Missing the days of No Nonsense Hifi

[Craig M.]

oooOOOooo.

(by the way, don't google 'oooOOOooo' to try to find an appropriate image)

Whoah!!! :O

(That was like a big red button with 'DON'T PRESS')

 

[davedotco]

Personally I think we need to differentiate between the term hi-fi as used to describe TVs, Phones and hi-fidelity which is something else entirely, at least we can then have discussions where everyone knows what is being discussed.

So, you can't simply tell what's being discussed just by reading the discussion, you need it labelled? I don't think anyone else has that difficulty. At least I've certainly never noticed.

Well I have, many times.

For example, I mention something that I think is important in hi-fi terms and get told that it doesn't matter one jot as long as the owner likes it.

Whilst personal preference is a perfectly acceptable way to choose an enjoyable (to the user) music playing system, it is not sufficiant to select a hi-fidelity playback system. I think this is self evident but others do not, simply because the words 'hi-fi system' means something very different to me than it does to them.

Just one simple example.

I think we can achieve high fidelity very easily these days. Certainly way easier today than it was not so long ago now. Performance, through technology advances deliver us that high fidelity. Picking up an iPod Touch, sticking 20Gbs worth of WAV files on it and some half-decent headphones and you're away. A FLAC file on a USB stick through the Onkyo and it's terrific. The sound quality is all there.

Most of the battle is in the mastering and originaly recording; thereafter the notion that one had to, or still has to, spend a small fortune to get high quality playback is an utter fallacy.

We can, but in my experience, we mostly don't.

I don't want to get into the capabilities of specific systems but most do not really do it for me. Occassionally I come across simple systems of relatively modest cost that do pretty well, well selected and carefully set up they can really work very, very well.

There is a difference though, some more sophisticated systems really can bring insight and enjoyment beyond the norm and I do find that it makes an enormous difference, to me anyway.

I am aware that others see things differently, but we are told, on this very forum, to trust in what we hear and this is what I hear.

 

[the record spot]

That's fine for you Dave, as you see it. I'd believe differently. I guess mostly as I hear it day in, day out. System cost below? Just under £2000 at full RRP. Hi Fi is full of opinions, but fidelity to the original recording is way easier today than ever it was. And significantly less hassle too. I've got the lot going through the 818, I've bi-amped my speakers and while the Onkyo isn't the last word in compact design, the sound quality it delivers is well up there.

Rather like Jimmy Hughes who used a Denon DVD3930 for his day to day listening (another great machine - I have one), gear like the 818 (and others like it) clearly show that high fidelity isn't a distant consideration for manufacturers.

 

[CnoEvil]

I am aware that others see things differently, but we are told, on this very forum, to trust in what we hear and this is what I hear.

IME. The more you get out and listen to as big a variety of stuff as possible, the more faith you can put in what you are hearing....but what do I know. :shifty:

 

[John Duncan]

oooOOOooo.

(by the way, don't google 'oooOOOooo' to try to find an appropriate image)

Whoah!!! :O

(That was like a big red button with 'DON'T PRESS')

It was a big red something, certainly :-|

 

[matthewpiano]

I'm not really sure there was ever such a thing as no-nonsense Hi-Fi. Getting the best sound has always required a degree of messing about, trialling this, setting things up, tweaking things etc. In some ways getting better sound is perhaps the easiest it has ever been and certainly accessibility of music is very much better.

WHFS&V is a mainstream magazine and has to be targeted at man-in-the-street to a certain extent. I see no problem with that and, although I still buy and read Hi-Fi Choice as a more focused hi-fi mag, I very much enjoy looking through WHFS&V and reading the bits that are interesting to me.

 

[davedotco]

That's fine for you Dave, as you see it. I'd believe differently. I guess mostly as I hear it day in, day out. System cost below? Just under £2000 at full RRP. Hi Fi is full of opinions, but fidelity to the original recording is way easier today than ever it was. And significantly less hassle too. I've got the lot going through the 818, I've bi-amped my speakers and while the Onkyo isn't the last word in compact design, the sound quality it delivers is well up there.

Rather like Jimmy Hughes who used a Denon DVD3930 for his day to day listening (another great machine - I have one), gear like the 818 (and others like it) clearly show that high fidelity isn't a distant consideration for manufacturers.

Then we agree to differ, no problem.

This was all brought into sharp focus for me about 18 months ago when I had a budget of about £2k to buy a system to playback the files on my computer.

For the first time in a few years I went out and actively started to look at and audition a new system. To put it bluntly I was seriously disappointed, the vast bulk of the equipment I heard was, to my mind junk, even some of my old favourites (in modern guise) seemed to have gone backwards, even some of my favourite British manufacturers were now just 'me too' products, most of the rest even worse.

The sound quality issue was so consistent over a range of products that for a time I assumed it was me, I was thinking that music no longer mattered to me so I just was not interested. In fact it took a sort of 'reunion' with a few old colleagues (including J M Hughes as it happened), talking music and swapping tales to give me the impetus to go out and try some serious systems and it was the Devialet based system that really reminded me of what it is all supposed to be about. I know the original Devialet was silly money but it restored my faith somewhat and I managed to find some far less expensive products that 'worked' too. Still out of budget sadly but affordable under slightly different circumstances.

Eventually I found a sub £2k system that was different enough and largely missing the sound quality issues I had been having, I was just about to order when Mrs DDC decided that if we were going to be in London for a few more years she was not going to put up wth renting any longer, so she decided to buy an apartment. Bang went my hi-fi budget.......

 

[steve_1979]

For some people it really is the end of the world if their new amp can't stream music from their iDevices via Airplay, irrespective of how well it sounds.

And it sounds very 'well' indeed

I just wish hi-fi could have been this much fun 20 years ago.

I agree with chebby. Modern HiFi equipment has both improved functionality AND better sound quality now. Happy days.

 

[steve_1979]

None of this junk adds to the quality of reproduction achieved (sends it barreling the other way!).

I disagree.

+1

 

[steve_1979]

None of this junk adds to the quality of reproduction achieved (sends it barreling the other way!).

I disagree.

+1

 

[davedotco]

I use as much modern technology as anyone, audiowise anyway, it is tremendously convenient and as someone who constantly craves 'new' music I use spotify a lot.

Macbook or iPad via Airplay into is how I listen to most of my music these days, I accept and enjoy it for what it is, but it is not, to my mind, hi-fidelity reproduction, by my definition anyway.

 

[steve_1979]

I use as much modern technology as anyone, audiowise anyway, it is tremendously convenient and as someone who constantly craves 'new' music I use spotify a lot.

Macbook or iPad via Airplay into is how I listen to most of my music these days, I accept and enjoy it for what it is, but it is not, to my mind, hi-fidelity reproduction, by my definition anyway.

I've never used Airplay before but Spotify Premium sounds identical to lossless CD rips to my ears.

 

[the record spot]

You had a budget of £2k and you knew Jimmy Hughes as well Dave? Fancy that! What are the chances eh...

 

[davedotco]

You had a budget of £2k and you knew Jimmy Hughes as well Dave? Fancy that! What are the chances eh...

I have been in and around the hi-fi industry for the best part of 40 years, I have met an awful lot of people so the chances of meeting Jimmy or Ivor or Julian or Touraj or anyone else for that matter is pretty high, I am not claiming to be thier best friends. A year or two ago I attended a 'reunion' of sorts for people who had worked at a certain West End hi-fi emporium and Jimmy was present.

I had neither seen nor spoken to him for many years, not since the Peter Belt fiasco in fact. We only spoke briefly, first about the about the opera, but mostly about cameras, his first love.

 

[MajorFubar]

Dave I think you've got a lot of good things to say, some of which I agree with, it's just unfortunate that sometimes you put it across in a very aloof way. Even I've found myself on the receiving-end of your sharp tongue, bizarrely on an occasion in another thread when I was supposed to be agreeing with you. But I do enjoy reading your posts, mostly, and I respect your obvious knowledge of the subject matter.

Carry on.

 

[davedotco]

Dave I think you've got a lot of good things to say, some of which I agree with, it's just unfortunate that sometimes you put it across in a very aloof way. Even I've found myself on the receiving-end of your sharp tongue, bizarrely on an occasion in another thread when I was supposed to be agreeing with you. But I do enjoy reading your posts, mostly, and I respect your obvious knowledge of the subject matter.

Carry on.

Genuine apologies if I was a little too sharp, I am use to fora that allow a little more in the way of 'banter' and 'rough and tumble', though I have been trying quite hard recently to be polite.

I do find it a little difficult on occasions with some of the rubbish that is posted, mostly I just 'bite my lip' and do not get involved but there are occasions where I feel I have to say something. Being scientifically trained I tend, particularly when correcting errors of fact, to be quite precise and say what I mean and I get pretty annoyed with some on here who then give me grief for things that I have, quite specifically, not said,

I am also somewhat miffed (see, very polite indeed!) when I am called a liar ( not yourself) when recounting a little anecdote from my years in the business, but hey, this is the internet so there is not much I can do.

Edited for spelling.

 

[The_Lhc]

Macbook or iPad via Airplay into is how I listen to most of my music these days, I accept and enjoy it for what it is, but it is not, to my mind, hi-fidelity reproduction, by my definition anyway.

Take out the Airplay and the rest of it is irrelevant, a Macbook delivering Lossless files to a DAC via an optical connection (for example) isn't going to sound any different to a CD player deliver digital audio to the same DAC. It's everything downstream of that that will determine if it's "hi-fi" or not.

Last year's KEF demo rig at the Bristol Show was exactly the above into an Electrocompaniet amp driving the Blades. If that isn't hi-fi then I'm not interested in hi-fi. It was extraordinary.

 

[davedotco]

Macbook or iPad via Airplay into is how I listen to most of my music these days, I accept and enjoy it for what it is, but it is not, to my mind, hi-fidelity reproduction, by my definition anyway.

Take out the Airplay and the rest of it is irrelevant, a Macbook delivering Lossless files to a DAC via an optical connection (for example) isn't going to sound any different to a CD player deliver digital audio to the same DAC. It's everything downstream of that that will determine if it's "hi-fi" or not.

Last year's KEF demo rig at the Bristol Show was exactly the above into an Electrocompaniet amp driving the Blades. If that isn't hi-fi then I'm not interested in hi-fi. It was extraordinary.

It is the Airplay that is the point....... :wall:

Even through my very simple system the Macbook via optical is better than the iPad via AEX, a dem I have done several times as it is very easy to set up.

However I still use Airplay for the convenience, streaming the Associates (live) as I write this. On the other hand, with a decent system this would not be acceptable (to me) for serious listening, with my current system neither produce hi-fidelity so it doesn't much matter.

 

[The_Lhc]

Macbook or iPad via Airplay into is how I listen to most of my music these days, I accept and enjoy it for what it is, but it is not, to my mind, hi-fidelity reproduction, by my definition anyway.

Take out the Airplay and the rest of it is irrelevant, a Macbook delivering Lossless files to a DAC via an optical connection (for example) isn't going to sound any different to a CD player deliver digital audio to the same DAC. It's everything downstream of that that will determine if it's "hi-fi" or not.

Last year's KEF demo rig at the Bristol Show was exactly the above into an Electrocompaniet amp driving the Blades. If that isn't hi-fi then I'm not interested in hi-fi. It was extraordinary.

It is the Airplay that is the point....... :wall:

That's why I said take it out, it's re-sampling everything to 16/48 for a start.

Even through my very simple system the Macbook via optical is better than the iPad via AEX, a dem I have done several times as it is very easy to set up.

That was my point.

However I still use Airplay for the convenience, streaming the Associates (live) as I write this. On the other hand, with a decent system this would not be acceptable (to me) for serious listening, with my current system neither produce hi-fidelity so it doesn't much matter.

Well that's your choice to do that even though you know it's inferior, I don't understand in that case why you would seek to lump the Macbook in as "not hi-fi" when it's perfectly capable of being so. That's not very scientific of you, the macbook isn't the problem.

 

[davedotco]

Macbook or iPad via Airplay into is how I listen to most of my music these days, I accept and enjoy it for what it is, but it is not, to my mind, hi-fidelity reproduction, by my definition anyway.

Take out the Airplay and the rest of it is irrelevant, a Macbook delivering Lossless files to a DAC via an optical connection (for example) isn't going to sound any different to a CD player deliver digital audio to the same DAC. It's everything downstream of that that will determine if it's "hi-fi" or not.

Last year's KEF demo rig at the Bristol Show was exactly the above into an Electrocompaniet amp driving the Blades. If that isn't hi-fi then I'm not interested in hi-fi. It was extraordinary.

It is the Airplay that is the point....... :wall:

That's why I said take it out, it's re-sampling everything to 16/48 for a start.

Even through my very simple system the Macbook via optical is better than the iPad via AEX, a dem I have done several times as it is very easy to set up.

That was my point.

However I still use Airplay for the convenience, streaming the Associates (live) as I write this. On the other hand, with a decent system this would not be acceptable (to me) for serious listening, with my current system neither produce hi-fidelity so it doesn't much matter.

Well that's your choice to do that even though you know it's inferior, I don't understand in that case why you would seek to lump the Macbook in as "not hi-fi" when it's perfectly capable of being so. That's not very scientific of you, the macbook isn't the problem.

Absolutely, it seems we agree, one of us must be wrong....... :shifty:

The only point to clarify is that although I do consider my Macbook to be real hi-fi (I never said differently), it is not remotely hi-fi within the context of my existing system due, as you put it 'to the components downstream'.

 

[the record spot]

Dave I think you've got a lot of good things to say, some of which I agree with, it's just unfortunate that sometimes you put it across in a very aloof way. Even I've found myself on the receiving-end of your sharp tongue, bizarrely on an occasion in another thread when I was supposed to be agreeing with you. But I do enjoy reading your posts, mostly, and I respect your obvious knowledge of the subject matter.

Carry on.

Genuine apologies if I was a little too sharp, I am use to fora that allow a little more in the way of 'banter' and 'rough and tumble', though I have been trying quite hard recently to be polite.

I do find it a little difficult on occasions with some of the rubbish that is posted, mostly I just 'bite my lip' and do not get involved but there are occasions where I feel I have to say something. Being scientifically trained I tend, particularly when correcting errors of fact, to be quite precise and say what I mean and I get pretty annoyed with some on here who then give me grief for things that I have, quite specifically, not said,

I am also somewhat miffed (see, very polite indeed!) when I am called a liar ( not yourself) when recounting a little anecdote from my years in the business, but hey, this is the internet so there is not much I can do.

Edited for spelling.

Seeing as I think you might be referring to me in your last paragraph all I will say is this: I felt it was quite the coincidence that right after I posted my comments around a £2k system and a passing comment around the Denon player Jimmy Hughes once had, you came back with how you once had a £2k budget too and just happened to meet Jimmy as well. Namedropping the "J M" for good measure.

Dave, I respect your views on some things but on others you leave me cold. Your posting style makes it look like you know better than anyone else, with an unfortunate arrogance in tow. You are what we'd call locally as a "bit of a blaw".

 

[The_Lhc]

The only point to clarify is that although I do consider my Macbook to be real hi-fi (I never said differently),

Well, that might not have been your intention but including it in a clause with the AEX that is stated as "not hi-fi" kind of makes it look as if you are saying that. I think. I lost my train of thought half way through typing that sentence...

But yes, other than that we are agreeing.

 

[The_Lhc]

Dave,... Your posting style makes it look like you know better than anyone else, with an unfortunate arrogance in tow. You are what we'd call locally as "The_Lhc".

I FIXED YOUR POST FOR YOU!!! HTH HAND!!1!!

 

[TimothyRias]

[...]

Take out the Airplay and the rest of it is irrelevant, a Macbook delivering Lossless files to a DAC via an optical connection (for example) isn't going to sound any different to a CD player deliver digital audio to the same DAC. It's everything downstream of that that will determine if it's "hi-fi" or not.

[...]

It is the Airplay that is the point....... :wall:

[...]

Airplay transfers everything as 44.1 kHz/16bit ALAC. So as long as your listening to normal CD quality rips, it is not the Airplay that is making a difference in SQ. The difference must be elsewhere in the chain. (Software EQ, an AppleTV resampling to 48 kHz, or something else)

 

[davedotco]

Dave I think you've got a lot of good things to say, some of which I agree with, it's just unfortunate that sometimes you put it across in a very aloof way. Even I've found myself on the receiving-end of your sharp tongue, bizarrely on an occasion in another thread when I was supposed to be agreeing with you. But I do enjoy reading your posts, mostly, and I respect your obvious knowledge of the subject matter.

Carry on.

Genuine apologies if I was a little too sharp, I am use to fora that allow a little more in the way of 'banter' and 'rough and tumble', though I have been trying quite hard recently to be polite.

I do find it a little difficult on occasions with some of the rubbish that is posted, mostly I just 'bite my lip' and do not get involved but there are occasions where I feel I have to say something. Being scientifically trained I tend, particularly when correcting errors of fact, to be quite precise and say what I mean and I get pretty annoyed with some on here who then give me grief for things that I have, quite specifically, not said,

I am also somewhat miffed (see, very polite indeed!) when I am called a liar ( not yourself) when recounting a little anecdote from my years in the business, but hey, this is the internet so there is not much I can do.

Edited for spelling.

Seeing as I think you might be referring to me in your last paragraph all I will say is this: I felt it was quite the coincidence that right after I posted my comments around a £2k system and a passing comment around the Denon player Jimmy Hughes once had, you came back with how you once had a £2k budget too and just happened to meet Jimmy as well. Namedropping the "J M" for good measure.

Dave, I respect your views on some things but on others you leave me cold. Your posting style makes it look like you know better than anyone else, with an unfortunate arrogance in tow. You are what we'd call locally as a "bit of a blaw".

I have spoken about my £2k budget before on other threads, mostly in reference to how I came to spend some time with ADM9s, this all happened about 18 months ago. it was nothing directly to do with your comments.

ADMs plus stands, Sonos Connect plus remote, about £2k. It was what I experienced looking for alternatives that formed the basis of my post.

And you brought up Jimmy Hughes, not me. I thought it something of a coincidence that I had spoken to him not that long ago and thought it worth mentioning, nothing more.