I think I found my 'end game' speaker

24

Comments

  • FaceFace Posts: 14,714
    edited August 2012
    ravaneli wrote: »
    High end tube CD player LoL. This is exactly the kind of stuff that ticks me off. The only high end thing with a tube cd player is it's cost. Nothing else. Almost all decent CD players reproduce sound 1:1 with the source. Stereophille.com has reviews and bench tests on many of them, go take a look and tell me where their flaw is.

    And vinyl?? It is amazing that there are still people that believe that vinyl has some kind of superiority over any digital format. It's like trying to pull science out of the bible. Whatever you want to record on vinyl will always be better recorded digitally. Unless the screeching has some santimental value for you..

    Time to move on, no?
    inexperience-demotivational-poster-1220815837.jpg
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
  • naturallightnaturallight Posts: 689
    edited August 2012
    My comment about trying different source supplies, was strictly that. If I was going to spend 20K on speakers..I'd bring my own Pre, the Op says he wants a new amp to run them..I would try out a number of amps, plus I would try out different input sorces, such as a high end CD player and some Vinyl..see how you like them. Nothing more. I'm not sure I'd spend 20K basied on what i heard off a Macbook. But ravaneli's comments..as seems the norm for him...are so screwed up, i have no comments .....
  • FaceFace Posts: 14,714
    edited August 2012
    There's nothing wrong with a macbook as long as it's hooked up to the right DAC.
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
  • ravaneliravaneli Posts: 530
    edited August 2012
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I have found that tube based computers provide the best sound quality. ENIAC and MANIAC I offer a smooth, well defined and articulated sound unmatched by the current silicon based CPUs. :wink:

    touche :lol:
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I have found that tube based computers provide the best sound quality. ENIAC and MANIAC I offer a smooth, well defined and articulated sound unmatched by the current silicon based CPUs. :wink:
    But as in all things your perception is your reality.
  • naturallightnaturallight Posts: 689
    edited August 2012
    I'm NOT saying there is a problem with a Macbook......again..all i'm saying is for that kind of money....I would try out all the sorce inputs i could. Nothing more.
  • AsSiMiLaTeDAsSiMiLaTeD Posts: 11,717
    edited August 2012
    You guys must think I'm really dumb :-)

    Of course Im not going to spend $15K on speakers without a thorough evaluation. Like I said, I've got plenty of time to evaluate them as I build up the funds. I'll skip the 'high end' CD player as I feel my Squeezebox or Macbook with a proper DAC sounds just as good if not better, but some vinyl will definitely be in order. The source is actually the least of my worries, my bigger issue is going to be finding the right amp
  • naturallightnaturallight Posts: 689
    edited August 2012
    No..your not dumb at all...LOL Your amp choice is probably going to be critical. Good luck on your hunting, and I hope you find the right amp that works for you.
  • DMaraDMara Posts: 1,436
    edited August 2012
    The source is actually the least of my worries, my bigger issue is going to be finding the right amp

    So which amp is Audio Concepts using to drive these speakers?
    Gears shared to both living room & bedroom:
    Integra DHC-80.3 / Oppo BDP-105 / DirecTV HR24 DVR /APC S15blk PC-UPS
    Living room:
    LSiM707's / LSiM706c / LSiM702 F/X's / dual JL Audio Fathom F113's / Parasound Halo A51 / Panasonic 65" TC-P65VT50
    Bedroom:
    Usher Dancer Mini 2 Diamond DMD's / Logitech SB Touch / W4S STP-SE / W4S DAC-2 / W4S ST-1000 / Samsung 52" LN52B750
    Other rooms:
    Audioengine AP4's / GLOW Audio Sub One / audio-gd NFB-3 DAC / Audioengine N22
    audio-gd NFB-10.2 / Denon AH-D7000
  • AsSiMiLaTeDAsSiMiLaTeD Posts: 11,717
    edited August 2012
    They had it hooked up to what looked like a small naim integrated all in one thing. There is simply no way that little device was driving those speakers at anywhere near their full capacity, but even so they sounded perfect. I figured if they sound that good with that little runt amp then I can only imagine what some real power would do for them. I didn't have them running around and swapping components, but when I'm ready financially I'll have them move them into the room with the big boy amps.
  • gdbgdb Posts: 6,125
    edited August 2012
    Congrats on finding your soul mate speakers ! The Duettes surely are more attractive than the big Wilsons that resemble a municipal trashcan, found on many sidewalks. Very interesting looking tweeter too ! :biggrin:
  • nooshinjohnnooshinjohn Posts: 21,300
    edited August 2012
    ravaneli wrote: »
    High end tube CD player LoL. This is exactly the kind of stuff that ticks me off. The only high end thing with a tube cd player is it's cost. Nothing else. Almost all decent CD players reproduce sound 1:1 with the source. Stereophille.com has reviews and bench tests on many of them, go take a look and tell me where their flaw is.

    And vinyl?? It is amazing that there are still people that believe that vinyl has some kind of superiority over any digital format. It's like trying to pull science out of the bible. Whatever you want to record on vinyl will always be better recorded digitally. Unless the screeching has some santimental value for you..

    Time to move on, no?

    You come up with some of the dumbest posts I have ever read here. 5 years in on this forum and you have yet to learn anything.:rolleyes:
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, TriangleArt Reference SE with Pass Labs Xono Phono Preamp, Walker Precision Motor Drive, ClearAudio Goldfinger Diamond v2 cartridge and Origin Conquerer Mk3c tonearm, Polk Audio "Signature" Reference Series 1.2TL with complete mods, Pass Labs X0.2 three chassis preamp, PS Audio PerfectWave DAC MkII, Pioneer Elite SC-LX701, Oppo UDP-205 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk audio AB700/800 "in-wall" surrounds.

    Saying that it's "too hard" to pursue your dreams is no different than admitting to yourself that you are too lazy to achieve them.

    “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”
  • tonybtonyb Posts: 31,430
    edited August 2012
    You come up with some of the dumbest posts I have ever read here. 5 years in on this forum and you have yet to learn anything.:rolleyes:

    Or experience anything....but the guy is opinionated for sure and that alone isn't a crime. It's the disguising of opinion, lack of experience, as solid advice where the downfall happens.

    Either that, or his ears are just plain ol' shot so none of this matters a hill of beans to him.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1430
    Tad 803 speakers
  • ravaneliravaneli Posts: 530
    edited August 2012
    for the record, i would be happy to claim property rights on my opinions, but they are not really mine, none of them. These are all conclusions that I have found in Stereophille, Audio Critic and a few other magazines and web sources. There are conflicting opinions in the audio community about many of these and I usually go on the side that uses bench tests and logic. I have zero respect for the perception of members for 'good' or 'bad' sound. It just means nothing.

    By the way, everyone here should know that the prevailing opinions HERE do not represent AT ALL the prevailing opinion in circles that are actually qualified to make judgement, like Audio Engineering Society. You can find and read presentations of those guys. No tube bullsh1t will ever fly there, no power conditioners, no cables, no amp difference and in general nothing that can't be shown on paper.

    If anything I find most of the members here severely misinformed of the opinions of actual people that have knowledge about these things.
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I have found that tube based computers provide the best sound quality. ENIAC and MANIAC I offer a smooth, well defined and articulated sound unmatched by the current silicon based CPUs. :wink:
    But as in all things your perception is your reality.
  • B RunB Run Posts: 1,896
    edited August 2012
    ravaneli wrote: »
    No tube bullsh1t will ever fly there, no power conditioners, no cables, no amp difference and in general nothing that can't be shown on paper

    If you really think dirty power, home depot speaker wire and any old amp (pro audio in your case) will work just as good and not make ANY sonic improvement, then you are just ignorant. I like how you speak for the entire audio engineering society now too.
    Living Room: Polk Lsim705’s, Lsim 704c, SVS SB12-NSD, Yamaha Rxa-2030, Denon DBT1713, Doug's Furutech SC's, Pepster PC's, Vizio 75" 4K M Series, Airport Express

    Bedroom: 70" Vizio, Pioneer Vsx530, Boston Acoustics CR7’s

    Theater Room: BenQ HT2050a, Stewart Firehawk 110", Pioneer Elite SC63, Lsim703’s, LSiM706c, Lsim 702f/x, SVS SB12-NSD, Xbox One
  • AsSiMiLaTeDAsSiMiLaTeD Posts: 11,717
    edited August 2012
    Care to share links to all those articles? If everybody in the audio industry believes that then why are there so many companies making products and so many people buying them?

    Personally, I'll never let a 'bench test' dictate what I buy. I'm not a machine, I don't hear like a machine, and I don't care what a machine tells me. I hear with my ears, and I let me ears tell me what I like and what I don't like. If I can consistenly hear a difference between two pieces of gear and prefer one over the other then that's all I need to know. You can say that only what's on paper counts and that I'm fooling myself into liking something that's not good, but then you're passing judgement on my methods and what I like which just invalidates anything else you have to say.

    Given your stance, why are you even here as a member of an audio forum???
  • DawgfishDawgfish Posts: 2,557
    edited August 2012
    This guy is a troll pure and simple. Let's quit given him any satisfaction and quit taking his bait.
  • ravaneliravaneli Posts: 530
    edited August 2012
    I came here seeking advice. You can search my first posts. Then I started reading myself and got quickly irritated with the prevailing opinions here. My right to be here is no smaller than your. I don't have to conform to your weird cult in order to post here.

    As for sources.. Stereophille has probably thousands of bench tests on all kinds of equipment. The Audio critic.. that magazine is pure gold. There is no issue that is not priceless. Go to their we and grab the back issues that are available for free and start reading from beginning. All arguments come from science and deduction. Nothing, nothing is accepted merely based on someone's perception or opinion. Also there are many papers and studies available for free. When u see a reference to a study, just google it, you can often find it, though not always. Like I said, i would be PROUD to be the one who has come with what I have been saying, but the truth is I am just repeating studies that someone else did. My contribution I guess is that I read them and found the arguments plausible.

    There is no dirty power and basic copper cables cannot be beat by expensive cables of any kind. At least for normal distances. Tubes are inherently inferier to solid state amps and much more expensive. Nothing that cannot be demonstrated and replicated in a double blind test is true. Everything that we can hear can be measured, thus differences between audio equipment must be demonstrated with measurement or at least confirmed by a double blind test. Just some food for your awakening.
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I have found that tube based computers provide the best sound quality. ENIAC and MANIAC I offer a smooth, well defined and articulated sound unmatched by the current silicon based CPUs. :wink:
    But as in all things your perception is your reality.
  • gdbgdb Posts: 6,125
    edited August 2012
    Or your going away party............I think you may have ripped your drawers with that "cult" crack.:eek:
  • DawgfishDawgfish Posts: 2,557
    edited August 2012
    ravaneli wrote: »
    I came here seeking advice. You can search my first posts. Then I started reading myself and got quickly irritated with the prevailing opinions here. My right to be here is no smaller than your. I don't have to conform to your weird cult in order to post here.

    As for sources.. Stereophille has probably thousands of bench tests on all kinds of equipment. The Audio critic.. that magazine is pure gold. There is no issue that is not priceless. Go to their we and grab the back issues that are available for free and start reading from beginning. All arguments come from science and deduction. Nothing, nothing is accepted merely based on someone's perception or opinion. Also there are many papers and studies available for free. When u see a reference to a study, just google it, you can often find it, though not always. Like I said, i would be PROUD to be the one who has come with what I have been saying, but the truth is I am just repeating studies that someone else did. My contribution I guess is that I read them and found the arguments plausible.

    There is no dirty power and basic copper cables cannot be beat by expensive cables of any kind. At least for normal distances. Tubes are inherently inferier to solid state amps and much more expensive. Nothing that cannot be demonstrated and replicated in a double blind test is true. Everything that we can hear can be measured, thus differences between audio equipment must be demonstrated with measurement or at least confirmed by a double blind test. Just some food for your awakening.

    Let's see here. You accept somebody's bench test or reports as gospel without ever having listened to the said equipment yourself and verified that what the reports are saying is correct. You then turn around and discount the findings of several members of CP who have sat down and listened and experimented for themselves and have based their opinions on ACTUAL real world experience, but we're the cult. I base my findings on what I actually hear myself from experimentation, you blindly follow the opinions of some magazine, web article, or bench test without actually verifying to see if they are correct, but yet again I am blindly following some cult. Tell me how that makes any sense whatsever?

    I have read many, many articles and websites regarding most things audio related and the prevailing conventional wisdom is much more in line with the prevailing opinion of CP than the jacked opinion you have. As has been stated earlier it is your opinion and you are entitled to it. You are also welcome to this board just like everybody else provided you operate within the rules and regulations of the board, which you have.

    Where you go wrong is telling people that their own experiences are total bs and trying to give people advice on subjects that once again it is obvious to everybody here that you know nothing about. You may have initially came here seeking advice, but I am convinced the only reason you come around here now is to troll and stir up crap.
  • DSkipDSkip Posts: 16,110
    edited August 2012
    Its like you're telling us how to kiss a girl when all you've ever done is hold their hand. You can't even get to first base until you experience it. Why is it so hard for you to gain a little experience? Skeer'd of cooties or something?

    Keep reading that dirty porno mag under your bed. That's what real sex is.....yeah.
  • EndersShadowEndersShadow Posts: 16,817
    edited August 2012
    What I find funny is these guys are the same folks that wont participate in free demos of gear.... for instance the MIT demo... for someone who says cable's dont make a difference why wouldnt you try them out just so you can say you did....

    ya know.....
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
  • ravaneliravaneli Posts: 530
    edited August 2012
    have you come accross of a negative review of freshly purchased gear? Is it all great? Some people come to honesty once they purchase the next item and sell the one they initially praised. One life is not enough to demo everything yourself. What about the entire world of science in general? Every single law in math, physics chemistry and whatnot - did you try everything yourself? At what point will you admit that we need to trust science over personal perceptions? I mean the list of problems with reliability of personal perceptions is too long to even scratch! Note that I don't condemn all perceptions! Only the ones that cannot be reproduced in testing. If you pick expensive cables every time in a blind test that is a different thing. But why on earth should I have more trust in your words than a bench test? Are you seriously suggesting that we take member opinions over bench tests and measurements? I mean what else do you have opinions on? Math? Physics? Where do u concede you lack credibility?
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I have found that tube based computers provide the best sound quality. ENIAC and MANIAC I offer a smooth, well defined and articulated sound unmatched by the current silicon based CPUs. :wink:
    But as in all things your perception is your reality.
  • DawgfishDawgfish Posts: 2,557
    edited August 2012
    I've said it before and I'll say it again, math does not 100% explain or replicate everything that happens in nature. Part of being a good scientist is realizing that. That's why we have tolerances, statistical error, and probability. Math is only perfect in the realm of math itself. Have you ever considered the fact that technology has not advanced enough to be able to acurrately predict and measure how the human anatomy and mind interprets sound? Another thing you quickly learn in science is we still don't know much about a lot of things. Maybe one day instruments and meathods will be developed that more accurately measure how the human mind percieves sound, but at this state in time I don't think we are there. Till then and even after then, I'll trust mey ears.
  • EndersShadowEndersShadow Posts: 16,817
    edited August 2012
    Adding to Dawg's comment....

    Just because the data says it sounds a certain way doesnt mean your ears and my ears hear it the same. You may be more sensitive to frequencies I am not, same with me...

    So just because data says it sounds good doesnt mean to you it wont sound like crap while to me it will sound like angels from heaven.....

    The variable you cannot predict or adjust for is the HUMAN EAR, hence one of my favorite sayings "It only matters how it sounds to you"
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
  • steveinazsteveinaz Posts: 18,998
    edited August 2012
    I applaud your efforts, too many people "ignore" their speakers and spend forever trying to figure out why they are dissatisfied their system.

    I have found that the speakers I enjoy the most---actually do improve poorly recorded source material to a certain degree. It's my opinion that this occurs because your better speakers are accurate in the most critical frequencies---the same frequencies that lesser quality speakers destroy; and that we are most sensitive to on poorly recorded material. Just my 2 cents...

    Neutrality definitions are all over the map. Go for organic, realism---you'll know when you hear it.
  • ravaneliravaneli Posts: 530
    edited August 2012
    my brilliant new sig demonstrates this argument best :)
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I have found that tube based computers provide the best sound quality. ENIAC and MANIAC I offer a smooth, well defined and articulated sound unmatched by the current silicon based CPUs. :wink:
    But as in all things your perception is your reality.
  • steveinazsteveinaz Posts: 18,998
    edited August 2012
    ravaneli---you have to climb out of the box my man. Quit reading specification sheets and go get your ears on some real music., Technologies like tubes and turntables survive for a reason bubba.

    There are people on this forum who can pretty much afford whatever they want--yet they plug along with their tube setups---why do you think that is?
  • gdbgdb Posts: 6,125
    edited August 2012
    Did you come to the conclusion that CP is a cult on you own, or, are you relying on someone elses published findings on the matter ???:lol:
  • steveinazsteveinaz Posts: 18,998
    edited August 2012
    LOL!!! Ouch...hehe
  • F1nutF1nut Posts: 42,665
    edited August 2012
    troll wrote:
    Are you seriously suggesting that we take member opinions over bench tests and measurements?

    I'll take an opinion based on experience over anything else (except my own experience), especially bench tests and measurements because they CANNOT tell you how it sounds.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!