Differences in sound between Hi-Fi brand

[wilro15]

Its not always that straight forward because your personal preference and the room are also a factor.

So if you went for Arcam (warm/dark) + Monitor Audio (forward) based on the above, you would think that gives you a system somewhere between warm and forward. Your personal preference might be for darker/warmer sounds, so Arcam/MA might still be too bright.

Also if your room is full of reflective surfaces that can give the impression of too much brightness too!

*dash1*

What I found difficult was determining what my preferences are. I used to gravitate towards bright/forward sounds because I liked to hear all the details of music exposed but I ended up with a system that gave me earache! So now I have gone a bit darker (moving from Naim to Abrahamsen/Electrocompaniet). Also have been making my room less reflective.

Its taken me years to get it right . . . I think I am there now *drinks*

 

[drummerman]

I would differentiate between hifi sounding and fun.

The former has good soundstage, good bass/mid/treble and perceived fine detail but somewhat doesn't 'let go' ie. it sits a little on the dynamics of music and you may feel a constant need to turn the volume up but it strangely doesn't make much of a difference. Everything just goes louder but micro (and larger) dynamics don't seem to stand out.

The latter sometimes doesn't excel in the usual hifi niceties but lets rip and sounds 'involving'. Soundstage may be smaller, treble and bass may not be as pronounced. It's a more 'cohesive' musical presentation, less apart, more of a piece but it ebbs, flows and bounces.

I've had hifi of both camps and they both have their merrits but as I get older (and more beautiful) I am more of the side of the latter. - Actually, it probably started from when I used valves.

It may be less 'accurate' and I appreciate that some wouldn't want to go down that road. As an example, I own two cyrus cd players (remember those), one two or three generations older than the other and I prefer the older one (less treble detail, more confined soundstage but better rhythmics and warmer sounding, slight treble roll-off and with this, a slightly more constricted stage).

@ Cno ... hope you feel better soon buddy

 

[CnoEvil]

@ Cno ... hope you feel better soon buddy

Thank you, Sir.

 

[CnoEvil]

Here are my subjective assessments, which are personal and not everyone will agree.

Forward / Bold / Exciting / Analytical

Chord

Cyrus

Cambridge Audio

Clean / Detailed / A little uninvolving

- Linn

- Bel Canto

- Digital Nad

- Moon

- Primare

- Densen

[font="ProximaNova-Semibold, arial, verdana, sans-serif"]Neutral[/font]

- Griffon

- Bryston

- Hegel

Fairly Neutral / Hint of warmth

- Plinius

- ATC

- Classe

- Mark Levinson

[font="ProximaNova-Semibold, arial, verdana, sans-serif"]Bold / Musical / Fun[/font]

- Rega

- Creek

- Roksan

- Exposure

- Leema

- Naim

- Krell

- Nad

Slightly Warmer / Darker

- Musical Fidelity

-Electrocompaniet

- Arcam

- Audio Analogue

- Unison Research Unico

- Quad

- McIntosh

Rich / Clear / Engaging / Euphonious[/b]

- Accuphase

- Luxman

- Pathos

- Sugden

- Audio Research

- Croft

Musical / Delicate

- Ayre

- Aesthetix

- Coda

- Lavardin

 

[Vladimir]

I would differentiate between hifi sounding and fun.

Well said. High fidelity is like pure and tasteless drink of water.

 

[assault]

I would differentiate between hifi sounding and fun.

Well said. High fidelity is like pure and tasteless drink of water.

I totally agree with you. Both of you.

 

[CnoEvil]

Can someone give an example of a system that is "hifi sounding", but not fun....and vica versa?

Where does hifi sounding end and fun sounding begin?

 

[Vladimir]

Naim = not high fidelity, expensive, fun

Harman / Kardon = high fidelity, affordable, boring.

At this point in technological progress, SS amplification (Naim excluded) and digital media 16/44.1 and up is high fidelity. So valves, cassettes and vinyl don't meet the standards for high fidelity like they used to 50 years ago (that's half a century ago).

 

[CnoEvil]

Naim = not high fidelity, expensive, fun

Harman / Kardon = high fidelity, affordable, boring

I see....though I suppose "fun" is very personal.

 

[drummerman]

Can someone give an example of a system that is "hifi sounding", but not fun....and vica versa?

Where does hifi sounding end and fun sounding begin?

I didn't mention brands simply because certain products of a particular brand may deviate from the house sound or the house sound slowly changes/evolves with new products but taking a broad sweep at it ... Cambridge Audio, Denon = Hifi ... Naim/Cyrus = fun

If review and owner comments are to be believed, a brand which has changed its house sound would probably include Rega (not the TT's). - Imho their products up until about 6 years ago sided on the detailed, neutral but slightly dynamically flat camp with their speakers injecting the necessary pepp (system synergy obviously). - Recent amplifiers have been reported to be even forward and energetic. Perhaps the speakers are now more rounded to compensate for that?

Naim too have changed their sound signature. I find nothing harsh about the Supernait/XS but they haven't lost the 'fun factor'.

I am sure manufacturers do listen to reviews and adapt without completely loosing identity.

 

[CnoEvil]

I didn't mention brands simply because certain products of a particular brand may deviate from the house sound or the house sound slowly changes/evolves with new products but taking a broad sweep at it ... Cambridge Audio, Denon = Hifi ... Naim/Cyrus = fun

If review and owner comments are to be believed, a brand which has changed its house sound would probably include Rega (not the TT's). - Imho their products up until about 6 years ago sided on the detailed, neutral but slightly dynamically flat camp with their speakers injecting the necessary pepp (system synergy obviously). - Recent amplifiers have been reported to be even forward and energetic. Perhaps the speakers are now more rounded to compensate for that?

Naim too have changed their sound signature. I find nothing harsh about the Supernait/XS but they haven't lost the 'fun factor'.

I am sure manufacturers do listen to reviews and adapt without completely loosing identity.

I can understand where you are coming from, but once you get away from describing sound and start trying to catagorize concepts, it becomes even more subjective. eg. I don't find Naim fun (ie. enjoyable/entertaining/pleasurable) and I would put Cyrus into the Hifi sounding catagory.

 

[drummerman]

I didn't mention brands simply because certain products of a particular brand may deviate from the house sound or the house sound slowly changes/evolves with new products but taking a broad sweep at it ... Cambridge Audio, Denon = Hifi ... Naim/Cyrus = fun

If review and owner comments are to be believed, a brand which has changed its house sound would probably include Rega (not the TT's). - Imho their products up until about 6 years ago sided on the detailed, neutral but slightly dynamically flat camp with their speakers injecting the necessary pepp (system synergy obviously). - Recent amplifiers have been reported to be even forward and energetic. Perhaps the speakers are now more rounded to compensate for that?

Naim too have changed their sound signature. I find nothing harsh about the Supernait/XS but they haven't lost the 'fun factor'.

I am sure manufacturers do listen to reviews and adapt without completely loosing identity.

I can understand where you are coming from, but once you get away from describing sound and start trying to catagorize concepts, it becomes even more subjective. eg. I don't find Naim fun (ie. enjoyable/entertaining/pleasurable) and I would put Cyrus into the Hifi sounding catagory.

Subjective, of course. Also, my cyrus system is now a few years old and I haven't heard their newest products so what you say could be the case.

Either that or I am deaf

 

[tonky]

Naim - I used to be a sceptic - but not now. Great sound - definitely not harsh - lovely rich clear soundstage (Naim Unitilite) no oversensitive inputs that I can hear.

Is it HiFi - sounds great to me!

tonky

 

[Vladimir]

Naim = not high fidelity, expensive, fun

Harman / Kardon = high fidelity, affordable, boring

I see....though I suppose "fun" is very personal.

If you believe all people are snowflakes, you shouldn't seek employment in sales and marketing.

 

[CnoEvil]

Naim = not high fidelity, expensive, fun

Harman / Kardon = high fidelity, affordable, boring

I see....though I suppose "fun" is very personal.

If you believe all people are snowflakes, you shouldn't seek employement in sales and marketing.

I generally don't deal in absolutes. People do usually fall into basic groups (brigades), where taste in hifi is concerned eg. Active, Valve, Digital, Class A etc.....and people who like Naim/Cyrus. *biggrin*

 

[Gazzip]

Naim = not high fidelity, expensive, fun

Harman / Kardon = high fidelity, affordable, boring.

At this point in technological progress, SS amplification (Naim excluded) and digital media 16/44.1 and up is high fidelity. So valves, cassettes and vinyl don't meet the standards for high fidelity like they used to 50 years ago (that's half a century ago).

.....and then there are some very clever products out there that can trick you in to thinking they are Hifi but which are actually "fun". Audio Research are very, very good at doing this, hence my love affair with their source and front end products. I partner them with Bryston and PMC (what I would class as neutral "Hifi") so that the ARC stuff can do its fun thing without any other sonic flavours being added to the mix.

 

[Infiniteloop]

Naim = not high fidelity, expensive, fun

Harman / Kardon = high fidelity, affordable, boring.

At this point in technological progress, SS amplification (Naim excluded) and digital media 16/44.1 and up is high fidelity. So valves, cassettes and vinyl don't meet the standards for high fidelity like they used to 50 years ago (that's half a century ago).

You should add electroacoustic transducers (loudspeakers) to your list Vlad. Their origins date back to a time before valves. - Over a century ago.

 

[iQ Speakers]

Blimey an interesting post about Hifi in general and Abrahamsen is mentioned along side Naim. What is the world coming too. I'm in the camp of kit should not colour music however there are always compromises. Ultimately it's about what you enjoy, having said that if you enjoy driving an Audi but you could of had a Jag for the same price or less you are living in ignorance of the better experience. You are safe and comfortable with your Naim/Audi. As they say bliss is ignorance.? Different Strokes for different folks. Unless we have all tried every single bit of kit, in our own room, under our terms, listening to our music, we are all living in blissful ignorance! God help us all. *blum3*

 

[tonky]

I put that comment in the same category as "When seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea". - Eric Cantona

 

[lindsayt]

Which Jaguar would I prefer driving to an Audi RS6?

For track use, which Jaguar would I prefer to an Audi R18?

 

[lindsayt]

Can someone give an example of a system that is "hifi sounding", but not fun....and vica versa?

Where does hifi sounding end and fun sounding begin?

I agree Cno. There's no reason why we can't be ambitious and go for systems that are good at the "fidelity" stuff: detail retrieval, focus, pitch stability and accuracy, whilst also being good at the "fun" stuff: dynamics and relatively full neutral frequency response.

An example of "hi-fi" sounding but not fun source would be a SME 20/12a with Koetsu or AN Io Ltd cartridge. Great at detail retrieval, pitch stability and accuracy. Relatively poor at dynamics.

 

[iQ Speakers]

Which Jaguar would I prefer driving to an Audi RS6?

For track use, which Jaguar would I prefer to an Audi R18?

The XFR

As for the R18 typo? if not Jag did do well at Le Mans a while ago but they would not let me drive one.

 

[pauln]

Blimey an interesting post about Hifi in general and Abrahamsen is mentioned along side Naim. What is the world coming too. I'm in the camp of kit should not colour music however there are always compromises. Ultimately it's about what you enjoy, having said that if you enjoy driving an Audi but you could of had a Jag for the same price or less you are living in ignorance of the better experience. You are safe and comfortable with your Naim/Audi. As they say bliss is ignorance.? Different Strokes for different folks. Unless we have all tried every single bit of kit, in our own room, under our terms, listening to our music, we are all living in blissful ignorance! God help us all. *blum3*

No way Naim and Audi. Totally different design philosophy. Audi use Bang and Olufsen in their higher priced models (or as an upgrade) while I think Jaguar use Meridien and it's Bentley that go for Naim.

Audi beats Jag every time for me, all through the range up to R8 vs F Type.

 

[iQ Speakers]

Its all entirely personel, but have you driven the new Jags? They are sensational. I'm affraid Audi dont handle well enough for me and there reliability according to warranty direct is abysmal, coming 2nd from last in engine reliabilty brands. Rover was last!

 

[pauln]

Its all entirely personel, but have you driven the new Jags? They are sensational. I'm affraid Audi dont handle well enough for me and there reliability according to warranty direct is abysmal, coming 2nd from last in engine reliabilty brands. Rover was last!

Not driven the new ones, last Jag I drove was a friends restored E type, quite fun but not an everyday car - much prefer my TT (3.2 V6 Quattro version) Never had any trouble with that or the A4 before that, maybe I've been lucky, touch wood. Quite fancy a 3.0 Diesel A4 next.

I assume you know Jaguar Land Rover is one company now? Indian owned. Don't know how that relates to reliability of Rover vs Jaguar cars going by your comment above.