Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Audio and Video Talk
General Discussion
best possible seperates combination of all time: source, amplification & speaker
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support AVForums:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ampdog" data-source="post: 64423" data-attributes="member: 144"><p>I must hesitate to post here because of the repeated admissions I have made in the past regarding lack experience of commercial equipment.</p><p></p><p>But I would go with Moog's first sentence. Because the final 'arbiter' used is something as subjective as human hearing, there can be no 'best' standard. 'Preferable' so often seems to veer toward cost distinction. Someone will quote the generality that that proves that 'you get what you pay for' - yet all too often such so-called 'best' products reveal distinct deviation from the original by way of performance stats. Thus, what you hear is <em>not</em> inaudibly close to the original (however that may have sounded - we were mostly not present).</p><p></p><p>I think at this stage the article quoted in the thread "Is this what analogue is all about' (Tube Section) is relevant: www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb10/articles/analoguewarmth.htm</p><p></p><p>The author explains why often the 'warmest' rendition of the original is preferred, adding "just the right amount of distortion to make the sound perfect" (an actual quote from a high-end amplifier manufacturer!). I believe we all know that often (high end) products on preferred lists have exemplary mechanical execution, inclusion of components of over-the-top specs etc. These may have impressive specs but not enough of audio value to compare. </p><p></p><p>As said elsewhere, I feel that in this we are fortunate to have limitations in our detecting device (hearing), thus the practical question is really: What combination of audio equipment presents inaudible deviation from the original? This does not make the choice easier, but perhaps less likely to be argueable.</p><p></p><p>My problem in compiling a choice will lie with loudspeakers. I believe (and tests have shown) that regarding amplifiers and ancillaries we have reached the stage some time ago of showing no audible contribution by the apparatus. Lastly - what source does one use for input - some of the over-processed CDs on the market?? </p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ampdog, post: 64423, member: 144"] I must hesitate to post here because of the repeated admissions I have made in the past regarding lack experience of commercial equipment. But I would go with Moog's first sentence. Because the final 'arbiter' used is something as subjective as human hearing, there can be no 'best' standard. 'Preferable' so often seems to veer toward cost distinction. Someone will quote the generality that that proves that 'you get what you pay for' - yet all too often such so-called 'best' products reveal distinct deviation from the original by way of performance stats. Thus, what you hear is [I]not[/I] inaudibly close to the original (however that may have sounded - we were mostly not present). I think at this stage the article quoted in the thread "Is this what analogue is all about' (Tube Section) is relevant: www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb10/articles/analoguewarmth.htm The author explains why often the 'warmest' rendition of the original is preferred, adding "just the right amount of distortion to make the sound perfect" (an actual quote from a high-end amplifier manufacturer!). I believe we all know that often (high end) products on preferred lists have exemplary mechanical execution, inclusion of components of over-the-top specs etc. These may have impressive specs but not enough of audio value to compare. As said elsewhere, I feel that in this we are fortunate to have limitations in our detecting device (hearing), thus the practical question is really: What combination of audio equipment presents inaudible deviation from the original? This does not make the choice easier, but perhaps less likely to be argueable. My problem in compiling a choice will lie with loudspeakers. I believe (and tests have shown) that regarding amplifiers and ancillaries we have reached the stage some time ago of showing no audible contribution by the apparatus. Lastly - what source does one use for input - some of the over-processed CDs on the market?? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Audio and Video Talk
General Discussion
best possible seperates combination of all time: source, amplification & speaker
Top