Well , out of $60k dealer gets $24k just for putting it on the shelf and playing a smart-***.
To make the whole project profitable on miniscule scale of perspective sales , ratio cost to final price should be probably 1:10 . So let's say the whole cost of that should be $3600 to make the whole endeavor making any sense. . Now , any of you offer me a product with finish comparable to this one for that price and I will buy it on the spot.
To make the whole project profitable on miniscule scale of perspective sales , ratio cost to final price should be probably 1:10 . So let's say the whole cost of that should be $3600 to make the whole endeavor making any sense. . Now , any of you offer me a product with finish comparable to this one for that price and I will buy it on the spot.
The mentioned "miniscule sale" and resulting price, or even the rarity of a given product is often wildly priced, we all pretty much know that.
Like paintings or sculptures of Original Art, the "inflated" values are up in the "rediculous" levels.
This then is basically the "toys" adored mainly by the Elites.
Like huge diamonds around a countess's neck at some fancy dinner party.
The Unwashed Masses, like us, take these things as slaps in the face of course.
Jealousy?
A form of Condecending towards the peasents?
Or just decadence and envy within the snotty upscale crowds, with a healthy helping of eccentric thrown in.
Form your own opinion.
Like paintings or sculptures of Original Art, the "inflated" values are up in the "rediculous" levels.
This then is basically the "toys" adored mainly by the Elites.
Like huge diamonds around a countess's neck at some fancy dinner party.
The Unwashed Masses, like us, take these things as slaps in the face of course.
Jealousy?
A form of Condecending towards the peasents?
Or just decadence and envy within the snotty upscale crowds, with a healthy helping of eccentric thrown in.
Form your own opinion.
My meaning was that the EQ circuitry exists at all. 'Clean' signal path and all that which audiophools love!
Not having met any audiophools puts me in a disadvantage here. Could you provide some links/quotes to make your point clearer?
In reality (something lacking in much of the audiophool world) what you're discussing is actally self-contradicting.
Meaning that they want sonic "perfection" in audio reproduction equipment, yet, it simply can't happen unless some form of "correction" is imposed along the way.
With records, it's absolutely mandatory to 'equalize' or rather 'un-do' what has been recorded onto the disks (with RIAA eq) in order to hear the sounds as closely as the original performance would sound.
Fast Eddie D described that simply in post #76.
And in some cases, the required RIAA circuitry is extremely complex, over-done beyond what is required for satisfactory listening by human hearing.
The signal is tossed and turned through sometimes hundreds of transistors before it gets emitted from the imperfect speakers to the imperfect human ears.
Because nothing is absolutely perfect in the world.
Even a hypothetical "straight wire with gain" as is sometimes mentioned, is not enough to re-create the same auditory experience in a home as it would be in a concert hall.
It's just impossible.
Tone controls, (multi-eq, bass/treble, etc) on the other hand, are 'correction' devices designed to taylor that sound to personal preferences and adjust for room or equipment flaws, and originally offered on equipment for the listener's convenience.
It was the norm for decades, and never 'put down' as being something horrible to have.
In fact, in many cases it was touted and featured in exclusive ways as something extrordanary and a desired thing to have.
For instance, Magnavox console stereos had a 'Timbre" control, Zenith had a 'presence' control,... basically a midrange/voice adjustment added to their bass/treble controls, before multi-band equalizers came on the scene.
However, in recent times it's become some form of beastly ogre, a nasty unwanted source of a dreamed-up unwanted distortion, put ito people's heads through repeated brainwashing and propoganda in the audio world.
This opened the door to and led manufacturers to justifiably eliminate such things in equipment as a sly, cost-saving measure to them, as well as boosting the cost to the consumer via inflationary tactics and extreme advertizing, citing 'purity'.
Which to me is all nothing but marketing bullcrap at the consumer's expense.
Whenever I see a modern amplifier with one or two dumb knobs on it, I move on, pass it by.
I don't 'buy into' or succumb to that audio marketing nonsense, shame that many do so easily (uneducated-inexperience-sheep).
Extraordinarily conspiratorial claim. Evidence in kind mandatory and unlikely.
Why believe everyone who disagrees with you is a manipulable idiot rather than consider they found tone controls too crude to be of value? I owned many pieces of gear with tone controls that never left 12 o'clock from the time I was a teen. The wide adoption of frequency response alteration via DSP room correction suggests that tone controls were always a stone axe more appealing to the smiley face EQ market.
Maybe the reason is that the less there is the less can scratch or wear out. I only like stuff with the bare minimum in switches and potentiometers so my self built amplifiers only have power on/off, volume and sometimes source select. It IS purity compared to all the extra "features" that are often implemented the quick, cheap and easy way. What is not there can not do harm 😉
Also the tone controls were/are often made with mediocre circuits with cheap opamps leading to channel differences, that is another reason why I skip them. The "direct" setting of ready built HiFi gear bypassing the tone control very often sounds best too. This also with treble and bass set to 0.
Reminds me of the fader/sliding potentiometer hype a long time ago. These were supposed to be superior and would offer better control. I have never experienced such bad potentiometers after that.
Last edited:
And I prefer to have some control and versatility over where something is parked in my home, and what I am listening to.
That translates to using tone controls to adjust sonics for my own preference.
A disco record playing with heavy bloated bass, or a thin weak-sounding tinny recording of Frank Sinatra, both initially controlled by the studio recording engineer, and not always to my personal liking.
By the way, those 1963 American-Made tone controls and switches perform like the day they came from the factory - once cleaned with DeOxit.
Well I don't need it since decades and never miss it. What I do notice is that older people like tone control set to the extremes. Just like the volume eventually 🙂
Perhaps because I've seen and experienced the phenomena shown by others with no background experience as I have, they've only been recent pets introduced to the market-driven propoganda.
As for you, you're preferences are satisfied with 12 o'clock settings, mine might not be in my living room, with a certain recording.
But I like having the convenience of control, and not being bound by what others must be satisfied with.
I don't have any bass <> treble controls on my stuff but that's simply because I do have good speakers/TT/CD player etc and a sub bass. However, I'm not against tone controls and have done a few in my earlier days. It is true that equipment with tone controls is frowned upon by audio reviewers - but then, given the kind of stuff they churn out, are we surprised?
I sent a preamp off for a review a few years ago, and the reviewer remarked in an email back to me 'it good to see a preamp without SMD devices, which always causes a constricted, closed in sound'. I just hadn't transitioned to SMD at that stage. Or another one (published review) about the fact that I had used an opamp (AD797 mind you) that unfortunately 'added an opamp haze to the sound' that you didn't get with discrete designs. All total bs. At least with Stereophile, the reviewers get to smoke a bit of weed, do their review but then they have to face John Atkinson and his AP and the reality of facts and numbers triumphs over subjectivist bs.
Let me remind you, for $60k, you can get a nice Tesla with a half decent sound system and a touch screen. 🙂
Not really an issue I think, most are Baxandall topology with perfectly fine opamps (good opamps are not expensive), if the signal needs EQing small differences due to component tolerances are the least of your problems - the lack of any EQ is a big issue!
Most rooms need some EQ, flat response in the electronics leads to non-flat reponse at your ears due to the room/speakers, tone controls are the minimum EQ for a good listening quality, unless you've already EQ'd the room/speakers.
Many people forget loudness - at low listening levels you need to boost bass and treble to counteract the non-flat response of hearing at low levels to get maximum information.
And particularly with speech you might want mid-boost to increase intelligibility/clarity against background noise. Not all listening is to music, in slience, at high level, alone 🙂 You might even have neighbours and need to turn the bass down late at night...
But its great to have a tone-circuit bypass switch (if only to allow measurement of the room response).
Re: Mark Tillotson post #94......
Good points, all of them.
You understand the natural variables involved in equipment and surroundings, as well as human hearing differences.
Those things are not questionable or ignorable, although some adhere to beliefs generated by others.
Good points, all of them.
You understand the natural variables involved in equipment and surroundings, as well as human hearing differences.
Those things are not questionable or ignorable, although some adhere to beliefs generated by others.
Well I have seen much japanese mid range stuff and much british made hifi and I have seen many many mediocre Baxandall circuits that were made with cheap mediocre parts. Yours may be OK but many just aren't and since many of use change gear more often than their underwear choosing stuff with no tone controls is understandable. Then I was service technician for a japanese brand and many potentiometers scratch and wear out already at young age. Nothing more irritating than scratching switches/potentiometers and power on/off thumps although many seem to like the latter here. I did not use tone control at all as the "direct" setting sounded best in 99% of cases and "best" may not be entirely to my preferences regarding tone and warmth etc. but then I should go to see live music. It is a view. Now I deal with older people I also see that anything that is a variable creates confusion and that is a good lesson to me to continue to make stuff as simple (and reliable) as possible.
No neighbours is lesson 1 to young audiophiles 🙂
No neighbours is lesson 1 to young audiophiles 🙂
Last edited:
Those Baxandall controls on my RCA Victor are mostly at "0" setting due to the voicing of the rest of the system.
Besides me, others have also agreed that the result is pleasant, almost perfect to them.
The volume pot has two taps, giving a smooth variable "contour effect" depending on it's level.
So indeed, if serving dinner in the dining room with that console mere feet from the table's guests, at whisper volume it gives a rich yet natural background enhancement that doesn't intrude on conversations.
Information loss: when a signal passes thru any circuitry information is lost.
The question becomes: is the use of FR compensation (only 1 of many dimensions) remove more than it adds. As said, tone controls are like a stone ax. Well implemented DSP EQ takes things to a whole different place, but can still subtract more than it brings.
Each case is different since we have different rooms, kits, and people.
Sometimes EQ makes sense, sometimes it does not. Always best to do what you can acoustically to fix things before adding the bandaid. Bandaids are sometimes necessary.
dave
The question becomes: is the use of FR compensation (only 1 of many dimensions) remove more than it adds. As said, tone controls are like a stone ax. Well implemented DSP EQ takes things to a whole different place, but can still subtract more than it brings.
Each case is different since we have different rooms, kits, and people.
Sometimes EQ makes sense, sometimes it does not. Always best to do what you can acoustically to fix things before adding the bandaid. Bandaids are sometimes necessary.
dave
Cars came to mind, and not dirt cheap ones, cost similar, you get way more bits fot your money, but with the QC issues Tesla has you could have chossen better.
Cars also have really really small margins, sell in huge numbers (making it profitable), but maintenance is going to add way more to the lifetime cost.
dave
Last edited:
I think this is why Elon Musk has built his EU Tesla factory in Germany. They will sort his quality issues out.