[Diamond Dog]

I "am" an audiophile snob. I have discovered Bryston is a fine product. i actually listened to it. And approve. (Bravo, bravo..)
So congratulate me, "snob girl", for buying the best sounding amp and preamp/phono i could afford.
Byrston 4B-SST2 and BP-26 with the BP 1.5 phono

That doesn't make you an "audiophile snob", love - just someone who has discerning tastes and ended up buying some fine gear that enhances her enjoyment of music. Nothing wrong with that. Now if you were going to go around dumping on the folks who own and enjoy their, say, Arcam or NAD or Rotel gear, that would be a different story but to your credit, I`ve never seen you do that even when you are acting as defender of the faith. Stay classy, Elizabeth because you and some of the other frequent posters here serve as an example to us all. 

D.   

[budt]

   I would urge everyone not to even respond to the thread at AA . The worse thing you can do is respond ( imo). You may appear like a zealot and often incites further agitation .OR if you do respond just say I use bryston with  _ _ _ _ and it sounds very good etc. Otherwise it just gets into a slugfest...

[1ZIP]

"musical, musicality A personal judgment as to the degree to which reproduced sound resembles live music. Real musical sound is both accurate and euphonic, consonant and dissonant."  *

The important words there are..."A personal judgement"..

*http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/index.html

[Stu Pitt]

I have to say there is some gear out there that gets too carried away with 'hifi' attributes and somehow doesn't convey a musical message.  I can't explain it well, but I'll try - it sounds like it's trying to reproduce a bunch of sounds rather than music.  Sounds stupid and makes no sense from a scientific point of view.

There are several brands I feel this way about.  Musical Fatality (err Fidelity) and Krell come to mind.  I can't put my finger on it, but they just put me to sleep.

Then there's gear that's overly smoothed over, lush, warm, and laid back.  I don't like my music distorted to make it sound better.  Sounds good enough already.  Marantz immediately comes to mind here.

Bryston pulls off the trick of being insightful, detailed, and yet lets the music flow the way it's supposed to.  Can't define "lets the music flow," it's just something I hear.  Call it PRaT, call it whatever.

I bought Bryston for several reasons.  A major reason was that it gets out of the way better than anything else I've heard.  It's got the least sonic signature or "house sound" of anything I know of.

I've heard Bryston called just about everything - bright, warm, forward, laid back, grainy, liquid, and on and on.  The final result can be any or none of that.  What's truly going on is that it's getting out of the way and letting what's upstream and downstream sink or swim.  It exposes your source and speakers for what they are.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I've found that most people who criticize Bryston gear are actually describing what I've heard in the rest of their gear.

None of this is blind defense for a brand I own.  Everything has it's flaws, including Bryston.  And there's a ton of great gear out there that I'd love to play around with.  But when I hear it, I know I'd come back to Bryston's honesty.  I was contemplating selling off my c 

[Stu Pitt]

Damn iPhone...

I was contemplating selling off my components and getting a Naim Uniti as a one piece/simplified system.   I really like Naim and would most likely own their gear if I didn't have my Bryston stuff.  While it gets all of the important musical stuff right, it still imparts a bit more of it's own character than Bryston does.  Most notably the wall of sound 2D approach.  I know I'd eventually come back to my B60.

McIntosh makes some fantastic stuff too.  So does Manley.  So does...

There is no best, just our favorites. 

[Diamond Dog]

Don't sell your "c", Stu. Your keyboard won't be the same without it !
 
D.

[ricko01]

There are several brands I feel this way about.  Musical Fatality (err Fidelity) and Krell come to mind.  I can't put my finger on it, but they just put me to sleep.

The mention of Musical Fatality brings to mind another strong attribute about Bryston... the stable product lineup that slowly evolves over time.

This indicates:

1- That they engineered the product correctly the 1st time
2- They respect their customers by ensuring the customers investment is not degraded within 6 months

I never purchase gear from companies that:

1- completely or substantially change their product lineup on a regular basis (aka Musical Fatality)
2- release the 'SE' version or the MK II version of a product within a short time after the initial product release

(2) always suprises me when they state the typical types of "improvements":

(a) we changed some capacitors in the analogue section to improve resolution
(b) we add some additional damping around the cd drive/transformer/.... to improve resolution
(c) we made some changes to the power supply to improve resolution
(d) we made some changes to the circuit traces to improve resolution
(e) we changed the cable dielectric on the internal point to point wiring to improve resolution
(f) we changed the way we wound our output transformers to improve resolution

Surely all of this could have happened during initial product development rather than "discovering" these a few months later and hence the need to release the 'SE' version or the MK II version

At least Bryston doesnt play these mind games with customers.

peter

[Freo-1]

There's one "audiophile " term that I'm ready to call " Bullsh*t" on - musical. It's a hunk of pcb's, wire, copper, silicon, metal and solder. lt is not musical- how the hell can it be ?  A trumpet isn't musical until ( hopefully ) a musician blows into it. You know what's musical ? Music , that's what. A musician , that's what. When an audio salesman tries to flog his goods to me using that hackneyed cliche, he'd better be able to include a part of the demo where said goods can pick up a fiddle and play " Orange Blossom Special " or I'm walkin'...


D.

Good point.  That's why you have to take the subjective reviews of equipment with large grains of salt.  The technical measurements can often provide more insight into equipment performance than a sales pitch.   

[Elizabeth]

Ahhhh... Bryston did change the transformers in the 7B-SST2 as noted in the Fremer review.
So they do make changes on-the-fly when it seems like an improvement is possible. just a heads up from a Bryston fan,

[Diamond Dog]

"musical, musicality A personal judgment as to the degree to which reproduced sound resembles live music. Real musical sound is both accurate and euphonic, consonant and dissonant."  *
The important words there are..."A personal judgement"..
*http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/index.html

OK, but that's often not how that word is defined when it's applied to audio equipment - " musical" is code for warm eg: Mac (IMO) where "detailed " is always hung on Bryston as an example because it typically does not exhibit that "warm" presentation. Does this make the Bryston amp less "musical " by the Stereophile definition? So let's run with the Stereophile " audiophile-approved" definition. When you go to hear live music, does everything sound all warm and cushy or do cymbals sound like what they are - a piece of metal being hit with a stick ? Can you hear the nuances of the guitarist using different pick attack angles ( think Billy Gibbons tossing in those eye-melting chirps in " La Grange " and is that "peso coin on steel strings" sound there for you to experience in all it's nastiness or is it lost in the warm and wooshy that according to the "reviewer " quoted in an earlier post most audiophiles prefer because it allows them to relax? Not all music is meant to relax you - a lot of it is meant to excite and challenge and thrill you. Which " La Grange" do you want to hear - the one which makes you want to pull your sombrero down over your eyes and slide into a siesta or the one which makes you want to get up on the cantina table and holler with your cerveza held high in the air? Which gear better expresses the music in the way that it was intended to be heard ? Which is the most "musical"? So why is the gear which provides the more authentic experience not referred to as the " musical" one? I still call "bullsh*t . And that Stereophile definition which tries to suck and blow at the same time is as irrelevant to me as the publication itself is at this stage.

But that's just my opinion - and I could be wrong...


D.

[Elizabeth]

Excellent comment Diamond Dog.

[JBLMVBC]

 
Bottom line is: live music. How many "audiophiles" have stood close to a flute, a violin, a trumpet, un-amplified instruments such as a piano, a drum set, and a soprano voice? "High Fidelity" is supposed to be fidelity to reality, not to a hypothetical idea of soundstage depth and scintillating trebles, how cute and flattering they might sound. That's why they replaced it with "High End" a convenient way to make excuses for overpriced gear, often using the same ordinary stock drivers with disastrous efficiency that could not reproduce the dynamics of a single piccolo!
This question of efficiency has also led to a drastic change in recording quality, for instance in classical music. In the 80s/90s, finished the dynamic direct sound of Mercury Living Presence and best Decca engineers that made you feel right at the conductor spot (hence today’s revival of these in 45rpm re-editions). Instead ambient sound became all the rage (and commercials were all selling this idea) while 100 musicians orchestras disappeared into some noisy mass down there in some pit with little dynamics. This change coincided with the rise of B&W studio monitors in most studios and their 90dB/w/m modest (in)efficiency. Clearly these could not handle the precision and demand of symphonic music closely recorded, hence the distant, ethereal sounding stuff produced then and sold to our ears as the “new”, “improved” way of hearing live concerts… from the third balcony!
Transparency is what I want, virtually no personality electronic so when realistic sound levels are projected, one can be fooled that indeed the singer is here, on stage now, or that my room becomes Egrem studio where Buena Vista Social Club records as I listen. The rest is noise.
Finally, professional sound quality is much more affordable than most “high end” noise making furniture.

[Watson]

A lot of the Bryston bashers are probably basing their comments on older Bryston gear (pre-SST). Some of the older products were genuinely a little stereotypically solid state to my ears. But the newer gear is truly fantastic -- especially SST2. It's truly high end stuff.

[1ZIP]

OK, but that's often not how that word is defined when it's applied to audio equipment - " musical" is code for warm eg: Mac (IMO) where "detailed " is always hung on Bryston as an example because it typically does not exhibit that "warm" presentation. Does this make the Bryston amp less "musical " by the Stereophile definition? So let's run with the Stereophile " audiophile-approved" definition. When you go to hear live music, does everything sound all warm and cushy or do cymbals sound like what they are - a piece of metal being hit with a stick ? Can you hear the nuances of the guitarist using different pick attack angles ( think Billy Gibbons tossing in those eye-melting chirps in " La Grange " and is that "peso coin on steel strings" sound there for you to experience in all it's nastiness or is it lost in the warm and wooshy that according to the "reviewer " quoted in an earlier post most audiophiles prefer because it allows them to relax? Not all music is meant to relax you - a lot of it is meant to excite and challenge and thrill you. Which " La Grange" do you want to hear - the one which makes you want to pull your sombrero down over your eyes and slide into a siesta or the one which makes you want to get up on the cantina table and holler with your cerveza held high in the air? Which gear better expresses the music in the way that it was intended to be heard ? Which is the most "musical"? So why is the gear which provides the more authentic experience not referred to as the " musical" one? I still call "bullsh*t . And that Stereophile definition which tries to suck and blow at the same time is as irrelevant to me as the publication itself is at this stage.

But that's just my opinion - and I could be wrong...


D.

Who the hell is it that your arguing with?

[Diamond Dog]

Who the hell is it that your arguing with?

No one, actually. Thank you for your inquiry.

D.

[Elizabeth]

Sometimes a big rant is good for the soul 

[1ZIP]

....yet another couple of fun filled hours on AC.

[skunark]

I did feel it was odd for Stereophile not to stop by Bryston's room for there CES coverage this year, perhaps there are some hard feelings on their side or perhaps they have a review coming out soon, or I just missed it.

It's probably never a good time to pull advertising with a magazine that reviews your products, especially when they probably reach the largest target audience of any print magazine for audiophiles.  On the flip side what are the ethical boundaries for a print magazine collecting ad revenue or gifts from the manufacturers?    Should the entity purchase the products they review or allow the manufactures send a "demo' unit for their scrutiny even if that demo unit was hand picked.  Also how will JAs comments in that thread be perceived by other manufacturers?

As a consumer, I would rather see a manufacture fully fund their website with accurate product descriptions and dealer locators than advertising for print magazine.  I would also prefer that manufactures require their dealers to carry every product for a given line.    Locally I have some dealers that focus on integrated amps, others that just focus on tube separate and home theater products and it's really frustrating to not be able to audition. 

[Stu Pitt]

Skunark,

I agree with the principal that dealers should carry the entire line, but I also think dealers should be able to carry what they want too.  At the end of the day, it's a business decision the owner needs to make.  Every Ford dealer doesn't carry the Ford GT.  Every Dodge dealer doesnt have a Viper on the lot   That's for a reason.

If I owned a shop, I'd carry what I felt made the most sense for me go carry, from a business standpoint.  Not every dealer can afford to have 28B SSTs on the floor.  A classic example of this is my local Linn guy.  He had a customer asking about the top of the line Linn LP12, which was about $30k.  If he bought one as a demo piece, he'd have to sell 2 just to break even, not counting overhead or space it takes up that he could put something that sells a lot of.  People don't buy $30k TT setups everyday.

Luckily for him, the guy bought 3.  Must be nice.   Had the guy not liked it and bought one for his home, one for his vacation home, and one for his son, the dealer would have been out over $20k.  Not exactly good in this economy for a little guy trying to survive.  He's got more important things to do then buy that TT and get stuck with it.  I'm sure he'd rather put that $20k into his 2 kids' college tuition.

[BobRex]

Bottom line is: live music. How many "audiophiles" have stood close to a flute, a violin, a trumpet, un-amplified instruments such as a piano, a drum set, and a soprano voice? "High Fidelity" is supposed to be fidelity to reality, not to a hypothetical idea of soundstage depth and scintillating trebles, how cute and flattering they might sound. That's why they replaced it with "High End" a convenient way to make excuses for overpriced gear, often using the same ordinary stock drivers with disastrous efficiency that could not reproduce the dynamics of a single piccolo!
This question of efficiency has also led to a drastic change in recording quality, for instance in classical music. In the 80s/90s, finished the dynamic direct sound of Mercury Living Presence and best Decca engineers that made you feel right at the conductor spot (hence today’s revival of these in 45rpm re-editions). Instead ambient sound became all the rage (and commercials were all selling this idea) while 100 musicians orchestras disappeared into some noisy mass down there in some pit with little dynamics. This change coincided with the rise of B&W studio monitors in most studios and their 90dB/w/m modest (in)efficiency. Clearly these could not handle the precision and demand of symphonic music closely recorded, hence the distant, ethereal sounding stuff produced then and sold to our ears as the “new”, “improved” way of hearing live concerts… from the third balcony!
Transparency is what I want, virtually no personality electronic so when realistic sound levels are projected, one can be fooled that indeed the singer is here, on stage now, or that my room becomes Egrem studio where Buena Vista Social Club records as I listen. The rest is noise.
Finally, professional sound quality is much more affordable than most “high end” noise making furniture.

You kinda have the right idea, but your time frame is really off.  The Mercurys and Deccas (as well as EMIs and RCAs) that you refer to were recorded during the late 50's and 60's.  Yes, they were monitored through efficient speakers (Tannoys in Europe, I'm not sure what was used here in the states (JBL?, Altec?)), but they were also recorded with simple techniques and (wait for it....) TUBEs!!!  Tube mics (Neuman, Telefunken,...), Tube recorders, and tube consoles.  It wasn't until solid state hit in the late 60's and early 70's that less dynamic speakers came into vogue (well before B&W) (as well as multi-miking), and that recording quality started the slide into hell and damnation.  It took a number of years before record companies were finally able to truly get quality recording out of this "newer technology".  Ironically, it took companies like Telarc to pave the way.

Now what this has to do with Bryston, I dunno.....