Audiophile on a Budget Redux

[J Lee]

Hey -- yet another of the ubiquitous "budget" system recs sought. Anyone care to try to help me out? I just moved into an apartment where I can play music at an acceptable (to me) volume and am interested in performing some upgrades within certain limits/constraints, many of which are financial, but some of which have to do with my own views on audiophilia.

Anyway, here's the deal: I have a fairly nauseous "system" right now by even my own low, low standards (cheapest possible portable CD player, ridiculous turntable/cassette/tuner/amp combo outputted through the 1/4" phones jack into an ancient Marantz Model 20 amplifier, which drives two JVC SX-A6 speakers (6 ohms) and, simultaneously, two small no-name speakers for "quad" sound). Even for me, who has always taken a no-nonsense approach to music (transcribing solos, learning the craft, focusing on the message and not the medium), it's intolerable what I'm hearing. All the same, I don't wish to be confined to my Grado SR-60s driven by my computer (Echo Indigo sound card) -- although it sounds far better than anything in my living room -- for any longer.

First question: what advantage would there be in purchasing a higher-powered amp (say, 100W/channel) given that I don't play recorded music at very high levels? I know what distortion (tube/valve) or clipping sounds like -- and I have never heard any of that through the speakers?

Second question: there's not really a serious budget problem, but I want to get off as cheaply as possible, given that my music performance rig needs some attention now (a decent, transparent mixer, for one -- which I can justify spending some serious dough on). Here's my proposed solution: a Toshiba 3960 DVD/CD/MP3 player (I already own many of the titles released on SACD in other formats -- including the Stones CDs [I played keyboards a bit ago in a Stones cover band and really DON'T want to listen to those records right now!] and can't justify repurchasing for improved quality -- especially as I'm learning to play Hammond organ and have need of a great many recordings I don't already own which are available on redbook CD or vinyl only), a Pro-Ject Debut turntable (or a Gemini XL-200 belt drive turntable, DJ-style sort of thing, but with an S-shaped tone arm, unlike those Stanton "STR8"s), and a DOD 31-band dual graphic equalizer.

Here are two constraints which have nothing to do with budget, per se. I understand these are bones of contention among audiophiles, but I don't wish to debate these points particularly. (1) I'm convinced by the lack of response to Richard Clark's $10,000 amp challenge that the sound quality of amps operating within their limits (i.e., not clipping) that there's no difference in sound quality between a high-end amp and a low-end amp. And (2) Interconnects/speaker cables. It hasn't been proved, so I don't believe it and won't spend any money on it until it has been demonstrated to have some effect, even on the high-end systems which are supposed to yield some of the benefits. So, no Tice clock, Shakti stone, Monster cable, whatever, for me...

If it turns out I need more power -- would someone mind explaining how this works, if this is the case? I'm used to using 300+ W amps for gigs, but this is always at stage volume...i.e., LOUD. How does the power affect low-volume home listening, if at all? -- I'm considering either a low-end Yamaha receiver (100-150 W) or an Alesis 100W power amp (a cheap amp used for studio monitoring) with an outboard phono preamp AND, in the case of the Alesis (which has only a few inputs), the best budget unpowered mixer I can find, in order to handle various inputs.

As far as speakers go, I'm actually pretty happy with the sound of those old JVC SX-A6s -- they have a rectangular woofer at the bottom of the cabinet, about an 8-inch woofer-thing, and two smaller tweeters, in addition to a grilled speaker (I don't know if it has its own driver or is just used to pump leakage) on the back, adjustable. I think it's a neat design, at least, and they sound OK to my ears, at least for now. But I know everyone's got their own preference for speakers, so I don't necessarily need/expect recs on speakers (I know a few people here use a certain model of Cambridge SoundWorks towers, which are attractively priced, and a few people have said they sound particular good with piano, which I listen to a lot, but I'm still not sure if I'm not going to simply use a pair of studio-style monitors on good stands and EQ to taste -- anyone ever gone this route?) When it comes time for better/different speakers, I'll probably opt for seeking recommendations and finding an online store with a good return policy (if such exists), the same way a lot of keyboardists "demo" musical instruments which aren't always available in stores and which need to be demoed in the context of a whole setup.

Anyway, thanks a lot for the input -- feel free, of course, to correct any of my thinking if it's wrong (I'm not upset by harsh criticism -- I just want to hear the TRUTH coming out of my speakers) or whatever. Cheers, John.

[Tanager]

I have not done the level of comparisons that some have, but I place little stock myself in the whole $$$ interconnects religion, much like you, and I am very very happy with my $400 integrated amp. I have a CA CD player and integrated amp, and I am very very happy with both - great performance, great sound (to my ears), not a lot of $$$. Good combo, IMHO. I bought my speakers from Axiom Audio, which is a speaker maker located in Canada. They will express ship, free of charge, to anywhere in the US/Canada, and you have a 30-day money-back guarantee. They had gotten great reviews from GoodSound, etc., so I felt like the chance was worth it. I've had my system for about 18 months, and I've been extremely happy with it. I still use my Nak BX-300 cassette deck, which I may never replace. One of these days I may actually get a phono stage and hook up my old Onkyo turntable, but no need yet.

[stonemonkts]

I can say without any doubt that when I replaced cheapo speaker wire with low-priced Monster Cables (< $50) there was an appreciable difference in the sound. I would never spend more than that though. But the chinzy thin speaker wire you buy at Ace Hardware just doesn't cut it.

[J Lee]

Tanager --

Thanks for the update on your own search for good playback -- your thread was, of course, the inspiration for this one, but I thought it best to just start a new thread, since there are, of course, different questions for different people. I've heard great things about the lower-end line of CA CD players -- and it (i.e., great CD sound) is certainly something I've been considering, and will do more considering, given your satisfaction. I guess there's something "extra-audio" going on in my seriously considering the Toshiba 3950/60 -- I want to see if there's something to all of the hype in certain circles (audioasylum, etc.) and wouldn't mind, in any case, having a DVD player even if I have to eventually go to a proper CD player like the CA. I'll definitely look into the Axioms, which always seem to be right up there in terms of choices others have made in this price bracket. Thanks!

Stonemonkts -- great handle! I believe in paying for build quality, even if in my case it might be for an additional bit of security/piece of mind, or as insurance against damage caused by frequent (?!) coupling/uncoupling. I guess I'm taking a very perverse position, but it's probably understandable given the VERY mediocre state of the rest of my "equipment" (hardly worthy of the name!) Let's face it, that Marantz amp I've got is pretty crusty at this point! What about Belden stuff? Or, for example, what about matching the gauge of some of that infamous hardware store zip-cord or another generic-type bulk cable to the higher-dollar-fetching cords? Do you think that might work out OK for someone admittedly trawling the dregs of audiophilia?

[Chris D]

Power in amplifiers affects moer than just volume. The more poweer (with low distortion) an amp has, the better it deals with shifts in dynamics at any volume. Regardless of what it takes to drive your speakers, more power means a cleaner signal.

When checking amps, be sure to look not just at watts per channel RMS but also at total harmonic distortion. The lower the latter the better, of course. Know too that some more reputable companies underestimate their power specs. Harmon-Kardon, for instance, back in the day always packed more power in its integrated amps than advertised.

[Tanager]

J Lee, if you're looking for a combo player that can handle a variety of formats, ask Kevin Bresnahan. If you recall the original thread, you might recall his being a fan of the Pioneer SACD/DVD/DVD-Audio/CD player, which IIRC was (and still is, looking at my Audio Advisor catalog) pretty reasonably priced.

[J Lee]

Thanks, Chris. Interesting. What's the deal with Harmon Kardon these days? They seem to have a number of integrated amps at my price point (sub $500), but seem to lack the cachet associated with their name, as you say, "back in the day."

What are the good places to look for empirical research on THD in a home stereo context, if any? I'm fascinated, since I've been using power amps for my whole life, but haven't really tried to understand anything at a hi-fi level, although, if I can add to the information you provide, I'd be a fool to ignore some of the basic concepts involved -- the ability to handle transients, dynamic power, however, is something I've come across a tiny bit before . Although, I would assume (and I've "heard," as in hearsay) that most any consumer amplifier would have an acceptable distortion rating. Wouldn't a failing in THD have been exploited to the tune of ten grand in Clark's famous amplifier challenge?

[stonemonkts]

Originally Posted by J Lee

Or, for example, what about matching the gauge of some of that infamous hardware store zip-cord or another generic-type bulk cable to the higher-dollar-fetching cords? Do you think that might work out OK for someone admittedly trawling the dregs of audiophilia?

I don't have a clue.

My experiences with cables/speaker wire stem from a former association with a workmate/buddy who was an audiophile lunatic. His system sounded better than anything I've ever heard in my lfe. His cables cost $3000 but as I say he was a lunatic.

So when it came time to set up my stereo after a move I decided to compromise and splurge for a set of Monster Cables for 40 bucks or so. I connected the cables and heard an appreciable improvement in sound. End of story.

[J Lee]

Fair enough, Stonemonkts! If a sub-$50 tweak can bring about some added clarity, then I'm all for it. I'll be the first to admit I'm perversely interested in trying to fashion my own cables/interconnects, but then again, I'm willing to use myself as a total guinea pig and, again, there are motivations other than purely sonic which are driving me (namely, brute curiosity). Just as in the case of the cheap Toshiba CD player, I may end up paying more for satisfying my curiosity, I may well end up back at Monster Cable for all I know.

Tanager -- thanks for reminding me about the Pioneer unit....I guess at this point I'm more curious than anything else about trying the various mods to the Toshiba (soldering/jumping at the PCB and whatnot) and seeing if it pans out. I don't know if anyone's AB'd the Pioneer and the Toshiba, though -- it's certainly the Toshiba's rep as a GREAT sub-$400 CD player that's driving me, at this point. Hell, maybe I'll buy them both and test them out myself, although one could argue that the rest of my components make a blind test impossible -- maybe with headphones?

John.

[Cozem]

I'm not going to get into specifics, but just want to layout a plan....

Numero UNO. You can have the cleanest, brightest power money can buy and it won't get you anywhere when you don't have a reputable source.
The 2 major points of a stereo circuit are the source(cd,turntable) and the out of the finished product(speakers). This is the order in which you should spend your money.. First source, then speakers and finally power.
You can set up a pristine McIntosh amp running some sick B&W's and you still are in the same boat (in my opinion) if your still running CD's in your portable CD player...

Change your source and go from there.

my 2 cents

[Cozem]

Also research your cableing on line.. Search. And then search some more.. You can find those $60 Monster Cables on line for half the cost.. Also check out some audio research sites.. There are certain situations where high end cables are not justified.
You can go to Home Depot and get heavy guage speaker wire for a tenth of what Monster Cable gets for them.

I only use name brand audiphile cables from my source to my power.. It's just copper guage after that.

Oh and what ever you do. Don't by a DJ turntable!!! Don't buy a Stanton, Don't by a Numark or a Technics..
You can get a Music Hall 2.1 for a little over $200. It will outperform any DJ table you were considering. And if you can't afford it right now, it's worth the wait. If you are really serious about good sound. These purchases might be the last purchases you have to make.. Wouldn't that be nice!!

[J Lee]

Thanks for those words of wisdom. I've done a fair amount of research myself and have come to many of the same conclusions, especially re power amps. And, no, I wasn't seriously considering spending any money on wires or cables --especially not speaker wires. Just didn't want to seem contrary, since I'm begging for some feedback. If need be, I'll just make my own interconnects with Neutrik connectors, as I've done for XLR/TRS/TS stuff for music playing.

As for the turntable -- I've been looking for a used Pro-Ject Debut (I, not necessarily II) but, no luck. If they are out there, they'll be cheap, and I can afford a much better cartridge. But the Music Hall budget-level stuff (same company, I think, as Pro-Ject) is more widely available, at roughly the same price (actually I think the MH 2.1 is maybe $80-$90 cheaper than the Pro-Ject Debut II -- don't know how they stack up, though, against each other).

I actually bought the storied Toshiba 3960 -- it produced a stunning difference in sound, immediately. I'm really happy with it, and I'm not convinced by the wisdom of some of the mods (e.g., swapping the power mains out). However, since I'm curious if the unit really holds up to more illustrious competition, I intend to perform a blind test using at least the best equipment I can find at some place to which I can return the losing gear without getting hassled or screwing over your average kindly, sage small-block audio salesman, about whom I have the highest regard. I may perhaps test an SACD player as well if I have the time, along with a disc which is reputed to be the best in class (and that I can stand to listen to), to see for myself if its worth the upgrade (I'm sure it will be, but it's the added cost of media, limited catalog, and the rise and very possible industry-wide adoption of competing formats which make me more interested in redbook CD playback). I need a new copy of "Waltz for Debby" anyway, so maybe that might be a good disc to check out on.

The specs on amplifiers are ridiculously similar, including negligible differences in THD -- I think that, given enough watts RMS for my application, with enough headroom in case I want to turn it up or switch to lower ohms speakers at some point, price is going to be the main consideration there. Call me perverse, or whatever, but I'm really convinced by Richard Clark's $10,000 amplifier challenge that there aren't audible differences in tone between amplifiers, when operated within their limits.

The only question is is 30 watts RMS per channel adequate to drive 6 ohms (or, possibly, 4 ohms) speakers at moderate volume. I think so, since I haven't heard any obvious clipping, but I have only an irrational feeling that more is better in this case.

[shrugs]

How much do you want o spend?
You may have posted that but I am not in a reading mood right now.

[J Lee]

Good question, shrugs (!) I didn't really specify except that I need to get off as cheap as possible as I need a very decent mixer for another application.

If a cheap component performs as well as another, within "reason" (my own subjective criterion -- don't know how to explain more!)then I'll go cheap. Thinking:

-- cheapest possible amplifier + phono preamp (perhaps build myself). 100 W RMS, <%2 THD. I still don't know if I can improve performance upon my crusty Marantz Model 20 (30 W RMS, driving 6 ohm speakers) at the levels I need.
-- $200-300 turntable with half-decent cartridge (no luxury features needed)
-- CD player -- $70 for the Toshiba 3960, but I may seek out purchasing more expensive models, such as a Pioneer Elite SACD/DVD/CD/... model and/or the Cambridge Audio 640C in order to perform blind test, then return the "losers." Potentially would pay up to $400-500 for a CD player which performed significantly better (audio-wise) than the vaunted (or ballyhooed) Toshiba model.
-- speakers $400-600. CA Soundworks Tower II; Axiom M50s.
-- cables: essentially 0% of budget right now. if I can find a place which will allow me to audition then return them in order to decide BLIND for myself, then I may test some. I don't know if it's worth the bother to try this, since no one else seems to have been able to succeed at ABX tests, and, of course, my system may not be "hi-fi" enough to "notice" a difference, but if I have extra time I might decide for myself in a BLIND test (not set up for double blind or ABX at home!). If not, I'll use zip cord or make my own using Neutrik connectors and whatever bulk shielded cable I can find.
-- I forgot $100-200 for a dual (stereo, essentially) graphic equalizer, 31-band. DOD makes a cheap one for live sound that may work. I'll buy this BEFORE a new amp and speakers -- seems smart to me.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

Originally Posted by J Lee

-- cheapest possible amplifier + phono preamp (perhaps build myself). 100 W RMS, <%2 THD. I still don't know if I can improve performance upon my crusty Marantz Model 20 (30 W RMS, driving 6 ohm speakers) at the levels I need.

Buy a nice stereo receiver or integrated amp with a phono input and save the dough on the phono pre-amp. Try the Denon DRA-395 (80 WPC/$349 list) or DRA-685 (100 WPC/$499 list), the Harmon Kardon HK 3380 (80 WPC/$349) or the Cambridge Audio 540A (50 WPC/$349 list - no tuner).

Originally Posted by J Lee

-- $200-300 turntable with half-decent cartridge (no luxury features needed)

Music Hall MMF 2.1 is a pretty decent turntable for the money. You can find it for around $325. It comes with a Goldring Elan cartridge. I think it's the best bang for the buck.

Originally Posted by J Lee

-- CD player -- $70 for the Toshiba 3960, but I may seek out purchasing more expensive models, such as a Pioneer Elite SACD/DVD/CD/... model and/or the Cambridge Audio 640C in order to perform blind test, then return the "losers." Potentially would pay up to $400-500 for a CD player which performed significantly better (audio-wise) than the vaunted (or ballyhooed) Toshiba model.

I love my Pioneer Elite DV-45A. It is still around and lists for about $350-400 these days. Great sounding machine for both CD as well as SACD. I disagree with most video reviewers who claim this has an inferior picture. It suits me well. If I were buying one today, I would "step up" a bit and compare the Pioneer Elite DV-59-AVi (around $1K) or the Denon 3910 (around $1.2K) but that's just me. I don't even know if they are "better" than what I have but I've been reading a lot of hype about these 2 and I would be hard pressed to avoid looking at them.

Originally Posted by J Lee

-- speakers $400-600. CA Soundworks Tower II; Axiom M50s.

Good choice with the CA Tower II's, however, they've been discontinued and are starting to dry up. They are one of the best "bang for the buck" speakers out there. I am thinking about selling my TII's and moving up to B&W's so maybe we can work out a deal.

Originally Posted by J Lee

-- cables: essentially 0% of budget right now. if I can find a place which will allow me to audition then return them in order to decide BLIND for myself, then I may test some. I don't know if it's worth the bother to try this, since no one else seems to have been able to succeed at ABX tests, and, of course, my system may not be "hi-fi" enough to "notice" a difference, but if I have extra time I might decide for myself in a BLIND test (not set up for double blind or ABX at home!). If not, I'll use zip cord or make my own using Neutrik connectors and whatever bulk shielded cable I can find.

I think you are making a perfectly acceptable choice. The only thing I would worry about is the connectors of your interconnect cabling. You may want to step up just a bit from the stock RCA interconnects but you don't need a bunch of $200 per pair Monster Cables. Check out Ron Thorne's thread here on the Corner about interconnects.

I am not an advocate of fancy speaker cables. I don't agree with most of the selling tactics that are used by some of the companies making these wires. Buy a good, heavy gauge speaker wire and minimize the distance as best as possible and you should be fine.

Originally Posted by J Lee

-- I forgot $100-200 for a dual (stereo, essentially) graphic equalizer, 31-band. DOD makes a cheap one for live sound that may work. I'll buy this BEFORE a new amp and speakers -- seems smart to me.

This is one I don't get. A graphic EQ adds beaucoup noise to your audio. If the sound is crappy flat, I don't know how much you can improve it with equalization. I haven't used an EQ in decades. Are they making them any better today? They used to be pieces of junk back in the late 70's/early 80's.

Later,
Kevin

[J Lee]

I understand your point about equalization in this context, Kevin....I'm sure you're right about the quantity of noise produced, especially in a cheap graphic EQ, and you're probably right about the relative uselessness of one of these when combined with good speakers and sources. I might pick a cheapo up since I could use it for another application and comment back on the quantity of noise if I get it hooked up to an armchair rig. The only advantage might be in isolating -- perhaps to a very limited extent, especially compared to a parametric equalizer -- frequencies where various instruments "live" for closer inspection. Like on some of those Jimmy Smith records where his left hand is not terribly up in the mix (like on the old CD reissue of "House Party," e.g.), where one wouldn't want to use the tone controls on the amp necessarily, to give a simple example.

If you're really letting go of your CA towers, I'd be very interested whenever you choose to make the switch. You seem to be one who takes good care of one's gear, and if you live in the states I'm sure we could work out an amenable deal. PM me if/when you get to that point, for sure!

Thanks for the rest of your comments, as well.

John.

[Chris D]

Kevin, as usual, gives great advice, especially on the amp-receiver-power end.

[frank m]

Came from an EE I knew working in the audio design business/ It was that at reasonably low volume, with MEDIUM power speakers. all well designed amplifiers sound the same. The difference between them and MacIntosh for example, is that when you turn the Mac up to its maximum volume, quality remains the same. At max volume for just about all lowto medium priced amps, is where clipping, distortion, hum etc occur.

I have a Ph.D. in Physics and have worked as an electrical engineer for most of my career, and have yet to be convinced by either a good argument, or demonstration to these ears that these high priced cables are anything but scam. If the wires are thick enough to keep resistance down for the required current, any decently made cable should do.

Moreover, I'm using pretty low priced speakers (Paradigm) while my Mac Woofers are having their cone surrounds replaced. At reasonable volume, I am very impressed with the quality sound from them. True, I can't blast Bach's Organ Cantota's at the volume my Macs attain, but again--at reasonable volume levels, not bad. Paradigm is only one of a panoply of damn good speakers out there. Choose with your ears.

And one of the tests of a recordplayer, cd player or tape is listening to piano music incorporating sustained notes. Best detector of hum or wow there is.

[J Lee]

"And one of the tests of a recordplayer, cd player or tape is listening to piano music incorporating sustained notes. Best detector of hum or wow there is."

Messiaen's "Catalogue d'oiseaux" it is, then!

Nice to hear some confirmation re power amplifiers of what I've heard elsewhere.

Thanks.

[Mike Schwartz]

Not knowing even a small amount about these things, I suspected the whole mega expensive cable thing is all blown out of proportion...all verified having worked in consumer electronics for a brief stint during the holiday season a few short years ago.

The profits on these things [percentage wise] are gigantic.
Often the cables are where almost all the money is made,much more on the 'wires' than the amps, CD players, etc.

You can sell lots of amps, CD players, turntables and such and not make bonus money as a sales person...if you're a consistent to strong Monster Cable seller, PHAT bonus money is there.

[shrugs]

Originally Posted by frank m

all well designed amplifiers sound the same. The difference between them and MacIntosh for example, is that when you turn the Mac up to its maximum volume, quality remains the same. At max volume for just about all lowto medium priced amps, is where clipping, distortion, hum etc occur.

:

Solid State amps sound the same as a tube amp? Tube Amps using different power tubes sound the same? What does the Mac reference entail?

[jazzfiend]

Tube amps are generally more colored, adding what some call liquidity or magical midrange musicality. For many, this is pleasing to the ear (lushness?), but less accurate than solid state. My tubed preamp (MFA Magus) does help to mellow out my big Adcom, which is kinda nice on my ears.

[Chazro]

Wazzup All!

Gottatellya, this thread in general and this section of Jazzcorner slams the point home to me about how misunderstood Audio equipment is percieved by the general public. This is a point long deliberated in the audiophile press, which is the failure of the Audio manufacturers to educate and properly promote thier product. I'm sorry fellas but statements like all amps and cables sound alike are just flat out wrong. What's most telling is the conviction with which these things are posted. The posters aren't allowing for the possibility that they might be mistaken, it's like comparing a Rolls vs. a VW and saying they're the same 'cause they both get you to where you want to go. Threads abound here about MP3 and computer-generated music when the truth about these mediums lies more in their convenience than in their audio quality. Gentlemen, just because a system plays loud and clear does NOT make it a superior sounding system, hell, any novice in this hobby realizes that loudness and clarity are basic Audio 101 requirements for entry-level sound systems. There are so many other things to listen for but that's a discussion for a different place, certainly not here. I realize that I'm not going to change anyone's mind here, not trying to. It's just that it's kinda frustrating when I think that this is primarily a music site for music lovers and yet the majority aren't hearing their music the way they could. I've loved music my whole life and always will, good equipment adds so much to the listening experience that it should be a no-brainer to any music lover, but this isn't the case. Anyhow, just needed to vent....let's get back to where we left off, what WERE we talking about? Oh yeah, all tube amps and all solid state amps sound the same, hyeahright!

[frank m]

It must have been eaten by people who've bought thousand dollar cables.

What I said was basically this: Mac entered this discussion as an example of an expensive well acclaimed amp, vs a well designed but much cheaper amp, of which there are a host. NOT as an example to prove superiority of solid state amps vs. tubes. I have a fond memory of my first Williamson feedback amp using matched KT66's. I could run it up to full amplification with no input and it was impossible to hear any hum, or shot noise or anything, even with one's ear right up to any of the speakers. Emotionally I am convinced that amplifiers with tube final stages are superior particularly at high power. I can't justify that belief by comparing specs between top-of-the-line tube vs solid state amplifiers however. Nor can I tell by listening whether a good system uses tube or transistors. And if someone claims to be able to that, I demand a demonstration. All that aside, I still have the feeling that tubes have a superior dynamic response, but I can't prove it. Can you?

As to the cables, I am most skeptical of fancy shmancy cables having ANY superiority, given equivalent resistance at same power level. SHOW me and explain why and I'll kiss your butt in Macy's window at high noon and send back my Physics degrees.

[J Lee]

And by "general public," Chazro, I assume you mean someone like me and I imagine not a few others who post here, experienced musicians who spend hours and hours per day listening to recorded music?

I understand your point -- I'm willing to leave it unresolved, as in to each his own opinion. I certainly do use tube amps and preamps for performing music, and I'm sure anyone who knows and loves these old and new amplifiers would be happy to expound upon the different qualities of each tube, each tone control, etc -- including me. I also strongly believe that one is a fool to not try out a piece of equipment in one's own rig, whether a $60 mixer or a $3000 keyboard. One must decide for oneself in such a personal decision. However, the live/maxell analogy is too imperfect to warrant further employ, IMO. Different needs, different cabinetry, tube saturation, ergonomics, etc.

Of course it's a hoary debate, always sure to polarize, and unflaggingly tedious in some respects. That's both the reason why I tried to abstain from fueling the fire, originally, but also why I was somewhat pleased to see healthy disagreement. For me, however, using the criteria I've presented above in my own quest for some improvement, I find that the so-called objectivist perspective offers an opportunity to knowledgably (even if in theory -- but since when HASN'T theory been a powerful, objective guarantor of experience?) make some hard decisions on where to place one's resources. Sources and speakers, e.g. To temper my common-sense position that if something hasn't been proved, and doesn't make sense to me theoretically, I also intend to perform blind tests in so far as I'm able within my own system, but, to the extent that I may not be able to devote time and other scarce resources to the task, I must rely, as we do ALL, on certain other results published by others to certain standards.

However, when, above, I wrote of a certain perversity in my system-building aspirations, I was also alluding to my philosophical conviction of the superiority, in every case, of establishing objective grounds for acting upon every single perception, belief, sensation, etc.

So, it's in my view a not-uninteresting but not-insoluble (IMO) debate which could just as well be thought of in other, more abstract terms.

Of course I'm glad for any material input anyone may have in the future and for the sound advice already given, regardless of philosophical stripe.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

John, FYI: I sent you a PM about my Cambridge Soundworks Tower II speakers. I am going to sell them as I found a set of B&W speakers that I want. If you are interested, let me know asap as I have someone at work that's interested.

Kevin

[J Lee]

Thanks, Kevin -- I just got your message. Expect a PM in about a minute or so.

[EDIT: the word limit for PMs is becoming a problem -- en lieu of editing out crucial info, I'm just going to post my response publicly, with apologies if this is inappropriate. If you reply back to this thread or via PM, Kevin, I'll just edit out the PM portion of this message and we should be set:

Kevin --

Thanks for the messages. I'm interested, BUT, there are a few reasons why you might want to consider going ahead with your other interested buyer --

(i) I don't have a use for the center channel speaker right now -- I don't have a multi-channel receiver at the moment, and may not have one in the near future.

(ii) I couldn't have a check sent off to you before this time next week. (It would have to be a personal check, as I don't have a lot of time to run errands these days, most likely, therefore you'd want to wait for it to clear as well before shipping off).

(iii) I'd need to figure out shipping costs and/or try to dicker a bit with you if it turns out that shipping could be a deal-breaker (I won't know until I can research weight/dimensions and find out what your costs might be for packaging materials -- I can, of course, find out MOST of this online, but it would take a bit of time for me to compile the right data here and plug it into FedEx/UPS/etc. freight calculators.).

So, I'd go for it, but with the above cautions, and I certainly understand if it's easier to sell to someone local and/or who may wish to purchase the matched set of speakers for you.

Of course, if the other deal falls through, we can chat some more.

Thanks,

John.]

[Chazro]

Wazzup JL!

Hey man, I swear I wasn't singling anyone in particular in my rant, it was just a general opinion/observation. A point you made in your opening is one that I've read elsewhere that always piques my interest. The notion that a professional musician inherently "hears" music at a level other than a "non-musician". I played drums for over a decade when I was a younger man, does that mean I heard music better then than now? Or how about this, If a person has spent a huge amount of time listening to music in his life, as I have, does this qualify me as a professional music listener? When does my 35-yr old listening ability start to match a professional musicians listening skills? If a musician has been a pro for a few yrs, does that automatically grant him the ability to "hear" better than I do? When articulated it sounds silly and yet I've had run-ins with musicians that DO feel their listening ability is inherently better just because they're musicians. Somewhat related is the opinion, held by certain musicians, that one can't completely understand the music unless one is a musician. Obviously, I disagree. BTW, plz don't think I'm referring to you specifically, I absolutely am not. I'm basically just killin' some time here, yaknowwadI'msayin'!?

Hey Frank!

Again, I'm just killin' some time here so don't think I'm trying to push your buttons or anything. You've mentioned your degrees and that you're an engineer a few times in your posts. Because of this I understand your feelings about needing scientific facts and data to substantiate any "claims" made about audio equipment. On the other hand, you've expressed an inability to explain why one amp sounds better than another, based on looking solely at specs. That being the case, it seems that you ARE willing to accept facts that aren't provable by scientific theory. This is a good thing. One of the FACTS about Audio is that there is unexplainable phenomena, such as why tube equipment, which usually performs abysmally on a test bench, sounds good to the human ear. Yo man, believe me when I tell ya that I ain't tryin' to convince you or convert you. Trust me, I've already got someone that'll kiss my butt when asked and she does a damn fine job of it too, thank you very much!!

[J Lee]

Hey Chazro --

Yeah, I'm sorry if it came out like that.

The idea that a "musician" (what does that mean? doesn't playing a pitchpipe/slide whistle/spoons count?) is somehow more attuned to deeper things is one of the worst myths around -- I think it cheapens all of us to buy into that line.

For me personally, if anything, I tend to listen to music as data, as notes or sounds of which I have some idea of how they were produced, which means at a quite lower level than most audiophiles....probably why I never bothered upgrading my pitiful equipment until now.

No question that audio engineering has its own special skillset which is independent of being able to perform Deep Purple covers on organ with one hand or whatever tricks people will think of.

So, I totally agree with you on this one, and maybe even exceed your zeal at trying to put down this sorry myth -- I really do think it ranks right up there with the goldenears thing as far as damaging the credibility of various passions.

In short, cool! We totally agree.