Oh no!

[scene]

What have I done? Finally got my Sonos Connect plumbed in via optical cable to the Pioneer amp in the dining room - the combined sub/amp I got to satisfy Mrs. Scene's desire to have a more discreet system - set it to pure direct and ran some test tracks through it.

Then I put the main living room system in synch with it and walked back and forth between rooms to see if what I was hearing was true. Then I asked Mrs. Scene what she thought... And we agreed, the cheap and cheerful, cobbled together system in the dining room sounds better than the Arcam + Monitor Audios in the living room. Even when I put that on stereo direct as well.

I may have to lie down for a bit...

 

[The_Lhc]

Rooms effects perhaps? Of course the only way you'll find that out is if you swap the systems between rooms...

 

[moon]

Those KEF KHT2005.2 are excellent speakers. I have a pair integrated into my kitchen run by a T amp, the results are great. Fantastic design.

So your thread should read Oh Yes! not Oh no!

 

[BenLaw]

Rooms effects perhaps? Of course the only way you'll find that out is if you swap the systems between rooms...

Good call. Weekend project.

 

[plastic penguin]

Oh dear... the wife effect. Had the same thing with a Rega Apollo a few months back. I thought it sounded better than the Arcam. Once Mrs. P said she preferred the Arcam I was then convinced she was right.

I would say what you're experiencing isn't a better sound but a different one.

The other thing is those MAs of yours. Good speakers in their day but the newer MAs are better IMO. If you was to stick a pair of RX1s on the end of your Arc you would probably hear a decent uplift.

 

[scene]

Oh dear... the wife effect. Had the same thing with a Rega Apollo a few months back. I thought it sounded better than the Arcam. Once Mrs. P said she preferred the Arcam I was then convinced she was right.

I would say what you're experiencing isn't a better sound but a different one.

I wish it was just different...

The Arcam+MA system sounded muddy and soft, lacking in clarity - basically mulchy

The Pioneer+KEF system sounded clear, detailed timing, clear notes.

The other thing is those MAs of yours. Good speakers in their day but the newer MAs are better IMO. If you was to stick a pair of RX1s on the end of your Arc you would probably hear a decent uplift.

That's a good point... Maybe I'll have to persuade the Mrs. about that RX6 upgrade...

 

[scene]

Rooms effects perhaps? Of course the only way you'll find that out is if you swap the systems between rooms...

Good call. Weekend project.

Ho hum. Not sure this is going to fly with the Mrs...

 

[plastic penguin]

Oh dear... the wife effect. Had the same thing with a Rega Apollo a few months back. I thought it sounded better than the Arcam. Once Mrs. P said she preferred the Arcam I was then convinced she was right.

I would say what you're experiencing isn't a better sound but a different one.

I wish it was just different...

The Arcam+MA system sounded muddy and soft, lacking in clarity - basically mulchy

The Pioneer+KEF system sounded clear, detailed timing, clear notes.

The other thing is those MAs of yours. Good speakers in their day but the newer MAs are better IMO. If you was to stick a pair of RX1s on the end of your Arc you would probably hear a decent uplift.

That's a good point... Maybe I'll have to persuade the Mrs. about that RX6 upgrade...

I'd always say MAs, regardless of model, would be a great match with Arcam. If the budget could stretch the new GX 100 are superb.

 

[cheeseboy]

Gotta chuckle at people saying that you need to upgrade the other system. Why not just move the better sounding system in to the room where you will listen to it most?

Does it really matter if it's not the one you've spent the money on? Surely the idea is to listen to and enjoy the music? If that's the cheaper, cobbled together system, so be it....

 

[scene]

Gotta chuckle at people saying that you need to upgrade the other system. Why not just move the better sounding system in to the room where you will listen to it most?

Does it really matter if it's not the one you've spent the money on? Surely the idea is to listen to and enjoy the music? If that's the cheaper, cobbled together system, so be it....

I actually agree with you! If only it was so easy...

All the cables for the Dining room system are routed in to the wall (see here) and the main system has big speakers - Floorstanders + full fat centre + big surrounds. Not really suitable for the Dining Room which is only 12ft x 11 ft (give or take).

Also I have to factor in (dis)approval of the Mrs. :silenced:

This is going to be fun...

 

[bigblue235]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better. Regardless of how old your MAs are, there's no way the other stuff should sound better unless there's something very wrong!

I had the same thing when I bought a Panasonic surround sound system. I thought it was better than the Rotel/MS gear that I had at the time. Then I gave my girlfriend a loan of that Rotal/MS system, and when I set it up at her house I thought it sounded amazing.

When we moved in together I tried them both again and the Panasonic sounded awful when compared to the hi-fi. My brother-in-law has an LG 5.1 system, and when I heard that for the first time I went through it all again!

 

[cheeseboy]

I actually agree with you! If only it was so easy...

All the cables for the Dining room system are routed in to the wall (see here) and the main system has big speakers - Floorstanders + full fat centre + big surrounds. Not really suitable for the Dining Room which is only 12ft x 11 ft (give or take).

Also I have to factor in (dis)approval of the Mrs. :silenced:

This is going to be fun...

oh ******! Well, for what it's worth, good luck with whatever you decide

 

[cheeseboy]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better.

I'd be willing to bet you just lot your bet. It's all subjective. If Scene says it sounds better, then that's all that matters to him isn't it? Doesn't matter if it's again 50k's worth of equipment, if somebody prefers one sound to another and they think that's better, then you can't tell them it's not!

It's also not like normal testing where you would listen, change something, listen again. By the sounds of it it's both sync'd playing at the same time, so you only have to walk between rooms - that in itself is a fantastic way to hear the differences (yes, I'll include the differences of the rooms in that as well). Doing the stop start thing is as reliable as a politician keeping their promises as your mind and ears just can't retain enough information in order to make a good enough comparison.

 

[scene]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better. Regardless of how old your MAs are, there's no way the other stuff should sound better unless there's something very wrong!

No better would be my description (which I realise is obviously subjective). That's why I got the Mrs to listen - wihout telling her... She commented that the Dining Room sounded better (unprompted)

I had the same thing when I bought a Panasonic surround sound system. I thought it was better than the Rotel/MS gear that I had at the time. Then I gave my girlfriend a loan of that Rotal/MS system, and when I set it up at her house I thought it sounded amazing. When we moved in together I tried them both again and the Panasonic sounded awful when compared to the hi-fi. My brother-in-law has an LG 5.1 system, and when I heard that for the first time I went through it all again!

*sigh*

And yes, I know room acoustics make a lot of difference...

Back to basics time.

 

[bigblue235]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better.

I'd be willing to bet you just lot your bet. It's all subjective. If Scene says it sounds better, then that's all that matters to him isn't it? Doesn't matter if it's again 50k's worth of equipment, if somebody prefers one sound to another and they think that's better, then you can't tell them it's not!

It's also not like normal testing where you would listen, change something, listen again. By the sounds of it it's both sync'd playing at the same time, so you only have to walk between rooms - that in itself is a fantastic way to hear the differences (yes, I'll include the differences of the rooms in that as well). Doing the stop start thing is as reliable as a politician keeping their promises as your mind and ears just can't retain enough information in order to make a good enough comparison.

There's a difference between him preferring it initially and it actually sounding 'better'. That's what I was getting at. I thought my Panasonic system sounded 'better', but it didn't. It was actually just different, and after using it for a while I realised it's limitations.

It makes no diffference to me either way, but I'd be very suprised if he doesn't go back towards the more expensive kit after a while, once the novelty of the new kit wears off.

Why the *sigh* scene?

 

[plastic penguin]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better

This is what I alluded to in my first post.

"I would say what you're experiencing isn't a better sound but a different one."

 

[scene]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better.

I'd be willing to bet you just lot your bet. It's all subjective. If Scene says it sounds better, then that's all that matters to him isn't it? Doesn't matter if it's again 50k's worth of equipment, if somebody prefers one sound to another and they think that's better, then you can't tell them it's not!

It's also not like normal testing where you would listen, change something, listen again. By the sounds of it it's both sync'd playing at the same time, so you only have to walk between rooms - that in itself is a fantastic way to hear the differences (yes, I'll include the differences of the rooms in that as well). Doing the stop start thing is as reliable as a politician keeping their promises as your mind and ears just can't retain enough information in order to make a good enough comparison.

There's a difference between him preferring it initially and it actually sounding 'better'. That's what I was getting at. I thought my Panasonic system sounded 'better', but it didn't. It was actually just different, and after using it for a while I realised it's limitations.

It makes no diffference to me either way, but I'd be very suprised if he doesn't go back towards the more expensive kit after a while, once the novelty of the new kit wears off.

Why the *sigh* scene?

The new kit's not that new - been using it for several months now, and the KEF Eggs go back years (just not using the currently defunct KHT sub). One of the worries about using the KEF eggs was that the reason we'd given up on them for the main system was that they were a bit indistinct, mulchy, etc. All the things I'm now finding that the Arcam+MA system is.

So, analysing things:

1. Historically found that Arcam+KEF Eggs sounded "mulchy"

2. Now find that Arcam+MA system sounds "mulchy"

3. Pioneer+KEF eggs sound crisp and clear

Leads to the logical conclusion that the part of the system that is at fault is the Arcam AVR250 AMP.

This was the conclusion I had reached when I typed *sigh*

 

[bigblue235]

Fair do's

 

[plastic penguin]

I'd be willing to bet it sounds different, not better.

I'd be willing to bet you just lot your bet. It's all subjective. If Scene says it sounds better, then that's all that matters to him isn't it? Doesn't matter if it's again 50k's worth of equipment, if somebody prefers one sound to another and they think that's better, then you can't tell them it's not!

It's also not like normal testing where you would listen, change something, listen again. By the sounds of it it's both sync'd playing at the same time, so you only have to walk between rooms - that in itself is a fantastic way to hear the differences (yes, I'll include the differences of the rooms in that as well). Doing the stop start thing is as reliable as a politician keeping their promises as your mind and ears just can't retain enough information in order to make a good enough comparison.

There's a difference between him preferring it initially and it actually sounding 'better'. That's what I was getting at. I thought my Panasonic system sounded 'better', but it didn't. It was actually just different, and after using it for a while I realised it's limitations.

It makes no diffference to me either way, but I'd be very suprised if he doesn't go back towards the more expensive kit after a while, once the novelty of the new kit wears off.

Why the *sigh* scene?

The new kit's not that new - been using it for several months now, and the KEF Eggs go back years (just not using the currently defunct KHT sub). One of the worries about using the KEF eggs was that the reason we'd given up on them for the main system was that they were a bit indistinct, mulchy, etc. All the things I'm now finding that the Arcam+MA system is.

So, analysing things:

1. Historically found that Arcam+KEF Eggs sounded "mulchy"

2. Now find that Arcam+MA system sounds "mulchy"

3. Pioneer+KEF eggs sound crisp and clear

Leads to the logical conclusion that the part of the system that is at fault is the Arcam AVR250 AMP.

This was the conclusion I had reached when I typed *sigh*

Don't get too down, Scene. Look at your main system logically: You have a decade old speakers, use a DVD player to play music, the amp, although still good, doesn't have the overall snap, crackle and pop of some newer ones... whereas the other set-up is relatively modern.

 

[bigblue235]

But, modern or not, the other set-up is based around a £200ish combined subwoofer & (multi channel?) amp used in home cinema kits. The Eggs are obviously from a different price bracket, but still! It's a bit of a turn-up for the books

 

[scene]

But, modern or not, the other set-up is based around a £200ish combined subwoofer & (multi channel?) amp used in home cinema kits. The Eggs are obviously from a different price bracket, but still! It's a bit of a turn-up for the books

Yup. The Arcam+MA system was a £1850 system when new. The Pioneer was £200ish, and the KEF eggs (2005.2) where £650 - but that included the sub which was about £150 - so £700ish system. Yes the Pioneer is multi-channel but I am running it "Pure Direct" for the Sonos using an optical cable to connect. The Arcam+MA is being fed by an identical source (Sonos Connect hard wired via gigabit ethernet, with Apple Lossless source files)

And let's face it - the Eggs were designed for Sub+Sat m/channel systems. The MA Silver 8is are full fat floorstanders designed for two channel music.

For the record, I've got the Sonos connected to the Arcam both via optical and RCA, so that when I click the "Direct" button on the amp, it flick over to using the analogue direct. This still sounds worse than the Pioneer.

:help:

 

[Craig M.]

Don't take this the wrong way, but it's how it should be. Look at the differences in the resources available to Pioneer compared to (in this case) Arcam. If Pioneer can't put out equal or greater quality for less money, then something is wrong somewhere. Have you tried the comparison with the Pioneer and your A85? The A85 should do a much better job, surely?

 

[CnoEvil]

At a guess, I suspect that while the DV88 was better than the average DVD player at playing CDs, in it's day, it will be a bit mulchy (my Arcam DV79 is anyway). When you then put mulch through a mulcher (Arcam amp).....you get it double mulched.

I am not saying that the Arcam amp is poor, only it needs a livelier source.....probably Rega or Audiolab.

Just thinking aloud

Cno

 

[Craig M.]

He is using the analogue (and optical - does the AVR have a dac?) from the sonos.

 

[scene]

At a guess, I suspect that while the DV88 was better than the average DVD player at playing CDs, in it's day, it will be a bit mulchy (my Arcam DV79 is anyway). When you then put mulch through a mulcher (Arcam amp).....you get it double mulched.

I am not saying that the Arcam amp is poor, only it needs a livelier source.....probably Rega or Audiolab.

Just thinking aloud

Cno

Interestingly, the dv79 sounds fine... :?