$Million Sound System

robinbowes

Grumpyrocker said:

I don't get why folks want to clutter up their house with massive speakers that look like it should have been on stage next to Free at the Isle of White festival. 

I, on the other hand, completely understand why your handle is "Grumpyrocker".

Grumpyrocker

robinbowes said:

Grumpyrocker said:

I don't get why folks want to clutter up their house with massive speakers that look like it should have been on stage next to Free at the Isle of White festival. 

I, on the other hand, completely understand why your handle is "Grumpyrocker".

Seriously? Calling out people for their username is so tiresome. Play the ball not the man. 

nero1701

richman6100 said:

I've been going to HiFi shows for decades. Some high end, some more accessible to the average Joe. I generally come away from both with a feeling that I've encountered some real gems and some utter bullshit. It's always been like that. The world of HiFi generates both incredible audio quality and utter snake oil.

One thing I will say is that I have never, ever, heard a pair of uber-expensive speakers that would work optimally in the average UK house. For example, I recently went to the UK HiFi show with a mate who is planning to upgrade his speakers to these:

https://hifilounge.co.uk/product/wilson-audio-alexia-v-loudspeakers/

We listened to a demo of them for about 30 minutes. Not really long enough to make a conclusive decision, but good enough to get an idea of their capabilities. Aside from their hideous looks (in my opinion) they struck me as a lesson in engineering brilliance which somehow went beyond reality. They were hugely impressive from a technical standpoint, but not how I hear the world. The bass presentation and its control was extraordinary, but not how bass sounds to me. It was too controlled, too clinical, too unrealistic. Massive, powerful bass is not that controlled in the real world. Critically, at near-field listening, they simply weren't as nice sounding as my own speakers which are far, far cheaper. In the huge room we were in they could blow you away at high volume, in your average lounge with neighbours nearby, I'm not so sure. Now, the speakers that I own (after owning countless models over the years) could never fill a large space like those Wilsons do, nor could they control powerful, bass-heavy, music remotely as well at very high volume. However, and this is important, they sound natural, relaxing and realistic when you're ten feet away, or six inches from them. In my listening room (my lounge), I sit about ten feet from them. My house is modest in size. Even in large UK houses, you're unlikely to be more than two or three times that distance from HiFi speakers, so what's the point in owning behemoths that could fill a theatre with sound. It all boils down to having what's appropriate for your listening space.

Speakers vary hugely. Their sound presentation makes them arguably the most variable component in a HiFi system. For this reason, the choice of speaker you own is ultimately one of personal, subjective choice. My speakers - Harbeth Super HL5+s - are the cheapest components in my system, but are the one thing I would not change, Unless I had a bigger room, in which case I would buy their bigger brothers. For me, they are perfect. On discovering them, my HiFi journey stopped overnight. I'd found the sound that works for me. I already owned decent quality electronics from McIntosh and a very nice turntable - a Michell Engineering Orbe SE. While I love the look and build quality of the McIntosh kit, I genuinely think that I could replace it with other, comparable quality gear, and not notice a significant difference. Amps should be relatively neutral in nature if they're not going to colour the sound of a recording and deliver an authentic representation of the original music. Turntables and cartridges do present music in more varied ways, but vinyl is an inherently compromised medium, even if I do love it.

Price is the elephant in the room. I was lucky enough to buy much of my system second hand and get a good price on gear that I traded in over the years. I also bought it before I had the financial commitment of kids etc. The mate I mentioned earlier is wealthy and has helped me immensely by selling me gear really cheap, knowing that I could make money on it as I upgraded over the years. In short, I could never afford my HiFi today. Part of that is down to personal circumstances, but prices have also risen beyond reason in the last 10-15 years. An example; I paid just over £2k for my turntable many years ago - it was 6 months old when I bought it secondhand and was in mint condition. Today, the same one, with the same tone arm and cartridge would set you back around £8k new. I love it, but it's not worth anything like that kind of money in my opinion. The same goes for my McIntosh SACD player. It's a digital source, how exceptional can one be? It replaced a Marantz SACD player that was around a third of the price, but 90% as good. Diminishing returns in terms of sound quality vs cost are significant in the HiFi world. I'm very aware that I have paid more than I can logically justify have to get that extra little bit of quality. The reality is that you can get a fine system for a couple of grand, a wonderful one for under £5k and an extraordinary one for £5k-£30k. Beyond that, you're being indoctrinated into the world of snake oil, pixie dust and bragging rights.

I know Paul from HiFiLounge fairly well, He's a sponsor of my racing league, Puts together a mean sound system!

roberty

fretmeister said:

If a person is over 40 and their hearing is already on the entirely normal slippery slope downwards, is there any benefit?

It seems quite a bit like the fastest cars and so on. When people reach the point they can afford it, often their reflexes aren't good enough to get anywhere near the limits of the car. If they ever were in the first place.

I'd argue that the worse your ears are, the better your sound needs to be. It should be more clear, not less

sweepy

Older high end HiFi can be a great buy, my system comprises of a lovely pair of Linn Isobarik from 1979 and a mental Voyd Reference turntable with 3 Pabst motors always a good idea to trawl the s/h market if you want quality

https://i.imgur.com/C8n5gHH.jpeg


https://i.imgur.com/Lznwm7W.jpeg

steveledzep

roberty said:

fretmeister said:

If a person is over 40 and their hearing is already on the entirely normal slippery slope downwards, is there any benefit?

It seems quite a bit like the fastest cars and so on. When people reach the point they can afford it, often their reflexes aren't good enough to get anywhere near the limits of the car. If they ever were in the first place.

I'd argue that the worse your ears are, the better your sound needs to be. It should be more clear, not less

I'm 67 and enjoy quite a high end system.  The other day something didn't sound right.  Investigation revealed the stylus tracking at 3.4g instead of 2.3g and I could hear it.  Arm counterweight must have been nudged at some point.

@sweepy, wonderful stuff.

viz

steveledzep said:

roberty said:

fretmeister said:

If a person is over 40 and their hearing is already on the entirely normal slippery slope downwards, is there any benefit?

It seems quite a bit like the fastest cars and so on. When people reach the point they can afford it, often their reflexes aren't good enough to get anywhere near the limits of the car. If they ever were in the first place.

I'd argue that the worse your ears are, the better your sound needs to be. It should be more clear, not less

I'm 67 and enjoy quite a high end system.  The other day something didn't sound right.  Investigation revealed the stylus tracking at 3.4g instead of 2.3g and I could hear it.  Arm counterweight must have been nudged at some point.

@sweepy, wonderful stuff.

Dunno if it’s my ear getting old but I like a slightly heavier tracking weight than recommended - mine’s supposed to be 1.7 but I prefer 2.5. The sound is just so much … better. It does less damage to the record too. Rubber grommet around the stylus hardens a bit quicker though. 

the_jaffa

sweepy said:

Older high end HiFi can be a great buy, my system comprises of a lovely pair of Linn Isobarik from 1979 and a mental Voyd Reference turntable with 3 Pabst motors always a good idea to trawl the s/h market if you want quality

https://i.imgur.com/C8n5gHH.jpeg


https://i.imgur.com/Lznwm7W.jpeg

I've always liked the way that Linn included an ashtray that looks like a driver on the top of the Isobariks. So 70s

Bungle1

Topic adjacent here but probably better than starting a new thread, based on the amount of people engaged in this post I'm hoping someone can shed some light on something.

I've been having strange behaviour with my setup recently, when I turn on my Subwoofer sometimes there is a popping sound from the other speakers and the receiver unit goes into 'protection mode' where you need to leave it a bit and reset it. 

My question is how would I determine whether the issue is with the receiver or the subwoofer? The only time it does this is when turning the sub on.

These are bit units to be taking somewhere to get a repair so it would be good to narrow the issue down.

steveledzep

Would you overcome the problem if you only switched the subwoofer when the receiver was switched off?  I'd be inclined to switch the sub on first and make it the last component to be switched off after your listening session.

Mattharrier

steveledzep said:

Would you overcome the problem if you only switched the subwoofer when the receiver was switched off?  I'd be inclined to switch the sub on first and make it the last component to be switched off after your listening session.

This was always the recommendation when I worked in the industry (Technics, so hardly in the same league as the stuff in this thread, but the same basic principles) - turn the amp on last, and off first, to avoid the pop.

Bungle1

Thanks both, I'll give it a try