Jump to content

High End Audio


Recommended Posts

The electronics is every bit as important as the speakers/room in getting a system to provide optimum reproduction and, as PZ stated, synergy is critical.  While Chris may find differences in upstream equipment to be only subtle, many do hear significant differences even when the equipment is of extremely high quality..  One of the areas of disagreement which many of us NYC area audio guys had with Julian Hirsch was his apparent belief that gear which measured the same sounded the same.  

 

There's no substitute for auditioning equipment (whether it be speakers or electronics) at home which is why some dealers offer a return privilege.  It is well worth doing business with them as the cost of return shipping often pales in comparison with getting stuck with equipment which is not pleasing to one's ears.

 

 

Maynard

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pzannucci said:

Now if you have a lot of front end electronics with the ability to eq and manage the speakers, then you can get nirvana out of many different electronics provided the noise level is reasonable on high efficiency speakers.  But then the equation is tipped back to spending more on electronics and less on the speakers.

 

My active crossover cost less than 1/10th of the loudspeaker cost. And the price of my loudspeakers were a real bargain as compared to some high-end prices quoted above.

 

Amplifiers, preamp/DAC and associated players just don't have as much effect on the sound when using truly high-end loudspeakers.  Upstream electronics are used by many to correct the shortcomings of loudspeakers, but if you're starting out with loudspeakers having few or no performance issues, electronics (other than perhaps an active crossover) are not nearly as important in my experience. 

 

Sure, if you want to spend many thousands of dollars on amplifiers and preamps, they will sound good.  However, "bang for buck" just isn't there in my experience as it might be if using typical loudspeakers having in-room issues with polar control/coverage, irregular frequency response, and other forms of distortion mentioned above. 

 

Chris

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Chris A said:

 

Sure, if you want to spend many thousands of dollars on amplifiers and preamps, they will sound good.  However, "bang for buck" just isn't there in my experience as it might be if using typical loudspeakers having in-room issues with polar control/coverage, irregular frequency response, and other forms of distortion mentioned above. 

 

Chris

I think that is a generalized assumption that mischaracterizes the idea of trying different "front end" electronics. perhaps there are some folks that try to solve in-room problems by swapping out components... and I am sure I have done so in the past, but if we're given a set speaker (whether a bose 901 or a Klipsch Jubilee), changing components in the "front end" tailors the sound to our personal liking.

 

you may argue that there are diminishing returns based on economic values, however every persons economic valuation is different and no one generalized statement can reconcile that.

 

I would in fact go on to say that in my personal experience, the more efficient and better a loud speaker is the more important the front end components are... mainly because those speakers begin to easily and clearly exhibit all the short comings and nuances of any upstream component... as a general stated idea.

 

Are the front end electronics "good enough"... let me be the judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Front end electronics to us the consumers can be hard to evaluate on paper as you rely on electronic tests and often times biased reviews. The tests are often done on a purely resistive load which will give a very rough approximation of actual performance. The issue of stability comes to mind for me. These high power amps with vanishingly low distortion may look good on paper against a purely resistive load when driven by a sine wave but what happens when you feed it actual music when connected to a heavily reactive load? Fatigue. More often than not. The best part about horn speakers is efficiency and accuracy. That way there you can get away with using much lower power amps. Why does this matter? When the amp is asked to do less it can perform better. When the amp is already using non-linear devices (transistors) and is asked to provide more gain you need more feedback to linearize it. The problem isn't the feedback but how it is implemented. I have seen a lot of amps get it wrong over the years. When an amp is asked to do a simple task it can be relaxed. The use of more linear devices with intrinsic feedback (triodes) can be used which is much easier to get stable performance. I will take stability with a little benign distortion nine times out of ten any day of the week. When pairing these low distorition high watt amps with inefficient speakers the speakers themselves are adding the majority of the distoriton now, not good, you just passed the buck.

 

Room treatment is a good thing but with poor front end electronics it's not even lipstick on a pig, it's worse. It's like using roadkill for your dinner and saying "but I cooked it perfect and used the proper spices".

 

Start with good speakers, I prefer horns, and then get good stable amps then treat the room. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schu,

 

I do recommend hearing a pair of well set-up Jubs in a treated acoustic room.  Based on the number of years of talking to each other here, it feels like it might be more like a reunion.  If you're ever planning to go through DFW, call or PM me.  I'm about 20 minutes from the airport: it's not an issue for me.

 

As far as other high-end loudspeakers, I do recommend listening to full-range multiple entry horns (MEHs) set up well to hear the differences in-room with their point source capability, extremely low modulation distortion, and controlled in-room polars to low frequencies.  I don't see other high-end loudspeakers that can do that, and every report that I've read by those that do listen to them at audio shows have mentioned the large qualitative difference in sound listening to MEHs. 

 

I see a lot of really large direct radiating loudspeakers with obvious changing polar coverage vs. frequency, higher modulation distortion, and surprisingly low efficiency for their size.  That seems to be a common theme.  It's a bit amazing to me that the "high end" loudspeaker marketplace is basically unchanged since the early 1980s.  It's a shame because there are much better engineering ways to do it--and much more cost effective. 

 

The few extremely large horn multi-horn systems (e.g., Avantgarde, Magico, etc.) that I've seen all have other issues related to polar lobing from their non-point-source designs and their use of full hyperbolic and exponential horn profiles that introduce polar issues vs. frequency and its associated "horn honk".  They're also usually way too big for typical room sizes, and all suffer from floor/ceiling/wall bounce nulls due to their typical spacing away from room boundaries.

 

It's amazing that these old "high-end" brands keep selling the same basic designs each year without major change...and the consumer marketplace hasn't put them out of business yet.  Perhaps it's a function of the large profit margins charged per pair that keeps them in business, and preying on uninformed consumers driven by apparent snob appeal, and with a lot more money than sense.  Perhaps the grapevine isn't working as it should in today's Google-driven world. 

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I am with Chris on this one, jubs sound very good on even modest equipment as long as they have very little distortion, and the amps are quiet and there is good synergy. Some of my other 2 channels systems that I have, and have had, its been a struggle to find amps that would bring out the speakers best sound. Finding amps for my Model 19s was a task to say the least. Once I found what worked it was very good. Funny story, went to the local HIFI store, brought some favorite recordings, listened to some B&W 802s with some TOTL Mac gear and Electrocompaniet gear and it wasn't even close the M19s blew them away in most areas, if I use 10 factors analyze a system, the Altecs would have one 8 and I might be giving to much credit to their "high end " system. My wife and I were fairly confused, funny thing is we brought 3 disks they had 2 of them to demo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to recall some commentary when I first brought my Jubilee's home, stating how good they sounded blah blah blah...

 

Being essentially chastised that they can't sound that much better, especially given that I was using "Kluge" amps (I believe was the word)...

 

I've pretty much ignored those comments, especially as some who came from that point of view, had never heard them....so I keep chugging along in my own blissful ignorance...not realizing these are not supposed to sound as good as they do. :)

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general Klipsch speakers are a bargain compared to many brand and closes to live performance style speakers.  What ever flavor speakers, amps, preamp, etc., these are best evaluated in your listening room.  That is the only place where you can truly evaluate the speakers and gear  to see if it suits your particular taste.  It has been seen many times that the uber expensive stuff does not offer that great of a benefit over more reasonable price component.  Careful setup can make a midrange system sound good and poor setup can make a high end system sound like crap.  Now, get the right speakers, some good gear and careful setup, and now your are talking about some nice sounds.

 

Good audio is achieved via a holistic approach, the speakers, gear, listen room, and proper setup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2017 at 2:59 PM, jimjimbo said:

For even more disappointment and ridiculous prices, you should attend AXPONA in Chicago every year.

After two visits about 2 years apart each, I have made the same conclusion. I did like the Wilson Audio room with about a Half Million's worth of gear, but the most impressive to me were the Open Baffle from Spatial Audio, with the offerings ranging from about $1,800 to $2,2200 per pair. Best sound for the money.

 

I also liked Andrew Jones bargain speakers from ELAC.

 

The best of show, IMHO were the big red Sadurni Horns, which brought tears to my eyes with their incredible sound and their $40,000 price tag.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I want to add, that as a former owner of tube gear, McIntosh, Marantz, HK Citation, Scott, etc. I moved on to the best of class AB amps from all the best from BiPolar transistors to the best of MOSFETS. They ALL sounded good enough and the Speakers were the main sound, not the amps, which were all high quality.

 

But now that I have a First Watt Alpha J Class A amplifier, I'm completely blown away by the sound micro detail, which also includes an ESS 32 bit DAC in my Yamaha pre pro. With all horns from top to bottom, All I need is those 40 watts and I can play louder and cleaner/more detailed than my friend with 600 WPC class D on direct radiator speakers, since he is about 15 db less efficient.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Chris A said:

 

My active crossover cost less than 1/10th of the loudspeaker cost. And the price of my loudspeakers were a real bargain as compared to some high-end prices quoted above.

 

Amplifiers, preamp/DAC and associated players just don't have as much effect on the sound when using truly high-end loudspeakers.  Upstream electronics are used by many to correct the shortcomings of loudspeakers, but if you're starting out with loudspeakers having few or no performance issues, electronics (other than perhaps an active crossover) are not nearly as important in my experience. 

 

Sure, if you want to spend many thousands of dollars on amplifiers and preamps, they will sound good.  However, "bang for buck" just isn't there in my experience as it might be if using typical loudspeakers having in-room issues with polar control/coverage, irregular frequency response, and other forms of distortion mentioned above. 

 

Chris

I didn't say the ratio of cost in your statements was incorrect nor picking at your front end.  I just said to the typical person that sets up a system with components off the shelf and many lower or higher resolution speakers, will notice that ratio drop (front end vs speaker) because the synergy means more when not having a lot of horsepower and knowledge. 

 

Juniper,

To my point, as you said, synergy not cost in many instances.  Exactly where I was going. You got the last 15% which matters to a lot of folks from the 19's

 

With lots of horsepower and/or knowledge though you can overcome a lot of synergy issues.  That of course doesn't mean you have to have 20k amps and same for front ends.  Sad part is with many manufactured loudspeakers, you do need a fat wallet to make them sound good.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"they cannot produce the full range of loudness of the music--i.e., "concert volume"--without audibly distorting.  This is especially true for "high end" loudspeakers for the customer expects this capability. PA and cinema loudspeakers have been horn loaded for many years because they do not distort like direct radiating loudspeakers.  Most consumer loudspeaker manufacturers have yet to recognize this customer need, including "high end" manufacturers."

 

I don't agree with Chris' point here at all.  It is not necessary for a speaker to be able to reproduce concert volume levels without audible distortion if the listener never requires it (and, of course, this is tied in with amplifier power requirements and so on).  The guy who doesn't enjoy orchestral crescendos louder than 85 db at the listening position, and whose speakers are extremely clean at that level, doesn't have to be concerned that his speakers will sound very poorly at 120 db.  I've heard countless non-horn type speakers which sound totally phenomenal.  We who participate on here just happen to favor what Klipsch has accomplished.  That doesn't mean that the electrostatic guys, or users of conventional type speakers are wrong.  In fact, the best sounding system I have ever experienced used a pair of huge Acoustats driven by tube servo amps modified by semi-local legend Danny Fanny (yes, that's his name) who is world renowned for his work on them.


Maynard   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems odd to praise high-end setups that are unable to reproduce the full range of music loudness that is captured in recordings...and that are experienced in real music concerts.  Recall the sound of concert bass drum, tympani, glockenspiel, low brass, trumpets and full double bass sections playing at full concert volume--in real life.  Who wouldn't want that capability in their truly high end setup--along with the micro-detail dynamics found in those same recordings?  (No one that I know.)  I assume that virtually all owners of expensive sound reproduction systems would savor that capability to accurately reproduce high dynamic range recordings (and not from around the corner and down the hall ;)).  Klipsch owners I would think would be most likely of all to want that--of all brands. 

 

I suppose that those that aren't interested in truly accurate sound reproduction might be found at an Acoustat web site or perhaps MartinLogan website. It just seems a bit odd to me doing apologetics on that subject on this particular web site.

 

Chris

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly right.  Several things are needed for reproducing life-like dynamic range.  I have only once seen any of these applied by a dealer with a showroom.  Even in very high-end show rooms I've visited with $200k+ stereo systems, they don't do everything possible to have the best possible dynamic range.

 

1. A very well treated room (if you can't hear yourself breathe, the noise floor is likely probably too high).  This also means that anything else that emits noise needs to be taken out of the listening area.  Lowering the noise floor of the room and adding bass traps and thick acoustic insulation should be at the top of the list.  Get a calibrated mic and nice measurement rig.  Try to perfect impulse/etc response along with waterfall plots as much as possible for your room.  My ears seem more sensitive to transients is why I recommend these measurements.  I'm not saying that frequency response isn't important, but it is usually the last measurement I look at.

 

2. Get rid of all sources of distortion.  This necessitates active crossovers and minimizing A/D and D/A conversions.  To completely eliminate hiss that a pre/pro might be adding my setup sounds best when I feed AES straight in my active crossover.  Do all processing in the digital domain and have a single D/A conversion at the end.  This also means having top notch digital processing like what a PC can do (using ASIO sound drivers and not anything that goes through window's mixer) or buying well designed top notch pro gear and outputting digital into an active crossover (hopefully one that has FIR filters as other digital crossovers will add unnecessary phase shifts).  For the LF/sub crossover, I found that low order Bessel filter crossover sounds the best.  Presumably this is because more drivers are moving at the same time (better room coupling) and I crossover well above and within the capabilities of all drivers.  My phase response is fairly flat (measured at the MLP) compared to any passive crossover that will have tons of phase shifts.

 

Also, try for a processor/preamp and amps that truly have low distortion measurements for IMD and THD.  As a side note, I also think slew rate is important for transient reproduction.  Clearly more than just producing a flat response matters.  Music has tons of frequencies mixed in and well recorded music has transients and lots of dynamic range.  One concerned with fidelity should want to fully recreate it.

 

3. Pick amps with a very low noise floor (to where sound comes out of nothingness).  I thought amp selection was BS to some degree until I actively tri-amped and heard hiss from my larger amps.  If one removes all the padding of the mid and high drivers and has a treated room, you can really get a since for which amps have the lowest noise floor.  I did put some padding back in upstream of my large amps and it helped, but then I was sacrificing dynamic range of the speaker processor.  Unfortunately, the only amps I tried that completely eliminate hiss for me are the Benchmark AHB2 amps and they are expensive even used.  All I can say is I hear guitarists breathing and other things that were buried in the noise floor before and feel the amps were worth it.  It would be great to tryout two of the Pass Labs First-watt amps, but since they are even more expensive than my used AHB2 amps I will stop why I am in the hole/dog house.  

 

4.  Speakers that can support ~120dB at the listening position and amps that can support this without clipping.  If you have headroom and play at a lower level, you are going to hear less distortion at an average level of 60-80dB playback versus speakers with lots of distortion at 120dB.

 

5. This should probably be number 2, but always pick the best mastering of the content you are playing.  Best mastering means not buying some recent remaster that squashes all the dynamics.  http://dr.loudness-war.info/  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny I don't remember seeing and digital signal processing at symphony hall. Why is it needed in you living room? You will have a different audible perspective depending on where you sit within the hall. The different frequencies produced by the instruments will interact with the hall and reach your ear at different times yet we stil are immersed in it while there. Most claim the live experience is what you are striving for yet the live experience is far from perfect.

 

Slew rate is a large signal phenomena, which will ultimately only come into play towards the end of the chain, usually the output stage of the power amp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I for one, don't listening anywhere near concert level.  Most of the time I peak at 85 db.  An amp and speaker that can reproduce at that listen level is OK with me.  Now, for HT, it is a different story.  I won't accept anything less than Reference playback without undue distortion.  I can't justify $50 K for a system that I can't turn to 0 db or a subwoofer system that can't play 0 db cleanly.  Multichannel HT is a different beast than 2 ch. music.  Either way, I can't justify these high prices for a less than adequate system, taking into account listening levels, type of music, etc.  This leave some wiggle room but, not $50 K dollars worth, lol.

 

The Anthem HT performance that I heard will make me stir away from their products because this was only a 5.1 system running out of gas and for the price tag, a Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo or Pioneer could put on a  better performance considering the cost ratio.  This is not a fair statement and I have to keep that in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you are right, most are striving for that "live" experience.  But I am sitting in a small room limited by small room acoustical issues (as most here are), and these room issues will be way more dominant especially below 200Hz (versus setting in the concert hall which is much bigger and doesn't have these types of issues).

 

Technology exists now that can correct time domain room related issues with very little latency, so why not use it?  If the playback is already a digital on my PC, doing this conversion digitally on my PC makes a lot of sense (versus having to do extra A/D and D/A conversions with something like this:  https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series/ddrc-88a ).

 

As you insinuate, the recording captures the concert hall based on where it was mic'd from (usually much closer than you sit), so the information is never going to be as if you were in the audience.  It is true for many recordings... 

 

3 hours ago, alzinski said:

Funny I don't remember seeing and digital signal processing at symphony hall. Why is it needed in you living room? You will have a different audible perspective depending on where you sit within the hall. The different frequencies produced by the instruments will interact with the hall and reach your ear at different times yet we stil are immersed in it while there. Most claim the live experience is what you are striving for yet the live experience is far from perfect.

 

Slew rate is a large signal phenomena, which will ultimately only come into play towards the end of the chain, usually the output stage of the power amp.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, etc6849 said:

Yes, you are right, most are striving for that "live" experience.  But I am sitting in a small room limited by small room acoustical issues (as most here are), and these room issues will be way more dominant especially below 200Hz (versus setting in the concert hall which is much bigger and doesn't have these types of issues).

 

Technology exists now that can correct time domain room related issues with very little latency, so why not use it?  If the playback is already a digital on my PC, doing this conversion digitally on my PC makes a lot of sense (versus having to do extra A/D and D/A conversions with something like this:  https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series/ddrc-88a ).

 

As you insinuate, the recording captures the concert hall based on where it was mic'd from (usually much closer than you sit), so the information is never going to be as if you were in the audience.  It is true for many recordings... 

 

 

Exactly.  No matter what we do with our systems it is not possible to recreate a theater like Carnegie Hall, Fillmore East, or even a large college auditorium in our homes.  And that is why I made the point about listening level.  A 120 db peak heard in even a 5k cu. ft. listening room isn't going to sound the same as it does in a theater.  About the best we can do is to get some reasonable facsimile which reminds us of the live event (try, for example, to duplicate Chicago's Carnegie Hall performance of around 1971, or Santana's at Fillmore East from '68, in your listening room and you will quickly see my point- it is a total impossibility regardless of what kind of system you employ).

 

Maynard

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2017 at 1:27 PM, ClaudeJ1 said:

After two visits about 2 years apart each, I have made the same conclusion. I did like the Wilson Audio room with about a Half Million's worth of gear, but the most impressive to me were the Open Baffle from Spatial Audio, with the offerings ranging from about $1,800 to $2,2200 per pair. Best sound for the money.

 

I also liked Andrew Jones bargain speakers from ELAC.

 

The best of show, IMHO were the big red Sadurni Horns, which brought tears to my eyes with their incredible sound and their $40,000 price tag.

I too, was  impressed with the $1500 Spatial Audio M3 speaker I heard at the Newport Show a few years back.  That speaker has jumped in price a bit since then and he has started to make some speakers for the deeper wallet these days, as well.

 

http://www.spatialaudio.us/x1-main 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...