QuestForThe13thNote

Wammer
  • Content Count

    1,062
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by QuestForThe13thNote

  1. No because common sense must prevail. It wouldn’t be possible to work out what the reference is as someone will disagree. What you’ve got to do is pull all the threads out of the many reviews and on different bits of kit to draw commonalities. It’s difficult but inferences can drawn. distortion is a fair point but that can come into preference and be mentioned too in any subjective review. I think the methodology is a fair point but it can be stated and room acoustic layouts stated, but again it’s posisble to draw commonalities in comparisons as the system is just changing not the environment. That could have an affect on room acoustics but again nothing is set in stone. im not saying you may do a comparison and not draw one due to these effects, but equally you can and that’s what’s reflected in the review. The comparison has to be to other products simple. No overt technicalities. Take what from it as you may. It’s subjective.
  2. Nor do I wish to cause ill feeling . I was just making what i though are valid points and I’d refer to my comments before uzzy, if you want to ignore them or not, obviously up to you. But I’m sure we will revisit sometime! Cheers.
  3. im very calm and bear no malice. I challenged something. Someone stuck to their guns, then I kept on debating, then it looks like they probably got upset and took a dim meaning from me. I can’t apologise for that. No life or death situation. Just discussion. No more no less.
  4. We are all free to challenge others views for the benefit of working out a good way forward. I get all that and agree with you but I’m not sure you’ve understood the point I made. I do get it your view is very much a ‘dac is a dac’ or ‘a pre is a pre’ approach as if they are similar, which you’ve given on other threads. but there are degrees of quality out there and big variance in what some amps do and sound. I think others will understand the point and I’ll leave it there.
  5. You stated you know how the Pre amp Sounds. A Pre amp doesn’t sound. It depends on the rest of the hifi as to what the sound is and what the Pre amp does to thebsound when you swap it to another. Even with 40 years you can’t test out every Pre/power and speaker combo. That’s even before we get on what the op preferences are not sitting with their system. That was my only point to which there is no argument. The Pre amp is one of the most important parts in the chain, more so to power amps I’d suggest and second to speakers. But I agree with you it could be speakers are better too, but don’t discount the possibility of the effects of pre amps. It could tighten up the sound or offer a different presentation that equates to no need to change speakers.
  6. It’s really important Paul because none of use are ‘connoisseurs’ on others systems we don’t know or own, unless we’ve sat with same components in ours and can understand the sound quality considerations required of the buyers
  7. It’s not sanctimonious but quite important to stress if the op hadn’t thought about it, and perhaps others, that’s why I made the point. If you’ve put up a post asking for views on pre amps and people come in with this is a smooth amp, or this is a good amp or words of same effect, when it’s never actually been heard in the system and same speakers and how it may be improved on (or equally not improved on) then it doesn’t help those that would rely on that as advice to take a way forward. Nobody knows how that pre works in the system. Give meaningful comparisons That’s why I carefully stated in one of my first posts that you should take input from people who can make meaningful comparisons on stuff they have tried. Or don’t go with this warm amp , smooth amp stuff when nobody knows the speakers. To start saying it’s a great Pre amp and I see no reason to change when nobody knows about how it sounds and how it might be improved when that’s what the op wants to try and do, can’t be good advice.
  8. Yes but you’ve no idea whether a change of flavour or preference is needed - I suspect it it from what has been said, and we should not make presumptions about how people choose their hifi or choose it on how we would, but give advice based on best of all worlds.
  9. I’m sorry uzzy but you’ve no idea where the pre amp is in the system, how it fits in. Nor does anyone else except Indus.
  10. Perhaps then go for a different design of speaker. If you perhaps equate increasing speaker size with sound quality and to get a bigger sound, which I would too, but maybe look to smaller speakers that trade this for more accuracy and timing and dynamics. It gets harder and harder to achieve this as you go big, so you probably need to spend a lot more again to get an upgrade over what you have. I’d look to medium size single bass driver floorstanders.
  11. It doesn’t so much matter how many stars as its a subjective review. It’s what the comparison is to another product ie 3 to 4 stars etc, that’s tells you where they hold the product. And you will get two people reviewing two bits of kit with one give 4 and another 5 as sq is subjective too.
  12. It was on Jason Kennedy’s system I think George, but I didn’t have a reference on my own stuff so equally i could like it, such is the fickle nature of hifi.
  13. Sound quality is very much flavour which pertains to quality. Like the flavour of laphroaig to bushmills. I know what you are getting at though. But sound quality has to be subjective. It’s like taste.....If you eat a lot of spicy food you can damage your sense of taste. When I was in Mexico last year I was listening to a lot of Michael Bolton.
  14. I think I heard the allegri on someone’s system I know. Trying to remember but he had either the avm pa 8.2 connected up to power amps or an atc intergrated , both on fact 12s, and the allegri just totally lost something in tone and as if it was a bit flat.
  15. I definetly don’t think the speakers are ones to change as they look very good quality indeed. If you’ve spent that much on speakers you’ve probably got there through upgrades and it’s a sound you really want and thus you likely won’t get ‘gains’ changing speakers but just something different. Particularly for a class of this type of speaker at that price.
  16. The Ls26 is probably close to it in ‘audiophile law of diminishing returns’ terms, but probably not in an improvement as your pre amp is half the price of the Ls26. Depends on how you look at it mind. I didn’t think the loss of deep and spacious sound would be something I’d trade off against refinement and more importantly natural realistic detail. Id suggest if looking at the Bryston, it could be trialled just as a quality product aside from the usual difficulties of whether it works for you, sq tastes, or works in your system, which isn’t possible for onlookers to tell/advise. the ar did offer great detail into the music and speed I thought, like my cyrus but it’s presentation was to do so in an open transparent way. Not airy treble but just less welcoming of the richer tonal qualities you’d get with live music say, which the Bryston did better. Hope helps.
  17. Ps also on the Bryston - lots are saying it gives a preferable sq to the bp26 and associated power supply, which was about £6k new, but the bp17 cubed is £4500 new rrp. Also huge benefit is 20 year transferable warranty which few others would do, if at all. It should keep the resale value very high! I’ve been quoted £3700.
  18. Mine is the Bryston bp17 cubed so far, which I’ve had on my system. It’s probably a buyer. I think you can only really make judgements on home demoed kit and be careful doing so on unfamiliar speakers or at shows in unfamiliar rooms etc. I had the audio research Ls26 on my system last week in a mini bake-off (See my bake-off report in the bake off section) and I’ve reflected further and I think it was bettered by the Bryston bp17 cubed. I’d like to try the avm pa 5.2 but that’s another tube design. The Ls26 was all about clarity, wide dispersion of the sound upwards, backwards and sideways common to tube hybrid designs I understand and neutrality (and not a million miles from my cyrus Dac xp Signature ss Pre amp but clearly better and of better sound quality). The Bryston however was tonally a touch warmer, not to make it too smooth but just right whilst still be quite neutral, and about a refined and real sound with instruments reflecting a bit more naturalness and reality. So the timbre on the Bryston would sound better to the AR or my cyrus Pre. Music being more real. I think I’d have the Bryston anyday. Reference level sound quality, faithfully reproduced from the source and such low distortion. The Bryston did seem to make a lot more of my decent Innuos source than the cyrus or AR.
  19. It’s not right to suggest that they only send in stuff to whf themselves and that what hifi don’t have any pull from customers (and request product from manufacturers) who buy the mag for stuff to be reviewed, so lacks credibility to think it’s only a one way tug of war.
  20. They review both products they want to review and those the manufacturer suggest. There are commercial reasons they review well knowns as they have to attract reqdership to brands people know, but it doesn’t detract from finding this out on hifi choice etc, so it’s a moot point.
  21. That’s not a balanced review, he has never answered the question -What do others like and buy and would this sound make sense to others? It’s not just him buying them stating the obvious. The review is for others to make their mind up. By all means if he does not like them he can say but he is going to be taken a lot more seriously if he can say what they do well, compared to not so. It’s a subjective review so there has to be balance. Nobody can expect a modern headphone to sound so bad like this unless it’s just distorting. It’s only a few hundred quid too. A car reviewer can’t just say I hate all Ford Fiestas as you can put damn all in them and they are cramp, if what someone else sees in the product is different or could be so - cheap run around, 1 occupant, etc. if a reviewer writes reviews and pisses on a product because they don’t like it, that’s a sure fire way not to get product. You have to be subtle, let the reader ‘read between the lines’. The message can be the same.
  22. The review of a product they hated and very badly reviewed, but they don’t do shit reviews as you said..... https://www.whathifi.com/heco/direkt-einklang/review
  23. I tend to often think that’s one of the worst things you can do as group bias comes into it like at bake-off. Eg One person says they can’t hear a difference between comparisons so another just thinks the same because they cannot hear the same initially, they may do so if they carry on listening, but they don’t. Certain built up views get ‘kept’. Or one person says the bass needs to be deeper because it’s what they are used to, you start getting ‘that system is bass light’ even when not. If all five agreed, there will equally be more than 5 who agree it’s good. Clearly to buy it! But you can’t disagree with a review on its content unto itself as the review has to be comparison based. If it isn’t comparison based there is basically nothing to disagree with and so far as using the review to choose a product and for this purpose it must be comparison based always. So you can’t say all five disagreed if a) you didn’t hear what the reviewer was comparing it against or the reviewer didn’t compare it against anything and b) if you are measuring the review in absolute terms (my point before about not doing comparison). It’s meaningless. A review can only be a review as a snapshot in time to see what’s good as a basis of comparison. So if they review the Qutest dac, they should review the ones similar to it eg audiolab or border patrol etc. Then they can say the Qutest is 5 star and the other 4 star (in their opinion). That’s effectively what whf and others do. Frankly what is totally mad sometimes with the way hifi gets bought and I see a lot on here do it, is not to then look at what the other mags say about the dac and if they rate it and what they’ve compared it to. But they still decide they will just try any old two dacs which aren’t reviewed and choose between them. They could have bought turkeys compared to the ones being reviewed. I’d do the test between what the mags say eg Qutest and audiolab, and then the other other less well known one to see if it’s lower performing in my opinion. I appreciate not everyone has the time but to ignore reviewers consistently rating a product and not even try it yourself is senseless for me. You could seriously miss out.
  24. No not black and white thinking, but you take it as my opinion just as I’d do same for you. I make my mind up myself.
  25. I set up the other thread .... I think the reliability point is a fair one pp. Reader surveys on reliability should be done and would be very useful, and the fact what hifi don’t do this is to their discredit. The product or brand could and should have a reliability rating, it would force longer warranties and strive for better reliability. You aren’t rating it on one being reliable and another not per see, but the failure or return rates etc...