Fixing an original SDA-1! Yay me!

Fongolio

Welcome to Club Polk Bobsama. If you are happy with your Mac and how it drives your 1.2tl's who gives a crap what we think anyway. Same as cables. If what you are using works for you then all of this thread is moot. I apologize for participating in the beat down and really do hope you hang around. There are some really great people here with tons of knowledge and experience. We just some times get carried away with the "I'm right and you're wrong" stuff. Be teflon.

F1nut

We just some times get carried away with the "I'm right and you're wrong" stuff.

Speak for yourself. The OP has been acting like he knows all, when obviously he doesn't. Correcting misinformation is the only way to stop it from spreading.

snow

Im not picking on you when I say the things I have... Well maybe I am but not for the reasons you most likely think. When someone says that a 100wpc is excessive it is as Jesse says misinformation and I would hate to have someone except this at face value.

When I first started out on my audio journey I thought an old Sony receiver and a pair of Bose 401's sounded pretty good because they were better than a clock radio or a boombox.

When I first got my Polks I thought they sounded pretty good hooked up to a Sony DA5-ES receiver but when I heard them hooked up to a Adcom GFA-555 amp I went wow there is a pretty big difference, when I heard them hooked up to a Carver TFM-35X I went wow they sound better, when I heard them hooked up to a Sunfire 300 x 2 I went wow they sounded quite a bit better. Everone of these upgrades were better and not because I needed more power so I could play them louder they sounded better at all volumes.


Perhaps instead of trying to tell us the facts as you know them ask others what there expeirence has been and what has worked for them you will be accepted a lot easier and most likely like myself learn a lot in the proccess.



REGARDS SNOW

Fongolio

F1nut wrote: »

Speak for yourself. The OP has been acting like he knows all, when obviously he doesn't. Correcting misinformation is the only way to stop it from spreading.

You are correct F1, I should only speak for myself. No offense intended.

snow

Fongolio wrote: »

Welcome to Club Polk Bobsama. If you are happy with your Mac and how it drives your 1.2tl's who gives a crap what we think anyway. Same as cables. If what you are using works for you then all of this thread is moot. I apologize for participating in the beat down and really do hope you hang around. There are some really great people here with tons of knowledge and experience. We just some times get carried away with the "I'm right and you're wrong" stuff. Be teflon.

This thread is not a beatdown it is a disscussion and hopefully one that we all learn something. Who cares what we think if what you are using sounds good to you now? that is an awful statement to make, If you ever want to grow and learn you have to try new things otherwise you would remain oblivious to anything better. I agree that if he is happy with the Mac and it sounds good to him then great no reason that he should change unless he wants to but dont say that anything more or better is exccessive.

Hell we all make mistakes and we all are learning I almost bought a pair of Studio 1C's the other day but thankfully I was told in advance that the tweeters would not mate well with my 1.2TL's as surround speakers even if I changed them to 194's.





REGARDS SNOW

Bobsama

You have quite a few valid points. The only problem with misinformation is it's tough to figure out what was real and what was fake, and then to figure out what was right. I prefer to talk or read in technical terms; it's easier to see the graph that tells me X is 1, Y is 2, and Z is 3, instead of reading a ten-page review which says X is either 1, 2, or 3, Y could be 4, but sounds more like 1, and Z your bank sum minus your common sense; buy if negative. Now then; point out where I am wrong. For where I've listened, 100W on a pair of 1.2TL's has been enough. 100W on on CRS+'s has been more than enough.

What I'm still interested in is real, non-marketing numbers that conclusively say that better quality interconnect cables and better quality power cables will really give cleaner, fuller sound. I'm not talking about generic v. Monster, I'm talking about whether or not Furutech FI-25M connectors, which run something like $250 each, are more than marketing fluff. I'm talking about whether or not Moon Audio's Silver Dragon RCA interconnects, which cost $300 plus $100/ft, will really make a big difference when connected to your standard $0.25-$5 female plugs as found on most all gear. Whether or not spending $600+ on 10' of speaker wire is going to really improve my sound or power-handling when compared to the generic equivalent. The same thing with most any other cable. I'm not saying grab it out of the bargain bin--I'm asking whether or not 1% is worth a four-plus digit price tag. I'm asking whether or not that 1% by better cables would be better spent on other gear; a more neutral preamp, a more stable poweramp, &c.

I've seen too often distorted testing in computers. One of a few dozen companies that literally pay big names for big reviews. I always love when one part is experiencing problems (unable to do part of the test) yet its result ends better. I love when companies will literally cripple games or other programs because the competitor's part runs better. I love when you have a comparison among five different manufacturer's renditions of exactly the same hardware. When they use overclocking to say that Card A is better than B or C, yet they're EXACTLY THE SAME. Luckily, very little in audio is strictly that way. From power to control to sources, there are so many different designs that you don't have five companies marketing the same exact piece.

The biggest place I'm still skeptical is in cables. I'll spend a few dollars on them, but I won't spend a fortune. I've never seen or been shown conclusive and independent results from half a dozen sources. That's too bad, really, as those are the types of reviews that I enjoy. Looking at rival product launches, you literally get two dozen reviewers going over each piece and publishing results. To me, that's good.

One day I may see the benefits in spending coin on cables. One day I may see the benefits of a 500wpc McIntosh-quality amp. But until then, I'll stick to technical discussion. I'm basically a newbie, by no fault of my own.

snow

I dont know what to say other than you need to try it out for yourself and see whether it makes a difference in your system and to your ears. I have no interest in finding technical data for you to study to prove that cables IC's or anything else makes a difference. Most people here seem to think so read through a couple hundred threads and thousands of posts on the subject and draw your own conclusions as to whether it's worth a shot to you.

The same on the wpc issue if you want start a thread and or take a poll of the SDA SRS SDA SRS 1.2 and SDA SRS 1.2TL owners to see what they think from there own personal experience to see what they are currently using and why.


If you decide that you want to try a set of new cables or IC's I suggest you buy a used pair here or on Ebay or Audiogon try them if you dont like them then re sell them for what you paid no loss this way and you will have satisfied your curiosity or simply ignore everythng we say without technical data, your choice.

My thoughts are read a lot, try a few things and let your ears be the judge not the technical data.



REGARDS SNOW

concealer404

Now who was it that said yesterday that all SDA SRS are 6ohm speakers?

lakedmb

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables.

Link to his Homepage.

snow

lakedmb wrote: »

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables.

Link to his Homepage.

Yeah yeah we have all seen this before :rolleyes: Let YOUR ears be the judge or dont your choice.

It's times like these I wish I was in charge of the ban button



REGARDS SNOW

nooshinjohn

lakedmb wrote: »

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables.

Link to his Homepage.

this link is meaningless... I just swapped out my monster thx1000 cables for set of Canare 4s11, and I can hear an appreciable difference between the two, and as far as price is concerned, they are similar, but the performance so far with the Carare is a bit cleaner and more balanced than the Monster was. I can only imagine the difference as one goes towards progressively better designed wires. There is however a very valid law of deminishing returns, which means that the money and effort spent in persuit of that last bit of perfection comes at a higher and higher cost for increasingly smaller improvements in performance. For the cable naysayers, I can only say that it is your system and your ears, and therefore up to you as to how and where you spend the coin to upgrade your setup. For those that can truly appreciate the sonic improvement a cable can make to their setups, then that is their choice as well. I am still on the fence a bit on this issue myself, but am eager to try something better.

But for you to post that rehashed piece of BS here is doing nothing to add to the discussion and does not in any way change the minds of anyone.

hearingimpared

lakedmb wrote: »

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables.

Link to his Homepage.

What is YOUR experience with differerent ICs and speaker wires? That link you posted is worthless and done to death.

lakedmb

When doing a true A/B blind test, not knowing what speaker cables were being used, I was unable to tell any difference. :eek: Whenever I was told which cable was being used, my mind did believe that it could hear a difference.

I believe that if you are happy spending the extra money on the cables, then by all means enjoy your setup, but I don't think that you are hearing anything that I am not.

snow

lakedmb wrote: »

When doing a true A/B blind test, not knowing what speaker cables were being used, I was unable to tell any difference. :eek: Whenever I was told which cable was being used, my mind did believe that it could hear a difference.

I believe that if you are happy spending the extra money on the cables, then by all means enjoy your setup, but I don't think that you are hearing anything that I am not.

Someone ban this troll please.



REGARDS SNOW

F1nut

The truth about blind tests.....

Now back to the question of the blinded testing. Here is what the now publisher (Robert Harley) of one of the major magazines wrote a few years ago....


Quote:
Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.

If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.

First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character. Furthermore, the stress of the situation—usually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculed—imposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.

Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experience—listening to music—into an intellectual exercise. It is well documented that musical perception takes place in the right half of the brain and analytical reasoning in the left half. This process can be observed through PET (Positron-Emission Tomography) scans in which subjects listening to music exhibit increased right-brain metabolism. Those with musical training show activity in both halves of the brain, fluctuating constantly as the music is simultaneously experienced and analyzed. Forcing the brain into an unnatural condition (one that doesn't occur during normal music listening) during blind testing violates a sacrosanct law of science: change only one variable at a time. By introducing another variable—the way the brain processes music—blind listening tests are rendered worthless.

JohnLocke88

george daniel wrote: »

man,, this one went to hell quick :rolleyes:

Just sit back, get some popcorn, and watch the train wreck...

Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.

Why? Perhaps it's just the fact that I'm just coming from a LSAT practice test, so I'm in hardcore logic mode, but just because the results of a test are 'unlikely' doesn't invalidate them.

If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.

Again, just because the conclusion is not the one that one wants, or expects to be true, doesn't necessarily invalidate the conclusion. If there is no difference, this could also be a reason why 'blind tests [don't] conclusively establish the audibility of these differences.'

First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect.
1. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character.

I'd imagine it's harder to perform a week long blind test under controlled conditions... just a guess though.

Furthermore, the stress of the situation—usually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculed—imposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.

Valid. White coat syndrome is evident in medical practice as well. So, not a surprise.

Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experience—listening to music—into an intellectual exercise.

Debate ended. Win.

The justification of high end cables is a logical exercise. Cost benefit analysis, concept of diminishing returns, etc. These are not emotional excercises.

The end result, listening to music / watching a movie, is NOT an intellectual experience.

Because you cannot effectively argue the "effects," you cannot argue the causes.

(Again, logic class for the win...If A -> B, B, therefore, you know NOTHING about A)

Fongolio

snow wrote: »

Someone ban this troll please.



REGARDS SNOW

Why?

F1nut

Why? Perhaps it's just the fact that I'm just coming from a LSAT practice test, so I'm in hardcore logic mode, but just because the results of a test are 'unlikely' doesn't invalidate them.

Do you seriously believe there are no sonic differences between the following?

Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver

JohnLocke88

F1nut wrote: »

Do you seriously believe there are no sonic differences between the following?

No... I'm sure there are many... but just because I seriously doubt that those components are the same, doesn't invalidate the possibility that I am wrong. If you're willing to overlook the flaw in logic to reach a conclusion that is otherwise true, then fine. But again, it is not a valid conclusion, as it may be true, but the logical process used to obtain it is FLAWED.

I'm not debating the truth to something, but merely the thought process used to obtain that truth.

F1nut

You'd make a good lawyer.

JohnLocke88

F1nut wrote: »

You'd make a good lawyer.

Yep... and then, when I am one... I can afford all the high end cables and other stuff.

See! I'm on your side... just need to get the fundage first

nooshinjohn

Well.... I guess it would depend entirely upon what the definition of the word "IS" is....

Bobsama

JohnLocke88 wrote: »

Yep... and then, when I am one... I can afford all the high end cables and other stuff.

See! I'm on your side... just need to get the fundage first

You too? And I thought I was the only one who did dual-enrollment in high school and course overload in college, just to get ahead for grad school! (or in my case, law school)

snow

Fongolio wrote: »

Why?

You figure it out, look up the meanig of troll then look up the rules here.

REGARDS SNOW

lakedmb

Troll? Hardly, just an enthusiast who doesn't believe in stroking my ego with the price of my cables.

I have lately become quite interested in Polk Audio speakers, due to some very nice finds on Craigslist. I recently picked up some M5Jr+'s that I have really enjoyed. I snagged a set of LS-70's, but wasn't very impressed with them. After, reading another forum members review of the LS-90's, I am very interested in giving them a listen.

Have a great day.

nooshinjohn

they will sound fantastic if you get a set of these...

http://www.nordost.com/productdetail.asp?ProdID=33 I don't know how much they cost, but hey who cares, it's just wire right?

JohnLocke88

nooshinjohn wrote: »

they will sound fantastic if you get a set of these...

http://www.nordost.com/productdetail.asp?ProdID=33 I don't know how much they cost, but hey who cares, it's just wire right?

I'd be afraid of breaking those things.....

And since this is now officially 'let's argue speaker cables' part 1,000,000,007, check these out

http://viperav.com/index_files/Page720.htm

actual prices shipped = about $150 for a full 5 cable set, or $40 for a set of stereo cables... they look pretty nice to me.

nooshinjohn

Gonna have to do better than that John... in order to run my SDA-SRS 1.2TL's, I would need 88k worth of the wires I selected to make the runs from amp to speakers! I cannot wait for them to get here so I can experience Audio Nirvana!

F1nut

Hardly, just an enthusiast who doesn't believe in stroking my ego with the price of my cables.

And with that comment you have basically verified Snow's opinion.

The truth........It's got nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with ego and everything to do with the sound.

Lose the attitude and ye shall be rewarded.

JohnLocke88

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Gonna have to do better than that John... in order to run my SDA-SRS 1.2TL's, I would need 88k worth of the wires I selected to make the runs from amp to speakers! I cannot wait for them to get here so I can experience Audio Nirvana!

Well, I'm not going to argue... that amp you have is awesome... I asked about it a while ago but you didn't answer. You're running the Cinema Seven by Sunfire right?

400 watts into 8 ohms... that's crazy cool.