HiFi and looks

[Farmitou]

I'm was just wondering how important it is to people. When choosing new components : it's obviously sound lead, but with more and more companies offering top end sound with looks to die for, which way do most people go and whats important to you guys? Looks and sound, or sound or simply looks?

Personally it has to be both and previously I built up B&O systems that to be honest didn't stand ground against my new system soundwise, although lookswise perfection. Now I'd say personally the sound has to be impecable, however the system must also look amazing too (a bit shallow I know lol)...

So what and your thoughts and preferences (also whats your dream piece of kit, forget cost...it is a dream piece after all).

 

[chebby]

More important to me now than I ever thought years ago.

Most hifi is hideous looking from any angle but the front fascia, and most manufacturers (especially the British ones) manage to louse that up too!

If only they would all chip in and collectively hire a really good industrial designer.

My own kit is no 'design icon', but at least it has the virtue of being compact, so more easily ignored.

 

[kevin7.1]

I would be more bothered about how my kit sounds my purchases are based on reviews of the sound and after going to the manchester show any new kit i buy will be auditioned first. At the minute i am listening to Spotify going from my pc through a Asus Xonar Essence ST (bought for reported sound quality) to my av receiver a Sony 1200 ES which i bought purely because of the review it received in what hifi thankfully the reviews where right the amp is amaizing with movies and i love the sound i get with music!!

That said there is an element of how it looks which factors in to my mindset now. For example i changed my cd player for a champagne colored Marantz cd player because my reciever is silver and i thought the black cd player looked silly against it. I had a budget for a second hand player so i scoured ebay and reviews until i found something i was happy with it came in imaculate condition and did sound better than my old cd player so i was happy.

I like my kit to look expensive so when i saw my receiver in the shop i was happy and now would prefer if possible for my next receiver to have an aluminium facia but at the minute i am liking the current Onkyo receivers due to the reviews they are getting.

So if i shortlisted two components and one looked ten times better but the other sounded ten times better i would go with the best sounding component.

my dream kit would be the Classe set up (including the cables) that B&W had at the manchester show with the PM1's i have never heard anything like it wouldn't need any better sounding speakers.

more realisticaly the bryston/pmc kit would be nice out of reach for now but i will try to make it happen in the future.

for av which ever sounded best out of the Pioneer and Onkyo 9.2 channel av amps.

 

[kevin7.1]

whats your dream kit chebby??

 

[Anonymous]

Always a tricky compromise. I like stuff to look appealing and readily admit I will discount ugly boxes for sure (having said that I have a pair of Acoustic Energy AE1 Classics which are not exactly a design statement although fairly unobtrusive). My brother also has a pair of monstrous ATC speakers (2 man lift to move them), but they produce bass to die for. Anyone remember those Gale 401 speakers with the chrome end caps - now thay did look the part. I agree also that having compact boxes is handy these days also, Sonos is good as the small boxes, although they are white, can be hidden away out of sight - the joys of wireless.

 

[plastic penguin]

Looks are important... up to a point. Course, the SQ is essential but having to look at a pug-ugly component would turn my stomach after a while. One of the ugliest is Nad IMO.

Might be worth looking at my recent post: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/the-perfect-amplifier

 

[John Duncan]

One of the ugliest is Nad IMO.

To be fair I think NAD have sorted out their looks (primarily by changing their colour to something closer to black) and they're up there with most other manufacturers now.

 

[John Duncan]

But to answer the question, I htink hifi should look cool. I get upset if two components are 5mm different in width or are a different black. Which means I tend to go for equipment from the same manufacturer.

 

[John Duncan]

Oh and tell me you don't want one of these, even if you have no records:

 

[Anonymous]

Sound is much more important than looks, BUT I wouldn't buy something I thought was ugly.

I personally like the look of old NAD equipment, I had a NAD 310 amp many moons ago, and I liked it.

My dream kit. Within reason, the new Avi ADM40s probably (and I'd keep my Squeezebox as source), and at only £3000 they are not beyond a future purchase

The best system I have heard. Lyngdorf CD-1, Classe amplification, Lyngdorf roomperfect processing and B&W 800D.

If I won the lottery I'd buy both of the above and AB them!

 

[John Duncan]

Classé amplification

Just get a Sony AVR.

 

[plastic penguin]

One of the ugliest is Nad IMO.

To be fair I think NAD have sorted out their looks (primarily by changing their colour to something closer to black) and they're up there with most other manufacturers now.

It's a Creek Evo with different badge.

 

[plastic penguin]

Oh and tell me you don't want one of these, even if you have no records:

Good at dusting, JD?

TBH, it looks gorgeous but not practical.

 

[Anonymous]

Classé amplification

Just get a Sony AVR.

I would probably get one of the new Yamaha Aventage AV receivers to be honest. I wouldn't bother with the overpriced amplification. But the thread (and AB test you are referring to) is very telling.

 

[Farmitou]

My dream piece would be O'heocha speakers, I just can see then sounding as good as wooden counterparts, I've tried some of the original blueroom speakers too and they did sound good, but no where near "traditional" designs of the same price range, so have become part of my TV system. I do think though, if the choice has to be made beteen 2 simular performing components that looks will be the deciding factor.

 

[John Duncan]

it looks gorgeous but not practical.

So a turntable, then?

 

[Anonymous]

I don't care about design, but built quality is an issue.

I mean I don't care if an amplifier is ugly but it must be built with top quality electro-mechanical parts (potentiometer, input selector, etc) and finishing (cabinet, bornes, RCA/XLR and loudspeakers conectors, etc) so that it last for 20 years or longer.

 

[John Duncan]

the thread (and AB test you are referring to) you are referring to is very telling.

Yes it is, in so many ways.

 

[chebby]

the thread (and AB test you are referring to) you are referring to is very telling.

Yes it is, in so many ways.

Can you post/link pictures of the two items (Sony and Classe?) so we can look at them?

 

[AlmaataKZ]

looks - very important.

why would I have anything in my home that I do not like the look of?

also - very subjective.

 

[Anonymous]

20 years a go I would say looks were less important, I bought whatever sounded the best and placed it on a traditional hifi stand with multiple shelves so it still looked "nice" but obviously it was still looking like a hifi rather than a nice piece of furniture. However that was when my hifi was in my bedroo,

These days the hifi is centre stage in the living room so it has to look aesthetically pleasing and fit in wih other furniture, and also there is limited room for this and other equipment & furniture. More by luck than judgement, the Wadia and mono blocks are all very large (heavy), rectangular, black lumps nicely fitting in an AV stand below the telly. I quite like the look and would want to keep some symmetry. As and when I come to replace something, the new equipment will have to find a home in this setting.

 

[John Duncan]

the thread (and AB test you are referring to) you are referring to is very telling.

Yes it is, in so many ways.

Can you post/link pictures of the two items (Sony and Classe?) so we can look at them?

Both ugly, IMO... :-D

 

[Paul.]

There is only one think that can make an amp look good, and that is VU meters

 

[Gusboll]

As can be seen from my gear list, looks are by no means important (although the PMC's are fairly pretty), but I do like the look of some of the Primare kit.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

the thread (and AB test you are referring to) you are referring to is very telling.

Yes it is, in so many ways.

Which AB test would that be? Or have I misunderstood the British sense of humour again?