Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/01/18 in all areas

  1. Couple of my favourite Kestrel in Richmond Park this evening Kestrel perched.jpg by Ben Bolton, on Flickr Kestrel perched 2.jpg by Ben Bolton, on Flickr
    7 points
  2. Good grief, that is the whole point. OF COURSE the mains supply will vary and have other things plugged in. That is why a good design is needed to deal with it. I stand by my point and would argue that if some sort of mains filtering is required for a product to work properly IT SHOUD BE BUILT INTO THE PRODUCT!
    5 points
  3. Possibly, but imagine how much more time we have to enjoy listening to music while we are not evaluating equipment and worrying about things not being right
    3 points
  4. 3 points
  5. [1971] Edgar Broughton Band - Edgar Broughton Band [flac]
    3 points
  6. In my view it is faulty. Whether DAC or amplifier or whatever, things should be designed to work regardless of external circumstances, or at least the external circumstances or limitations should be clearly defined. To require something to have external filtering because without it, it can't work properly is just sloppy, poor, inadequate design. Sadly, in the quest for ever lower pricing, much of what's sold today IS inadequate. S.
    2 points
  7. I am with Serge. About 5 years ago I decided it was time to update my >15 year old DAC, not least so I could listen to these new fangled "high res" recordings. I was lucky enough to get home demos of several models from around £1200 to £12,000. None of them were "eccentrically" engineered type but over a period of weeks I was astonished to discover that they all sounded almost identical. I think I heard a touch more detail on the pedal sounds of one of my piano recordings (but not the music...) but otherwise nowhere near the difference I was expecting from reading journalist
    2 points
  8. [1989] Tears for Fears - The Seeds of Love [flac]
    2 points
  9. Oh ... snow by Keith M, on Flickr
    2 points
  10. I'm afraid I don't buy into this precept of being swayed by any form of attachments or misguided influences as I listen to something new for quite a while, provided the product doesn't do anything that has obvious traits or flaws. Sometimes I am uncertain, (and I grant you, digital can be like that with tighter regimes of these 'measured' frameworks where much is doing what it should be without any anologous artefacts to steer the sound too violently off-kilter), and I then return to a previous model that was in the system chain, but again return once more and begin to notice subtleties that
    2 points
  11. To which they responded "let's make everyone in the land have electric cars in the next few years"
    2 points
  12. Heartbreaker. Ryan Adams. Music to take decos down.
    2 points
  13. No it wouldn't. Or at least, only on a superficial level. My experience is that the better CD transports and DACs make the most musically of whatever they're fed rather than highlighting the shortcomings of any given disc when viewed from a 'hifi' perspective. One of the reasons I've reverted to CD as a primary source is that to my ears this seems to be a harder trick for file-based sources to pull off, even via the same DAC(s).
    1 point
  14. Hi Mike.... Serge has given you all the right advice, as I would expect!!! Yes, I can tell already from the split grilles and the proportions of the cabs, and the faint shadow of the drivers, that those ARE genuine CELEF RT-1s. Back in the early 1980s I paid £600 (around $1,000USD) for a pair of ex-demonstration RT-1s. They were reduced to half price, having been DOUBLE that originally. The retail price was officially £1200 (around $2,000USD). That was at a time when, as a young professional, I was earning around £400 take-home pay each month. So this was a VERY expensive pair
    1 point
  15. Excellent visit to Robin/Wizmax today for my first taste of mono vinyl and Quad electrostatic speakers... that aside, a tip of the hat to him for this recommendation... [2001] Eric Bibb ‎– Painting Signs [flac]
    1 point
  16. Love this album, especially disc 2 with all the 12" singles on it. Some great tunes...
    1 point
  17. One needs to be clear what one means by 'master tapes' There's the final mix stereo master tapes, which is generally what the artists and/or record company signs off, and there is the disk-cutting master tape which is the final mix master after it has been further equalised, limited etc so that an LP can be cut from it. This was done mainly for 'important' artists so that copies of this disk-cutting master could be sent to record plants round the world for them to cut the lacquers locally. In the case of very high volume artists, it also allowed the record company to make more copies of the o
    1 point
  18. I perhaps slightly misinterpreted you mentioning MRI measurements above. I'll agree if they show we are sensitive to certain things that may not currently be considered relevant (including ultrasound and infrasound) then such data might act as a clue to additional electrical or acoustic measurements that may be informative. What I don't though believe is ever going to be viable is an overall assessment of audio quality based on MRI scan data. (I should maybe add that I am a hospital physicist [strictly Clinical Scientist], and whilst MRI is not my specialism I do have some basic relevant under
    1 point
  19. ...but still fresh as a daisy and it has one of the best opening tracks ever! [2010] Anathema ‎– We're Here Because We're Here [flac]
    1 point
  20. I am pretty sure that Stewart Wennen has a pair of these and they sounded utterly superb on the back of a Crown DC300 power amp. It was one of the systems I remembered as being right up my alley.
    1 point
  21. Yeah yeah, but that assumes that all hi-fi is designed and manufactured without any constraints due to budgets etc. and the parallel logic is to say that if a DAC is affected by RF or EMI noise in the USB cable then the DAC design is deficient or the DAC itself is faulty. Been there, discussed that elsewhere and got the T shirt.
    1 point
  22. Not I've not tried that one. I'd agree the differences between some DACs aren't big. I'd definitely wouldn't want to compare them in quick AB comparisons.
    1 point
  23. I did mean to say earlier these were very similar to the Profile Model 11 . in fact they used the same bass (Volt or similar) and mid (4" seas) .. the profiles used the SEAS tweeter and I do not know what was in the Beaulieu. The profiles were in larger cabinets had more bass .. they both had an incisive top end (a bit too much so for me). If i had bought a pair I would have put an LPad or a 1 ohm resistor on the tweeter to tame it a bit .. but that was the early days of CD where the top end could cut off heads at up to 100 paces :). It was interesting to see the reference to NIPRO ab
    1 point
  24. I am not so sure than vinyl ads or subtracts .. in the 70s a guy called Peter Marshall demonstrated his Profile 11 loudspeakers at shows using master tapes and records (so you could compare the two and to give the speakers the best possible sound from a master tape). The master tapes sounded clearer and more dynamic but not so much that you would miss it if you only had vinyl. Similarly at Whittlebury Mike Valentine demonstrated master tape, CD and vinyl copies of his recordings and yes you guessed it the master tape and vinyl came out tops .. A lot has to do with digital recording ver
    1 point
  25. Working from first principles, if one assumes that the objective of designing, manufacturing and marketing a piece of hifi is to give the customer good sound quality, and if the item in question is designed to be powered by plugging into a mains supply then it follows that if some sort of device is needed between the item in question and the mains for it to sound good then it can be considered a design failure.
    1 point
  26. I don't even think the same!
    1 point
  27. [1985] Bryan Ferry - Boys and Girls [flac]
    1 point
  28. No offence, some people love cars and for me they're a tool to get me from A to B. Hmm this still sounds remarkably familiar
    1 point
  29. I have Serge's attitude towards cars... if it's cheap to run, reliable, and gets me from A to B, then it is adequate. I in fact have a PRIUS
    1 point
  30. Fila Brazillia - Brazilification. CD
    1 point
  31. Unless you accurately level match and compare unsighted, your sighted bias will be hugely influencing any opinion. Keith
    1 point
  32. But it is either very easy or counter intuitive using measurements. If you use the really, really old collection of measurements and 'tests' that show what can be heard such as THD below 0.1% then all SS DACs meet all these simple requirements. I believe a lot of these measurements came from Wireless World in the 50s. Therefore these measurements show that all SS DACs sound the same as all of them meet these requirements. So it is easy buy the pretty box as they all sound the same. Yet when you listen they sound different. So now you need not to check the sound quality of these
    1 point
  33. If we set aside Serge and move on from his view (which I paraphrase as being that once transparency has been achieved then there is no more transparency available to be revealed and any differences between DACs are in effect fiddling with the tone) I can say that I have and continue to find differences between the accuracy and transparency of DACs. Whilst I have a clear preference for some DACs I accept that not all share my preferences. I current own the Chord Dave and when used with the Chord Blu2 MScaler I think it is without parallel. The level of realism and sheer vinyl type sound is unca
    1 point
  34. Best of. Contains 23 tracks, so I guess it is about half their output.
    1 point
  35. 1 point
×
×
  • Create New...