Roger Russell FOS or legit?

tonyb

xcapri79 wrote: »

I doubt Peyton Manning would fair better in a similar poll conducted in Boston.;)

Not exactly an apples to apples comparison is it ?

But if you asked about the quality of the QB to the NFL as a whole,he is over the top.
Ask about some windbag audio guru to the audio community as a whole, you get a big negative but still resist the results. So tell me again the point in this poll is...?

treitz3

[Continued from post #260.....] Here you go, facts to back my "claim" up......

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90449

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93109

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93081

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89897

At these prices, you do not need to have unlimited funds. Just an eye out for a good deal when you see one. So please, spare me the unlimited funds song and dance.

nooshinjohn

xcapri79 wrote: »

We all do not have unlimited funds.

AGREED!

xcapri79 wrote: »

Using Roger Russell and other sources as my guide, instead of wasting money to upgrade my wires, I was able to purchase a second Emotiva XPA-5 amp.

If you had bought just ONE used Parasound, Sunfire 5/400, or any number of other multi channel amps you would have had no need for two new Emotivas and would have been better served in the long run. You would have also had some money left over to run some better cables up front.

xcapri79 wrote: »

Having one dedicated to the R, SR and the other dedicated to the L, SL speakers allows me to use a single XPA-5 to each of my LSi25's when operating in 2 channel mode. Now that gives me sound performance within my budget.

The second XPA-5 is overkill by a long shot and with a BETTER amp, may not have been needed for your front speakers. Choosing separate amps however, you would have been MUCH beter served by either Monoblocks or a dedicated STEREO amp up front. I do however, agree with your premise of running a separate amp to the fronts.

xcapri79 wrote: »

Thank you Roger Russell.

If you were willing to hear and experience what others here have done for LESS money that you have spent on your rig by not taking his advice, I am willing to bet you would not be thanking him. All he has done for you is diminish your view as to what can be accomplished in the world of audio and prevent you from understanding there is better out there.


Cheers!

inspiredsports

xcapri79 wrote: »

I doubt Peyton Manning would fair better in a similar poll conducted in Boston.;)

Nevertheless, Manning is not a fraud. You can "see" his "football beliefs" on any given Sunday.

And wires aren't football and this forum isn't Boston, so what's your point?

heiney9

xcapri79 wrote: »

instead of wasting money to upgrade my wires

Curious, how do you know it's a waste of money if you've never tried it?

I'm quite certain you are NOT in the MIT cable program. A free (well you have to pay to ship it the next person in line) chance to try uber high end cables.

FREE FREE FREE FREE FREE

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

H9

treitz3

Did he mention free?

Just don't hook them up to your surrounds and expect to hear a major change...

Face

treitz3 wrote: »

Did he mention free?

Just don't hook them up to your surrounds and expect to hear a major change...

IIRC, he listens in 7.1 multi-channel.

inspiredsports

Face wrote: »

IIRC, he listens in 7.1 multi-channel.

That brings up a good point and I don't have much knowledge beyond the simple 5.1 system on my 50" plasma system in the den that the kids use.

Does it even make sense to compare high line cabling in 2 channel systems with 5.1 or 7.1 systems? Is it even in the same ball park or is xcapri comparing football to baseball?

Sami

Before I ask the question I have on my mind, let me confirm my stance on the whole cable debate: neutral. I have not witnessed any improvement that one high quality cable makes over another similar high quality cable but I am on entry level gear so I don't pretend to know it won't make a difference either (SDA 1C's, LSi15's, DQ-10's;Aragon,Sherbourn,B&K,Adcom,Rotel etc).

Anyways, to my question...how many of you who spend a lot of time tweaking with cables in your system have not treated your rooms? To me all that time and money seems pointless until your room has been properly treated as if you do it after you have found what you think is the perfect cable, you have to start your cable journey all over as the whole setup has changed.

I know most of you with high end gear have done all the steps. Once I have finished with my room treatments I will visit the issue of cables once again to see if I can fine tune my system even better. As of now it's not high on my priority list as I barely even get time to listen anymore on my main systems. Right now the most time I just listen in my home office where I am working through HK AVR and LSi7's fed by a PC source.

inspiredsports

I personally take into account component placement and isolation and percentages and placements of wall treatments, carpeting and upholstered and non upholstered furniture, but I don't think Roger Russell gave it a second thought when he designed his A/B switch tests that we are currently polling and debating.

Sami

inspiredsports wrote: »

I personally take into account component placement and isolation and percentages and placements of wall treatments, carpeting and upholstered and non upholstered furniture, but I don't think Roger Russell gave it a second thought when he designed his A/B switch tests that we are currently polling and debating.

I find that hard to believe as he is a professional who designs gear so he has access to rooms that are far better than most of us could hope for. You don't design and test your gear in your living room.

treitz3

Sami wrote: »

Anyways, to my question...how many of you who spend a lot of time tweaking with cables in your system have not treated your rooms?

To answer your question Sami, that was my next step. Then life happened and my newborn and I fought it out for the audio room. He won, since that was the only available room for him. Right now, the rig is in the living room right next to the TV. :eek:

Please don't throw the stones..... *as I run away, yelling as I go......*

"It's not pointless [to me] as I heard a change way back in the day with something a simple as a Monster IC. I know that this isn't the topic of this thread but I have also heard many a change in many a system concerning SC's with absolutely no room treatments whatsoever so I [personally] don't see why room treatments would be necessary to enjoy the change".

Face

Both my listening rooms are treated. A treated room will allow more subtle differences to be heard.

Sami

To me it's a journey toward the best sound quality possible, and I perfectly understand your situation. I had a great room (but a little too small for HT) for audio in my previous house but then we upgraded and I went with a bigger room for HT purpose. That screwed the sound and it has been 4 years and I really haven't gotten back into it since this time I want to start from ground up and the first step for me would then be room treatment.

To me cables provide small improvement at best, at least with the gear I can afford, so it just seems pointless at this time since my room is a mess. Once I have the room sorted out, I would have to do the whole cable thing again since what might have worked for that room configuration might be horrible (relatively of course) for my newly treated room.

I do hope you see the concern I have in this matter and don't see me just wanting to argue. I know by now most of you think I am anti-cable, which I am not, but I'm not a believer either until I hear it myself.

p.s. my biggest project at work right now involves automated audio quality measurement, although not home audio it has given me a chance to bring home one of these: http://www2.rohde-schwarz.com/en/products/test_and_measurement/audio/UPV.html

inspiredsports

Sami wrote: »

I find that hard to believe as he is a professional who designs gear so he has access to rooms that are far better than most of us could hope for. You don't design and test your gear in your living room.

I was describing my office / listening room, not my living room. But anyway, a designer not designing for use in the "living room" is missing what a huge portion of his target audience needs. And you'd actually be surprised to learn how many living rooms make for a fairly well balanced chamber for sound reproduction.

Additionally, you don't need to be in a tuned test chamber or cone of silence to hear what good cables can do to improve the listening experience.

Sami

inspiredsports wrote: »

But anyway, a designer not designing for use in the "living room" is missing what a huge portion of his target audience needs.

Not for high-end target audience. When you have money for McIntosh gear, you have money to have a good listening room.

ben62670

Mon40CSMM10 wrote: »

In my own case, I'm running affordable speaker cable: Royal Cable RCSW16GCP50/RCSW18GCP100.

(The RCSW16GCP50 is available as 50 feet of 16 gauge cable. The RCSW18GCP100 is available as 100 feet of 18 gauge cable. Where did I find both of those? Car audio section of a WalMart store.)

Now, I've got a bi-wired arrangement going to the front mains, with the 16 gauge cable going to the lower binding posts and the 18 gauge cable going to the upper binding posts. (Bi-wiring itself did not produce a major audio improvement, though I did find it helped the receiver run cooler.) The rest of the speakers all only use the 18 gauge cable. Cable runs are no more than 12 feet, so it is a very compact home theater arrangement.

Long story made short, I am more than happy with the sound I am getting from the receiver/speaker/speaker cable combination in use.

Could I get even better sound with more expensive cables? Maybe, or maybe not. But unless high end cable manufacturers want to send me cable lengths free of charge to try out, I also don't see why I should spend a significant amount of money trying cables I'll likely not be able to return (once I've cut them to various lengths and removed insulation to allow for connecting to speakers and receivers).

Let's see. You are using the bottom line of Polk's with a fairly cheap receiver(LSI's need a separate amp of decent quality). Your opinion on quality speaker cables is mute. I do agree the WalCheese automotive wire is much better than the "home" speaker cable. I didn't read it. I actually tried it. Till you try something in a higher resolution system your opinion means nothing, but a waste of web space driven by shear ignorance.

I hope this comparison helps. chevettes and Corvettes are both made by chevy, and both have their places. Am I saying the monitors are absolute junk? No. One thing about Polk is dollar for dollar they are in most cases better than other speakers out there in their price range. Also as for internal wire it is pretty cheap stuff that could use replacing in many models of Polk's. The LSI's internal wire is pretty decent. Companies sell products to make money. I am sure that Polk and nearly any other company cuts cost to return maximum return(look at the caps and resistors they use). Also most LSI owners(not so much here) are running the LSI's with crap receivers and crap wire like bottom of the line ~M~ cables, or AR's, or WalCheese wire. Are you going to make a chevette faster by putting drag slicks on it? I hope I dumbed it down enough for people that just don't get it;)

Xcrappy please continue posting. There are still a few people who don't realize how asinine you are:D Also you are good for a laugh;)
Take care.
Ben

hearingimpared

xcapri79 wrote: »

Thank you Roger Russell for ruining the option of getting the best performance out of my rig by limiting my use of better wire throught my rig.

Fixed it for you.;)

BlueFox

inspiredsports wrote: »

That brings up a good point and I don't have much knowledge beyond the simple 5.1 system on my 50" plasma system in the den that the kids use.

Does it even make sense to compare high line cabling in 2 channel systems with 5.1 or 7.1 systems? Is it even in the same ball park or is xcapri comparing football to baseball?

Last week I upgraded my 5.1 HT from hardware store 12 gauge to Mapleshade Clearview Double Helix with Plus option. In another thread there is a review of it. I went with the Mapleshade cable because it made a big improvement in my 2 channel system so I knew it worked.

The HT consists of 4 LSi15s, and a PSB Synchrony One Center, Oppo BD83, Sony 7100ES (pre/pro), Sunfire TGA5400 amp, PSW1000 sub, and a Sony 9100ES SACD player. Around two years ago, I did the room treatment with Auralex Acoustic foam (pyramids). Additionally, over the summer I upgraded (with Mapleshade ICs) the 5 analog ICs between the pre/pro and the amp. Even with the hardware store wire, I was able to hear more detail (leaves rustling, glass breaking, etc.) in the soundtracks with the new ICs.

Then last week, after upgrading the speaker wire, the sound took a giant leap forward. I am hearing things in soundtracks I either never heard before, or existing sounds are so much clearer, more focused, and detailed. Obviously, music is much, much better with the cable upgrade.

For me, there is no question that better wire in a HT has positive results.

inspiredsports

BlueFox wrote: »

Last week I upgraded my 5.1 HT from hardware store 12 gauge to Mapleshade Clearview Double Helix with Plus option. In another thread there is a review of it. I went with the Mapleshade cable because it made a big improvement in my 2 channel system so I knew it worked.

The HT consists of 4 LSi15s, and a PSB Synchrony One Center, Oppo BD83, Sony 7100ES (pre/pro), Sunfire TGA5400 amp, PSW1000 sub, and a Sony 9100ES SACD player. Around two years ago, I did the room treatment with Auralex Acoustic foam (pyramids). Additionally, over the summer I upgraded (with Mapleshade ICs) the 5 analog ICs between the pre/pro and the amp. Even with the hardware store wire, I was able to hear more detail (leaves rustling, glass breaking, etc.) in the soundtracks with the new ICs.

Then last week, after upgrading the speaker wire, the sound took a giant leap forward. I am hearing things in soundtracks I either never heard before, or existing sounds are so much clearer, more focused, and detailed. Obviously, music is much, much better with the cable upgrade.

For me, there is no question that better wire in a HT has positive results.

So then a huge consideration for 5.1 or 7.1 systems would be the need to shell out a huge amount of cash for 6 or 8 cables.

I can see why xCapri would want to deny that he needs to buy 8 high quality cables.

nooshinjohn

inspiredsports wrote: »

I can see why xCapri would want to deny that he needs to buy 8 high quality cables.

I think he would also deny the second coming:eek:....

snow

inspiredsports wrote: »

So then a huge consideration for 5.1 or 7.1 systems would be the need to shell out a huge amount of cash for 6 or 8 cables.

I can see why xCapri would want to deny that he needs to buy 8 high quality cables.

I think his first move should be to sell his amps and buy better quality amp/s, he would get more bang for the buck this way, then upgrade the crossovers in his speakers so if he did buy or try better cables he could actually detect a difference. And I think I should upgrade my crossovers also first because I think that is the weakest point after I get the system the way I want it then I will upgrade the speaker cables it's a bang for the buck thing in my mind.



REGARDS SNOW

BlueFox

inspiredsports wrote: »

So then a huge consideration for 5.1 or 7.1 systems would be the need to shell out a huge amount of cash for 6 or 8 cables.

That is the truth. Throw in the ICs, and it does add up quick. Of course, it is a personal choice how one spends money, and for me it is worth it. However, the cables worked so well it has me now thinking of upgrading the front LSi15s to PSB Synchrony One towers. Yikes, another expense. :eek:

I sure wish I could not hear any difference between components, ICs, speaker wire, etc. My bank account would be much better off.

BlueFox

snow wrote: »

....then upgrade the crossovers in his speakers so if he did buy or try better cables he could actually detect a difference.

Granted, upgraded x-overs might be a worthwhile tweak, but it is not necessary to hear a difference between cables with LSi15s. As you said, the amp should probably be first.

snow

BlueFox wrote: »

Granted, upgraded x-overs might be a worthwhile tweak, but it is not necessary to hear a difference between cables with LSi15s. As you said, the amp should probably be first.

I think you would be able to tell a difference even without upgraded croosovers allright I just think at least for me the biggest margin of improvement would be the crossovers.

Whatever is the weakest link in the chain will yield the biggest improvement. I noticed that when I bought a Sunfire 300 X 2 amp a while back that the RCA inputs were cheaply made, not even gold plated so I had much higher quality RCA's installed and the difference was amazing!! even though I had IC's that were hundreds of dollars a pair and a nice pre sending the signal to the amp the cheap RCA's on the back of the amp was holding it all back.



REGARDS SNOW

heiney9

xcapri79 wrote: »

It goes without saying that good connections are very important.
Good connections along with adequate copper and adequate insulation is all you need for good speaker cable performance. Roger Russell was so right. The rest is for show or bragging rights.
Fancy cables are the audiophile's version of a diamond ring.

Based on the poll results to date, it is good to see that more and more people on this forum are seeing it that way.

And how many different cables have you tried again? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Red bolded in your statement is pure BS. Come back when you've actually tried it and given it a good audition. Like I said why aren't you in the almost free MIT cable swap program................because you have a very limited view of this hobby and an extremely closed mind........and you like stirring the pot and being a troll.

H9

BlueFox

xcapri79 wrote: »

The rest is for show or bragging rights.
Fancy cables are the audiophile's version of a diamond ring.

That is correct. Women swoon, and drop their drawers, when they see/hear good speaker cables. :rolleyes:

megasat16

xcapri79 wrote: »

The rest is for show or bragging rights.
Fancy cables are the audiophile's version of a diamond ring.

Why are you still crapping this thread and insulting others who knows what they can hear, xcapri?

You don't have to try or hear a good cable since you can't hear a difference anyway but why you kept insulting others who paid a good money on cables coz they can hear (I know I can)?

As such, we the cable believers don't need to go out and insult Roger Russell or you alike who can't hear a difference in cables.

The cable believers probably pity the naysayers for their less hearing ability and the naysayer probably should pity the cable believers for spending the crazy amount of money on the snake oil (even though not a cent comes out from their pocket). :rolleyes:

dorokusai

xcapri79 wrote: »

Based on the poll results to date, it is good to see that more and more people on this forum are seeing it that way.

Just because I voted genius doesn't mean I'm on your side.

inspiredsports

xcapri79 wrote: »

"Roger Russell was so right."

So, understanding the reason the above sentence was included in his last post, one can only wonder why he is not on my my "trolls to ignore list". But then again, his entertainment value is so very high.