Reliability of HiFi gear: rant ahoy

[WayneKerr]

On a OP related note - How long to keep the boxes for? 2 Weeks? 2 Months? 2 Years? 20 Years?

I had my Tannoy speaker boxes since 1997 and they came in handy when I sold them today. It was used to store other camera and lens boxes in the loft.

How long shall I keep my new Marantz amp and cd player boxes and associated polystyrene packing? Also my Dali Oberon box. They are all big and bulky and I have no room really. Do warranty claims insist on original packaging?

I'm keeping my current kit boxes in the loft and they'll stay there until either the kit pegs it... or I do

 

[nopiano]

I'm keeping my current kit boxes in the loft and they'll stay there until either the kit pegs it... or I do

Me too!

 

[Gray]

....my Quad tuner box is still in the (Laskys) carrier bag.

And, needless to say, it's not one of those environmentally friendly carrier bags that self destruct into a million pieces (ruining the environment they're in 🤨).

 

[Noddy]

Me too!

Me three. I keep almost all boxes and packaging material, even when there is no need. Boxes for high value items such as amps are reserved for the item in question. Other boxes, bubblewrap etc are used when I sell something on eBay, thus I recycle materials.

The amount of packaging that we discard is shocking.

 

[Noddy]

The replacement Chord Mojo battery arrived today, I put it in and the Chord Mojo works, but only when used with my amp and Wiim Mini. It does not work with my iPhone. Research suggests either the camera adapter cable is broken, or Apple broke compatibility with iOS 11.

 

[AJM1981]

I try to go for amps and speakers that are tradable and don't have degradable additions. There are / were some systems that use gel around tweeters or anything similar. I prefer nothing that can dry out and make elastics turn brittle. I think I managed to buy long lasting stuff till this point. I am quite conservative when it comes to brands and usually wait for a while till a product seems to be more than just a hype.

little exception: given the first generations of iPods I was an early adaptor. Apologies

 

[Noddy]

I am quite conservative when it comes to brands and usually wait for a while till a product seems to be more than just a hype.

Unfortunately many products that get rave reviews are in my experience mediocre or flawed. The user comments in this forum seem sensible, so maybe that’s the best source of recommendation.

 

[AJM1981]

Unfortunately many products that get rave reviews are in my experience mediocre or flawed. The user comments in this forum seem sensible, so maybe that’s the best source of recommendation.

Rave reviews on sound are different.

 

[Noddy]

Rave reviews on sound are different.

Can you explain what you mean?

 

[Al ears]

Can you explain what you mean?

i believe he means most reviews are all about the quality of sound you get from a piece of equipment and that the reviewers dont have that equipment long enough to test it's longevity.....

 

[Noddy]

i believe he means most reviews are all about the quality of sound you get from a piece of equipment and that the reviewers dont have that equipment long enough to test it's longevity.....

I was referring to the sound of the products. Clearly it’s not fair to criticise a review because they didn’t predict that my copy would break. I believe it is very hard to predict longevity.

Unfortunately most reviews use terms that to me are meaningless: rich, warm, dry, authoritative, sweet, articulate and so on. I can understand what is meant by an exaggerated treble, or a lack of bass. My Arcam Solo Movie was described in some reviews as having a rich, warm sound, whatever that means. Mine has a muddy sound, with a reduced treble, and little soundstage.

At least when there are measurements, you have something that is not totally subjective.

 

[podknocker]

I agree entirely, with the WHF Audiolab Omnia review, about 12 months after I bought one. The sound quality and features and most of the user experience etc. What the review couldn't tell me perhaps, is the DTS PlayFi works flawlessly on an Android phone, which I didn't have then, but this app needed a licence for MS Windows, in order for it to send FLAC data, to the Omnia, rather than default 'out of the box' settings, where it would stop every few minutes, or seconds. Audiolab didn't ship the Omnia with a licence key and default settings don't work.

The WHF review also wasn't able to know the device would need a servo version update, via CD from IAG, due to some design shortcoming. Sound quality can impress, from early on, but you can only get the full picture of a product, after lengthy ownership, especially when you have a multi function product, using a mediocre and unintuitive app. I'm happy with the Omnia and I hope it carries on being reliable and sound fantastic, although slightly soft and safe. I do get a better sound when I increase the volume. The QA3030i do open up a bit, at higher volume levels, although this is not possible most of the time, because of proximity to other people.

 

[Gray]

My Arcam Solo Movie was described in some reviews as having a rich, warm sound, whatever that means. Mine has a muddy sound, with a reduced treble, and little soundstage.

See now to me Noddy, the description of rich and warm would certainly alert me to less than neutral treble.
And your description of 'muddy' tells me that their description of rich warmth was probably right.
As we always say, it's all subjective - I know we should always listen for ourselves.
But I must admit that if anything was described specifically as being predominantly rich and warm in a review, it wouldn't make a purchasing shortlist for me.

I agree that all those other descriptions can be a bit vague - 'forgiving' for instance tells me that it's not regarded as too bright.....but the reviewer may just be one of those types that's over sensitive to HF, in which case, it probably wouldn't be bright enough for me 🤪

 

[Noddy]

See now to me Noddy, the description of rich and warm would certainly alert me to less than neutral treble.
And your description of 'muddy' tells me that their description of rich warmth was probably right.
As we always say, it's all subjective - I know we should always listen for ourselves.
But I must admit that if anything was described specifically as being predominantly rich and warm in a review, it wouldn't make a purchasing shortlist for me.

I agree that all those other descriptions can be a bit vague - 'forgiving' for instance tells me that it's not regarded as too bright.....but the reviewer may just be one of those types that's over sensitive to HF, in which case, it probably wouldn't be bright enough for me 🤪

Well indeed, however to most people not steeped in the audiophile world I bet those terms don’t mean much. They mean very little to me. In fact, rich and warm sounds nice doesn’t it? So to the non audiophile, it sounds really positive, as if they really like it. But why not use plain English? Then people might realise that it means they have reduced the treble, if that is indeed what those terms mean. And beyond the sound, the user interface is really hard to use. The basics are fine, switching source, easy, playing a CD, easy, turning up the volume, mmmm, well that wheel thing is awful. But doing anything more is a nightmare.

Then there’s the Chord Mojo. It is a decent DAC, but measurements show it is no better than ones costing less than half the price. The reviewers swallow the marketing nonsense about it using a field effect programmable gate array or whatever it is rather than an off the shelf chip. So they assume it is technically super advanced, when it isn’t. And because they make no measurements, they cannot see through the marketing, Yes it looks great, the lights look great, but in use it’s really annoying, it is for many a poor user interface. Then there is the battery, which is a consumable item i.e. it wears out. I was quoted £80 to replace it. I found out today that does not include VAT. So, about £100 every few years to replace the battery.And yet most reviews drool over it. You’d almost think the reviewers didn’t use it for a prolonged period of time (a few days at least) and apply a critical eye. It’s as if they just experienced the initial delight someone in a shop might. Maybe they are blinded by techno-bling.

 

[npxavar]

Reviewers refrain from being negative for obvious reasons. WHF is an exception in that they drop their guards only for 5 star products.

 

[Noddy]

Reviewers refrain from being negative for obvious reasons. WHF is an exception in that they drop their guards only for 5 star products.

WHF was quite negative about the Audeze Sine headphones, which I loved soundwise. There weren’t many reviews of the product elsewhere.

 

[npxavar]

That is something I have observed with reviews: 4 star product get quite a harsh treatment, while 3 star products are simply abused. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the writing style, and it's not exactly out of the ordinary for magazines to be sprayed with hyperbole.

 

[Noddy]

For the sake of clarity, I wasn’t singling out WHF magazine, there’s lots of reviews by magazines, and commercial websites, my comments apply generally.

 

[npxavar]

With regards to reliability, one can only guess from the brand reputation and a few rules of thumb.

 

[Gray]

rich and warm sounds nice doesn’t it?

No doubt it was intended as positive comment by the reviewer - and it would be to many readers....but not particularly to me (and it seems that rich and warm is not for you).
Personally descriptions that sound nice to me are fast, clean, clear, open, tight and neutral.
Give me neutral over rich and warm every time.

As for a £100 battery every few years....no, just no.
(I think my tuner went 11 years before it needed a new backup battery - and a fiver was more than enough for me )

 

[nopiano]

WHF was quite negative about the Audeze Sine headphones, which I loved soundwise. There weren’t many reviews of the product elsewhere.

Probably not as negative as this. I keep this for reference when folk say everything gets a great review! (Two stars is pretty rare!)

Home review

Our high hopes for these single-driver speakers have been dashed.

www.whathifi.com

 

[Gray]

Probably not as negative as this. I keep this for reference when folk say everything gets a great review! (Two stars is pretty rare!)

Home review

Our high hopes for these single-driver speakers have been dashed.

www.whathifi.com

Even with that though, they come up with two positives for SQ in the pros column.
Then they say 'the sound is a big old mess'

They think the quirkyness is a pro....not sure many would agree.

 

[Al ears]

Even with that though, they come up with two positives for SQ in the pros column.
Then they say 'the sound is a big old mess'

They think the quirkyness is a pro....not sure many would agree.

I seem to recall the Heco Direkt speakers got rather good reviews...

 

[podknocker]

Well indeed, however to most people not steeped in the audiophile world I bet those terms don’t mean much. They mean very little to me. In fact, rich and warm sounds nice doesn’t it? So to the non audiophile, it sounds really positive, as if they really like it. But why not use plain English? Then people might realise that it means they have reduced the treble, if that is indeed what those terms mean. And beyond the sound, the user interface is really hard to use. The basics are fine, switching source, easy, playing a CD, easy, turning up the volume, mmmm, well that wheel thing is awful. But doing anything more is a nightmare.

Then there’s the Chord Mojo. It is a decent DAC, but measurements show it is no better than ones costing less than half the price. The reviewers swallow the marketing nonsense about it using a field effect programmable gate array or whatever it is rather than an off the shelf chip. So they assume it is technically super advanced, when it isn’t. And because they make no measurements, they cannot see through the marketing, Yes it looks great, the lights look great, but in use it’s really annoying, it is for many a poor user interface. Then there is the battery, which is a consumable item i.e. it wears out. I was quoted £80 to replace it. I found out today that does not include VAT. So, about £100 every few years to replace the battery.And yet most reviews drool over it. You’d almost think the reviewers didn’t use it for a prolonged period of time (a few days at least) and apply a critical eye. It’s as if they just experienced the initial delight someone in a shop might. Maybe they are blinded by techno-bling.

Techno-bling! Love it. That's exactly the reason. Many reviewers are like kids, on Christmas morning, with their shiny new toy. Many products can appear to be the best thing ever, but after prolonged use, it can turn into something you really regret. I had a Toshiba TV many years ago and the Toslink connector was vertical, so the weight and twist of the cable would make it fall out. The Toslink connection is a poor design anyway, in my opinion. I had to glue the cable in, shortly before I got rid of the TV. The next model had a horizontal fitting, so would have been OK. Who would have been able to spot this as a potential issue, when seeing the TV for the first time? There are so many things I look out for now, when considering a tech purchase. Caveat Emptor.

 

[Gray]

I seem to recall the Heco Direkt speakers got rather good reviews...

An acquired taste in every respect (even the 'Einklang' model name 🤪)