How is that new test equipment working out for ya? I haven't seen any measurements posted other than that ONE that showed us how bad tantalum caps are, which by the way we all knew 30 years ago. Oops, now there I go mentioning what happened 30 years ago like you do.
So how about reading the instruction manual and make some relevant measurements instead of ranting online?
Using that new equipment as a door stop seems a waste of money or do you just like to look at it and pretend it's going to good use?
When my group of friends all went in together to buy first generation Led tv's at a discount, I picked a plasma 50", for about a third of each of their costs.
Their power supplies have all packed in now, my plasma is still working fine.
For tv programming I use the default setting.
For movies, the colour gets turned down to about 40%, the warm setting is engaged, sharpness turned down, with a medium dynamic contrast.
The 24 fps makes a worthwhile synch on most movies.
Strangely, a dc blocker on the power feed made a slight improvement too
Tweaked a bit , I like a plasma picture better than anything else at this time.
Cannot see inking down for 3D, or the 4K anytime soon.
But then, I can remember a 21" tv seeming huge!
Step right up folks, seems that Stephen Mejias, former Stereophile "reviewer" has now joined AudioQuest
"Stephen described the demonstrations taking place in the AudioQuest suite: comparisons between two Apple TV video/music streamers, one using generic HDMI and AC cabling, the other connected with AQ's Cinnamon HDMI ($85 for 1.5m) and NRG 1.5 AC ($169 for 1.5m)"
http://www.stereophile.com/content/munich-high-end-2014-day-1#comments-link
Yep we all know how horrible generic HDMI and AC cabling works
"Stephen described the demonstrations taking place in the AudioQuest suite: comparisons between two Apple TV video/music streamers, one using generic HDMI and AC cabling, the other connected with AQ's Cinnamon HDMI ($85 for 1.5m) and NRG 1.5 AC ($169 for 1.5m)"
http://www.stereophile.com/content/munich-high-end-2014-day-1#comments-link
Yep we all know how horrible generic HDMI and AC cabling works
If you're able to get into the service area, and are prepared to fiddle with the finer settings then you can hit a "magic" setting - which of course is just the right settings - where the picture is always 'right'. Took me a while - almost there, a touch less green, a tiny bit more red contrast, that sort of thing - but the picture subjectively always feels right, it loses any overtones of coming across as artificial in the presentation.
Just like John's exploring, I have found physical imperfections in a system overall, all the tiny non-linearities in various places add up to generate that typical, oh so familiar, 'hifi' sound - the instant giveaway that the sound is "fake" - and only by knocking over each one of them, one after the other, does the sound lift itself above the normal sense of grunge attending the playback - and becomes convincing ...
How is that new test equipment working out for ya? I haven't seen any measurements posted other than that ONE that showed us how bad tantalum caps are, which by the way we all knew 30 years ago. Oops, now there I go mentioning what happened 30 years ago like you do.
So how about reading the instruction manual and make some relevant measurements instead of ranting online?
First he would have to argue that his ST 1700 was somehow far superior to Bruno's System Two and explain why the System Two was incapable of showing the distortion products found in his measurements in spite of the System Two being able to see more than 20dB lower than than the ST 1700.
I remember Charles Hansen coming to John's defense, saying he doubted Bruno's System Two was capable of doing the same measurement that John was doing. And by that he simply meant notching out the 1kHz fundamental of the test tone before doing the distortion spectra.
He doubted Bruno's System Two was capable of this because he said the System One that he'd owned for ten years certainly wasn't capable of it. I spent a few minutes perusing the System One's manual and found that it could do it as well.
*sigh*
se
The knee jerk defense of your posse is a telltale sign, my ST 1700 has decayed into uselessness just sitting on the shelf for 20yr. Comparing the ST1700 to and AP is rather dubious, in their raw states that is. You could passive LC filter an ST1700's oscillator and use a passive notch and equal an AP (one frequency at a time).
Last edited:
Bought a st1770a off ebay 2 years ago thanks to some friend , recaping it,and some power supply work the number look good to me and it stable. Using it takes a lot of time compared to automated ones. one tone at a time.
You can have your TV set up professionally, best way, again using eyes cant be trusted, same as setting up a monitor for photography, use a colour munki.
Or buy a setup DVD.
No you believe you perceive some physical imperfections, they only gain substance with proof, measurements and a science based explanation.
Enough to know that Bybee's make no audible difference, and are therefore a scam.
I have the Kane DVD, which got to a certain point, but it still wasn't optimum. Eyes can be trusted, if they have a point of immediate comparison - we have a very pleasant bush outlook, so when, say, a news report comes on with a similar viewpoint you flick your eyes outside and then back to the TV, adjust a touch closer to ideal.
But probably the best is the human face, we have a strong disposition to picking when that's wrong - and so many TVs have red, orange, yellow faces - just slightly out and the person looks as if they have makeup caked on
- Status
- Not open for further replies.