I think you are right. The most important thing is your source. I had a $30 set of Logitech 2.1 speakers. Component selection included Cheng electrolytic capacitors, ceramic disc (de)coupling caps, unidentifiable chips, cloth surround drivers (paper cone), and tiny wire....
Overall impression of the sound quality was...it sucked?...no....infact it sounds very good. Everything is crisp, and good overall coverage of all of the frequencies...
My audiophilistic mindest kicked it when I opened it up one day, saw the components, and determined that the sound quality was now all of the sudden not good enough for my ears.
However, the most important thing is probably your own version of the source, whether it is a CD, or an mp3, or a vinyl. If you are playing a 96kbps mp3, that is your first problem.
The next problem is how it was recorded, and if it was done right. And how as it mastered? Did they pump up the "loudness" level too much? Take Metallica's Death Magnetic for instance. It's one of the worst mastered albums I've ever heard....It's not your audio system's fault it can't deal with the terrible distortion.
I do believe in good quality of components, but most of the time this fact is based on prolonging the longevity of your audio system. Why build a hi-fi system just to have it die a few years down the line? Use some good quality components, but don't go buying that snake oil garbage. In fact, the standard good quality components are many times BETTER than the snake oil, because snake oil companies can use a lower quality item and market it under some silly branding for major profit.
I use Panasonic, Nichicon, United-Chemicon electrolytics, Wima/Panasonic film, Xicon/Vishay-Dale resistors, Kemet ceramic capacitors, NKK switches, Neutrik connectors, Bourns potentiomers.
All of this stuff is just standard high quality industrial grade stuff. Nothing out of the ordinary, and it doesn't need to be. Don't tell me you really hear a difference between swapping out an RCA connector. If you really can, good for you, but for 99% of us, save your money and headaches.
~Just my ideas. Feel free to comment, critique, or screw me over at any time.
Dick Burwen has implemented the Palette in software, 2 versions the Audio Splendor and the Bobcat under $500.
burwenaudio.com HOME
burwenaudio.com HOME
I totally agree with you about most standard parts being perfectly good. Connectors can have issues. When you put dissimilar metals together, you form a tiny amount of diode effect. A voltage exists between them. I don't know if this is likely significant in the real world. Then there's oxidation. Gold is the only metal that doesn't oxidize with any chemicals or air that it's likely to be in contact with. Virtually all other metals will, and there can be what's called molecular migration over time that can turn a connection into a distortion mechanism. I've found this to be especially true with line level relays that aren't sealed. There are a few places where it's good to be picky. When someone tries some $1000 interconnect cables, and actually believes that they sound better, in my opinion it's more likely that a connector had gotten corrupted with some variation of molecular migration/oxidation over time, and plugging in the new cable re-established more cleanly this connection. Are Bournes pots better than Alpha's? Have you tried PEC pots (military)?
Anyone using tone controls or eq have a bad audio system......
Define your boundaries of goodness, please.
How good is this one? It shows in-wall line arrays and concrete woofers in my living room.
Define your boundaries of goodness, please.
How good is this one? It shows in-wall line arrays and concrete woofers in my living room.
LOOKS NICE WHAT KINDA SPEAKERS U USE BRAND OR DIY
For midrange I use some no-name Chinese 4" drivers with polypropylene cones; 8 per side. For highs I use 1" high flat cone Fostex speakers made for Dell notebooks, 16 per side; for lows below 80 Hz I use Alpine 12" drivers in concrete boxes, plus concrete horn under floor for effects (below 40 Hz).
I like pretty much Audissey by Denon. Even though my speakers are quite flat, it makes them sound much better. But I can't use both Audissey and my tube amps all togeher (well, SS amps no low frequencies, trube amps on mid-highs). I am going to add line outs to Denon receiver later.
Yes i know ... and i disagreed with levinson then 2 .....
I had a chance to hear the Palette and what it could do for poor recordings. We will have to agree to disagree.
For those interested in a review of a good tone control a review of the Palette from 1992.
Cello Palette Preamplifier | Stereophile.com
Yeah I wouldn't go for the super super cheap connectors, just for the sake of...well...being overly cheap. I use gold plated connectors, but that's about it. Again, I use gold because it prolongs the life of your amp/audio setup. Gold does not tarnish as you have said.
But there's no point in buying those Neutrik NextGen plugs or those type of plugs which are going for $50-100/connector. Yikes. Save your money and put it to where it counts...or put it on something other than diy audio, like that leaking faucet in the kitchen (hey, ever thought of that?)
Bourns is a respectable name for potentiometers, precision resistors, and some switches. They're nothing fancy. Most of the time they are cheap, and excellent quality. I've only had experience with the super cheap Alpha pots, so I can't really compare. PEC: I might have used them, but I can't really remember.
The only brands I really recall actually buying are Bourns and ALPS.
Hi,
It may be time for a serious "High End Tone Controls" Threads.
Studying 1970's & 1980's Japanese Amp's and Preamp's reveals many solutions to the "tone problem" that can be implemented in quite high end ways without appreciable compromise. This includes completely passive solutions.
Ciao T
It may be time for a serious "High End Tone Controls" Threads.
Studying 1970's & 1980's Japanese Amp's and Preamp's reveals many solutions to the "tone problem" that can be implemented in quite high end ways without appreciable compromise. This includes completely passive solutions.
Ciao T
Hi,
Well, first, EQ's by their nature are minimum phase systems, if you change the response, phase must change.
Second, many, many years ago I owned an Equaliser (eastern block made) that contained 3 NPN Transistors per channel and used LCR Filters for the EQ. It was 10-Band. And it was VERY transparent and low noise.
One could use a similar system with a single tube, no feedback etc. to make an "ultra-fi" variant of the Cello Palette. I did consider this before, so far time has not allowed it.
Well, if you needed that huge amount, then you did it wrong... ;-)
Ciao T
Well, first, EQ's by their nature are minimum phase systems, if you change the response, phase must change.
Second, many, many years ago I owned an Equaliser (eastern block made) that contained 3 NPN Transistors per channel and used LCR Filters for the EQ. It was 10-Band. And it was VERY transparent and low noise.
One could use a similar system with a single tube, no feedback etc. to make an "ultra-fi" variant of the Cello Palette. I did consider this before, so far time has not allowed it.
Well, if you needed that huge amount, then you did it wrong... ;-)
Ciao T
Missing the point was not enuff, now misquoting .....
I didn't miss quote. Your posted lacked the proper definition of HiFi. Im just once again correcting you.
You definitely lack an understanding about audio science and how sound interacts with any room and how each individual has to accomodate for slight changes because of their own sound processing requirements. If you have been doing this for "many moons" maybe you just are not very good at create a proper response in room.
If you can measure your room, post the results on here proving that you have accuracy without proper room correction then your anecdotal opinion will actually matter until then you are just another audiophile that believes in too many myths. Myths that will never help those who want to understand audio science better.
Honestly, opinions like yours continues to enforce why 99.9% of the word thinks audiophile is kind of a nasty word.
Last edited:
I hear Penny&Giles are quite usable.
In fact I know some engineers who wouldn't touch a console fitted with anything else. Not cheap though…
How the content is created is not my concern so Im sure you are probably right but it has nothing to do with what needs to be done in our rooms.
My goal is to recreate that content as best I can with the resources available to me. Its just a just some people posting on this thread act like their system is HiFi but what would they say when their in room measurements show their systems to be not HiFi
hehe, yep...I posted above about what happens in a recording studio is 100% out of our hands. Our control starts after having the content so its pointless to discuss how that content is created. The content is created based on your skill set and your tools that has nothing to do with the end user though. The end user still requires their own processing to get it 100% accurate to them in their room with their ears.
Im not sure how I confuse you. For anyone to playback any recording accurately they need to control the respones in their room to not only correct what the room does to the response but also what their inaccurate ears/brain processing does to that response.
Those who stick speakers in a room and never measure to know the truth simply have full audiophile blinders on and live in a non-audio science world. Their opinion at that point helps no one else trying to design a truely better in room response.
Doug, maybe I'm missing the point as well, but I think where a.wayne is coming from (not wanting to put words into his mouth, just my interpretation) is that the engineers in the recording studio have already put eq in. What eq? My guess would be for the average listening room
So the question them becomes, does your perfectly eq'ed room which is near perfect with respect to the perfect tones that come out of the eqing software, actually give you an accurate result when you play back a recording rather than something designed to eq the room
Assuming that said recording may have been bumped to cater for typical deficiencies which *most* people will have in their listening environment?
Tony.
So the question them becomes, does your perfectly eq'ed room which is near perfect with respect to the perfect tones that come out of the eqing software, actually give you an accurate result when you play back a recording rather than something designed to eq the room
Assuming that said recording may have been bumped to cater for typical deficiencies which *most* people will have in their listening environment?
Tony.
I had a chance to hear the Palette and what it could do for poor recordings. We will have to agree to disagree.
For those interested in a review of a good tone control a review of the Palette from 1992.
Cello Palette Preamplifier | Stereophile.com
Ohh, i agree the palette works, disagree in what and why one would need such. If it's a bad recording , then it's a bad recording , why change it , makes putting on a good recording that much more enjoyable...
Personally poorly designed speakers is the big culprit IMO....
Yes you mis qouted me and again missed the point, now what ? personal insults ...
Doug, maybe I'm missing the point as well, but I think where a.wayne is coming from (not wanting to put words into his mouth, just my interpretation) is that the engineers in the recording studio have already put eq in. What eq? My guess would be for the average listening room
So the question them becomes, does your perfectly eq'ed room which is near perfect with respect to the perfect tones that come out of the eqing software, actually give you an accurate result when you play back a recording rather than something designed to eq the room
Assuming that said recording may have been bumped to cater for typical deficiencies which *most* people will have in their listening environment?
Tony.
We will disagree on engineers ability to EQ for rooms or people. They engineer content to sound good to them, how or why they would EQ it for the unknown lacks any sort of logic.
I have yet to see how a recording can even be EQ for any specific room or person. Do you have examples??
Last edited:
Yes you mis qouted me and again missed the point, now what ? personal insults ...
Typical tatic, you can not answer the questions so you start this defensive posting off topic.
Be a man and post your room response. You are the one saying you do not need EQing and EQ is bad. I want to see the science because your opinion without science is 100% meaningless.
If you do not have any science then its best for you to go back to the analog world, after all this is a digital forum
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.