49 pm:

Chris, aside from my dramatized Yamaha quip, could you give me an example or two? I don't recall saying anything was intrinsically better anywhere. And I certainly didn't say "it's all about preference". If you want to get actually better sound, you can't design simply to preference, you have to build a product that is scientifically, measurably better. Now, how to measure that is a bit sketchy, but it's better than having people fight over the subjective part. What I did say that, if you are going to claim something actually "sounds better", then the measurements should reflect it. It's hard to say that an amp with really bizarre measurements has better "PRaT" and therefore is "better".

Likewise, you can't just say "this car is better" unless it is better in almost every way you can measure a car. Fortunately, people are more reasonable about cars and car reviews reflect that and they don't start making up new words or talk about intangible BS. Of course, audio attracts very strange people for some reason.

Art

Gold Member

Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon
USA

Post Number: 6712
Registered: Feb-05

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 03:29 pm:

Actually they do John. Not only do cars talk about and show measurements they also talk about how it feels to drive the car...purely subjective. Just as there are enough different auto designs to suit nearly every driver there also enough different designs in audio to suit nearly all subjective preferences. As all audio gear is some way colored, that is to say, varies in some way from the original source (if anyone really knows what that was and how many variables play into it's sound) all we as consumers are doing is choosing the color that best suits our taste...not really much more complicated than that.

Platinum Member

Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 12475
Registered: May-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 04:05 pm:

.

"Most speakers are only hundreds of phase shift but some are worse, which is obvious in the impulse response."

"Hundreds of phase shift"? Hundreds of what? ms's? (milliseconds - for those that don't understand the scientific abbreviation) How do "most speakers" get hundreds of phase shift? What causes this? How many degrees can those other worser speakers get? Thousands? Really? How's that happen and why is that worse? What sorts of phase shifts are these? Acoustic? Mechanical? Electrical? Moon? Or all of the above? Or none of the above? Got a clue? Want to buy a vowel?

"And much of the bass lags several *milliseconds* (for those that don't understand the scientific abbreviation)"

Lags what milliseconds? Something's leading but much of the bass is lagging? But only "much" of the bass? Not all of the bass? Does much of the bass lag more if the driver is bigger or smaller? What part lags and what part leads? How do they decide who leads and who lags? Do they have like guy bass and gal bass and the guy bass always leads? But all of the bass is coming from one driver? Which way does it move when it lags?

"which is why subwoofers are often pegged by auto setup algorithms as being 10 or more feet further away than they really are."

Never used anything like an algorithm to set up my speakers. I just listen. So I'll give you this one.

Any more on time getting messed with in PRaT? Any more on what PRaT stands for? If you do have more, then I'll move on to how PRaT can make a speaker "bright and unnatural". "Bright" ain't nowhere near what affects PRaT. So how's that happen? MS's? Right? While we're at it,what's "bright"? What's it mean?

Did you pick the Yamaha 100- because it's "natural sounding"? It says so right in its name, you know? It a Yamaha NS-1000. The "NS" stands for "natural sound". So it doesn't have any PRaT I assume?

Pathetic? I'd have to agree, someone here's pathetic. JA you got words. That's all, just words and a few concepts. But the words don't go with the concepts and the words alone don't make any sense. I'd rather be my age with my hearing and know what I know than to be your age and still not know jackshit. I suspect if you stick around I'm going to spend my days going, "Aww no, not again!"

"It's hard to say that an amp with really bizarre measurements has better "PRaT" and therefore is "better"."

All you keep talking about is measurements, JA. So like what measurements are important - other than several phases and ms's?

"When I recommend an NAD AVR to someone, it's not because it's "the best sounding receiver". No, it's because it's designed well, has a modular chassis w/card slots, is extremely easy to use and setup, has oodles of power, a nice remote, an room correction system with improved response curves and I know it really well so I can talk them through most any issues over the phone. And then they tell me whether any of that is even important to them or is worth it.

When do you let them listen?

.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 35
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:16 pm:

Art, yes but there's a big difference. You don't have people arguing that a car is faster if the data doesn't support it. They might say that it "feels faster, yet isn't". And the subjective impressions are far more consistent than in audio. If car reviews were like audio reviews, a company would put nicer hubcaps or platinum spark plugs on the "Tercel II SE" and reviewers would go nuts about how much better it performs with zero measurable improvement. And they'd say that the Tercel II SE is clearly better than cars half the price and almost, but not quite as good as cars costing twice as much.

Silver Member

Username: Unbridled_id

Chicago
Usa

Post Number: 227
Registered: Mar-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:26 pm:

What we need is a uniter, someone to bring us together. Anybody have Obama's number?

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 36
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:27 pm:

Degrees, Jan, degrees. Have you heard of a crossover? Do you know anything about speakers? Or do you just move air through your lips?

I let people "listen" all the time, but tell me, are you one of those magical people that can listen through different speakers in a different room, with different cables, a different CD player and even different music and tell me how my amplifier sounds? If you think so, it sure explains a lot. A lot of people surprisingly think they can.

I think if I stick around, you'll be one frustrated "big fish" in your little pond as someone might challenge you on your BS. I think I'd rather be my age, be able to hear still, and not sound like a frustrated old guy who thinks he knows way more than he does about audio, desperately hoping people will listen to his stories around the internet fire.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 37
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:39 pm:

Obama? But, uhhhh, I come from one of those small PA towns where we desperately cling to our guns and religion and hate other people for no reason...........

Silver Member

Username: Unbridled_id

Chicago
Usa

Post Number: 228
Registered: Mar-04

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:44 pm:

Jan, you do sound a little uptight. I recommend Yoga, I am getting back into it (well I purchased a book at least).
Or maybe yogurt, it's loaded with probiotics: Yogurt May Help Prevent Osteoporosis, Yogurt May Reduce the Risk of High Blood Pressure, Yogurt With Active Cultures Helps the Gut, Yogurt With Active Cultures May Discourage Vaginal Infections (does this one apply?), Yogurt May Help You Feel Fuller.
Well, you can't say I haven't tried to help.

Silver Member

Username: Hawkbilly

Nova Scotia
Canada

Post Number: 237
Registered: Jul-07

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:46 pm:

" could you give me an example or two?"

Okey doke.

"Rega is a bit eccentric, but Naim is downright daffy. Linn? Goodness, talk about cheap, low grade electronics sprinkled with pixie dust."

"57s are just old, crappy speakers that, while maybe sounding better than most old speakers, still are a nowhere near today's better stuff, no matter what you put in front of them."

"And 95% of all your sound is your speakers, your room acoustics and your setup. "

These sound like pretty entrenched remarks to me. And BTW I really don't give a rats behind what you think, but if you're going to make a statement, back it up and stop meandering all over the place.

And, what shop in Albuquerque again ? I think I missed that response.

Nick K

Gold Member

Username: Nickelbut10

Post Number: 1393
Registered: Jun-07

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:50 pm:

Lets see, Guns?, BS Religion?, Do you like oil as well? WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!Bush Supporter I bet. LOL!! Thanks for the great price on my recent mortgage. lol.

What are we talking about here? All I see is a lot of stuff about Phase angles. My speakers play music, and sound good...lol Who give a flying f u c k about Phase angles.

Nick K

Gold Member

Username: Nickelbut10

Post Number: 1394
Registered: Jun-07

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 05:52 pm:

John- FWIW, Jan's recent speakers are speakers he built himself. And from what I hear they sound pretty good to boot.

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 38
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 06:06 pm:

Chris, I said eccentric and/or daffy, as in design or what they're selling. I didn't say they sounded intrinsically worse, though Linn is intrinsically expensive for the internal parts quality.

You are misquoting me on the 57s. I have heard a lot of those "amazing" speakers and they don't sound all that great compared to many, if not most <$500 speakers and I'm willing to lay money on the measurements backing that up, if anyone were to go back and measure speakers that old seriously - FR, distortion, dispersion, spectral decay, etc.

95% of all your sound *is* your room acoustics, speakers, setup. Well, technically, it's much more than that, but you can't put an exact number. Could be 99.9% unless the amp or something is close to defective. Feel free to insert your own number. 80% is fine too.

Nick, I love oil and war in all its forms

Not talking about phase angles, i'm talking about inherent delay in most analog speakers, many of which are supposed to have 'pace, rhythm and timing' (there, i said it for you Jan).

You, uhhhh, believe everything you hear, do you Nick?

I'll wait til I hear them next to a reference or til the reviews and measurements all come out

Bronze Member

Username: John_ashman

Albuquerque, NM
United States

Post Number: 39
Registered: Apr-08

Posted on Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 06:15 pm:

BTW, i think there's a *bit* more leeway to talk smack about 40 or 50 year old speakers. Ask any speaker engineer and they'll tell you that the parts quality, knowledge base and CAD available today put older speakers clearly out of the game, even though there are plenty of low grade speakers available today.