Covenanter
Well-known member
plastic penguin said:
Well you didn't but then you are posting on what purports to be a hifi website so I thought hifi had something to do with it.
Chris
Well you didn't but then you are posting on what purports to be a hifi website so I thought hifi had something to do with it.
Chris
Covenanter said:
I was talking in general, though saying that, there can (imo) be noticeable differences in the way CDPs sound eg. Arcam vs Cyrus, or Linn vs Chord.
IME. A system should be seen as a cohesive unit that needs to be in balance (for the taste of the person owning it).
Covenanter said:
This is a stereo/AV forum which is technically "hi-fi", but that doesn't mean everyone like a "hi-fiy" sound or analytical. After all you were the first person on this thread to mention "hi-fi".
We all want hi-fi (high fidelity) from our systems, including PP. He is just doing the deflection dance to avoid judgmental finger wagging and "I told you so" if he fails. "Study more, you will fail your Math test" - "I don't care about Math. No one needs it in life." Childish? No. Deffence mechanisms are all human. It depends if we are prepared for failures or successes.
Now. We all want high fidelity but the difference of getting there is between two schools, two methods.
The subjectivist's approach to hi-fi system building is getting individually flawed components, selecting them by sighted listening, aiming to cancel each other's strengths and weakneses in order to create a balance (aka synergy), and get the best possible performance for their sterlings. They start with the interaction source+amplifier first and finish with the interaction room+speakers. In their paradigm electronic componenets are imminently flawed and human hearing is the point of reference.
The objectivist's approach to hi-fi system building is getting individually neutral components, selecting them based on measured performance, sighted and/or unsighted listening to combine them together and get the best possible performance for their sterlings. They start with the interaction room+speakers first and finish with the interaction source+amplifier. In their paradigm human hearing is imminently flawed and scientific measurements and tests are the point of reference.
If we see high fidelity in relative terms, who is getting their satisfaction for how much £, then subjectivists seem to be the much bigger spenders. There is a red line, maybe somewhere arround £2K for stereo and £5K for full HT, where objectivists suddenly become very very scarce (if at all existent). All the industry upwards of that red line caters for subjectivists.
I painted with a very broad phenomena-noumena checkered brush. However, if you agree of this division having some existance in reality, can you share why do you think this is the case? General question for everyone while the Electrocompaniet PC-1 is burning in.
Now. We all want high fidelity but the difference of getting there is between two schools, two methods.
The subjectivist's approach to hi-fi system building is getting individually flawed components, selecting them by sighted listening, aiming to cancel each other's strengths and weakneses in order to create a balance (aka synergy), and get the best possible performance for their sterlings. They start with the interaction source+amplifier first and finish with the interaction room+speakers. In their paradigm electronic componenets are imminently flawed and human hearing is the point of reference.
The objectivist's approach to hi-fi system building is getting individually neutral components, selecting them based on measured performance, sighted and/or unsighted listening to combine them together and get the best possible performance for their sterlings. They start with the interaction room+speakers first and finish with the interaction source+amplifier. In their paradigm human hearing is imminently flawed and scientific measurements and tests are the point of reference.
If we see high fidelity in relative terms, who is getting their satisfaction for how much £, then subjectivists seem to be the much bigger spenders. There is a red line, maybe somewhere arround £2K for stereo and £5K for full HT, where objectivists suddenly become very very scarce (if at all existent). All the industry upwards of that red line caters for subjectivists.
I painted with a very broad phenomena-noumena checkered brush. However, if you agree of this division having some existance in reality, can you share why do you think this is the case? General question for everyone while the Electrocompaniet PC-1 is burning in.
tino
Well-known member
Hard to choose equipment objectively if there is little published measurement data either from the manufacturer or reviewers. I tend to assume most digital sources and amps are fairly neutral, and speakers/room interactions not. I like equipment that allows some degree of subjective adjustment through tone controls, equalisation, DSP effects, or room correction. Also I tend to choose equipment by my own subjective aesthetic standards. A lot of equipment falls by the wayside on this last point alone.
The popular KEF LS50's have a fairly detailed White Paper published online. From my observations, a subjectivist will skimp through it and consider it as a bonus, a decor, but not a factor he will use to base his decisions on.
Vladimir said:
Sorry Vlad - you need a check up from the neck up. It is not only about personal taste but also what sound one is familiar with: Some may see that as a creature of habit, which I believe describes me. Or you could look at me a time waster.
Given I've been buying hi-fis since the late 70s, rest assured I know the sound that appeals - and the ones that don't.
BTW, what sources have you owned?
plastic penguin said:
I owned everything but 8 track, elcassette and a wax cylinder. Multiples of each, from cheapest to high end, I currently have 3 hi-fi systems. The list is too long to mention everything, just be rest assured mine is bigger than yours. *dirol*
Vladimir said:
Ahhh... but bigger doesn't necessarily mean better.
So what are your current sources, with you current 3 systems?
Vladimir said:
Does this look familiar?
"He is just doing the deflection dance to avoid judgmental finger wagging and" 'I told you so'....
You're doing your upmost to avoid the crunching question.
C'mon, Vlad, man up....
Vladimir said:
It would appear from your statement that you are not very good at chosing stuff you actually like the sound of, or you wouldn't have such a high turnover. *diablo*
So carefully objectively choose your neutral system then get it home only to dicover it is not neutral anymore due to the room and furnishings. Oh dear better get subjective until it sound neutral again! 
Sliced Bread
Well-known member
Vladimir said:
Ah I see what your saying. Your saying that using your objectivist appraoch it took you longer to find a sound you like.
*mail1*
MikeToll said:So carefully objectively choose your neutral system then get it home only to dicover it is not neutral anymore due to the room and furnishings. Oh dear better get subjective until it sound neutral again!
The room is part of the system Mike. Got any bass traps?
Vladimir said:
It's great if you have the spare cash....which usually stops when you have kids. *smile*
boggit said:
While we wait for PP to come back with more impressions it's open mic night. Feel free to discuss hi-fi, men's thong, or anything really.
CnoEvil said:
No kids, Hi-Fi is my only vice and I don't have allergies towards second hand gear or media (CD, tape, vinyl). I also love tweaking and fixing. Building DIY speakers was epic fun but they sounded like a fart in a bucket.
Having driven a Audi 1.8T Sport cabriolet many times (my brother's car), they really do personify the reputation of German engineering is top notch. The build quality is superb, performance and handling is very good. However, despite of their solidity and craftsmanship, and when compared with a same CC powered Alfa, they really are different. For pure driving experience, even though they have slight iffy build quality, the Alfa is peerless at that price, though it's hard to convey why.
That pretty much sums up the difference between the Electro and Naim. The Electro is every bit as capable, but just lacks that little something... I'm struggling to find what that something is.
Anyway, I've played CD almost constantly since Friday evening (when not earning my corn), and I feel musically drained. I'm going to give music, CDs in particular, a rest until Friday.
That pretty much sums up the difference between the Electro and Naim. The Electro is every bit as capable, but just lacks that little something... I'm struggling to find what that something is.
Anyway, I've played CD almost constantly since Friday evening (when not earning my corn), and I feel musically drained. I'm going to give music, CDs in particular, a rest until Friday.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram