A good read..

BigJim

http://www.indiespinzone.com/other/highend.html

Early B.

The guy who wrote it doesn't appear to know very much about high end audio, but it was interesting to read, nonetheless.

LessisNevermore

Zero wrote:

I couldn't make it much past the third paragraph. I wont say why, but those who know - will know why.

My thoughts exactly. I did read the majority of it, my impression is that the author is young.

F1nut

I agree with some of it and disagree with some. It is, after all, a subjective hobby.

I did like this though, "what comes out of the TV is fine because I have always felt cinema was about the image, not the soundtrack."

madmax

I think it was a well thought out article. It definitely summarizes a whole group of fanatics and each subject could have books written about it. I would recommend it as a quick overview for those getting started in audio. Why don't you guys like it?
madmax

dragon1952

I've seen that before. I agree with just about everything he said. I pretty much quit reading when he got to the speakers though. I figured I didn't need to read his opinion as I'd already got the gist of the article. The $2000 is about right though IMO, although I might say $2500 give or take. In my case I've got a used tube integrated that would be around $700-$750 with the upgraded tubes I added, the Jolida CD for around $650 and currently a gorgeous pair of Klipsch KG 4's I got for $220. Add about $250 for interconnects, speaker cables and power cords and it comes to approx $1900.
The Klipsch recently replaced a pair of vandersteen 2ce sigs BTW. Those would've added another G. I got rid of them because since I started learning guitar I just wasn't listening enough and wanted to finance some more guitars. To tell you the truth, considering my current listening habits, I'm enjoying these Klipsch more than I did the Vandy's. Talk about some rockin' speakers!

HBombToo

I'm glad I'm not the only one that drinks his wine like beer:D
1/4twin

Joey_V

I like that he talks about Stats in the end... hhhehehe....

I'm going to reread it again, I skimmed through it waaay too fast.

organ

I thought it was a pretty good read. Nothing new for us but could be a big help to those new to this hobby. I agree about the speakers write up. It's too subjective and it's obvious he's loyal to stats and planars.

John K.

After reading the entire article it appears that it could in fact be considered to be a "good read" if one is interested in reading still more relating to the promotion of audio mythologies which have no factual basis. The author may simply be young and naive and angry or(more likely)old and still stubbornly clinging to misconceptions which have become ingrained over the years. In any case, for example, he appears to have no understanding of the digital sampling process, the way in which transistors act as valves to amplify audio signals, or how wires and cables simply act as guide rails for the power/information traveling in an electromagnetic wave along their outer surface.

This did bring to mind an article which another member brought to our attention about a year ago and which touched on some of the same points. "The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio" was published in the Audio Critic and represents a good summary of some audio mythologies which conflict with well-established principles of audio technology. Those who didn't read it previously may find it to be of interest. There are many things in audio which can't be learned "by ear", so-to-speak, and require study of the technology involved.

F1nut

Once again, Johnny shows his ignorance about all things audio. The number one rule in audio is trust your ears. It's a pretty simple concept, yet one you continually fail to grasp.

You think the author is "young and naive and angry or(more likely)old and still stubbornly clinging to misconceptions which have become ingrained over the years."

I'd say it's more a case of you needing to remove your cranium from your anal ****.

dragon1952

What a freakin' ignoramous. Some people need to remind you every so often that they are idiots, just in case you forgot. :rolleyes:

Loud & Clear

Enjoyable read. Reminds me that I really do need to acquire a turntable. His thoughts on cables made perfect sense also; the wire should match as closely as possible with your source, pre & amp, presuming that you chose wisely in purchasing those pieces of gear.

Andrew2112

He just sounded like an angry man..

univera

Cool picture. Why rip Rotel, Nad, Denon, etc? In my mind, I want to move up from those pieces down the line, but they sound great to me. I have always loved the sound of NAD/Rotel and the price point. Just because other pieces are attainable for a bit more, as we all know, sometimes that bit more is more than we can can bite off.

Plus, I am just getting down to the nitty gritty and having the money to play with, so I would prefer to go base high end then jump right to it. That way, when I do move up, I have a more critical ear that has experienced the different levels of quality. For example, I am upgrading to an NAD C 542 cd from my Toshiba DVD. Has to sound better. It will be like having a new CD collection. Then, I can go Jolida, etc down the line and get a new collection again!

And, I can decide later if I feel the tubes, etc sound that much better. Sometimes, easy setup and equipment that sounds very good out the gate is more preferable than having to buy stuff only to tinker and try 10 different cables because the piece is so honest. (Not everyone wants to or has the knowhow/desire to to mess with the 555 A/B switch. I would f it up for sure!)

I was actually scared of the Krell amp I was considering as I thought it might be more revealing than I liked, and I didn't want to experiment endlessly with cables to get an ideal sound. I wouldn't even know where to begin as there are endless opinions on cables. My NAD sounds great on the SDA's, with mediocre cables and average speaker wires. It's not the end of the line, but just the beginning. Confuscious say sometimes one has to walk before they jump.
That's my lifestyle preference at the moment. Maybe I am just in some type of comfort zone and need professional help???? The author seems to be a bit full of himself.

ohskigod

my ears seem to validate a good chunk of those audio lies,

believe me, I wish it wasnt the case, it would save me some money.

the component break in is a lie? tell that to my Jolida cd player, which sounded like complete @ss out of the box. I'm serious, I wanted to stab Jesse for reccomending it to me (figurativly of course) when I first turned it on.
Of course, after I was told to calm down, I left it on for a few days, played it again, and voila, sounded great. But apparently, because some guy in an article says so, it was a figment of my imagination. apparently, I'm an idiot for believeing my ears.

reeltrouble1

If the timbre of identical sound frequencies can sound different.

And audio equipment reproduces sound frequency.

Then the timbre of a frequency a specific piece of audio equipment reproduces can sound different.

RT1

LuSh

John K

That article within the Audio Critic is a laughing stock of many of todays top designers. Not the marketing people, but the actual designers and engineers of today's SOTA. His general lack of even simple concepts is transparent throughout his article. The entire article itself is aimed at an audience that has very little understanding of how the technology works, hoping to create a hype or buzz about "the truth".

steveinaz

Lush, trust me when I say you are wasting your time....John's a "bits is bits" guy. No disrespect intended John, just stating the facts.

szhleppy

Everyday I'm reminded of how little I know. Thanks for my daily reminder.

F1nut

Lou.......LOL. You're too big a dude for me to risk pissing off. Besides, I like you.

Steve, it doesn't matter if Johhny "get's it" and trust me, he won't. Rather, it's important to show those just getting into the hobby and those already here that the "bits is bits" philosophy (talk about the biggest lie in audio) results in nothing more than poor to mediorce sound quality.

Mystrogue

ok hi, For starters i gotta say this person did his homework, was articulate and laced his presentation with irony, sarcasm and sardonic observations on peoples obsession with the audio evolution...well put together. He even TOLD us there were going to be rants. Now with that said, i have a distinct advantage over others as my left ear "guts" are artificial..My tympanum is titanium graphed with some tissue from my thigh and the three bones are made out of titanium as well(had an accident when i was younger). so i really must tell you all he is right on..he gave insight to what i hear everyday everywhere.( my hearing picks up waves from ranges 8 Hz -to 34 KHz) surprisingly enough( or not to some pro sound engineers) electrical "noise" that EVERYTHING that carries signal fall withing this range. So with that being said, his analysis of "noise" from BigJim is spot on. for those who may disagree Please trade me places for say 5 minutes, you will need Thorazine.(or lots of jim beam). I m sorry if i rambled on here but he hit a chord(no pun intended) the one upside is I have people actually calling me or coming over to have me tune their equip from bookshelf spkrs to ball blasting hanging arrays. What other people study and buy equipment to analyze, i carry with me. so in closing here(you all are going THANK G**) BIGJIM RIGHT ON..don't ever stop yer research!!! others may think yer all barf in the hat wrong, but they said the same about ,oh ...Edison, Ford, Bell, The Wright Brothers, that guy that wears a colander on his head, Kim Khardashian (ok SHE is all kinds o wrong) :cheesygrin: