Yes, I apologize. I just hope it goes both ways and I guess its just me but Andre Visser seems to attack in every post talking down to others like we are beneath him in audio, hecked he even posted calling me arrogant (Pot,Kettle...). Im just a guy that will hit back online or in the real world.....if it all stays on topic then Im on topic.
You can get more than you think from the site. You just have to know where to look. But yes they are discontining some of their drivers and the ones that are left are not cheap. Shame really.
http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Transducer List/Transducer List.pdf
Rob🙂
That's true and I hope that the music industry will soon start adopting standards set by the film industry. Music reproduction would benefit tremendously from surround channels. Stereo just can't deliver that kind of spaciousness (LEV and ASW) in a controlled manner - controlled by the recording and not by mere chance (recording-speaker-room interaction). Even in the days of Blumlein the people at Bell Labs felt the need for a center channel to overcome the various drawbacks of phantom images (stability, localization errors, tonality) - this was 80 (!) years ago.
Best, Markus
Last edited:
I like multi-channel too. But for home use 4 or 5 are plenty for me. (even thought I have heard systems that used over 100 - yes really).
And ditto the mastering standards. It would be great if there actually were a standard in music. Maybe some day.
And ditto the mastering standards. It would be great if there actually were a standard in music. Maybe some day.
Doesn't need backup, its a well known fact.
If you learn to read you will notice that all of the quotes you've made are distorted to suit your story, wake up and stop your arrogance, it is not needed. According to me, the whole HT craze were started by manufacturers to make money, based on SQ little science were involved.
I've bought my first HT system in 1995, it was impressive for watching movies but were seriously lacking when listening to music. After that I've bought the first Rotel pre-processor that were available here and used seperate 250W amplifiers for each channel, nice but still lacking with music. Then replaced the Rotel with a Sunfire TG4 processor, that sounded quite good with music as long as the DSP were bypassed 🙄, after that I've tried listening to movies with my stereo system and the Sunfire wasn't used ever since.
No my system doesn't cost more than my car but perhaps only because I've designed and build everything myself, except for my CD Player (which are far from standard also)...... typical?
If you say so. Strange that more and more of those I know are moving back to stereo or at least use a seperate stereo system for music. I hope both survive because I guess everybody is allowed to do what they like most. 😉
It's nearly 30 years people foretell the death of vinyl, claim the superior performance of latest technology etc. etc. but then when it comes to judge the real musical performance of any kind digital stuff vinyl is The Reference. That's really funny!
The same for 2 channel systems....
The same for 2 channel systems....
Just go back to your post #13 at the beginning of this thread and rethink that statement.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/147514-pro-vs-hifi-drivers-pros-cons-2.html#post1880214
Wow, looks like you missed a lot of psychoacoustic studies. A good start would be to go through the references section at the end of this paper: http://harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Documents/Scientific Publications/13686.pdf
Best, Markus
That's your opinion.
In the meantime CD will die before Vinyl and SACD is already dead. Have a look at the sales.....
Good morning Doug,
I'm not as sure of this point as you are. It seems to me the masses are moving toward home theater in a box - little satellites and a noise-maker woofer-box crossed over far too high. Would you say that 5.1 is the future as far as listening to music goes? 2 channels seems good enough for mother nature! 😀
Jim
I don't buy those kind of vinyls. Already have a huge number for 100 years of listening!
Anyway there are plenty true analogue vinyls given the ridiculous number of people around the world that really care about hifi....
No, that's not just an opinion, that's reality. Any physical digital medium will die before vinyl because it's just cheaper to distribute online. The drop in sales of CDs does not add to sales of vinyl, it adds to sales of downloads. iTunes sells 5 million songs per day.
Do you sometimes read publications about sound recording? I do. Nobody uses their 24-track machines anymore (except for effects like tape compression). Why should we? Digital equipment delivers tremendously better quality (there's a multitude of tools audio signals have to pass before reaching the master out, e.g. compressors, EQs, etc. - analogue equipment degrades the signal in each step, digital doesn't) at much lower costs and speeds up the production process.
Best, Markus
Last edited:
That's true for binaural recordings, cross-talk cancellation techniques or wave field synthesis but not for stereo.
Best, Markus
Wrong. It was started by movie producers to give accurate localization. Big screens(50 feet) and stereo dont work (unless your right in the middle), because phantom center usually isnt in the center. Sony felt that even 3 front speakers werent enough so SDDS has 5 speakers up front.
Yes and no. In your equation is not included the second-hand market for vinyls.
Is iTunes of comparable quality? I don't think so.
I don't care. Where is this quality? I can't see it. The vast majority of digital productions are poor...... 30db's or less of real ultra-compressed dynamics is the norm. They have to "sound" on cheap consumer stuff! Quality production does not exist anymore except for very few titles while the good vinyls around are a huge number in comparison and sound better! You should rip something and look by yourself instead of reading.....
A LP setup can reproduce LF energy down to at least the LF resonance of the arm/cartridge combo, which in my setup is below 10hz. Needless to say frequencies can be recorded this low on LP and often have been.
The phono preamp I use responds down to a couple hz.
This statement is nonsense, vinyl is already dead. What percentage of music released in the last ten years was released on vinyl compared to CD? What percentage of cosumers are buying new vinyl over CDs?
Somewhat OT:
The frequent reports here of the death of SACD is grossly overstated, it's a small and growing niche market - at least here in the USA.
My only problem with SACD is that new releases are limited to mostly recent or ancient Classical or Jazz recordings, and re-issues of 1980's pop and alternative. The catalog unfortunately is quite small compared to CD. I'm quite surprised that the Beatles reissues were not also released on SACD, as most of the crowd I run with who like the Beatles also own fairly good SACD players.
On a good machine SACD can sound a good deal better than what you get on an equally carefully produced CD, and at least the equal of 24/96 high rez digital downloads.
I listen to "obsolete" vinyl, SACD, CD, tape, and high rez digital. Vinyl still wins most of the time, with SACD generally doing almost as well in my system.
As a disclosure I have absolutely nothing that would qualify as anywhere close to SOTA. Vinyl playback is handled by a restored 41yr old Thorens TD-125/SME3009 with a Grado Reference Platimum cartridge driving a D3A/5842 based passively equalized phono stage with outboard psu. SACD is handled by a heavily modified SCD-777ES. CD playback by a variant on Peter Daniel's Shigaclone idea, and my diy dac. High rez (and 44k) digital is handled by my diy media server driving the same dac as the Shigaclone.
The frequent reports here of the death of SACD is grossly overstated, it's a small and growing niche market - at least here in the USA.
My only problem with SACD is that new releases are limited to mostly recent or ancient Classical or Jazz recordings, and re-issues of 1980's pop and alternative. The catalog unfortunately is quite small compared to CD. I'm quite surprised that the Beatles reissues were not also released on SACD, as most of the crowd I run with who like the Beatles also own fairly good SACD players.
On a good machine SACD can sound a good deal better than what you get on an equally carefully produced CD, and at least the equal of 24/96 high rez digital downloads.
I listen to "obsolete" vinyl, SACD, CD, tape, and high rez digital. Vinyl still wins most of the time, with SACD generally doing almost as well in my system.
As a disclosure I have absolutely nothing that would qualify as anywhere close to SOTA. Vinyl playback is handled by a restored 41yr old Thorens TD-125/SME3009 with a Grado Reference Platimum cartridge driving a D3A/5842 based passively equalized phono stage with outboard psu. SACD is handled by a heavily modified SCD-777ES. CD playback by a variant on Peter Daniel's Shigaclone idea, and my diy dac. High rez (and 44k) digital is handled by my diy media server driving the same dac as the Shigaclone.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.