Says exactly what many of us have been saying about what adding a rack can do for your system. So that's cables and equipment supports dealt with, whatever next? I think I may apply.
The big question
- Thread starter JoelSim
- Start date
plastic penguin
Well-known member
chebby
Well-known member
JoelSim:
Says exactly what many of us have been saying about what adding a rack can do for your system. So that's cables and equipment supports dealt with, whatever next? I think I may apply.
What says what? Eh?
Joel you are conning yourself if you think you are some sort of 'voice in the wilderness' or pioneer about equipment stands. I think it might go back to the original S”und ™rganisati”n spiked turntable tables in the very early 1980s (or earlier) which were developed into full-blown equipment racks with isolation spikes for each shelf and feet.
Says exactly what many of us have been saying about what adding a rack can do for your system. So that's cables and equipment supports dealt with, whatever next? I think I may apply.
What says what? Eh?
Joel you are conning yourself if you think you are some sort of 'voice in the wilderness' or pioneer about equipment stands. I think it might go back to the original S”und ™rganisati”n spiked turntable tables in the very early 1980s (or earlier) which were developed into full-blown equipment racks with isolation spikes for each shelf and feet.
chebby:JoelSim:
Says exactly what many of us have been saying about what adding a rack can do for your system. So that's cables and equipment supports dealt with, whatever next? I think I may apply.
What says what? Eh?
Joel you are conning yourself if you think you are some sort of 'voice in the wilderness' or pioneer about equipment stands. I think it might go back to the original S”und ™rganisati”n spiked turntable tables in the very early 1980s (or earlier) which deleveloped into full-blown equipment racks.
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
Says exactly what many of us have been saying about what adding a rack can do for your system. So that's cables and equipment supports dealt with, whatever next? I think I may apply.
What says what? Eh?
Joel you are conning yourself if you think you are some sort of 'voice in the wilderness' or pioneer about equipment stands. I think it might go back to the original S”und ™rganisati”n spiked turntable tables in the very early 1980s (or earlier) which deleveloped into full-blown equipment racks.
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
chebby
Well-known member
JoelSim:
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
No Joel they don't. They are very familiar with the concept.
Millions bought 'rack systems' in the 1970s and 80s and they were in turn copied from the professional studio rack that had been with us since the beginning of recording studies, computer rooms etc.
Suggest you find another wheel to re-invent and make your own.
QED 79 strand vs Bell wire anyone?
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
No Joel they don't. They are very familiar with the concept.
Millions bought 'rack systems' in the 1970s and 80s and they were in turn copied from the professional studio rack that had been with us since the beginning of recording studies, computer rooms etc.
Suggest you find another wheel to re-invent and make your own.
QED 79 strand vs Bell wire anyone?
jaxwired
Well-known member
JoelSim:
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
It is snake oil. The Big Questions is a nice feature and I like it, but don't kid yourself into thinking it prroves anything. How about next month, we test whether placing different kinds of fruit on top of the speakers makes them sound better. Try an apple first, then an orange, and finally a pineapple. "Wow, much better than the last system. Really opens up the mid-range and the bass is much tighter."
All in good fun my friend...
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
It is snake oil. The Big Questions is a nice feature and I like it, but don't kid yourself into thinking it prroves anything. How about next month, we test whether placing different kinds of fruit on top of the speakers makes them sound better. Try an apple first, then an orange, and finally a pineapple. "Wow, much better than the last system. Really opens up the mid-range and the bass is much tighter."
All in good fun my friend...
plastic penguin
Well-known member
jaxwired:JoelSim:
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
It is snake oil. The Big Questions is a nice feature and I like it, but don't kid yourself into thinking it prroves anything. How about next month, we test whether placing different kinds of fruit on top of the speakers makes them sound better. Try an apple first, then an orange, and finally a pineapple. "Wow, much better than the last system. Really opens up the mid-range and the bass is much tighter."
All in good fun my friend...
Totally concur, jax. I think WHFI should be applauded for inviting ordinary folk like myself to blind test variations during a course of a few hours. And what it proves is that, in the main, most of our conclusions are pretty similar to the experts at the 'Tower'. What it can't tell you, however, is how it translates to an individual living room or bedroom.
As we ALL know, there are no right or wrong answers or findings.
I was merely suggesting that many people think a rack is snake oil. And it's not.
It is snake oil. The Big Questions is a nice feature and I like it, but don't kid yourself into thinking it prroves anything. How about next month, we test whether placing different kinds of fruit on top of the speakers makes them sound better. Try an apple first, then an orange, and finally a pineapple. "Wow, much better than the last system. Really opens up the mid-range and the bass is much tighter."
All in good fun my friend...
Totally concur, jax. I think WHFI should be applauded for inviting ordinary folk like myself to blind test variations during a course of a few hours. And what it proves is that, in the main, most of our conclusions are pretty similar to the experts at the 'Tower'. What it can't tell you, however, is how it translates to an individual living room or bedroom.
As we ALL know, there are no right or wrong answers or findings.
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
Alec
Well-known member
JoelSim:
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
idc
Well-known member
al7478:JoelSim:
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
Very good point al. I am sure The Big Question would be held up as a shining example if it came to the same conclusion as those who doubt racks can sound different.
To those who do still doubt that racks etc don't make a difference, what evidence would satisfy you? Add the Big Question result to What Hifi reviews and personal testimony from Joel and myself when I got my rack and that is a lot of evidence. I see nothing to the contrary exept doubt without evidence, which is not very convincing at all.
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
Very good point al. I am sure The Big Question would be held up as a shining example if it came to the same conclusion as those who doubt racks can sound different.
To those who do still doubt that racks etc don't make a difference, what evidence would satisfy you? Add the Big Question result to What Hifi reviews and personal testimony from Joel and myself when I got my rack and that is a lot of evidence. I see nothing to the contrary exept doubt without evidence, which is not very convincing at all.
al7478:JoelSim:
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
If a blind test suggests the same things that I've heard with my own ears, then it is robust enough for me. However, if it had found different results to those I had heard myself then the jury would still be out to my mind. And before you jump at me, I'm not suggesting for a moment that I am the oracle, that isn't what I've said at all in this post or any of the others above.
It's similar to the WHF review of my new CDP, to me it's a very accurate representation of what I've heard from it myself.
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
If a blind test suggests the same things that I've heard with my own ears, then it is robust enough for me. However, if it had found different results to those I had heard myself then the jury would still be out to my mind. And before you jump at me, I'm not suggesting for a moment that I am the oracle, that isn't what I've said at all in this post or any of the others above.
It's similar to the WHF review of my new CDP, to me it's a very accurate representation of what I've heard from it myself.
al7478:JoelSim:
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
If a blind test suggests the same things that I've heard with my own ears, then it is robust enough for me. However, if it had found different results to those I had heard myself then the jury would still be out to my mind. And before you jump at me, I'm not suggesting for a moment that I am the oracle, that isn't what I've said at all in this post or any of the others above.
It's similar to the WHF review of my new CDP, to me it's a very accurate representation of what I've heard from it myself.
All I will say that when I bought my rack, made by the same guy as the one in the test, my personal findings were incredibly similar to those found in The Big Question. 'Basslines were suddenly easy to follow, and better separated' was a comment from AndrewH13 that particularly resonated with me.
So, to summarise, if a blind test like this is conducted and it supports exactly what I have personally found then it's saying something that has an element of robustness to it.
If a test agree with you it is robust?
Nice.
If a blind test suggests the same things that I've heard with my own ears, then it is robust enough for me. However, if it had found different results to those I had heard myself then the jury would still be out to my mind. And before you jump at me, I'm not suggesting for a moment that I am the oracle, that isn't what I've said at all in this post or any of the others above.
It's similar to the WHF review of my new CDP, to me it's a very accurate representation of what I've heard from it myself.
chebby
Well-known member
ZZ-Top assist Joel in demonstrating a robust new support....
(Or is that Big Chris on the right?)
(Or is that Big Chris on the right?)
chebby
Well-known member
Craig M.:nah, that won't do. parts of it look flammable.
They will be clean-shaven for the production version.
They will be clean-shaven for the production version.
Alec
Well-known member
Funny Chebby!
I didnt mean anything too serious by it joel. indeed, id probably take the same position you describe in your last post.
I didnt mean anything too serious by it joel. indeed, id probably take the same position you describe in your last post.
al7478:
Funny Chebby!
I didnt mean anything too serious by it joel. indeed, id probably take the same position you describe in your last post.
lol, I am not clean shaven at the mo, a week in now.
Funny Chebby!
I didnt mean anything too serious by it joel. indeed, id probably take the same position you describe in your last post.
lol, I am not clean shaven at the mo, a week in now.
Really dont understand all this racks can make a sonic difference stuff?? If it looks nice and is well built buy it. Its funny, i have a friend who thinks that all audiophiles deal in pretentious pomposity and i have a hard time trying to convice him that i can genuinly hear differences between amps and speakers and cd players. But when it comes to racks and we get things like the following i really dont have any choice but to agree with him -
"For
Smooth treble, great detailing, fast, good looks
Against
Lacks some weight in the bass and mid-range"
"Special glass shelves deliver a fine sense of drive and insight."
"Difficult to assemble and sound is cluttered, confused and edgy"
Seriously??? If its got to the point where your system sounds "cluttered, confused and edgy" or lacks "bass and mid-range" - i will eat my hat if the fault lies not with your system and with your rack! But hey each to their own!
Peace out.
"For
Smooth treble, great detailing, fast, good looks
Against
Lacks some weight in the bass and mid-range"
"Special glass shelves deliver a fine sense of drive and insight."
"Difficult to assemble and sound is cluttered, confused and edgy"
Seriously??? If its got to the point where your system sounds "cluttered, confused and edgy" or lacks "bass and mid-range" - i will eat my hat if the fault lies not with your system and with your rack! But hey each to their own!
Peace out.
jaxwired
Well-known member
Shaxos is spot on. In the time I've been reading the WHF forums, I've never once seen anyone suggest fixing a SQ weakness by purchasing a new rack. Sometimes common sense must dictate. If ever there was proof that we cannot trust our own brains and our own ears, this is it. Reason tells us that a rack can't impact the sound, yet our ears sense a difference. Conclusion? Can't trust our ears...
Ooo, I like this game:
Blind test that supports your beliefs = there, told you so.
Blind test that challenges your beliefs = we can't trust our ears.
Nice one, jaxwired!
Blind test that supports your beliefs = there, told you so.
Blind test that challenges your beliefs = we can't trust our ears.
Nice one, jaxwired!
Does Coca Cola taste different out of a bottle or a can?
It can't possibly, but it does.
And my rack made a very significant difference.
It can't possibly, but it does.
And my rack made a very significant difference.
A wee question. This is being described as a blind test, how was blinding achieved. Were the speakers and other kit placed behind screens, or were the participants blindfolded? Or was it not a blind test?
The blinding process in the cables Big Question was clearly explained, and it's conclusions have given me serious pause for thought, but it's not entirely clear that the rack test was a blinded test.
Also, given that the pattern of Big Question features is to start basic and incrementally "improve" the setup, validity may be further improved if the order of the different systems is randomised, as well as the process being blinded to the panel members. Just a thought.
The blinding process in the cables Big Question was clearly explained, and it's conclusions have given me serious pause for thought, but it's not entirely clear that the rack test was a blinded test.
Also, given that the pattern of Big Question features is to start basic and incrementally "improve" the setup, validity may be further improved if the order of the different systems is randomised, as well as the process being blinded to the panel members. Just a thought.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram