AudioCircle
The Commercial Zone => Audio Shows and Events => Rocky Mountain Audio Fest => Topic started by: gstraley on 22 Oct 2010, 03:51 am
-
I have read a number of posts here on AC and have read a number of links to online magazine reviews about RMAF 2010. I also had a couple of audio friends that attended and spoke to them about different rooms.
What I came across is that there are no 2 people that agree about what they heard in each room. Some liked room A and hated room B. Other people hated room A and liked room B. I also picked up on that if a person owns some piece of equipment from a room, they liked what they heard from that room.
From what I understand there were 4 rooms that were using the same Daedalus speakers. I have read posts here on AC that a number of people liked the Daedalus room with the Modwright equipment. A couple of friends told me the only room with Daedalus speakers they liked was the one with a SET amp driving them. One friend felt that it was one of if not the best sound of the show. He did not like the room with the Modwright equipment or the other 2 rooms.
Some people commented that the GR Research room had the best bass of the show. Others that I have heard from thought that it was over blown and boomy. A couple of guys here on AC felt that the treble was a bit on the bright side. A friend of mine that for the most part does not like solid state amps (except for a few) felt that the treble was pretty good and non fatiguing to him. Is it the recording they did not like or are they blaming the speakers?
One reviewer commented that the Aperion Audio Verus Grand Tower Loudspeakers were a speaker that he would buy. At the price, if it is really that good it is a steal and the audio bargain of the century. He is about the only one that even mentioned that speaker. You usually do not even get a finish like that unless the speakers are way over $5,000.00 not to mention that they were only $1800.00. What did he hear in it that room that most other people did not? Was it the really nice finish for the money or was it the sound?
I read some peoples "best of show" rooms and they were other peoples "worst of show" rooms. How can there be that much difference in peoples opinion? I can see "best of show" and it was pretty good but "best of show" and terrible?
I have been to a number of audio shows and have been an exhibitor. I came across feeling that no hotel rooms at Audio shows really sound as good as your own room. What I also noticed was smaller speakers that do not do low bass as well as other speakers tended to sound better in those hotel rooms. The one time that I exhibited at RMAF I was in a room that had 3 speakers from this one manufacture. The only one that sounded even remotely balance was their smallest speaker. Unfortunately every one walking in wanted to hear the large statement speaker. The speaker over powered the room.
The other thing that seems to be apparent is that some (online) magazines usually only talk about the ultra expensive rooms and seem to dismiss other rooms unless there is an innovative product they want to talk about. Some of the best sounding rooms IMO were not the ultra expensive rooms but the mid priced rooms. A good number of the ultra expensive rooms usually ended up sounding the worst IMO.
I was not there so I cannot personally comment on what I heard. This posting is not to single any one person or manufacture out. I was just point out what I read and heard from people that were there. It is also to point out how many differing opinions there are even amongst audiophiles. Who do you believe? Anyone? No one?
-
Well, there's actually only one opinion that's right, and that's mine. Ignore the rabble and let the divine truth of Tysonius guide you. Since he generally agrees with me, we'll allow the opinion of Jasonius (PEZymandius) to maybe attain demi-godhood as well.
-
Gregg,
Wish you had come. Had a good time with Rich until we somehow lost him the second day. Bob
-
I think the best beer in the world comes from Germany, my friend prefers the English. He just doesn't get it! :lol:
I spent years buying off other peoples recommendations, but have since learned that the maxim applies: YMMV!!!
I've finally found the sound I've been searching for; and wouldn't you know it, someone just posted in the "OB" forum that my beloved Hawthornes have a "stuffy midrange and dull highs." He doesn't get it either! :green:
Seriously tho, what is dull for you, sounds more natural to me. Again the maxim: YMMV.
I've never been to RMAF or similar, but would like to attend for the entertainment, and also to hear the "potential" in various designs. But for now, I will continue down the road I'm on; improving and tweaking my system. It does not matter now what someone else says. This works for me. For the relative newcomers to this crazy, and fun, hobby; find out what works for you. . . and if you can get to one of these shows!! It'll probably be AK fest for me next year.
-
Seriously though, there is no magic bullet in high end audio. You gotta listen for yourself and make your own judgment. Hard to do, unless you go to a B&M store or spend the $$ to go to a show like RMAF. Once there, ignore everyone and just listen.
-
There are a lot of prejudices people carry with them that affect their opinions. Sometimes, certain speakers turned them off and they listen to other similar designs believing they'll have the same tradeoffs. Sometimes, they'll believe what other people are saying without truly forming their own opinion. Sometimes, they're fanboys. Sometimes, they're fooled by trickery (sounds nice in quick demo, not so much for a true listening session) Sometimes, it's just a matter of personal preference.
As for differing comments on the same speakers...music is likely different and not all of the same recording quality. Were those giving opinions listening from the same spot to the same music? Likely not. I think a lot of times people look at a design and form prejudices and therefore, many would be wise to hide their speakers and let people decide for themselves. We all have our own beliefs...about how a coax should sound...how a fullranger should sound...etc.
-
Well, there's actually only one opinion that's right, and that's mine. Ignore the rabble and let the divine truth of Tysonius guide you.
Is that tinnitus? I couldn't find a wiki on Tysonius :scratch:
I did find Pezizomycotina which I think was related to dinner Friday night?? :P
Any who, my take on audio shows.
- I can understand the AC problems.
- I can't understand much of the room problems as I did a pole and hotel rooms were about the size of our average listening room. As with any room, bring treatments.
- fly by reporting issues. where were you when you listened (the back wall), type of music (gotta hear something you are familiar with), first impressions (room, looks of the equipment, looks of the host, price, etc.)
- I do believe the sound will change through out the show (tweeks, positioning, gear, etc)
- You will have cheerleaders of certain brands.
- And now the biggest...."that amp sounded great(bad)" How do you know it was not a different component that was picking up the slack or bringing the synergy down. :dunno:
Bass issues? see Big B's post. I think an eq may be a must for audio shows.
Ultimately, we each have our own idea of what sounds good and skepticism.
I urge everyone to hit an audio show every year and try to audition in your own room.
-
I also thought that the Aperion Audio Verus Grand was one of the best speakers I heard at RMAF and the best value IMO. I probably would buy a pair if I had room. Not quite as good as my Odyssey Audio Kismet speakers, but great for the money. I have five 2-channel systems at my home and my wife made it clear to me before I went to RMAF that I was not to buy any more speakers. So I bought a preamp from Wyred4sound. I just had to buy something. My money was burning a hole in my pocket.
-
1. If people do not use their own music that they are INTIMATELY familiar with, their opinion should count for VERY little. Sonic memory is fickle enough without throwing in the variable of the recording. I mean, come on people, did you ever consider that the recording might be bright, bass heavy, over compressed?
2. Older listeners MAY prefer brighter speakers as their high freq hearing diminished with age. Hence the varing opinions on something like the GR research top end. I think they are somewhat bright and measurements verify this, but if your hearing up there is rolling off, maybe they are a perfect fit.
3. Peoples idea of too much or not enough bass varies wildly. I know many listeners who are completely happy with a system that plays to 60Hz well and could care less if they get the actual fundamental of the lowest notes.
I wish all so-called audiophiles could attend this seminar:
https://almin.memberclicks.net/assets/Documents/WinterSymposia/sean%20olive%20training%20for%20web.pdf
Greg - tech - www.phatplanetstudios.com
-
I would like to add that the only opinions that I trust are those that felt that same way about several rooms we had in common. In other words, maybe their own personal preferences mirror mine, so I can more comfortably trust their opinion of a room I did not get to hear. Other than that, I don't trust most other than a few fellow engineers that I've worked with. IMHO many people at these shows don't know what accurate systems sound like. When I say "accurate", I mean to whatever is captured on the recording.
Greg
-
It's not magical or mysterious or even hard to figure out.Bottom line....everyone perceives sound differently.There's no reason other than that.
-
It's not magical or mysterious or even hard to figure out.Bottom line....everyone perceives sound differently.There's no reason other than that.
I agree, also one can go to the same room three different times (Fri,Sat and Sun) and hear a completely different sound. Someone can say how bad a room sounds (Fri) and I can listen to the same room on Sun and think these guys are crazy it sounds pretty damn good.
-
I attended the show a couple of years ago and I found the show to be amazing while also being frustrating. I was able to see/hear a tremendous amount of gear and meet many of the key people in this industry. For me it was difficult to make an A versus B versus C comparison and I think that what a lot of folks do when they attend RMAF. You walk into a hotel room (usually poorly treated)
and it has speakers and other gear you probably have never heard before. Are you listening to the gear, the speakers, the cables, etc? Maybe you can hear enough to say I would like to hear that in my home/system.
Bottom-line for me is that I enjoy reading the comments about the rooms and the gear but I take the opinions about the room sound quality with a grain of salt. Heck, it is even difficult to read professional reviews of gear and wonder if you would agree with the reviewer.
Ken
-
Some people commented that the GR Research room had the best bass of the show. Others that I have heard from thought that it was over blown and boomy.
Depending on where one sits or stands in a room, the bass response changes.
-
If everyone heard the same thing this hobby sure would be boring. :thumb:
-
I have been wondering with these same dilemmas about this years RMAF. IMO this subject is just as important, if not more, than the actual show coverage from ACer's.
Too many variables... and I have wondered if it is possible for a 'bad show situation' or one to many negative comments from a 'trusted', 'popular' or 'experienced' personality on the internet can do more overall harm than the entire show did good for a manufacturer.
-
From what I understand there were 4 rooms that were using the same Daedalus speakers. I have read posts here on AC that a number of people liked the Daedalus room with the Modwright equipment. A couple of friends told me the only room with Daedalus speakers they liked was the one with a SET amp driving them. One friend felt that it was one of if not the best sound of the show. He did not like the room with the Modwright equipment or the other 2 rooms.
There are a lot of variables involved here. Two of the 4 rooms used Ulyesses with the all poly crossover upgrade. One room was a large suite powered by ModWright KWA 150 amps; the other room was a smaller room powered by a Berning OTL. The preamps, DACs, sources and cables were different. One room was a large suite with only vinyl. The Ulysesses in this room did not have the AP crossover (the upgrade was preformed after the show) and were powered by Atma-Sphere OTLs and pre with phono and different cables. The 4th room had the smaller DA-RMa speakers powered by a ModWright KWA 100 with the LS 100 pre with phono and ModWright modded Sony & Oppo source equipment and different cables than any of the other rooms. So, was the difference in the rooms the amps, the sources, the cables, the size of the room, the speakers, the music being played or a combination of all the above?
I think it boils down to we have different "likes" when it comes to audio gear and music. Some like tubes; some like SS; some like computer streaming, some like vinyl; some like classical, others like RnR; some like a warm sound, others like a strong bass sound, etc., etc. And it is all good! We perceive sound differently. The bottom line is to trust your own ears. Thus, I think we should expect many different opinions on room sounds at RMAF.
This years RMAF was a blast and IMO, the best one yet (this was my 6th in a row).
-
Even the industry reviewers, as much as they are derided on this and other forums, all include caveats with their show reports like, "Sounded good at the show but will hold opinion pending full report". These are professionals who have been to a zillion shows and know how colored perceptions can be at these things because of all of the variables mentioned so far. The wide variance in reports from AC'ers is to be expected, nothing unusual at all.
-
I just hope someone interested in a product [that was not at the show] does not cross a manufacturer off their list due to comments and perceptions made from a 'flawed' situation.
-
This is probably the worst scenario to really do critical listening in and comparisons...combined with perceptions and being human its a wonder that the opinions are as close or as far as they are from each other.
I would walk into a room (no i didnt attend this show) in other shows and if the music was not to my liking I instantly got a not so great feeling etc...depending on how many people are in the room, the attitudes etc all feed into ones overall analysis.....its hard to be objective.
I need to have some time with the setup, play certain familiar cuts etc...
I guess if you can put aside all your bagagge etc then you probably could come up with a gut feel on how things sound in a particular room if you get to listen to somthing your familiar with.
If the rooms are acoustically different for whatever reason, then something you know sounds good is in a lousy room, setup etc will most likely sound lousy.
Imagine vendors on day one are in one room, day two they all swap rooms around!! Day three they swap again!! Oh boy!
This would be an incentive to stay for all three days etc!!
Alex
:D
-
I have been wondering with these same dilemmas about this years RMAF. IMO this subject is just as important, if not more, than the actual show coverage from ACer's.
Too many variables... and I have wondered if it is possible for a 'bad show situation' or one to many negative comments from a 'trusted', 'popular' or 'experienced' personality on the internet can do more overall harm than the entire show did good for a manufacturer.
Let's face it, I think it works in both directions. It's simply the nature of the business and people.
George
-
I agree with George.
As per the Daedalus rooms, although the Modwright gear was in the rooms where I likedthe speakers sound the least, to me it had NOTHING to do with the amps (I own them and know their sound, although not in those rooms) but had to do with speaker placement and room size/treatment. One large room had the speakers a foot from the walls, firing east west and one had them 5 feet from the back wall in a small room, firing north south. Big difference! Lou and Emmanuel had their reasons, but the differences were clearly much more based on acoustics rather than equipment IMO. But to report "Modwright Daedalus room beaten by 30 watt OTL amp" isn't reporting anywhere near the full perspective. This is one reason RMAF reports are all over the board...perspective. Each of us walk into a room and focus on different things (if i am hot to trot on that cd player, I'll probably focus on it).
-
Especially at trade shows, people listen with their eyes instead of with their ears. They also listen with pre-conceived notions - - such as really big and really flashy looking and expensive is certainly better. Fire hose speaker wires and interconnects must certainly be better, along with safe size power line conditioners and amplifiers that require a fork lift truck to move.
One amateur reviewer of RMAF called our equipment "mid-fi" even though it recently received rave reviews in TAS and was listed as one of the best values in the whole industry. This simply tells us to quit working on better circuits and start working on better looking faceplates and to raise our prices a whole lot.
Some careful listeners reported that we had better sound in the small AVA/Salk room with our Ultravalve tube amp and Songtowers than they heard in the big Salk room with Soundscapes and megabuck electronics. Others of course raved about the great sound of the Soundscapes in the big room.
Actually Jim had a real problem with the big Soundscapes at the show. They were brand new and untested and the woofer supplier had supplied a batch of new woofers that were way out of spec - - - low bass output. The situation was salvaged by careful use of an equalizer built into the electronics in the big room, but speakers still were nowhere up to their performance potential. However, the thundering herd were impressed by the room size and all the expensive stuff and never really listened carefully at all. Lucky for Jim the electronics provider in the Soundscape room did have the built in equalization capability. Our electronics would not have been able to help with the woofer design spec problem, we don't offer a built in equalizer. We had the same issue with the HT3s in our much smaller room, the same out of spec woofer. This prevented us from using them at all. Fortunately both the HT2s and SongTowers performed just fine.
All of Jim's current speakers are designed with Audio by Van Alstine equipment. Dennis Murphy uses an AVA Insight+ DAC, Preamp, and amplifier, and Jim has our best hybrid equipment. I doubt if either of them are so stupid that they feel they are limited the performance potential of their products in the design stage by using "mid-fi' electronics.
I will plead guilty to designing audio equipment that is not as expensive looking as some people desired. Maybe we can do something about that in the future.
Until then I just ask you to listen with your ears, not with your eyes.
Best regards,
Frank Van Alstine
-
I think everyone that listens should have their hearing checked. You may be surprised as to what you can or can't hear.
Don't forget that the older you are, the less high frequency you can probably hear. My point being not only is it subjective but you also have the difference of ear quality.
-
Frank.....
KISS , Keep it simple stupid....looks are cool, but performance and value for my dollar is very important. Your stuff is wonderfully sounding, yes its not as pretty as some other equipment but plays well.
Your Ultravalve is really great performing and looks very nice as well.
If making the same electronics look better increases the cost, count me out.
I would love for you to make 'kits'!!!
Alex
:D
-
I agree with George.
As per the Daedalus rooms, although the Modwright gear was in the rooms where I likedthe speakers sound the least, to me it had NOTHING to do with the amps (I own them and know their sound, although not in those rooms) but had to do with speaker placement and room size/treatment. One large room had the speakers a foot from the walls, firing east west and one had them 5 feet from the back wall in a small room, firing north south. Big difference! Lou and Emmanuel had their reasons, but the differences were clearly much more based on acoustics rather than equipment IMO. But to report "Modwright Daedalus room beaten by 30 watt OTL amp" isn't reporting anywhere near the full perspective. This is one reason RMAF reports are all over the board...perspective. Each of us walk into a room and focus on different things (if i am hot to trot on that cd player, I'll probably focus on it).
This is an excellent post. Most of the rooms I liked best had modest setups and somewhat small speakers, because most of the rooms were pretty small...
To me, it's always about room and system synergy.
-
I have read a number of posts here on AC and have read a number of links to online magazine reviews about RMAF 2010. I also had a couple of audio friends that attended and spoke to them about different rooms.
What I came across is that there are no 2 people that agree about what they heard in each room. Some liked room A and hated room B. Other people hated room A and liked room B. I also picked up on that if a person owns some piece of equipment from a room, they liked what they heard from that room.
From what I understand there were 4 rooms that were using the same Daedalus speakers. I have read posts here on AC that a number of people liked the Daedalus room with the Modwright equipment. A couple of friends told me the only room with Daedalus speakers they liked was the one with a SET amp driving them. One friend felt that it was one of if not the best sound of the show. He did not like the room with the Modwright equipment or the other 2 rooms.
Some people commented that the GR Research room had the best bass of the show. Others that I have heard from thought that it was over blown and boomy. A couple of guys here on AC felt that the treble was a bit on the bright side. A friend of mine that for the most part does not like solid state amps (except for a few) felt that the treble was pretty good and non fatiguing to him. Is it the recording they did not like or are they blaming the speakers?
One reviewer commented that the Aperion Audio Verus Grand Tower Loudspeakers were a speaker that he would buy. At the price, if it is really that good it is a steal and the audio bargain of the century. He is about the only one that even mentioned that speaker. You usually do not even get a finish like that unless the speakers are way over $5,000.00 not to mention that they were only $1800.00. What did he hear in it that room that most other people did not? Was it the really nice finish for the money or was it the sound?
I read some peoples "best of show" rooms and they were other peoples "worst of show" rooms. How can there be that much difference in peoples opinion? I can see "best of show" and it was pretty good but "best of show" and terrible?
I have been to a number of audio shows and have been an exhibitor. I came across feeling that no hotel rooms at Audio shows really sound as good as your own room. What I also noticed was smaller speakers that do not do low bass as well as other speakers tended to sound better in those hotel rooms. The one time that I exhibited at RMAF I was in a room that had 3 speakers from this one manufacture. The only one that sounded even remotely balance was their smallest speaker. Unfortunately every one walking in wanted to hear the large statement speaker. The speaker over powered the room.
The other thing that seems to be apparent is that some (online) magazines usually only talk about the ultra expensive rooms and seem to dismiss other rooms unless there is an innovative product they want to talk about. Some of the best sounding rooms IMO were not the ultra expensive rooms but the mid priced rooms. A good number of the ultra expensive rooms usually ended up sounding the worst IMO.
I was not there so I cannot personally comment on what I heard. This posting is not to single any one person or manufacture out. I was just point out what I read and heard from people that were there. It is also to point out how many differing opinions there are even amongst audiophiles. Who do you believe? Anyone? No one?
Having set up and participated in many shows, I would suggest the following:
1) Each seat in any given room sounds dramatically different.
2) Seated and standing sounds very different with some speakers
3) The number of people in a room can make it sound different
4) BASS will vary wildly from the center to the boundaries and especially in the corners. We all know this, but somehow expect it to change as we pile into a room and find a space to listen
5) Unless everyone judges based on the exact same recording perceptions will vary
6) Most vendors constantly make adjustments during the show which will change how some perceive a room. Normally Sunday is the best sounding day.
7) Some people "hear" with their eyes, or through a personal bias or preference. (this is NOT being critical of that type)
8 ) Only a small % are actually making sonic judgements based on real versus recorded criteria, it is more often recorded versus recorded.
9) Many also judge from a perspective based on their personal room and system as well as their experience with High End gear.
-
Here are some impediments to making informed decisions at RMAF or any other show for most showgoers:
1) not playing music you are familiar with
2) the system is either way better than what you have at home or the opposite
3) no acoustic treatments or poorly executed
4) dispersion of the speakers is preventing you from experiencing the REAL sound
5) other noise in the room is interfering
6) sound is too quiet or too loud to make any judgements
All of these can be overcome if you do some important things:
1) come prepared with a good quality track that you are familiar with, either on CDROM or memory stick or both
2) try to sit in the sweetspot
3) ask the one in control to raise or lower the volume - we will not be affended
4) dont assume that the speakers sound like this with all electronics or visa-versa. It's a system thing that can be spoiled by the wrong cables, poor matching of amps and speakers or even room the wrong size for those speakers. Just go into 99% of bricks and mortar stereo salons and you will discover that most salespeople cannot build a good sounding system to save their lives. Same thing at shows. If there is great sound in the room, it is probably because of the great front-end electronics, and good amp-speaker matching. Dont attribute great sound or bad sound to just the speakers. It's a system thing. If something sounds good, examine the whole system. If you buy those speakers and take them home to your electronics, you may have an entirely different result. This is the most difficult thing for consumers: mixing and matching electronics to speakers. Just remember that great clarity and dynamics is usually moslty due to the electronics. Great bass response, imaging and good dispersion is the speakers/treatments.
We do a lot of tweaking of our system as the show progresses, including DSP EQ, moving the acoustic treatments, and even adjusting the speakers. There is no way that 1/2 day of set-up can achieve a perfect room sound. I cannot do this at home, so why should I be able to do it in a strange room with limited power outlets, wierd reflective surfaces etc.?
By Sunday our sound is always significantly better than on Friday. We had the big Salks and as AVA says above, the bass drivers were efficient, but bumpy and did not go low. Jim replaced them the night before the show started with the original low-efficiency woofers and then we were off and running. I believe he had hoped to make the speaker more efficient to make it usable with a wider variety of amps. We had my modded JC-1's which put about 750 watts into each with very low output impedance, so this was no problem. We also tweaked the back-covers on the midranges and did some EQ with Amarra. All of this culminated in a very live sound. I'm at home now using Amarra EQ to tweak my ribbons to sound as good as our room at RMAF. For the first time ever, it was actually better than my home system. I'll never get the bass slam we had there using my speakers. Maybe Jim will cut me a deal......
Steve Nugent
Empirical Audio
-
Hell, my opinion of my own system changes from day to day!
-
To be honest I think the most anyone can hope for or take from a trade show is a generalized impression. Crap always sounds like crap - there's no remedy for that. Unfortunately every great product under less than ideal conditions can sound like crap too, so much is unfairly dismissed due to the venue.
-
Plus if the review was made by a man versus a women. Women have much more sensitivity to the high end. Some speakers The Ninja likes make my head hurt because I can hear what he cannot. Add to the fact of getting older we all have, that sound like beauty is in the eye or in this case the ear of the beholder and I am surprised we ever agree at all.
Mrs. Ninja
-
4) BASS will vary wildly from the center to the boundaries and especially in the corners. We all know this, but somehow expect it to change as we pile into a room and find a space to listen
I wonder whether anyone tries the multi-sub method investigated by Welti, intended to minimize spatial variation. I realize time is short, but the rooms are the same year after year, right, so it wouldn't have to be done again the next time.
-
I too have my take on evaluating equipment under show conditions which can be best summed up by a comment I received at the show.
Two people took me out in the hallway to ask some questions about or Purity Silver Statement preamp that was in the room. The first person made the statement "it's hard to tell how good a component is in an unfamiliar setup".
To my surprise, the other gentleman stepped in right away and said something along the lines of "yes, but if the whole system sounds really good, you know their are no weak links and you can hear the potential of any given piece in the chain". This made a lot of sense to me.
We followed the following rules in our room:
1) Let the listener pick the music.
2) Hand the listener the remote so he/she can listen at a volume of their liking.
3) Allow the more interested listeners to choose their own seat. We did not 'make' anyone sit in the sweet spot as many wanted to hear how things sounded from various seating positions.
4) If people wanted to talk while someone was in the room listening, ask them to step out into the hallway as not to disturb the person trying to listen to music.
5) Turn off the air conditioner and unplug the fridge.
6) If there are too many people in the room when someone wanted to sit and listen, invite them back a bit later when the room was less crowded.
7) Never make excuses for what someone is hearing. Let them make their own judgement and come to you for answers.
8) Close the door. Too many rooms left the door open throughout the whole show and all listeners could hear was the chaos in the hallways.
9) Turn the lights down. Let people relax a bit. There is a lot of chaos going on at these shows and nobody can enjoy anything if they are tense.
Our room was professionaly treated prior to the show. I think it is important that people know this and what they are hearing is the potential of any given piece in the room. We all realize not everyone can generate the same results in their own room but at least they have something to shoot for and know what is possible:wink:
-
And you guys did a good gob at it.
Mrs. Ninja
I too have my take on evaluating equipment under show conditions which can be best summed up by a comment I received at the show.
Two people took me out in the hallway to ask some questions about or Purity Silver Statement preamp that was in the room. The first person made the statement "it's hard to tell how good a component is in an unfamiliar setup".
To my surprise, the other gentleman stepped in right away and said something along the lines of "yes, but if the whole system sounds really good, you know their are no weak links and you can hear the potential of any given piece in the chain". This made a lot of sense to me.
We followed the following rules in our room:
1) Let the listener pick the music.
2) Hand the listener the remote so he/she can listen at a volume of their liking.
3) Allow the more interested listeners to choose their own seat. We did not 'make' anyone sit in the sweet spot as many wanted to hear how things sounded from various seating positions.
4) If people wanted to talk while someone was in the room listening, ask them to step out into the hallway as not to disturb the person trying to listen to music.
5) Turn off the air conditioner and unplug the fridge.
6) If there are too many people in the room when someone wanted to sit and listen, invite them back a bit later when the room was less crowded.
7) Never make excuses for what someone is hearing. Let them make their own judgement and come to you for answers.
8) Close the door. Too many rooms left the door open throughout the whole show and all listeners could hear was the chaos in the hallways.
9) Turn the lights down. Let people relax a bit. There is a lot of chaos going on at these shows and nobody can enjoy anything if they are tense.
Our room was professionaly treated prior to the show. I think it is important that people know this and what they are hearing is the potential of any given piece in the room. We all realize not everyone can generate the same results in their own room but at least they have something to shoot for and know what is possible:wink:
-
I do not subscribe to the school that claims "people listen with their eyes" While it is true sometimes, for me some of the most god awful sound I heard was coming from the big ticket rooms like the Legacy room or the Rockport/Win analog room (Win analog was probably my favorite room last year too, so there you go). And some of the greatest sound was coming from the smaller rooms like Fritz speakers and Aperion audio. Though I will say I wouldn't fault anyone who bought Fritz's speakers on sight alone. :lol:
-
Especially at trade shows, people listen with their eyes instead of with their ears. They also listen with pre-conceived notions - - such as really big and really flashy looking and expensive is certainly better. Fire hose speaker wires and interconnects must certainly be better, along with safe size power line conditioners and amplifiers that require a fork lift truck to move.
One amateur reviewer of RMAF called our equipment "mid-fi" even though it recently received rave reviews in TAS and was listed as one of the best values in the whole industry. This simply tells us to quit working on better circuits and start working on better looking faceplates and to raise our prices a whole lot.
Some careful listeners reported that we had better sound in the small AVA/Salk room with our Ultravalve tube amp and Songtowers than they heard in the big Salk room with Soundscapes and megabuck electronics. Others of course raved about the great sound of the Soundscapes in the big room.
Actually Jim had a real problem with the big Soundscapes at the show. They were brand new and untested and the woofer supplier had supplied a batch of new woofers that were way out of spec - - - low bass output. The situation was salvaged by careful use of an equalizer built into the electronics in the big room, but speakers still were nowhere up to their performance potential. However, the thundering herd were impressed by the room size and all the expensive stuff and never really listened carefully at all. Lucky for Jim the electronics provider in the Soundscape room did have the built in equalization capability. Our electronics would not have been able to help with the woofer design spec problem, we don't offer a built in equalizer. We had the same issue with the HT3s in our much smaller room, the same out of spec woofer. This prevented us from using them at all. Fortunately both the HT2s and SongTowers performed just fine.
All of Jim's current speakers are designed with Audio by Van Alstine equipment. Dennis Murphy uses an AVA Insight+ DAC, Preamp, and amplifier, and Jim has our best hybrid equipment. I doubt if either of them are so stupid that they feel they are limited the performance potential of their products in the design stage by using "mid-fi' electronics.
I will plead guilty to designing audio equipment that is not as expensive looking as some people desired. Maybe we can do something about that in the future.
Until then I just ask you to listen with your ears, not with your eyes.
Best regards,
Frank Van Alstine
That was me. I'm not an amateur reviewer, I'm just a dude. And I posted my opinion. I'll follow it up and say that ANYTIME people start talking about what "great value" someone's equipment is, then that equipment is, by definition, mid-fi. If it were "true" high end, then they would use terms like "best in class".
-
Plus if the review was made by a man versus a women. Women have much more sensitivity to the high end. Some speakers The Ninja likes make my head hurt because I can hear what he cannot. Add to the fact of getting older we all have, that sound like beauty is in the eye or in this case the ear of the beholder and I am surprised we ever agree at all.
Mrs. Ninja
Absolutely not true. I've talked to three board certified audiologists now and they've all told me that men and women's hearing measures identical. Granted, some of us have exposed our ears to things that have changed our HF hearing, but the common thought that women have better HF acuity is an urban myth.
Talking to a couple of psychoacoustics guys, they have said that in the caveman days, women concentrated more on hearing the sounds of babies and men listened more carefully for approaching animals, but again, the actual hearing mechanism is identical. There is nothing in the physiology that would make women hear HF better or worse than men.
Perhaps in today's modern cave, more men have gone to extremely loud rock concerts or used noisy power tools, but that's it....
-
Mhnnn..I guess I will have to go next year to form my OWN OPinion. :lol:
-
Yes do that, everyone do that. And no one complain about someone elses opinion for once. Whether you're a manufacturer or a hobbyist or even just curious you WILL have an opinion and it WILL piss off someone who would rather be an armchair audiophile than get down in the trenches and hear for themselves.
-
Trade shows are about exposure and marketing, beyond that I wouldn't take anything too seriously.
-
Interesting how the "reviewers" respond to opinions of their opinions, and that is just to their opinion, not their creations or lively hood. Just another dudes observation. :lol: 8)
-
Interesting how the "reviewers" respond to opinions of their opinions, and that is just to their opinion, not their creations or lively hood. Just another dudes observation. :lol: 8)
If only the supreme court would rule on these matters.
-
That was me. I'm not an amateur reviewer, I'm just a dude. And I posted my opinion. I'll follow it up and say that ANYTIME people start talking about what "great value" someone's equipment is, then that equipment is, by definition, mid-fi. If it were "true" high end, then they would use terms like "best in class".
So you're saying it doesn't matter what it sounds like, just what the manufacturer lables his gear as to determine if something is "high fi" or "mid fi." I guess everyone should just start throwing around marketing terms then so that all manufacturers, by your definition, can be hi fi.
That said, I did enjoy and appreciate the coverage.
-
MY OPINION ONLY
I don't at all judge with my eyes....I'm not the least interested in how a component may look in judging how it sounds. Unless I am considering it's purchase seriously at some point...at that time what I typically judge is it's bulk (that is, I want smaller and trimmer whenever possible to reduce eyesore and increase WAF :wink:)
I also judge quickly....I know when my system has been dialed in correctly, I know it in about 3 seconds or the first few notes. About the only variable that I have to factor in is the music itself....if it was poorly recorded (ie, doesn't sound like a musical event as it once was), then it's hard to tell. But a lot of the other stuff like 'sweet spot' never seems 100% relevant to me. That is, I can listen past the benefit of a sweet spot.
A credit to digital front ends today (and perhaps advances in metal dome tweeters in some rooms that had them)...not even one room did I go into that I felt the need to run out of immediately (Nola was close to it, however :( ). They were all enjoyable to an extent - and few were 'steely' sounding (as some were at T.H.E. Show in Vegas 2004 and 2005)
I also only was there day 1 and 3/4 of day 2; many of the exhibitors have mentioned that they gradually dialed in their systems better as the show wore on. Sharing dirty power in rooms they had little time to acclimate to is a tough putt when you're trying to sell sound 'quality' to the hungry masses of audiophools.
I consistently noticed the same as TONEPUB/Jeff mentioned previously....small drivers and modest setups sounded the best, overall in most of the rooms (which were, predictably, hotel sized at maybe 15 x 20'). No matter what was tried with bass traps, wall coverings, towels or other room aids...those with 8" and less drivers sounded, on average, more suited and better than the rooms using main speakers of 10" or larger. Monitors with drivers 8" or less tended to sound best of all.
This is a generality, but was noticed time and time again at the show.
It's a lesson for all of us to take back....if your listening area is of modest size, buy a speaker suitably sized for it. More mistakes by enterprising and excited audiophools have probably been made by stuffing some grand experiment of a large speaker into modest sized rooms over time and any other foible 8)
It was a special event for me, I had been planning to attend for 5 years and for various reasons my plans got scuttled, and it met or exceeded every expectation. The somewhat unexpected bonus was the fun had meeting so many of you fellow AC'ers there :thumb:
John
-
What I came across is that there are no 2 people that agree about what they heard in each room.
I think this is because many people don't listen with their ears. They listen with their eyes, and what they see determines whether or not they like the equipment in the room.
Then there are the people that base their judgement of the equipment on the personality of the person running the room. The logical extension of this is to have booth babes. Strategically placed booth babe bazooms guarantee a good review. (I suppose booth buffs might be useful too when there are female listeners.)
-
The logical extension of this is to have booth babes.
I think tastes vary even more with that...at least with audio it's about the music. :thumb:
-
This is your brain on music (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0452288525/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0525949690&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1MWXYWEF4S0HBVWWM8RZ) was the reading for my trip out to RMAF. There may be some differences in what we hear based on physical differences like one person can hear higher frequency than another, but that's really minimal and the big difference is that each of us process what we hear in personal ways that can be very different.
I really enjoyed reading this book and understanding that perceptions are fallible. In fact, we are wired to perceive certain data incorrectly because the trait responsible for the misperception helped us survive as a specie. Perfect sine waves and flat response across the spectrum may not be what we want in music. :o How each of us process the perceived information is up for debate. I don't subscribe to any specific school of the philosophy of arts. From Aristotle and his (pretty much always wrong) theory of aesthetics, Kant's critique of judgment and absolutes, Hegel's culturally relative "absolute," Schiller's sensuous Romanticism, Adorno and Derrida's mumbo jumbo, Freud and psychoanalysis, etc. etc., I take bits from here and there to come up with my personal position that takes a semiotic perspective on arts in general -- everything matters and figures into how we enjoy music and arts in general. Some things have universal characteristics and some are relative to the individuals.
So, I am not surprised we have differing views. 8)
-
The logical extension of this is to have booth babes. Strategically placed booth babe bazooms guarantee a good review. (I suppose booth buffs might be useful too when there are female listeners.)
My wife calls me "babe" all the time. . .but I don't have bazooms.
:D
-
I think this is because many people don't listen with their ears. They listen with their eyes, and what they see determines whether or not they like the equipment in the room.
Then there are the people that base their judgement of the equipment on the personality of the person running the room. The logical extension of this is to have booth babes. Strategically placed booth babe bazooms guarantee a good review. (I suppose booth buffs might be useful too when there are female listeners.)
One of the nicest most showy rooms at the show run by one of the nicest guys is the Nordist room and it sucked this year.
Just proves you don't know what you're talking about. Number of booth babes spotted at RMAF 0. Next time attend the show before you make comments that are based on preconceptions.
-
Pez and others,
I wish I had your discipline. Although I have trained my ears, for years, for listening to audio (using some of what Woodsyi just posted about) I still can't be disciplined enough to completely erase visual cues from my listening perception, be it equipment eye candy, the nearby nodding of heads or smiles of listeners, or even the feel-good color of the listening room . You guys are made of stronger stuff. P.S. I personally listen in almost darkness for this reason.
-
Lol ya, base your listening habits off of Woodsyi! His perception of good sound goes up exponentially with the amount of alcohol consumption. :lol: I often find that if a room was good one year, chances are it will be as good the next. The only exception seems to be the cost no object rooms tend to be all over the place. Win analog room = great 2009, bad 2010, dynaudio room great 2010, terrible 2009.
-
The only exception seems to be the cost no object rooms tend to be all over the place. Win analog room = great 2009, bad 2010, dynaudio room great 2010, terrible 2009.
..Wilson Audio bad every freakin' year. Sorry but those speakers do NOTHING for me sonically. They actually hurt my ears.
-
I wouldn't know, I avoid Wilson audio like the plague. :icon_lol: they should stick to making tennis balls and leather jackets. :nono:
-
..Wilson Audio bad every freakin' year. Sorry but those speakers do NOTHING for me sonically. They actually hurt my ears.
That's funny because I WANT to like them for their aura but every time I listen at these shows or in demo rooms, I have my Salk reference in my head and I cannot justify spending that much for no improvement, or even the step down, in some cases.
Now the Vandersteen room made me forget about ol' Jim-what's-his-name. :o
-
Agreed, wow! Big red and I agree! :o
-
...
Now the Vandersteen room made me forget about ol' Jim-what's-his-name. :o
... but then you'd have to deal with ol' Richard-what's-his-name :lol:
-
Pez and others,
I wish I had your discipline. Although I have trained my ears, for years, for listening to audio (using some of what Woodsyi just posted about) I still can't be disciplined enough to completely erase visual cues from my listening perception, be it equipment eye candy, the nearby nodding of heads or smiles of listeners, or even the feel-good color of the listening room . You guys are made of stronger stuff. P.S. I personally listen in almost darkness for this reason.
Agreed, although I'd add that simply knowing what you're listening to can color your perceptions too.
I don't think that any amount of discipline or training can overcome these things either. It's simply part of being human.
-
I think the whole point of having all this gear in one place is so that you can experience it and form some initial impressions. Of course, one guy is going to hate Wilsons and one is going to love them, but at least now you're actually HEARING something and trying to find what your particular holy grail is.
For what it's worth, I've heard almost every speaker there sound great and sound terrible at different shows. So it is tough for you as the end user to find what you'll really enjoy.
-
Excellent post and good overall discussion ... all points very nicely made ...
Cheers
-
I have never been to an audio show. But i see a lot of posts from people coming out them that seem to check their hobby at the door. I wouldn't expect a system to sound good at first, even in a well thought out system in some one's home can sound off at first. It takes time to adjust and at those shows that really isn't possible.
So for me at those shows i would look at gear in terms if i can work with it. Does it have features i am looking for or that i am use to working with. How does it sound at this volume or maybe will it work with my existing gear. Its a hobby thing not a shock and awe thing.
-
For what it's worth, I've heard almost every speaker there sound great and sound terrible at different shows. So it is tough for you as the end user to find what you'll really enjoy.
I would be just as happy if all the displays at shows were static displays. I don't think you can make any real decisions based on what you hear at a show.
I like talking to the designer to see where they're coming from and then it's time for an audition in my system, at my house, if I'm still interested.
-
I'll follow it up and say that ANYTIME people start talking about what "great value" someone's equipment is, then that equipment is, by definition, mid-fi. If it were "true" high end, then they would use terms like "best in class".
Where did you get these "definitions"?
Wikapedia defines High-end audio as, "High-end audio is a term used to describe a class of consumer home audio equipment marketed to audio enthusiasts on the basis of high price or quality, and esoteric or novel sound reproduction technologies. High-end audio can refer simply to the price, to the build quality of the components, or to the subjective or objective quality of sound reproduction."
So its a subjective ratio of price:build quality:to objectivity of sound reproduction. Just having one of the ratio lower dosen't make it no longer High-fi it makes it even better.
and
This is my favorite by silcom.com, "Equipment that is always expensive and pretentious, and sometimes excellent. Also see Hi-Fi Fetishism."
So seems this is the way we want people to see high-fi, as so out of reach of the masses that it could only truely be done by the very pompous. No wonder we are branded as a bunch of stuffy old men with our noses up so high we can no longer see where we are walking. Could it be off a cliff?
Mrs. Ninja
-
I have never been to an audio show. But i see a lot of posts from people coming out them that seem to check their hobby at the door. I wouldn't expect a system to sound good at first, even in a well thought out system in some one's home can sound off at first. It takes time to adjust and at those shows that really isn't possible.
So for me at those shows i would look at gear in terms if i can work with it. Does it have features i am looking for or that i am use to working with. How does it sound at this volume or maybe will it work with my existing gear. Its a hobby thing not a shock and awe thing.
This is an awesome post.....
-
This is an awesome post.....
thanks Tone... you are welcome to publish it.....hehe
-
Beyond all of the obvious things, like music that you are unfamiliar with and rooms that are not yours etc., I believe the main differences in opinion have to do with preconceived notions of what it should sound like.
IME, most audiophiles are "used" to a certain kind of sound, and it's usually not live. If more of these folks spent more time at live concerts, particularly up close and personal without PA systems, they would have an entirely different concept of what is good sound. Show them a live playback and they become confused. Not sure whether it's good or bad because it's so different from what they are used-to.
Many describe a "bright" sound when you are playing in-your-face jazz or big-band, but this is exactly what it's like. Horns are bright and really loud.
Sometimes its the track too. If it is closely miked orchestral, then the percussion tends to be to hot, not like a real concert. Sometimes it's the track, not the system.
Many listeners are conditioned to a "stereo" or "hanging in space" sound. If they dont hear this, then its not good. Lots of folks that like the tube sound are conditioned this way. The midrange vocal may be really live, but the rest is missing, the accurate highs and the bass.
With some, the only "live" trending systems that they have heard were also harsh, annoying and fatigueing, so they are biased against anything like this and therefore prefer the "warm" sound.
It is possible to have your cake and eat it too. Accuracy, liveness and dynamics without fatigue or harshness. The problem is that only .001% of systems can deliver this recipe. Therefore, we mostly crave what sounds "pretty" rather than what sounds "live" IMO.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio
-
Well gee wiz guys tell me its not so. Sound is subjective to the beholder. Audio shows are just that. Showing the gear. Sometimes they actually get good sound.
for the seasoned show goer no biggie. For newbies its a rat race to the finish. getting everyones opinion to form your own.
We have been there done that. Nowadays the fever is coming back with reasonably priced products that perform very well. The difference between high end gear and the modest has gotten narrower. Especially digital.
My advice go back to the concet hall and listen to live unamplified music. If one plays an instrument than the chase is much easier. Use that as your reference. You can't go wrong. Why ? Its your liking and your ears, room etc.
charles
-
Beyond all of the obvious things, like music that you are unfamiliar with and rooms that are not yours etc., I believe the main differences in opinion have to do with preconceived notions of what it should sound like.
IME, most audiophiles are "used" to a certain kind of sound, and it's usually not live. If more of these folks spent more time at live concerts, particularly up close and personal without PA systems, they would have an entirely different concept of what is good sound. Show them a live playback and they become confused. Not sure whether it's good or bad because it's so different from what they are used-to.
Many describe a "bright" sound when you are playing in-your-face jazz or big-band, but this is exactly what it's like. Horns are bright and really loud.
Sometimes its the track too. If it is closely miked orchestral, then the percussion tends to be to hot, not like a real concert. Sometimes it's the track, not the system.
Many listeners are conditioned to a "stereo" or "hanging in space" sound. If they dont hear this, then its not good. Lots of folks that like the tube sound are conditioned this way. The midrange vocal may be really live, but the rest is missing, the accurate highs and the bass.
With some, the only "live" trending systems that they have heard were also harsh, annoying and fatigueing, so they are biased against anything like this and therefore prefer the "warm" sound.
It is possible to have your cake and eat it too. Accuracy, liveness and dynamics without fatigue or harshness. The problem is that only .001% of systems can deliver this recipe. Therefore, we mostly crave what sounds "pretty" rather than what sounds "live" IMO.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio
Well said. Live music is bright but not threadbare. The weight of live is IMO is what is missing for most music reproduction. Gestahlt in other words. I guess non fatigueing is really the key to great sound. Even a live performance can be so. Lincoln center before the alteration was NOT the place for a violin concert. Where as Carnegie is.
The room the room the room.
charles
-
Yes and we think just alike and see just alike I mean we could be practically the same creature and yet we perceve things so very different.
Put a man and a woman to compare anything, a car, a apinting, a speaker, a color for the wall, a piece of clothing and what the two will percieve and proccess in thier brain will be different.
Mrs. Ninja
And with the Ninja and I that is a good thing
As to Jeff your Audiologist and old wives tales I give you just a few of the many studies that have been conducted and come up with the women hear better then men conclusion....its why we have bigger vocabularies earlier in life. I can produce more if you would like.
1. Professor John Corso of Penn State University in the late 1950's and early 1960's. Dr. Corso simply used a soundproof booth, headphones, and a tone generator. He consistently found that the girls hear better than boys do, especially in the range of frequencies above 2 kHz.
See John Corso, Age and sex differences in thresholds, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 31:498-507, 1959; also John Corso, Aging and auditory thresholds in men and women, Archives of Environmental Health, 6:350-356, 1963.
2. Professor Jane Cassidy at Louisiana State University, Professor Cassidy, in a study of 350 newborn baby girls and boys, found that the girls hearing was substantially more sensitive than the boys, especially in the 1000- to 4000-Hz range which is so important for speech discrimination.
See Jane Cassidy and Karen Ditty. Gender differences among newborns on a transient otoacoustic emissions test for hearing. Journal of Music Therapy, 37:28-35, 2001.
3. A variety of more recent studies using more sophisticated technology have not only confirmed the superior hearing of girls at higher frequencies, but have also begun to demonstrate the anatomical basis for that superiority. The group led by Hiroaki Sato was the first to demonstrate consistent sex differences in the anatomy of the inner ear: girls are born with a cochlea which is shorter and stiffer than boys. The shorter, stiffer cochlea provides a more sensitive frequency response.
See their paper, Sexual dimorphism and development of the human cochlea. Acta Otolaryngologica, 111:1037-1040, 1991.
4. A few years later, a French group led by Thierry Morlet demonstrated that the hair cells themselves are stiffer (and therefore more sensitive) in girls compared to the hair cells in boys. See their paper, Development of cochlear active mechanisms in humans differs between gender, Neuroscience Letters, 220:49-52, 1996.
These differences may help to explain sex differences in language acquisition. For example, the average 18-month-old girl has a vocabulary of about 90 words, compared to just 40 words for the average 18-month-old boy; see figure (source: Simon Baron-Cohen, Svetlana Lutchmaya, and Rebecca Knickmeyer, Prenatal Testosterone in Mind: amniotic fluid studies, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004.
JUst to name a few....
Still love me Jeff?
Mrs. Ninja
Absolutely not true. I've talked to three board certified audiologists now and they've all told me that men and women's hearing measures identical. Granted, some of us have exposed our ears to things that have changed our HF hearing, but the common thought that women have better HF acuity is an urban myth.
Talking to a couple of psychoacoustics guys, they have said that in the caveman days, women concentrated more on hearing the sounds of babies and men listened more carefully for approaching animals, but again, the actual hearing mechanism is identical. There is nothing in the physiology that would make women hear HF better or worse than men.
Perhaps in today's modern cave, more men have gone to extremely loud rock concerts or used noisy power tools, but that's it....
-
Lol ya, base your listening habits off of Woodsyi! His perception of good sound goes up exponentially with the amount of alcohol consumption. :lol:
Only good stuff, dude. :wine:
As I commented to BRM when I was leaving the room, I didn't like the sound from the room with speakers named Zinfandel and I can't stand the wine, zinfandel. Is it a mere coincidence? :dunno: Everyone brings different evaluative software to these shows. You just have to key in with folks who typically like similar sounds but you will have to be the ultimate arbiter of the sound you like...
-
The room the room the room.
What is the most important thing for great true to life sound, Alex?
-
I never, ever listen with my eyes. My favorite speakers look like @ss (Geddes Abbeys), and my current custom tube amp has crap sprouting out the top of it like cancerous electronic tumors. Since I put my gear in a cabinet that has doors and frosted glass on the front, the looks are completely irrelevant to me.
BTW, I am NOT saying that a marketing term makes gear hifi or midfi. I'm talking about when reviewers discuss the sound of your equipment, if they use terms like "best in class", then from a pure sound quality perspective, you qualify as high end. If they use terms like "great value", then you are in the mid-fi category (but punching above your weight class). Ever notice that you never see a negative review? That's because reviewers have a sort of coded language they use to shield manufacturers. Terms like "great value" mean "I liked it but didn't love it", or "Hey, if I didn't have my reference gear (which is clearly better), then this piece would be OK". Sorry, but that's the truth.
-
Typically most value is not the same as the best quality. In this hobby of asymptotically diminishing returns, the best value is probably found at the base of the steep rise in cost over quality graph. I would not call that midfi but it's not at the top either.
Klaus and Alex had really one of the best value package for $5500 in the Odyssey room but they know and admit that their stuff is not at Symphonic Line level. Nor is the price, which is the point.
-
I liked the Odyssey room this year, but then I like it every year. You are right, it's not the Symphonic line, it's the "great value" line. And Klaus understands that. And I have no issue with that. My problem is when manufacturers think that their gear is world class, and it just isn't, like AVA seems to. Good for the $$? OK, maybe. Best in the world? Not even close.
-
I never, ever listen with my eyes. My favorite speakers look like @ss (Geddes Abbeys
:o When will you have a pair then?
-
This post started out slow but really turned into a having a lot of good comments. I started this post in General Audio and it was moved. This may be off the RMAF topic but...
I find similar experiences when I go to audio dealer showrooms. You go to listen to a pair of speakers and end up with equipment that you may not be familiar with. Some even still have the switch on the fly boxes to change gear real quick. I really do not end up knowing what you are listen to half of the time. I am listening to the speakers that I came to listen to or everything else? I know everything else plus the speakers. Epecially the switching box.
About 5 years ago I went to listen to a pair of speakers that were highly recommended to me by a friend. I even brought my tube integrated amp that I was using at the time. I wanted to get some kind of handle on how they sound and if the amp was powerful enough to drive the speakers.
After listening to their gear hooked up to them and not liking what I heard I had them hook up my integrated amp. Better but still not great. Another friend that was with me at the time looked at me and said that the speakers must suck. I knew that my other friend knew what to listen for and that he was usually correct. So I asked the dealer if they would let me take them home to audition them. My buddy looked at my like I was crazy. He said why do you want to waste your time and energy moving them.
Got them over to another friends house and compared them to his Dunlavy SC 4a's. Immediately you could hear how slow the Dunlavy speaker were compared to these. I then took them home and compared them to the speakers that I was using at the time. They really sounded much better than my other pair of speakers and IMO the Dunlavy's. I then bought them and am still living happily with them.
To this day my buddy that went with me to the Audio dealer to listen to those same speakers at the showroom cannot believe how much of a difference that they sound with my gear and my room.
Moral of the story is that one should really hear gear in their system with the music they listen to before purchasing (if possible).
Gregg
-
I've haven't been to a RMAF yet. But the last Stereophile show convinced me that attending exhibits at these shows is alot like "speed dating". :o The exhibitor has only a few minutes (or the length of your chosen tune) to make a good impression. I then can decide whether or not to examine at a dealer, the manufacturer's equipment based on that few minutes.
-
...attending exhibits at these shows is alot like "speed dating"...
Exactly! And that's why they shouldn't be taken too seriously.
-
I liked the Odyssey room this year, but then I like it every year. You are right, it's not the Symphonic line, it's the "great value" line. And Klaus understands that. And I have no issue with that. My problem is when manufacturers think that their gear is world class, and it just isn't, like AVA seems to. Good for the $$? OK, maybe. Best in the world? Not even close.
For some AVA owners they are world class. The point being different strokes for different folks. I don't have any AVA equipment, but I never belittle some one who happens to like equipment that may not be my cup of tea.
-
Yes and we think just alike and see just alike I mean we could be practically the same creature and yet we perceve things so very different.
Put a man and a woman to compare anything, a car, a apinting, a speaker, a color for the wall, a piece of clothing and what the two will percieve and proccess in thier brain will be different.
Mrs. Ninja
And with the Ninja and I that is a good thing
As to Jeff your Audiologist and old wives tales I give you just a few of the many studies that have been conducted and come up with the women hear better then men conclusion....its why we have bigger vocabularies earlier in life. I can produce more if you would like.
1. Professor John Corso of Penn State University in the late 1950's and early 1960's. Dr. Corso simply used a soundproof booth, headphones, and a tone generator. He consistently found that the girls hear better than boys do, especially in the range of frequencies above 2 kHz.
See John Corso, Age and sex differences in thresholds, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 31:498-507, 1959; also John Corso, Aging and auditory thresholds in men and women, Archives of Environmental Health, 6:350-356, 1963.
2. Professor Jane Cassidy at Louisiana State University, Professor Cassidy, in a study of 350 newborn baby girls and boys, found that the girls hearing was substantially more sensitive than the boys, especially in the 1000- to 4000-Hz range which is so important for speech discrimination.
See Jane Cassidy and Karen Ditty. Gender differences among newborns on a transient otoacoustic emissions test for hearing. Journal of Music Therapy, 37:28-35, 2001.
3. A variety of more recent studies using more sophisticated technology have not only confirmed the superior hearing of girls at higher frequencies, but have also begun to demonstrate the anatomical basis for that superiority. The group led by Hiroaki Sato was the first to demonstrate consistent sex differences in the anatomy of the inner ear: girls are born with a cochlea which is shorter and stiffer than boys. The shorter, stiffer cochlea provides a more sensitive frequency response.
See their paper, Sexual dimorphism and development of the human cochlea. Acta Otolaryngologica, 111:1037-1040, 1991.
4. A few years later, a French group led by Thierry Morlet demonstrated that the hair cells themselves are stiffer (and therefore more sensitive) in girls compared to the hair cells in boys. See their paper, Development of cochlear active mechanisms in humans differs between gender, Neuroscience Letters, 220:49-52, 1996.
These differences may help to explain sex differences in language acquisition. For example, the average 18-month-old girl has a vocabulary of about 90 words, compared to just 40 words for the average 18-month-old boy; see figure (source: Simon Baron-Cohen, Svetlana Lutchmaya, and Rebecca Knickmeyer, Prenatal Testosterone in Mind: amniotic fluid studies, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004.
JUst to name a few....
Still love me Jeff?
Mrs. Ninja
I still love you, I just disagree. My daughter didn't start talking till 23 months.
Some of that may be true with infants, I'm sure. But the audiologists I talked to all were measuring adults. They also told me that a lot of hearing acuity is hereditary, as well as your chances of losing your high frequency hearing. (kind of like baldness)
Personally, I think no one has taken a wide enough sample, but that is strictly my opinion.
-
Studies on infants cannot be assumed to apply to adults. Another factor is that needs to be considered is noise exposure. Men, particularly historically, have greater noise exposure (occupational, recreational, military service) resulting in high frequency hearing loss. The differences across individuals of either gender is much greater than the differences between men and women. As with most things, broad generalizations rarely apply to individuals. People like different equipment, have different priorities, biases, budgets, etc. It's far from as simple as women hear better than men therefore....
-
One thing about this and I am sure this will get flamed.. the excuse of not knowing the music or track is a weak one..
Any good listener IMO should be able to listen to unfamiliar stuff "if recorded well" and know if they like the system or not.... I enjoy it as it broadens my awareness and keeps my eyes open for new stuff to demo.. it's only when splitting hairs on the last 10% is when using familiar music is key..
-
I agree completely. BTW, HH, your designs are bad@ss. I envy and respect your skill, especially after building a couple of different speakers on my own. This stuff is HARD, and you make it look not just easy, but graceful.
-
I agree completely. BTW, HH, your designs are bad@ss. I envy and respect your skill, especially after building a couple of different speakers on my own. This stuff is HARD, and you make it look not just easy, but graceful.
Much appreciated my friend... and you'll get to see/hear mine at RMAF 2011 if your going :green:
-
Since it's only a 13 minute drive from my condo downtown, I'll DEFINITELY be going :thumb:
-
I wonder whether anyone tries the multi-sub method investigated by Welti, intended to minimize spatial variation. I realize time is short, but the rooms are the same year after year, right, so it wouldn't have to be done again the next time.
I haven't seen it, but it certainly may have been done. (and I have not been to RMAF, so I am talking about CES/THE Show rooms)
Wasn't Welti's paper about frequency response variations?
I think while it will to a degree "smooth" bass frequency response in the center (seated) sections of the room, It will not stop the collection in the corners and closer to the walls, which in popular rooms is SRO. And multisub locations out of the mains firing plane can affect timing issues.
One other element and the reason I may not have seen it commonly used, is that most rooms have a standard two channel stereo set up and less frequently use a sub or subs.
I know we have used them a few times, but no more than two locations for practical, aesthetic, and logistical (space/set up/wiring/powering) reasons.
Last year no subs, the year before that 4 subs, but they were stacked on each side of the room to create a DIPOLE bass.
I'd like to set up a Quadratic Push/Pull sub set up, but that would really take some doing.
-
So what I'm hearing is, next year at RMAF, Virtue should have no sign, other then "enter here" and we'll have little aisle lights to guide you to your chairs play some music in total darkness AND THEN turn the lights on to keep the "visual experience" to a minimum?? hehehe. Honestly though, Virtue gear is made to be seen....so we'd be turning the lights off and on a whole lot!
-
I wonder whether anyone tries the multi-sub method investigated by Welti, intended to minimize spatial variation. I realize time is short, but the rooms are the same year after year, right, so it wouldn't have to be done again the next time.
Duke of AudioKinesis does something similar with his SWARM setup. I would assume he has used it at shows too.
-
Doing the multiple subs can be a bit challenging in a 13x19 room along with equipment speakers, seating for 6, treatments, a table for literature, etc. Oveall it can work quite well, just a bit tough in smaller spaces at shows.
Bryan
-
So what I'm hearing is, next year at RMAF, Virtue should have no sign, other then "enter here" and we'll have little aisle lights to guide you to your chairs play some music in total darkness AND THEN turn the lights on to keep the "visual experience" to a minimum?? hehehe. Honestly though, Virtue gear is made to be seen....so we'd be turning the lights off and on a whole lot!
My take on it is that you should keep the lights on and the sound off. :)
I think that the people who get good sound at the shows are those who are good at setting the rooms up. The gear itself seems to be somewhat less important.
If I visit your room, I want to be able to see and touch the equipment. I also want to hear from you why your equipment is worth consideration, your design philosophy, etc. I also want some literature that I can take with me that's informative.
I suppose it's ok if you're playing some background music too, but it's just going to be pleasant noise and not something I'm going to listen to critically.
-
My take on it is that you should keep the lights on and the sound off. :)
I think that the people who get good sound at the shows are those who are good at setting the rooms up. The gear itself seems to be somewhat less important.
If I visit your room, I want to be able to see and touch the equipment. I also want to hear from you why your equipment is worth consideration, your design philosophy, etc. I also want some literature that I can take with me that's informative.
I suppose it's ok if you're playing some background music too, but it's just going to be pleasant noise and not something I'm going to listen to critically.
hmmm....isn't the point of going to the show to hear the "sound"? I'm confused lol. Turkey, did you visit our room by chance?
-
Much appreciated my friend... and you'll get to see/hear mine at RMAF 2011 if your going
Glad to hear you will be showing off your designs at the show next year! Do you know what you'll be bringing or are you thinking about a new design this year to debut at the show :wink:
If we don't meet prior to then, see ya next year in Denver.
-
hmmm....isn't the point of going to the show to hear the "sound"? I'm confused lol. Turkey, did you visit our room by chance?
No, I didn't go to RMAF.
I've found that what you hear at a show (or at a local dealer for that matter) has very little to do with what things will sound like in your own home.
So, trying to do critical listening at a show is not very useful and distracts from other things that can be done well in that type of environment.
-
Interesting stance, why is it then that you are ripping into people who attended the show and formulated an opinion based on what they heard? I find it odd that we are all taken in by "eye candy" and voodoo, yet you haven't taken the time to actually show up at RMAF to verify this rather unfounded point of view...
-
Turkey, that's why we offer a 30-day money back guarantee! It allows people like you to test our sound at your convenience in your home :wink:
-
Interesting stance, why is it then that you are ripping into people who attended the show and formulated an opinion based on what they heard? I find it odd that we are all taken in by "eye candy" and voodoo, yet you haven't taken the time to actually show up at RMAF to verify this rather unfounded point of view...
Why do I need to go to RMAF to verify anything? I've been to enough shows to know how they work.
The original post seemed to me to be about something that applies to audio shows in general, not just RMAF. (This was just a specific instance of a general phenomenon.)
-
I seriously doubt you spent any time observing the people there to see if they were "judging with their eyes" No way. That's the last thing people look for at these shows. You're asking questions, looking at gear, listening. When did you ever observe someone saying "ohhhh purdy! I'll take it!"?
-
I'll admit it was me the minute I saw Gary Dodd's electric blue battleship monoblocks and he said he would do them in Home Depot orange for me. I said Ooh I want those in my house. :icon_lol:
Mrs. Ninja
(Cuz they'd be pretty)
-
For me, the purpose of going to a show like that is to see (and hear) the stuff in person that I would never get to outside of that venue. Plus getting to meet the designers and owners and other audio enthusiasts is a great bonus.
Yes it is true, you can't honestly make a purchasing decision BASED on what you hear at a show like that, as there are many factors involved, but it would be a very boring show if you couldn't listen to anything...
Regarding the original topic, Neither my wife or I enjoyed the Tidal room (400 something I think). In fact it was quite disappointing. They even were kind enough to play one of my tracks and quite frankly it was boring. I actually liked the Aperion bookshelves more, which we had just visited prior to this room. Now I get home an read Stereophiles raving review of the room and it just makes me wonder what happened. It is interesting how different our experiences were.
Do I think Tidal is a bad speaker brand? No, but I certainly would need to listen to them in a different environment.
Honestly I think pretty much all the products at the show have the potential to be good, and that is how I approach each room visited at the show.
-
Frank mentioned that some people judge with their eyes not their ears. True, but I think a few shows back he had some models on display that had a gold 2 tone faceplate scheme that DID look pretty good. I wonder how much buzz and/or sales it generated?
-
I seriously doubt you spent any time observing the people there to see if they were "judging with their eyes" No way. That's the last thing people look for at these shows. You're asking questions, looking at gear, listening. When did you ever observe someone saying "ohhhh purdy! I'll take it!"?
You're purposely misunderstanding this, right? Because I don't think you're that dumb.
-
I seriously doubt you spent any time observing the people there to see if they were "judging with their eyes" No way. That's the last thing people look for at these shows.
I think you might be surprised how many people use 'their eyes' as well !
When did you ever observe someone saying "ohhhh purdy! I'll take it!"?
35 years ago..............I married her !