Quantcast
High end audiophile converters - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
High end audiophile converters
Old 10th September 2012 | Show parent
  #31
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
There's rampant hype in the audiophile community, no question. I'd hate to be head-of-marketing at one of those companies, a challenging position to hold. Doesn't change the facts stated above. Some people will stare at a logo and swear that they're hearing magic because of the brand/hype - no doubt about it - and others have the ability to ignore these things and judge sound, just the sound. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Before you lost interest in the hobby, what kind of equipment did you use?
Yes, I would hope that I would fall into the latter category, being able to judge just the sound. But even to this day I get fooled myself after swearing up and down about what I thought I was hearing. These convictions would then be squashed by a scientific double-blind test, revealing pure guessing based on statistical analysis.

I never really could afford the really high end stuff back then but that didn't stop me from dreaming. I was never the "purist" type at all: Probably my most remembered system was an early 80s pair of Klipsch Cornwalls powered by a Yamaha power amp & preamp with a Yamaha linear tracking turntable and Signet cartridge; around a $5K system back then.
Old 10th September 2012 | Show parent
  #32
Moderator
 
psycho_monkey's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
So true. And it's no different with studio vs. mastering. The MEs have equipment far superior to ours. They want to hear absolutely everything. We send them audio recorded via a $70 microphone and they tweak it while listening to $100K+ systems. It's strange, but it works.
Well no, that wasn't what I meant at all.

I've been in plenty of great studios with expensive monitoring - maybe not $100k, but there are recording studios with that.

Good studios spend money where it matters. There's never been any proof that super expensive amazing oxygen-free cable is aurally better than mains cable. Providing the cable can handle the current, it's fine.

Mastering rooms are different from mixing rooms because they're designed for a different purpose. You don't need to fit 20+ people in. You don't need a great big reflective mixing desk. The ergonomics can be designed around the acoustics, whereas most recording/mixing rooms need a degree of versatility and ergonomic consideration. Hence the mastering room can be more accurate.

If you only need a few compressors, you can afford to spend more on each one of course. But I know plenty of mix rooms with "mastering standard" gear - Cranesong and GML compressors, Prism Maslec EQs..it's not a black art or anything.

There's plenty of mix rooms that sound amazing using standard speaker cables. Even "money no object" places don't tend to waste cash. And that's before you get into all the rest of the cabling. You pay for build quality (connectors that aren't going to break etc) but not for hype.

I once met a guy who presented me with a £100 XLR he'd been sold as premium quality....I think he was a little surprised to learn that at Abbey Road they use standard, well built but normal XLRs!
Old 10th September 2012 | Show parent
  #33
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
But not very well. How else can you explain digital overs, clipping and mass compression? Judging by some of those results we hear, it seems like the opposite of your statement is true.

If this were 1988 and I presented a typical modern master to a major record company, that mix/mastering job would be rejected outright.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #34
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
But not very well. How else can you explain digital overs, clipping and mass compression? Judging by some of those results we hear, it seems like the opposite of your statement is true.
I typed a lengthy, detailed answer explaining it, then realized that it's much simpler: you can't buy skill. You can't drop me into a Formula One race car and expect anything more than a crash. You can't buy an Neve console and a bunch of U47s and expect to sound like Al Schmitt. What you're doing is confusing talent with electronics. The age-old argument: arrow vs. archer.

I'm as perturbed by ****ty sounding albums as you are, but the blame doesn't fall on the gear.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #35
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey ➡️
Good studios spend money where it matters. There's never been any proof that super expensive amazing oxygen-free cable is aurally better than mains cable.
Again, cables should be exempt from any serious conversation about high end gear. Few people don't realize the reality of uber-expensive cables and the audiophiles who shop with their ears realize that there's a threshold of quality past which NOTHING will sound better. You can spend $20K on a cable if it makes you feel better, but it won't make your audio sound better.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #36
Moderator
 
psycho_monkey's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
Again, cables should be exempt from any serious conversation about high end gear. Few people don't realize the reality of uber-expensive cables and the audiophiles who shop with their ears realize that there's a threshold of quality past which NOTHING will sound better. You can spend $20K on a cable if it makes you feel better, but it won't make your audio sound better.
...and that was my original point!
Old 11th September 2012
  #37
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
One last thing: there's an important analogy to vision which helps explain why many people aren't hearing what I call 100% live sound. Imagine staring at a television which produces an image that's virtually indistinguishable from a real landscape. Now imagine looking at the image with 20/50 vision. You'd be missing it. Everyone else is drooling over the other-worldly technology and you think they're crazy. You're completely sure that they're insane because what you see, you're reality, is blurry. You look from another angle, and squint, and rub your eyes but it's still blurry.

This happens when people listen to mediocre hi-fi systems. Unless everything in your chain is on the level, you're missing something. Place the best amp in the world with decent speakers and the point is lost. Put Radio Shack cable between Goldmund Epiloques and Boulder amps and you'll say, "that sounds no better than my Onkyo back home." And you'd be right.

It's very difficult to achieve that last 5%, and the last 1% is 100 times more difficult. But there's a VERY distinct difference between hearing a recording that's absolutely amazing and one which doesn't sound like a recording at all. It's nirvana for an engineer - it'll make you giddy like a little girl. This level of playback is extremely difficult to arrange, and horribly expensive, but entirely worth it for many people. You only need to hear it once. The first time I truly crossed that threshold I said, "holy fvck!"
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #38
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
Again, cables should be exempt from any serious conversation about high end gear. Few people don't realize the reality of uber-expensive cables and the audiophiles who shop with their ears realize that there's a threshold of quality past which NOTHING will sound better. You can spend $20K on a cable if it makes you feel better, but it won't make your audio sound better.
Anybody worth their salt knows this. But unfortunately, with the digital revolution and proliferation of boutique pro audio gear, the same exact concept is totally ignored when it comes to converters. The equivalent of the threshold you mention for converters is so low nowadays, yet so many new (and old) engineers get caught up by the hype and popularity of such a benign part of the signal chain. The old crap in=crap out adage seems to be most appropriate for converters.

From the absurd fetishism for converters and gear elitism you see on this forum, you would think that no good albums were ever made before the advent of high end digital recording gear. And you would think with all of the technology available to us at this time (which really can't get much better, can it?) for recording/processing, you'd think that there would be a vast improvement of music and audio since the pre digital age. Is there?

If cassette tapes were still the standard, much less vinyl, I as a consumer would still enjoy music just as much. By contrast, audiophiles are limiting themselves to enjoying only that which is acceptable to them according to an arbitrary standard they condition themselves to.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #39
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unfiltered420 ➡️
From the absurd fetishism for converters and gear elitism you see on this forum, you would think that no good albums were ever made before the advent of high end digital recording gear. And you would think with all of the technology available to us at this time (which really can't get much better, can it?) for recording/processing, you'd think that there would be a vast improvement of music and audio since the pre digital age. Is there?
The album I mentioned in my spiel about sonic nirvana was from the 60s, but it was recorded by craftsmen. What better sounding technology facilitates is not better music but better sound. It narrows the gap between what is "possible" for a bedroom engineer and the legends, like Mr. Schmitt. That wasn't possible in your bedroom before.

I cut my teeth on bad gear (Peavy consoles and Alesis 3630 compressors, etc.) and I had to work my frickin ass off to get good sound. It's precisely because of that hard work that I learned how to mix. Then, when we could afford better gear - very gear in some cases - my mixes were instantly improved though I was doing nothing different. Suddenly, I felt as though I might be able to compete with my heroes. As our budgets improved, so did our gear, and today the bar is very high. Newbies will never have to deal with 3630 compressors and so they'll never hone some very important skills which would give them the chance at creating top-notch mixes. They can be lazy but that gets you only so far. Skill - the things I was forced to learn a few decades ago - is what allows this.

So my point is only that today's gear makes everything sound better, and to answer your question directly there is an improved potential for better sound, no question. Or at least clearer -- we're all responsible for mixing it well and for making other people want to listen to our crap.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #40
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by unfiltered420 ➡️
Anybody worth their salt knows this. But unfortunately, with the digital revolution and proliferation of boutique pro audio gear, the same exact concept is totally ignored when it comes to converters. The equivalent of the threshold you mention for converters is so low nowadays, yet so many new (and old) engineers get caught up by the hype and popularity of such a benign part of the signal chain. The old crap in=crap out adage seems to be most appropriate for converters.

From the absurd fetishism for converters and gear elitism you see on this forum, you would think that no good albums were ever made before the advent of high end digital recording gear. And you would think with all of the technology available to us at this time (which really can't get much better, can it?) for recording/processing, you'd think that there would be a vast improvement of music and audio since the pre digital age. Is there?

If cassette tapes were still the standard, much less vinyl, I as a consumer would still enjoy music just as much. By contrast, audiophiles are limiting themselves to enjoying only that which is acceptable to them according to an arbitrary standard they condition themselves to.
Damn RIGHT ON! I've been wanting to say this for quite a while but knew someone would be me to it, as well as say it much better. Thanks. Flame him, not me LOL. j/k
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #41
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
The album I mentioned in my spiel about sonic nirvana was from the 60s, but it was recorded by craftsmen. What better sounding technology facilitates is not better music but better sound. It narrows the gap between what is "possible" for a bedroom engineer and the legends, like Mr. Schmitt. That wasn't possible in your bedroom before.

I cut my teeth on bad gear (Peavy consoles and Alesis 3630 compressors, etc.) and I had to work my frickin ass off to get good sound. It's precisely because of that hard work that I learned how to mix. Then, when we could afford better gear - very gear in some cases - my mixes were instantly improved though I was doing nothing different. Suddenly, I felt as though I might be able to compete with my heroes. As our budgets improved, so did our gear, and today the bar is very high. Newbies will never have to deal with 3630 compressors and so they'll never hone some very important skills which would give them the chance at creating top-notch mixes. They can be lazy but that gets you only so far. Skill - the things I was forced to learn a few decades ago - is what allows this.

So my point is only that today's gear makes everything sound better, and to answer your question directly there is an improved potential for better sound, no question. Or at least clearer -- we're all responsible for mixing it well and for making other people want to listen to our crap.
I agree, however, better sound quality does not necessarily mean better music. Meaning better specs, noise, distortion, "clarity", etc. does not necessarily mean the music sounds better, even the same exact material. That seems a contradiction, as if better does not = better, but it's true. Many old albums have a certain distinction caused by "inferior" (by spec) gear. The real instruments that computers and digital synths have for the most part replaced like the Hammond tonewheel organ, clavinet, and mellotron, etc., are all lo fi, and all in my opinion, sound infinitely better than their high quality equivalents. And some old albums just would not make sense or would completely lose their vibe if recorded with today's gear.

This is why even the lowliest recording gear, like a mackie mixer/interface can be easliy used to make music that surpasses the specs of so many great albums made in the past, and since some of the music of the past is of such great quality, it thus has the capability to sound as good as anything ever recorded. I know many times people on this forum will admit over and over that the material is way more important than the gear used to record it, but I really don't think that most of them realize the degree to which this is true.

Here is a pertinent analogy: I used to be of the opinion that if you took 2 musicians, of exactly equal skill and talent, and you gave one an instrument that was of significantly higher quality, that person would be the better musician. While I still believe this to some extent, a more revealing way to look at is that if you gave the other musician an instrument that is inferior (yet still decent enough to play), let him get used to it/practice on it for a while, and give the other musician a superior instrument, but don't let him get used to it, the person with the inferior instrument, all things equal, will be a better musician. The point being it really doesn't matter what equipment you have, so long as it passes signal,has decent specs (which almost all modern gear, even low end has) and you know the ins and outs of it, it can be just as good as anything else.

What most don't realize, is that even the cheapest gear these days is of a sufficient quality, (most of all converters), that using any sort of exotic gear is simply an artistic choice. Not to say it is not useful, but the sentiment that you need anything other than a DAW and a MOTU interface to make intersting, artisitic, unique, and beautiful music that is on par with the greatest of albums is a fallacy.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #42
Lives for gear
 
DSD_Mastering's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
But not very well. How else can you explain digital overs, clipping and mass compression? Judging by some of those results we hear, it seems like the opposite of your statement is true.
.
Just like anything else, this is a service industry. We give the client what they want. If they want it crushed beyond recognition, then so be it! We have to feed our family also.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #43
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
You have to buy it before you can find out what's in it. Sort of like Congress.
Quote of The Year perhaps? And during a Federal Election Year none the less ..
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #44
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by unfiltered420 ➡️
I agree, however, better sound quality does not necessarily mean better music. Meaning better specs, noise, distortion, "clarity", etc. does not necessarily mean the music sounds better, even the same exact material.
This is the most important point through all of this and it's often treated as a side note. All other things being equal - like the music itself - better (let's define that simply as more realistic) sound almost always means better music. No, not always, as you pointed out, but it's typically preferred to capture the source in the truest possible form. If poor quality is an equitable effect, you can throw poor quality into the pot, you still want it captured accurately.

So there's sound, and then there's music, and although they're entirely different the two share some real estate in the middle.
Old 11th September 2012
  #45
Here for the gear
 
🎧 5 years
I'd love to jump in here on my first GS post. I actually registered here to ask about an RME UFX used with a control surface, and I see a thread regarding audiophile gear, and realize I can contribute something right away.

I am a pretty hardcore/diseased audiophile. I've been through many phases - modified quad electrostats, all balanced tube gear, the entire cable mania, power cableing/conditioning and of course Hi End D/A's.

For a living I run my own small video post facility, and know as much on the audio side as a decent engineer. But I've always had a penchant for high end audio playback and recording music as well, and have recorded or produced projects in studios a few times, and on location.

On the audiophile D/A market, a product I have been using for quite some time now has risen to the top as a state of the art product for a reasonable price ($4000) The PS Audio PWD is stellar sounding product that has various I/O's and a network card option that turns the unit into an ipad driven music server. But the star of the show is the fully balanced audio - which sounds best in native (though over sampling is available) appodising filters, and a new NativeX mode that lowers jitter to under 1 picosecond. I have lived through all the upgrades and this latest NativeX advancement takes the already excellent sound quality and created a new phenomenon where the congealed slightly congested digital signal opens up with each sonic event now occupying it's own
3D pocket in space. PS Audio has been doing reclockling from digital's earliest days and they have come up with an outstanding product. They have now also put analog switches into thier power supplies in the latest iteration. The inputs are toslink - RCA coax, USB asynchonus, AES, HDMI (2 of them but they are for I2S) and Ethernet/Wireless (with the optional network Bridge/server card)

If people were dying to hear it in the NYC area I might consider letting a few GS'ers take a listen.


And as far as monitors go we audiophiles tend to go well beyond most studios. I use C.R. 1 monitors from T A D which were created as a high end home monitor as well as for studio use.
Only a handful studio can afford them, Abbey Road mastering being one of them. The vapor deposited beryllium coincident drivers are a very special breed of driver, and the designer, a physicist, is so talented that when parent company Pioneer demanded he design some low end $150 speakers, the audiophile mags were shocked that anything in this price range could actually sound good.
Old 11th September 2012 | Show parent
  #46
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
As to cables, yes, they do make a large difference around here. I like Ray Kimber's stuff. My room is loaded with his excellent pure silver wire. He makes a damm good speaker cable too, if you can drop the presumptions and give it a listen...
Certainly. I was referring to the multi-thousand dollar/foot stuff.
Old 12th September 2012 | Show parent
  #47
Gear Maniac
 
AtomicMidi's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I still think that studio gear has a different purpose, at least in terms of DAC's and A/D's and other bits, it seems that in studio transparency and non-destructive functionality is often desired whereas in Hi-FI world this is not always the main function, though of course some level of transparency and realism is desired regardless.
One great system can sound fundamentally different from another, both having different tonal characteristics, but of course both will be appreciated by their owners, each thinking their system is more "true"

They don't have "character" verbs, so they buy coloured amps and speakers instead, to shape their tone, could that be the case?

I don't know, I'm just rambling!

Well, at least I found out about some cheapo A/D's to play with!

thanks guys!
Old 13th September 2012 | Show parent
  #48
Gear Addict
 
jono's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
Not really. There is plenty of mystery about pro level converters as well. Most provide no specs, no info as to design, mostly marketing info instead.

You have to buy it before you can find out what's in it. Sort of like Congress.
So I bought this new stereo-hi-fi converter box thingy a while ago. I turned it on, and it did NOTHING for 2 years. The Left channel light blinks GREEN constantly. Right channel light blinks RED constantly. I've been watching it for 2 years, and still no sound comes out....maybe sometimes some static-y noise, but no music. I was thinking maybe the sample-rate is too high for this particular unit. Maybe I'm expecting too much? I dunno, 96/24 is a lot. Maybe, even though I paid a lot for it, I should lower it to 44.1/16. Would I see results then?

Or, should I throw the f_cker away and just get a new one?
Old 13th September 2012 | Show parent
  #49
tkr
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jono ➡️
So I bought this new stereo-hi-fi converter box thingy a while ago. I turned it on, and it did NOTHING for 2 years. The Left channel light blinks GREEN constantly. Right channel light blinks RED constantly. I've been watching it for 2 years, and still no sound comes out....maybe sometimes some static-y noise, but no music. I was thinking maybe the sample-rate is too high for this particular unit. Maybe I'm expecting too much? I dunno, 96/24 is a lot. Maybe, even though I paid a lot for it, I should lower it to 44.1/16. Would I see results then?

Or, should I throw the f_cker away and just get a new one?
You`ve been scammed. Just throw the f_cker away.
Old 13th September 2012 | Show parent
  #50
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jono ➡️
I turned it on, and it did NOTHING for 2 years. The Left channel light blinks GREEN constantly. Right channel light blinks RED constantly.
You sure you didn't buy a Christmas ornament?
Old 13th September 2012 | Show parent
  #51
Gear Addict
 
jono's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkr ➡️
You`ve been scammed. Just throw the f_cker away.
We've all been scammed, no?
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #52
Moderator
 
Reptil's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
very interesting. I need a good DAC for an outboard sampler. Would this box do 44 KHz 16bit, or is it just "DVD standard"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
The home audiophile market is, and has been, far beyond that which is used by nearly all studios. What we call top-tier is mediocre in their highest circles. Budgets are unlimited for some of those guys so there are no holds barred in design and production.

But it pays off. The best sound I've been able to achieve from my studios pales in comparison to what my home system can produce. Why not use that for recording? Good question. No A/D, obviously, but the amps, loudspeakers, converters, etc. could migrate. Mastering guys use this stuff. I've seen $200K monitoring systems in some ME's studios, and that's just the start. Studios don't invest that type of cash in monitoring, most anyway.
In the nineties I was living in a student house (not a dorm) with roommates, that were deep into audiophile stuff professionaly in the nineties Yes, there's the potential for quality. But just like everywhere, there's posers and there's the real thing.
I've found that some much hyped audiophile stuff doesn't double in quality compared to the studio gear, but the price you have to pay does.heh
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBrightSide ➡️
A few years ago I was lucky enough to work with perhaps the highest regarded speaker designer in our country. And I got a sneak peak into the world of audiophiles, which is simply amazing to say the least.
There is NO length that they will not go to to get the highest fidelity sound possible.
But with a different filosophy alltogether! There's a difference, subtle but present, between "neutral" and "beautiful". They're going for "all out". Pro audio is about "what do we need to hear mistakes and good things". If you're going all out, indeed the sky's the limit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBrightSide ➡️
I feel alot of them would be astonished that the importance of high end monitoring isn't a priority in general here.
aah but then you're generalising.heh
and (speaking from my own POV) I'm intimate enough with my old nearfields that my brain can interpret and use their output, and I can look into the sound, better than an audiophile with a 200K speakers that he changes every few months for the latest thing. (and a lot of them do just that)
it's about learning how to listen IMHO, and excellent speakers do help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtomicMidi ➡️
....
They don't have "character" verbs, so they buy coloured amps and speakers instead, to shape their tone, could that be the case?

I don't know, I'm just rambling!
....snip....
no, I think you're quite right.
they do know beautiful sounds just like audio professionals, but with a different esthetic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBrightSide ➡️
...snip...
The audiophiles are a rare breed indeed.
I heard of a guy, who when he has friends over to demo his system, unplugs his fridge to reduce the risk of low level hum.
That's IME quite a prudent thing to do. A lot of studios and audiophiles isolate the power to their gear. It's not such a good strategy to put a fridge on the same group as a +50K monitoring/listening setup.

allright I'll stop talking now heh
If anyone could find me an equally low priced but good (>Akai MPC1000 output) DAC that does 16bit 44.1 KHz, I'd be very grateful.
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #53
Gear Addict
 
jono's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkr ➡️
You`ve been scammed. Just throw the f_cker away.
Ahh - sorry mate. I see you're from Norway. Well, my little post was an allegorical reference to Mr. Williams' post regarding our Congress...no one picked it up...but you are CORRECT - throw the f_cker away is the correct answer!
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #54
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil ➡️
Yes, there's the potential for quality. But just like everywhere, there's posers and there's the real thing.
I've found that some much hyped audiophile stuff doesn't double in quality compared to the studio gear, but the price you have to pay does.heh
As with every business, there are talented craftsmen and then there are those hacks who are very good at marketing who give the others a bad name. And as you say, the same goes with those who buy audiophile equipment. The idiots who go on about not allowing their signal paths to go uphill and against gravity. You have to ignore that noise. Be smart. Use your ears.

Regarding doubling in quality, I don't think you can double quality by doubling price unless you're talking about the very, VERY low end where a $200 receiver might be twice as good as one that's $100, and that might even be a stretch. Jumping up the ladder even a little, a $1,000 receiver is not twice as good as its $500 cousin. Nowhere near that. Many people wouldn't perceive a difference at all.

And as I'd mentioned above, when you get up in the stratosphere, with the five-figure units, doubling the price might get you nothing more than 0.1%. The more you spend the less of a reason you'll have to spend it.
Old 14th September 2012
  #55
Moderator
 
Reptil's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Yes, well put. That's what I meant. heh
sort of like this, right?

the Y axis is the improved quality, the X axis is the money invested.

Personally I find it a challenge to get inexpensive but awesome sounding gear, and IME that is sometimes possible.
Other times theres no way around having to plunk down cash to get the sound you want.
I have the impression for many of the feeling audiophile enthousiasts the gear is a goal in itself.

The "bling" factor plays a role, in both pro audio and even more in audiophile. You also pay for how things look.
I must say I like how this looks:

now we know where all of Greece's loans in the past decade went to: only half kidding of course.

can't fault these guys for being passionate and focussed, but I like a different kind of challenge.
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #56
Lives for gear
 
TheBrightSide's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo ➡️
The idiots who go on about not allowing their signal paths to go uphill and against gravity.
I've never heard that one.
Classic!
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #57
Gear Guru
 
elambo's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil ➡️
Yes, well put. That's what I meant. heh
sort of like this, right?
Yep, sorta like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil ➡️
The "bling" factor plays a role, in both pro audio and even more in audiophile. You also pay for how things look.
I must say I like how this looks:
That's a Pass Labs amp and I agree they're damn sexy, but they also happen to sound amazing. I have a Pass very similar to that one powering a McIntosh preamp which feeds sound to my kitchen and they look great together. However... sadly they're both sitting in a rack in my basement and I can't even see them. It's ALL about the sound 100%.
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #58
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil ➡️

can't fault these guys for being passionate and focussed, but I like a different kind of challenge.
It's like that with all forms of art. The artists themselves would never spend that kind of money on paintings or recorded pieces of music. For an artist, the process of creating is far more interesting than the final product.

I enjoyed the video, though. The look on the wives' faces was priceless. I could almost hear their thoughts: "Is that how much he spent on the junk? Just imagine how many pairs of nice shoes I could have bought with that money!" heh
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #59
Gear Maniac
 
AtomicMidi's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
There are overlaps though, especially if we are talking about monitoring. I don't know about US, but in UK there is a term "flat earthers" which is a term designated to audiophiles who want their signal flat and uncoloured, and apparently it has become a popular thing lately.

Spendor, Rogers, Kef, all of them contributed to the famous BBC monitors, and they were first created for BBC studios. Now they have become very popular with audiophiles.
Which probably explains why the price for Rogers LS3/5A BBC monitors keeps going up.. sigh.. also let's not forget Tannoy.
Old 14th September 2012 | Show parent
  #60
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
I had the $5000 150 watter over at my shop back in Van Nuys, CA. After matching gains, I connected one side and the other to my standard amp, an Adcom GFA 545.

The owner walked out very pissed off. My used $220 amp creamed his Pass Labs amp in every way. I think he sold it.
Still use my 535 but am wondering when it will need to be re-capped. I bought it new in the late 80s.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 56 views: 6996
Avatar for Reptil
Reptil 16th April 2005
replies: 217 views: 78973
Avatar for chessparov2.0
chessparov2.0 12th September 2020
replies: 698 views: 248020
Avatar for EffinPoop
EffinPoop 28th May 2021
replies: 777 views: 179387
Avatar for Sapro
Sapro 15th April 2021
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump