Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.atheism > #2176065

Re: cloud hobbit is

Show all headers | View raw

On 01/10/2016 20:44, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 5:07:28 PM UTC-7, Alex W. wrote:
>> On 29/09/2016 14:28, Dreamer In Colore wrote:
>>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:50:42 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit
>>> <youngblood2949@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Obsessed?  With What?
>>>>
>>>> Truth? Freedom? Intelligence? Honesty? Integrity? Good Audio
>>>> equipment?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oooh, I'll bite.
>>>
>>> Good Audio equipment?
>>>
>>> OK... how about this as a game?
>>>
>>> a) You have $100K to spend
>>>
>>> b) You have $15K to spend
>>>
>>> c) You have $2.5K to spend
>>>
>>> Go. Justify your choices. List your assumptions first.
>>>
>>
>> Assumptions:
>>
>> -- active speakers are better because the amps are perfectly
>> matched to the speakers;
>
>> And that's great if you like the sound of those speakers.  Some
>> other nonpowered speaker might sound better.  The weakest link in
>> the audio chain, because the electronics have distortion that if
>> you combine if from all the components in the chain, it won't come
>> close to typical woofer distortion of 5$
>
>> -- half the budget should go on the speakers;
>>
> Or more depending on how much gear you need.  Some folks don't care
> about home theatre, so they can get by with a well build amp, preamp,
> tuner and a CD player and be fine.  Others might wish to add a
> distortion generator, oh sorry, I mean a turntable.  Then you have to
> decide on a tone arm, a cartridge, and the assorted cleaning gear.

Which is one reason why I do not own vinyl -- I know myself well enough 
that going down that particular rabbit hole will land me in a world of 
self-inflicted financial pain chasing down the best tone arms, needles 
etc....

:-)


>
>> -- vinyl sounds better.
>>
> That depends.  If you have an LP that has never been released on CD,
> if the CD release was mixed by a guy with 2 tin ears, or maybe the
> sound created by vinyl is just wht you prefer.  A well-done LP is
> still better than a crappy CD, but a well-done CD mixed and
> engineered by good people is the most breathtaking sound you'll ever
> hear. There's no way you will ever get the music to sound exactly
> like it would if there were live musicians in your room, but the
> increased dynamic range and absolutely inaudible distortion make CD
> my main choice.  I just have duplicates of all my favorite LP's
>
>> -- the only tweaks worth exploring are clean power supply,
>> vibration reduction and decent quality cables;
>>
> Have you ever seen modern equipment with a noisy power supply in
> anything other than drug store stereo? Never had a problem with a
> noisy power supply. Vibration reduction for the turntable I assume
> you will want.  It's completely unnecessary for anything else. Decent
> quality speaker cable can be purchased at Home Depot for about 30
> cents a foot.  The cables that come with the equipment are perfectly
> fine and will not audibly inferior to any other kind regardless of
> price.  Think about how far the electricity traveled through
> nonaudiophile approved wire to get to your house.  You're going to
> clean it all up in the last 2-3 feet with magic wire?  it's all
> bullshit.

Two different things here.

First, yes I do clean up my power supply, but that happens at the socket 
and has nothing to do with the cables (other than the power cable).

The cabling between the components and to the speakers are for as clean 
and undistorted transmission as possible from the source to the 
speakers.  That is where quality does pay (always subject to the law of 
diminishing returns, of course).


>
>> -- it's always worth looking at second-hand audiophile gear.
>>
> For electronics, it's well worth considering pro audio gear as in
> what musicians and venues use to power their speakers.  They sound
> just as good and since they don't pay the outrageously high
> advertising bill that home audio gear does, they cost less.

Pro audio gear is a good suggestion, but it is worth bearing in mind 
that they have different priorities from us "civilian" audio consumers. 
Pro speakers, for example, as used in recording studios, tend to be far 
more analytical than many people may desire when playing back their CDs 
or listening to radio.


>
> Consider powering a subwoofer with one.  really good bass is what
> requires lots and lots of power.  If you using it for home theatre
> there can be low-frequency sound in the 20-25 Hz range that will
> sound like shit if your amp clips. To hear it the way it should sound
> you need something that can cleanly play 2000 watt peaks.  While that
> power is only needed for a very small amount of time, if it isn't
> there you will know it, especially once you have heard it.

Which is why I like active speakers: with those, the amp tends to be far 
better matched to the speakers' frequency figures.


>
>> As to specific setups at each of these price points, that's too
>> tricky. It really all depends on your listening habits and musical
>> preferences (not to mention the all-important WAF, or "Wife
>> Acceptance Factor").
>
> For amplification and for vinyl playback yes.  For anything else
> it'sd just making sure you have enough power to drive your speakers
> to the SPL you like.
>
> A 150 dollar CD player will most likely sound identical to every
> other CD player unless the unit is "tweaked" by the manufacturer to
> play other than flat, or the unit is broken.  It is trivial to make
> CD playback that is flat from 20 Hz to 20 kHz with no distortion in
> the audible range.  Find one you like the look of and buy it.

Hardware does make a difference, IME.  Not all CD transports are the 
same, and a $150 CD player is unlikely to sport a transport that will be 
anywhere near as smooth-running and silent as a $1,000 CD player.

I'd also argue that there are worlds of audible difference between a DAC 
equipped with, say, a Cirrus versus a Burr-Brown chip.  True, having 
upmarket chips is not a magic bullet by any means, but it does help.

As for the design aspect being "trivial", well, IMO that is where good 
R&D and engineering come into play.  It takes a good engineer to design 
a circuit that properly matches a chip's signal to noise specs, to have 
a decent PCB layout, proper EMI shielding, grounding and power supply. 
That takes money.  Yes, it is quite possible to acquire a perfectly 
acceptable CD player for $150, but it will in no way approach audiophile 
standards for the simple reason that building a CD player to a price 
point as low as that does not leave enough money for good engineers to 
do their stuff.


>
> I just realized how much I spent talking about CD's when they are on
> their way out.  Damn I'm old.

Don't worry.
The day before yesterday, I had to explain a "mix tape" to my SO's nieces...


>
> Every single word I said is true and verifiable by any decent
> measurement lab, or by any EE.

Sorry, but I do not believe in all those measurements.  It's like rating 
a gourmet meal according to the nutritional values posted by a lab. 
What counts is the individual *sound experience*.

Back to alt.atheism | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

cloud hobbit is jackpineforeveryone@gmail.com - 2016-09-26 07:52 -0700
  Re: cloud hobbit is Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 16:50 -0700
    Re: cloud hobbit is Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-29 00:28 -0400
      Re: cloud hobbit is "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 10:07 +1000
        Re: cloud hobbit is Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-10-01 01:34 +0000
          Re: cloud hobbit is "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 14:54 +1000
        Re: cloud hobbit is Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 03:44 -0700
          Re: cloud hobbit is "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-02 17:09 +1100
  Re: cloud hobbit is hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-26 18:03 -0700
  Re: cloud hobbit is "We'll Always Hang FagZ And Castrate Jews" <macabbeus@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 13:53 -0700
    Re: cloud hobbit is Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2016-09-27 13:56 -0700
      Re: cloud hobbit is hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-10-01 23:35 -0700
    Re: cloud hobbit is Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 15:30 -0700
  Re: cloud hobbit is hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-10-01 23:25 -0700

csiph-web