[martyo]

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. 

[Wind Chaser]

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. 

If only the supreme court would rule on these matters.

[intamin22]

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.

[TheChairGuy]

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 )

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

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 

John

[turkey]

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.)

[jtwrace]

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.   

[woodsyi]

This is your brain on music 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.    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.   

[catastrofe]

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.

[Pez]

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.

[ted_b]

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.

[Pez]

Lol ya, base your listening habits off of Woodsyi! His perception of good sound goes up exponentially with the amount of alcohol consumption.  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.

[jtwrace]

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. 

[Pez]

I wouldn't know, I avoid Wilson audio like the plague.  they should stick to making tennis balls and leather jackets. 

[Big Red Machine]

..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.

[Pez]

Agreed, wow! Big red and I agree! 

[TomS]

...
Now the Vandersteen room made me forget about ol' Jim-what's-his-name.

... but then you'd have to deal with ol' Richard-what's-his-name 

[turkey]

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.

[TONEPUB]

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.

[saisunil]

Excellent post and good overall discussion ... all points very nicely made ...
 
Cheers

[werd]

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.