Of course they know what they're doing, which is crafting very high performance individual components, parts of a whole, which then have to come together at some point as an ensemble. And this last step in my experience is where the "problems" start to arise. I have heard immensely ambitious systems sound appallingly bad, and extremely modest, low budget setups which were vastly superior in presenting the music messages.
All my experience has taught me it's all in that last step of combining and fine tuning of the group of components to work as a unified whole, that's the part that's critical. Which includes the interaction of the mains supply and any other sort of electrical activity in the listening environment, wired or wireless. Unless every aspect of electrical behaviour in the area, that can impact, is considered then the chances are that the end quality will be well down on what's possible. And this very importantly also means other types of second order effects: triboelectric, piezoelectric, etc.
Frank
I would find it hard to believe the microphone cost would deter a recording company.
EDIT - from their site, "All aspects of Ambiophonics are in the public domain and may be used without fees by any home user or manufacturer."
Last edited:
Apparently John and Nelson's systems do not meet your standards of setup and craft, since they sounded like excellent stereo systems (which they were), not like live music.
I obviously don't have any experience with what their systems sound like, certainly they would be of an extremely high standard, but my criteria is based very strongly how well the reproduced sound generates a soundscape in the room where the perceived quality, the texture matches that of live music. There are many extremely subjective tests for this, but I find one of the simplest to perform is to wind up the volume so that the measured SPLs would approximately equal the real thing in the environment, for a human orientated, relatively intimate musical performance. In other words, a string quartet playing, say, rather than synthesizer fantasy, or rock concert. Then, proceed to have an extended, involved conversation with someone next to you; if you can do this with complete comfort, no sense of irritation with the volume of the playback develops then you're in pretty good shape ...
Frank
Last edited:
Hey, I'm just talking about a simple test to use!If the music is interesting, an extended conversation is about the last thing on my mind.
Of course, in the time of Mozart and such a lot of "serious" music was written and performed purely as a mild diversion, an entertaining aside to the "important" conversations taking place at dinner tables and the like -- Divertimenti and the others ...
Frank
Fas42, SY apparently is the ONLY person who has heard a number of hi fi systems. He hasn't included Wavebourn's and I think that he should, in his evaluation.
Now, what did SY hear when he was here? Did he hear my best effort? No, I lost my 'best effort' when I had a firestorm 20 years ago. My present system, even though it uses a CTC Blowtorch and a Vendetta Phono stage, is completely compromised in every other way.
When SY came over to my apartment, a number of years ago, the main topic was NOT listening to hi fi, but showing SY my 'wire measurements'. I did not have the hi fi going, until SY asked to listen to it. I personally was concerned, because I had heard it when it sounded better, you know: different woofers, tweeters, amp, phono cartridge, etc. components I sorely miss. I do remember playing him something from a MARANTZ 10 tube tuner, dialed into a local jazz station, IN MONO! I ALWAYS USE MONO with tube tuners, it sounds better. So much for 'imaging'.
What used to 'knock me out' years ago, was visiting Dave Wilson at his home, when he lived here in the SF Bay Area. We used to make an evening of it, with my significant other, and Brian Cheney, of VMPS. We would just listen to selected records. It was wonderful! He also had 10 times or more higher investment, but he WAS using one of my preamps (a JC-80 at the time) with his WAMM loudspeakers. That was a different time, and my WATT-PUPPIES, a gift from Dave, about 25 years ago, was lost in the firestorm, and I never got a complete replacement, just the original WATT 1, used. Not quite the same thing.
I have not used my hi fi as a listening example for the last 20 years, since it is just TOO expensive to replace everything that I lost.
Now, what did SY hear when he was here? Did he hear my best effort? No, I lost my 'best effort' when I had a firestorm 20 years ago. My present system, even though it uses a CTC Blowtorch and a Vendetta Phono stage, is completely compromised in every other way.
When SY came over to my apartment, a number of years ago, the main topic was NOT listening to hi fi, but showing SY my 'wire measurements'. I did not have the hi fi going, until SY asked to listen to it. I personally was concerned, because I had heard it when it sounded better, you know: different woofers, tweeters, amp, phono cartridge, etc. components I sorely miss. I do remember playing him something from a MARANTZ 10 tube tuner, dialed into a local jazz station, IN MONO! I ALWAYS USE MONO with tube tuners, it sounds better. So much for 'imaging'.
What used to 'knock me out' years ago, was visiting Dave Wilson at his home, when he lived here in the SF Bay Area. We used to make an evening of it, with my significant other, and Brian Cheney, of VMPS. We would just listen to selected records. It was wonderful! He also had 10 times or more higher investment, but he WAS using one of my preamps (a JC-80 at the time) with his WAMM loudspeakers. That was a different time, and my WATT-PUPPIES, a gift from Dave, about 25 years ago, was lost in the firestorm, and I never got a complete replacement, just the original WATT 1, used. Not quite the same thing.
I have not used my hi fi as a listening example for the last 20 years, since it is just TOO expensive to replace everything that I lost.
I was not distressed, I was impressed how well you spotted crossover frequency between 24 speakers from police motorcycles and 3 piezo horns, per channel.
It was an experiment with 3-row line arrays prepared for bard-festival on open air. I used them for home concert then. I did not expect that cheap 48 speakers +6 piezo-horns to sound soo good, intended to test the concept only. Such frequency was chosen to minimize audibility of ringing of piezo horns.
Last edited:
Apparently, You arent aware that they cost $4000-$7000 each originally. back when that was serious money.
Unless, you wanted to sell only a handful to a few major studio's... For all other studios it was prohibitive. Yes, Scott its price was a deterant to most studios.... hard to believe or not.
Yes, you are right, Nelson. I was reluctant to play my hi fi for SY. It isn't bad sounding or anything, BUT I just don't have the sound quality that I used to have, before the firestorm. Then, I could invite comparisons. Having comparisons made by a third party today, of the systems of various hi end designers, caught like a random snapshot, depending on a number of things, is problematic.
The only really good home sound system from an audio designer that I know, that would be 'on call' for the most part, would be Dave Wilson's WAMM system. Even Dave has disappointed me (sonically) sometimes at CES and elsewhere, but when it is 'right' it is very, very right! My former, and very essential partner in designing and building the CTC Blowtorch, Bob Crump, has been dead for years, now. However, every CES for years, he put together a system that competed favorably with just about anything out there, using the CTC Blowtorch as the fundamental building block. He was the one who showed me that: 'engineering is good, but refinement is even more important'. He would select, build and break-in all the cables and electronics, before going to the CES, for example.
Even without my input, when showing with others, that happened before our partnership, the sound in his listening room had a superior quality, over many other demos. Now, I am scolded that this is all nonsense, and that we were just imagining that we heard anything exceptional. Oh well. '-)
The only really good home sound system from an audio designer that I know, that would be 'on call' for the most part, would be Dave Wilson's WAMM system. Even Dave has disappointed me (sonically) sometimes at CES and elsewhere, but when it is 'right' it is very, very right! My former, and very essential partner in designing and building the CTC Blowtorch, Bob Crump, has been dead for years, now. However, every CES for years, he put together a system that competed favorably with just about anything out there, using the CTC Blowtorch as the fundamental building block. He was the one who showed me that: 'engineering is good, but refinement is even more important'. He would select, build and break-in all the cables and electronics, before going to the CES, for example.
Even without my input, when showing with others, that happened before our partnership, the sound in his listening room had a superior quality, over many other demos. Now, I am scolded that this is all nonsense, and that we were just imagining that we heard anything exceptional. Oh well. '-)
John, I picked you and Nelson because you're both well known to the forum participants and I had a chance to listen to your systems using good source material. Over the decades, I've heard systems demoed at major manufacturers, tweako high end designers' homes, audio salons, audio shows, audiophile homes, the homes of reviewers for Stereophile, homes of the authors of classic books on hifi.... you just have to accept that after 45 years of playing with this stuff, I may have been exposed to a rather wide range of sound systems in "high end" environments.
Would you have me believe that every single one of them was improperly set up?
Would you have me believe that your system is too poor to show up the wonderful differences in broken in cables, magic quantum devices, resistor brands, and whatever that you claim you can hear?
Or is it more likely that a good stereo is a good stereo, and while they often differ, none of them sound anything like live music in a real acoustic space?
Would you have me believe that every single one of them was improperly set up?
Would you have me believe that your system is too poor to show up the wonderful differences in broken in cables, magic quantum devices, resistor brands, and whatever that you claim you can hear?
Or is it more likely that a good stereo is a good stereo, and while they often differ, none of them sound anything like live music in a real acoustic space?
Thanks. The coaxial version was a pita to solder, I had to use some "tricks" to accomplish it. Kevlar string was used to hold one side during soldering.
I'll take a look, the fluke one took forever to download. IEEE must be using dialup.
My three plate array design is actually pretty easy to build. Course, it gets easier with experience.
jn
If the majors don't endorse some standard we would end up with nothing but vanity recordings. I noticed they have a free ipod app.
I do know that to stay in business making it means you have to make a profit and sell a lot of them. It was more a business failure than a technical one. Now that we all have access to multi-channel recievrs in the home for Movies, they can be used for better audio. So, timing in the market place is another point they missed. Too, early.
You give the majors too much credit. they arent run by technology, that is for sure. I have owned a recording business in the bay area and I have been to small studios and I have put up $50K for an LP of very high quality to be made and I have been to probably the highest technology studio - G.Lucas's SkyWaker Ranch when recording. trust me, you give studio's too much credit.
BUT.... now is the time to start using and pushing for higher standards... if there ever was a time needed. The mic can be bought as a clone for under $1K, I found on the Internet.
because the consumer can only affect the playback equipment he buys, the source side is in sad shape and responsible for the continued HiFi sound (with near perfect playback electronics, no less). Having heard many masters and made some myself, I know the largest part of the problem (lifeless sound) is the front end - the recording side.
With some 1500 studio's in USA, the majors arent even needed much anymore to make music. Witness the explosion of DAW. There's a lot of places in the world to sell better recording systems to - if the price is right.
Thx for the opportunity to get on my soap box. -Dick
Last edited:
A couple years ago Dark Side of the Moon was released on SACD and it sold 800,000 copies. CD sales have gone down but SACD has gone up. Check wiki SACD. 120 db dynamic range, 50Khz bandwidth etc. Multichannel capable. I guess it isnt dead after all -- still alive for jazz and classical music fans who appreciate quality sound. Support it or forever have MP3 quality everywhere.
And thank the great cosmic muffen for High Definition master digital downloads !
And thank the great cosmic muffen for High Definition master digital downloads !
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.