[Affordable$$Audio]

Hi Everyone:
The March Issue is now available for download.  This month you'll find a terrific piece demonstrating the sonic degradation that happens with the abusive use of Dynamic Compression.  Reviews of the Emotiva 5 channel amp, AudioMagic cables, Promitheus DAC, and a look back at the Carver C-9 Hologram Generator.  Plus 2 DIY articles.
Thanks for reading!
www.affordableaudio.org

[Zero]

You know, here we've covered a number of Promitheus components, yet they've still managed to allude my ears..   

[nlange20]

Is $2,400 becoming more and more "affordable", now-a-days? Is there a reason you reviewed $2,400 cables? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of your publication? I guess not.. 

[saisunil]

Nice reviews - especially the Emotiva amp and Promitheus DAC.

Thanks

[Mister Pig]

Is $2,400 becoming more and more "affordable", now-a-days? Is there a reason you reviewed $2,400 cables? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of your publication? I guess not.. 

Guess I should take a stab at answering this post, since it is my review that is in question.

Some people define affordable as entry level, or cheap. I have a different definition of the word. I think affordable means that a component offers a high level of performance for the amount of money being spent. While price is certainly part of the equation, it is not the overriding trait in determining what is affordable.

Let me lay out a scenario. Say a person buys one entry level component after another. After a year or two, it gets sold to chase down the next "giant killer" that has been introduced. The audio kitty gets smaller due to depreciation, and cash needs to be infused into the audio coffers. Wouldn't it be better to save a bit longer, and buy a component that resides in the next tier or two?

I believe there are "affordable" high-end components. This niche is populated by gear that is capable of high resolution playback, yet still can be bought by the average person. $50K amps are not within the financial reach of a regular person, but a $5K one is. The cables in question are not inexpensive, but they can be bought by many audio enthusiasts. Also, these cables perform at a level that is not equaled by entry level or mid-tier wire. Are they for everyone? No. But they should interest the audio person who is taking that next step up the audio ladder.

 I understand that not everyone will agree with my position regarding the definition of affordable. But hey, that's what makes this hobby so appealing to a wide base of people. No single audio camp has a lock on good sound. There are many pathways to audio nirvana. Tubes, planers, vintage gear, horns, all these components have a system configuration that will highlight their strengths.

So I will keep writing about what I consider to be affordable components. In spite of their price.

Regards
John Hoffman
Affordable Audio

[Zero]

More and more enthusiasts are becoming hipped to our publication - in short, we are increasing in popularity! We have begun to adopt to our ever growing and diverse audience.  Although you will begin to see higher priced items featured more often in future articles, this will in no way divert our attention away from covering gear for those on a shoe-string budget. You will still see articles that cover equipment that even a (working) college kid and afford. Only now, it will share space with more traditional, yet still reasonably priced hi-fi.

[nlange20]

Zero, would you mind making a poll to see how many AA readers actually own, or would consider purchasing $2,500 cables?

[markC]

Zero, would you mind making a poll to see how many AA readers actually own, or would consider purchasing $2,500 cables?

How about AC members. I'll bet it's less than 25%.

[nlange20]

It doesn't matter..  I bet it's even lower than that..

Maybe 10% or so. Which is a small niche inside an already small niche.

[BradJudy]

Although you will begin to see higher priced items featured more often in future articles, this will in no way divert our attention away from covering gear for those on a shoe-string budget.

These statements conflict.  Having more articles on higher priced gears means, by definition, there will be attention diverted away from the affordable items.  Even if the number of articles on affordable gear stayed the same and the publication just gets larger, it changes the content of the publication. 

[maxwalrath]

Zero, would you mind making a poll to see how many AA readers actually own, or would consider purchasing $2,500 cables?

How about AC members. I'll bet it's less than 25%.

I would guess it's closer to 5%. 

[Zero]

Nlang20,

No thanks. I'm flat out too lazy to poll 5 or so forums.    On that note, I think most would agree that a $2400 set of cables is far from being inexpensive. Hell, you can buy a pretty decent new amp / pre amp /  speakers for that kinda coin. However, there is no denying that plenty of people have been and continue to support that sect of hi-fi. While the percentage of readers that play in that territory may be ultra small, it is nonetheless very important to establish a reference point. It would make no sense to sit atop a soap box and wax idiotic about the value of a product if you've never personally experienced anything beyond its class. Sure its expensive. Sure it presses the boundaries of what is considered 'affordable'. However, at the end of the day, these sort of reviews help to keep the balance. Provided that coverage on such exotica will not materialize into a common theme - I see absolutely zero problem with it.

BradJudy,

Change can be a good thing. In this case, it is a very good thing. There will no shortage of articles that cover components that our 'frugal' enthusiasts enjoy. Things will be as they've always been in that regard. A few vintage pieces here and there, mixed in with a lot of sub $1500 component reviews. The only difference now is that you are going to start seeing a few more reviews on products that occupy the $2000 and above category. This market segment is incredibly important, and there has already been an incredibly positive response to the components we have reviewed in that range. It's a good place to be in! As for a diversion of attention;

We couldn't cover the spread without manpower. Affordable Audio has recently brought on a few new passionate and talented writers! We are excited to welcome these new guys to the family! In fact, we are still looking for a few more passionate and talented individuals to join the staff. The bulk of these guys will be focusing on the inexpensive side of things. To my knowledge, theres going to be only two of us that will cover the occasional higher end piece; myself and John. There's a lot of exciting things to come, and right now, we are only in the brainstorming stages. Fun stuff !
 

[JLM]

I for one, am not interested in $2000+ cables, so I didn't read the article.  Hopefully it was put in some sort of contest of affordability, such as comparing it to the writer's favorite $500 cables.  Without framing the review in this way, it belongs in "Absolute Sound" not "Affordable Audio".  As the poster above stated, I hope you don't lose your way.

IMO most audiophiles (even reviewers, no personal digs intended) don't have the proper listening environment to justify $2000+ cables or other comparably priced components.  Anyway, at these prices its more about personal taste and equipment synergy than anything else.  Which makes applying the review of uber expensive components very difficult as I'll probably never match the reviewer's room, taste, or the rest of his equipment.  Frankly my designed/dedicated listening room should surpass anything I've read of being used in a professional review.

Come on, it is pure rationalization to state that spending $2000+ on cables saves you from multiple purchases of less expensive cables.  After all, a large portion of the hobby aspect of audio is in the hunt for the next piece.  In fact one of the attractions to "Affordable Audio" for me is the focus away from the spending/hunting aspects of audio and back to enjoying the music.  Another is the approachability that simple/affordable/good sounding equipment offers to the newbie.

[Affordable$$Audio]

As Publisher, it is time for me to clear the air:

"Affordable$$Audio" is still our mantra and our main focus.  I'm a frugal SOB, and it kills me to spend $15 on a haircut, especially at a time when my head follicles (except ears) are in full retreat!  Yes, I have allowed and will continue to let both John and Sean push the envelope a bit as a recognition that on occasion one of us "average joes" gets lucky and has a chance to move up the audio chain.   However, 85% of our reviews will stay below $1500 and a vast majority will hang under $1K.  This is our target area and loyal following.  That is opposite of Stereophile and TAS.  I have reviews coming up over the next several months that easily fit into our zone.  Not to mention how much fun I had with the vintage Carver C-9, so I'm on the hunt for other quality vintage gear to review.

Time to get back to the music.
Mark

[Mister Pig]

It appears to me that one of the traditional audio prejudices is rearing its head in this thread. Cables aren't a component, they are an accessory. There have been several DAC and speaker reviews that landed just north or south of the 2K price point. Nobody has an issue with them, a 2K DAC is a viable purchase. After all its a component.

Yet you take all that signal that's been painstakingly manipulated, and run it through a set of wires that sell for $300, or less. Runs of 4 feet, 8 feet or longer. Magically everything is OK while the signal is in transit? Figure out how far a signal has to travel through the systems cables, a meter for each pair of interconnects, then 8 feet for speaker wire. There is a large opportunity for signal loss in these stages.

Why bother buying high end electronics that fall into the affordable category if you are going to be  a miser with your cable budget? Sure the wire referenced in the review is expensive, but it is a foundational piece for a high quality system. Unless you spend some time with high quality cabling in your system, you really wont know what it is capable of. From my perspective, cables are as important as any other component within a system.

Regards
John Hoffman
Affordable Audio
Affordable Audio.

[jimdgoulding]

What is the cables job?  To supply information without loss?  Some years ago I read a shoot out featuring 10 or so interconnects.  The fellow writing the article, Mr. James Hayward was the head of Bell Canada engineering and operations and was said to be a long time audiophile.  It's quite a detailed article wherein he discusses a lot of theory and answers a lot of questions.  He didn't name a winner but put a lot of emphasis on low capacitance and resistance.  The Kimber PBJ, the least expensive cable in the survey, had the lowest.  The article also contained info about RCA'a and contact metals, the significance of rise time and inductance, and more.  Some more expensive interconnects didn't fare well in this study.  I do remember him saying that if your preamp has balanced circuits use balanced interconnects to avoid noise and hum because of the potential of different grounds.  Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.

One problem as I see it for audiophile publications is that they have to have new things to talk about and manufacturers have to stay in the foreground to get talked about.  It's marriage for them and a challenge for us to sort it out.

[BradJudy]

Yet you take all that signal that's been painstakingly manipulated, and run it through a set of wires that sell for $300, or less. ..... There is a large opportunity for signal loss in these stages.

Actually, this is the traditional audio bias: associating dollars to better signal transmission. 

[nlange20]

Yet you take all that signal that's been painstakingly manipulated, and run it through a set of wires that sell for $300, or less. ..... There is a large opportunity for signal loss in these stages.

Actually, this is the traditional audio bias: associating dollars to better signal transmission. 

Bingo.

As Publisher, it is time for me to clear the air:

"Affordable$$Audio" is still our mantra and our main focus. Yes, I have allowed and will continue to let both John and Sean push the envelope a bit as a recognition that on occasion one of us "average joes" gets lucky and has a chance to move up the audio chain.   

Mark

Mark, I am not only speaking for myself, but for other "budget"-'philes' out there.. I believe if you continue to allow publishers to push the envelope on "higher"-end products (cables, components, speakers, whatever) you might as well throw a few more $ in between the AA. You truly have a gold mine here, by being one of the few (only one I know) audio publications that actually reviews products that can be purchased by the "average" person..

Even if the average joe DOES get lucky for a huge promotion, wins the lottery, or even a scratch-off, why would he want to look in an AA magazine, when afterall you're supposed to be covering 'affordable' audio pieces (cables, components, speakers etc.), not high-priced audio pieces. That's what those other publications are for. There would be nothing wrong and starting up a second magazine to review "pricier" components, but I truly believe they don't belong in the "affordable" section of your magazine.




Just my $.02




-Nick 

[Mister Pig]

Yet you take all that signal that's been painstakingly manipulated, and run it through a set of wires that sell for $300, or less. ..... There is a large opportunity for signal loss in these stages.

Actually, this is the traditional audio bias: associating dollars to better signal transmission. 

Blindly equating high price with increased performance is a fallacy. That's agreed. On the other hand, dismissing a product based on its cost(high or low) is just as narrow minded. Do you have the personal experience to validate your position? Here is something to keep in mind. In the brick and mortar days of audio stores, the staff would use the best cables available to demo their gear if the customer let them. Why? Cause they performed better. These people made their living selling audio gear, they knew what was going on. How do I know? worked part time as a salesperson in an audio store during my college years. It was a great job, and I had all kinds of fun.

In my time writing for Affordable audio I have covered $500 DAC's, $600 speakers, $300 computer based music servers, $150 a pair full range drivers, and $140 a set speaker cables. I would feel that my writing has been heavily biased to the offerings that offer a high ratio of cost vs performance.

Heck my personal system contains a JVC XL-Z1050TN CD player that I use as a transport from time to time. Matter of fact, I recently found a new home for the Electra-Print 300DRD amplifiers that I have used for several years. They were replaced by a Jeff Rowland Design Group Model 5 amplifier. So I am not biased towards expensive or the latest audio offering. I own what I feel offers the best sound for what I can afford.

On the other hand, what kind of authenticity would you subscribe to a review of a high end piece of electronics, or even a mid tier piece if the writers personal system consisted of entry level gear. Just how broad is their perspective, and how can they make a valid comparison? My goal in writing for Affordable Audio is to find those gems that can create a believable illusion of music. Sometimes a piece is inexpensive, sometimes not.

Regards
John Hoffman
Affordable Audio

[BradJudy]

Yet you take all that signal that's been painstakingly manipulated, and run it through a set of wires that sell for $300, or less. ..... There is a large opportunity for signal loss in these stages.

Actually, this is the traditional audio bias: associating dollars to better signal transmission. 

Blindly equating high price with increased performance is a fallacy. That's agreed. On the other hand, dismissing a product based on its cost(high or low) is just as narrow minded. Do you have the personal experience to validate your position? 

I never stated that position, so I don't have to validate it.  Perhaps you meant that note for someone else?  You agreed to the only point I was making.