Jump to content

Elad Repooc

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Elad Repooc

  1. There are a number of white papers which address this subject - long story short, not only does room size tend to dictate the size of the speaker which should be considered, it also more or less dictates the amplifier power required to efficiently move air without damaging or destroying the speaker. While on the topic my only complaint with Linn speakers has been over the years - when driven passively, in certain rooms and with something like 100 watts of Chakra power (as an example), if you really want to get up and boogie (i.e., play the things at party level, which I don't personally do very often, but sometimes you want that), they reach dynamic compression relatively quickly. So they are really better suited as Aktiv/Exakt speakers, which largely removes the limitation. @zee9 I think all of your options are valid considerations, but as kool-aid drinking Linn fanatic I have always been someone who ultimately knows one should start with the source when possible. I mean I'd go for a Klimax DSM way before considering replacing 140's, personally. I myself have always wanted a front-end heavy Linn system with their cheapest speaker, properly integrated into a suitable room. I'm talking Katans, Tukans, Majik 109's with Klimax level sources (LP12 and DSM), Klimax Exaktboxes feeding them, with Solos for each drive unit, if only to prove a point to any interested passers-by. An Exaktbox Sub with a pair of Linn, REL, JL, Genelec, or some passive Bag End subs with Klimax amps would round that system out quite nicely. Just a different perspective to consider as that has been a long term dream of mine - also something like a Selekt DSM with Exakt'ed 109's has been a system I've been thinking about, as a shorter-term solution. That being said, I do enjoy (and have enjoyed) exploring other speakers, and I've owned Martin Logan, KEF, B&W, Vienna Acoustics, Era Designs, and PSB speakers over the years. I still use some of them in various areas. I have wanted to explore speakers which support Exakt, such as the Kudos, Manger, and PMC stuff, out of curiosity. I have also wanted to own Harbeth, ATC, Dynaudio, and a number of other brands but one only has so much time and money, and I am one with expensive taste but a frugal budget at the end of the day. This thread reminds me of the time I heard B&W 802D's passive with Klimax and then Aktiv Exakt and it blew me away. Anyone who owned (or had extensive experience with, which I did) that speaker who would have heard that demo would have seriously questioned whatever else it was they thought was the "correct" electronics to use with B&W speakers. Even the B&W national sales manager at the time happened to hear that system and admitted Aktiv Exakt made the passive system sound broken in comparison. And yet, here in North America, B&W is mostly sold part-and-parcel with a popular electronics brand (which I think anyone who lives here would be able to guess - glowing blue lights and VU meters bring anything to mind?) which does absolutely no justice to the exceptional job B&W has done with their products, still somehow these pairings are touted as being "high performance". Anyway, @zee9 there are many great options that work well with Linn, I am partial to Linn speakers with Linn electronics, but in general would try to go "source-first" before upgrading speakers. Food for thought.
  2. Photos like this give me a bit of cringe factor. I have some doozy's I could possibly dig up that are about 100x worse (buried on some such backup or another), which I used to present as examples of what not to do with electronics and the associated wiring. Thankfully, this seems fairly innocuous given the application.
  3. Here's a quick, concise overview of the primary benefits of fiber optic cables when used for telecom backbone infrastructure. http://www.mit.edu/course/21/21.guide/pd-cxc.htm The quoted source is the --Artel Communications Corporation, "Fiber Optics in RGB Color Computer Graphics Communications," Application Note CG-1 After looking briefly into Artel and what they do I think they have a good grasp of the benefits of fiber. Although perusing this topic reminded me of some articles and information I've read over the years about how fiber optics can be used to collect data, such as traffic patterns, etc. When delving into this it's because they can compare what went in on one end and what came out on the other and examining the way the car vibrations modulated the waveform traveling on the fiber line. Quite fascinating. There was even a study in which they apparently are using fiber to study seismic activity. https://news.berkeley.edu/2019/11/28/underwater-telecom-cables-make-superb-seismic-network/ From the linked article, a couple of quotes really stood out to me: Something to think about while contemplating the future... of Exakt link maybe? When might we see SFP type ports for single- or multi-mode fiber delivery to our digital crossovers? Will Linn have sensors in the FPGA which can remove unwanted seismic noise caused by a car driving down the road outside your door perhaps?
  4. It is a complicated topic, but the fact is that the definition of "identical" is what is being brought into question. There are certainly phenomena within the "digital" ecosphere, as well as a myriad of challenges (including how long digital data can be not only stored, but replicated, written, and re-written, etc.) which would quickly lead one to realize that "identical" when it comes to digital can be painted with a fairly broad brush. Not to mention the fact that the data itself, while identical, may be affected in numerous ways both up to and including the final "render" of the information. As it pertains to Linn, my comprehension of the DS platform as a whole was that it was designed to minimize the affects of other upstream computing devices (including NAS storage and network hardware) by creating an entirely bespoke computing device designed strictly for use with audio. However there are differences (to me for the most part quite subtle in my experience, if certain things are paid attention to) in upstream computing components affecting the sound of the DS/DSM products. As others have pointed out in various threads, some have heard improvements with different networking components, cables, and music server hardware. Personally I've found such differences minimal in most properly setup systems using DS/DSM. Some make systems sound better, some make them sound worse. Good quality products typically yield a better result, and software should be included in that as well I think. Also with respect to digital volume control, I think Linn tried to put that one to bed, but the idea that "analog" is automatically better than "digital" is slippery slope, and that one should trust one's ears. Certain amplifiers have unique input gain stages and thus sound better with a higher gain buffered output from an analog preamp. Some amplifiers (such as Linn's) are quite robust and have no problem with what a DSM outputs. It all depends on the product mix and what sounds best given the application. I'm sure there's plenty of people who have preferred "analog" over "digital" for their use case, but there's just as many who have preferred the opposite.
  5. I have a sofa, and set up for typical listener height. That being said, making sure the tweeters are the same height from the floor has to do more with time and phase alignment of the drivers (less intermodulation distortion) than with listener height. While the correct height relative to the speaker's sound field will yield better results, if the tweeters are intermodulating then it will sound worse everywhere, including at the sweet spot.
  6. The guide is excellent. A few comments in addition to what Lejonklou described, would be: After the final toe-in position has been determined, ensuring the speaker is front-to-back, side-to-side level on spikes and not rocking back and forth is a must. In addition, ensuring the tweeters (or supertweeters) are the same distance from the floor (in terms of height) is recommended. One may also wish to ensure the same distance to the tweeter dome from the primary listening position using a tape measure or laser distance meter, though I have found personally that ensuring the same distance from the floor, assuming all other measurements are symmetrical, is adequate. One may find that after making such adjustments, previous movements of the speaker (such as toe-in) may be reversed a bit, or previous placement may change a bit. This is especially the case when the speakers are too large to properly setup on spikes to begin with. If possible, set the speakers up with the spikes installed. It will make finding the right spot(s) much easier. On that note, if you have installed other speaker isolation devices besides spikes (I have seen various mentioned around the forum, and am familiar with a number) keep in mind that if you installed them after a previous tune dem of the speaker with spikes installed in order to find the proper positioning, you will likely need to re-do your tune-dem of the speakers with the new isolation devices, since the output of the speaker can be affected. Also I would point out that the above is for a typical dynamic driver speaker, the process for dipoles, ribbons, electrostatics, etc. is very similar but there are some additional things to be aware of, including the speaker rake angle, and the fact that in some rooms toe-ing such speakers out (as opposed to toe-in) can often bring the most musical enjoyment. All of course highly room and environment dependent.
  7. I am familiar with Moon Audio. Great folks. Very headphone-centric.
  8. I have owned three different BMWs of various vintage and not one of them was problem-free. So, my mileage varies a bit from yours. It's also more or less a meaningless comparison. Can you give examples? I'd like to know. Sonos? Heos? BluSound? Sony? Yamaha MusicCast? What? Don't tell me Roon, please. I don't find anyone's interface these days particularly advanced in the first place. Mainstream stuff to me is plagued with problems. I have seen the problems with just about everything by now, and I have my issues with the Linn apps for sure. That being said, I have my issues with all of the apps from any number of manufacturers and third party providers. None of them are perfect, and many have flaws which are far more egregious than what Linn provides (which is a slightly simpler interface). So I happen to more or less find the Linn app(s) easy to deal with. Space Optimisation is supposed to be implemented by the dealer, and Konfig was also initially meant as a tool for dealers, though as with most of what they do they made the software open to end users. Sure you can learn it as an owner, but it might be less hassle to hire someone who knows what they are doing instead.
  9. I have heard this from people whose ears I mostly trust, and yet I have also heard from others which I also mostly trust that the opposite was indeed the case (the Katalyst Klimax bested the dCS). Since I have never done the comparison I cannot really comment, only to say that the claim the dCS Vivaldi is a better sounding source component is not a universally held opinion, and people should perform their due diligence.
  10. Personally, I attribute this to a general attitude among sales consultants, installation technicians, manufacturer representatives, and many, many others within the HiFi/audio community which is one that is not interested in progressively learning more and more about what it is that they do at the end of the day. They believe, think, or imagine that they have "everything figured out" and there isn't anything more to learn about their profession or hobby for that matter. While I will be the first to admit that yes, networks are complicated, and yes, there can be challenges in implementing them properly (I have likely run into a large majority of them), formulating a rudimentary set of "best practices" when deploying a network should have been within any competent audio retailer's capabilities at the time of the launch of the Linn DS. If they didn't know they were going to have to learn more about computers and networks they should have been paying more attention to how the music they listened to and evaluated their myriad of products with, was made with computers, and relied on properly implemented networks. Prior to DS we had home automation systems, lighting control systems, remote controls and touchscreens, flat panel displays, video components, and countless other existing audio components which utilized a network connection for some such or another reason. Logitech Squeezebox, Sonos, Audio Request, Escient, Kaleidescape, and a number of other audio products all preceded Linn DS and all required a knowledge of how to configure a local area network. What I have seen in the decade-plus since the release of Linn DS is a continued hesitancy on the part of a large majority of high end audio retailers, as well as custom integrators, (oh, I suppose I should also mention the reviewers and press too) to gain a better comprehension of how a local area network operates, in addition to how DSP and active systems operate, all of which are technologies quite common to the "professional" audio world. In fact I used to often make the point in conversations that as I see it Linn brings what are common technologies in the professional and music production sphere, to a domestic environment in a way that is elegant and easy for the end user to operate if installed properly, and with commonly available, off-the-shelf network equipment to boot. As a final note (yes, I am painfully aware of the length of these drawn-out diatribes), I say this because I have seen not only Linn, but many other brands, invest a lot of time and energy into attempting to train and educate their dealers with respect to local area networking, only to have very few come out of those meetings actually retaining much of the information that was shared. Some attribute it to the complexity of networking, but time and time again my observation has been it's more due to an unwillingness on the part of individuals to spend the time to learn about things in order to be of better service to their clients.
  11. You may laugh, but on certain integrated amplifiers with preamp out/main input sections with supplied jumpers, replacing them with an actual RCA interconnect made quite a big improvement in many cases. It was not expectation bias, I proved it many times to numerous people with no previous expectation. "Just Listen"
  12. Actually, it could be due to a number of different things, typically if a system sounds "bright", in my opinion it may not be setup properly in some fashion. While I will concede that there are certain components which sound a bit "bright", most of the time some changes to the configuration help to alleviate the perceived "brightness". In my experience things sound "bright" because harmonic information is improperly aligned, in other words there is "smear" in the mid and upper ranges. Typically a more accurate electronic component will control the output of the loudspeaker with less variance in tolerance, so if something sounds bright it could be because the air rarefaction is occurring more accurately, and possibly exacerbating room influences one did not perceive before, especially if the loudspeakers weren't close to being properly tuned up in the first place. In other words, I don't take anyone's review of a component as being "bright" without a huge grain of salt, and if I believed every audiophile I read on the internet I probably wouldn't own Linn to begin with
  13. I've been there. My comments at this point are - there are dealers who believe they can dictate how manufacturers do business, even down to which products they should develop and/or offer. I've seen many of them push their weight around in this arena too many times, and with many different brands besides Linn. The businesses which think this way, are soon to become irrelevant because things will continue to progress without their antiquated ideas of how things should be "sold".
  14. I've been there. My comments at this point are - there are dealers who believe they can dictate how manufacturers do business, even down to which products they should develop and/or offer. I've seen many of them push their weight around in this arena too many times, and with many different brands besides Linn. The businesses which think this way, are soon to become irrelevant because things will continue to progress without their antiquated ideas of how things should be "sold".
  15. I suppose i should read it (not that I would agree with it because I do have some very intimate experiences with his ideas) but I'm just curious what he meant by this. Does this mean that how the musician performed in the listening test was not a qualifier? I guess I'm a bit confused.
  16. The one time I heard an Eclipse system, I was quite impressed. I always liked Fujitsu plasma displays, and their computers, so I'm not surprised they make just as excellent audio gear.
  17. The PS Audio DirectStream DAC does not sound very good in my personal opinion, despite whatever technical pedigree they claim. There are many other DACs from other manufacturers which cost quite a bit less and offer better performance to my ear (including Linn; a Sneaky DS/DSM for example) so I don't even take their products very seriously anymore. I used to subscribe to Paul's Posts but honestly receiving boring audiophile drivel each morning was a bit much, so I had to cancel. I don't comprehend what some of these manufacturers are listening for, let alone listening to, to create some of the products they pawn off to people. That being said, I did like their entry level Perfect Wave DAC back in the day, mainly because hardly any consumer HiFi companies even made DACs at that price point, and I do appreciate some of their products in the power category, though I've never owned them personally. A cursory look at their newly designed website leaves a lot to be desired. They make claims such as: There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim which means they are pulling it straight out of their behind. When manufacturers expect one to believe this drivel it makes the entire industry suffer as a result. They might think they are helping "high-end" audio with this crap, but they are only hurting it.
  18. I have seen this but I am not sure it's a consistent thing, based on my recollection. It seemed a bit random when they were included. It would be interesting to compare notes with others on this. As I said I remember seeing converters included but I can't recall how consistent it was.
  19. This is why it's best to consult with a Linn specialist (i.e. dealer, retailer, or distributor) for things of this nature. It may take some time, but typically you will find the dealers quite helpful. Though personally, I would try to keep things XLR all the way through. Or vice versa, RCA. Converting one to the other can sometimes be a compromise, depending on the overall setup.
  20. I agree, very much so. The fact is that there are so many variables when it comes to electronics, loudspeakers, rooms, applications, etc. that results can vary widely. It's quite a mind boggle at times, and this points to yet another reason why I happen to appreciate Linn products and the results - they are relatively consistent, and predictable in terms of performance. They provide a very flexible tool for the application, with very little fuss.
  21. There are plenty of records from other time periods which are indeed excellent, and not quite rubbish - but as a whole, if one casts a wide and deep net into the music recorded, produced, and sold during the 1970's, there is so much more of it that is good, than bad (my personal opinion of course) because the competition back then was hardcore. And, it was a worldwide phenomena. It brought out the best in talent as a result. Nowadays, with everyone being able to make beats on a computer fairly easily, the competition is lacking because people care less and less about musicianship any longer it seems, with rare exception. I read an article by Bill Bruford on The Absolute Sound (I know, a trash rag* but a decent writeup nonetheless) that sort of touched on this recently: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/absent-without-leave And I highly agree with @Ian H's assessment of OP's question. *I say this somewhat jokingly, but the fact is as much as I am not a huge fan of Stereophile, I am less a fan of Absolute Sound. Great for thumbing through the latest high-gloss ads, though.
  22. Isn't it already remotely upgradeable? Or am I missing something? I thought the entire benefit of owning a Linn was that the processing is happening upstream in an FPGA so as to tailor the digital audio stream data to the specific DAC. The DAC's firmware is thus the firmware for the specific DSM in use, as it instructs the downstream DAC how to operate. I mean, personally I've experienced noticeable improvements in performance with a Majik DS simply because of firmware updates. Why would Organik be any different? We've all experienced improvements to Space Optimisation - that's an improvement to the DAC, and Linn is still not done with what SOv2 has to offer, as far as I am aware. I think any prospective Linn owner should be confident that Linn improves their DSM product line, and has the track record to prove it, via free software and firmware updates. I don't think they are changing this at all with Organik.
  23. Most musicians don't care much for typical domestic audio equipment, but I have known many who are very much what they consider "audiophiles". They are just obsessed with different things, things like pedals, loop machines, reverbs, gates, compressors, microphones, preamps, DIs, guitar, bass, and other instrument amps, synthesizers, consoles, etc. - and that is just on the electronics side of things, not even mentioning instruments and such. It is simply a different level of appreciation for the same thing, music. Some of them do own nice stereos, but most are used to studio equipment which can and does often perform better at similar price points to domestic gear. I have heard of some big names who own expensive domestic kit but I always wonder how good it actually sounds. I highly doubt many of these names take the time (or have allowed someone else to take the time) to implement their "high end" products properly, unlike the engineers they hire for the studios they record in, which have very specific requirements in terms of noise transmission and control, acoustics, etc.
  24. It seems that attempting to put into words how a particular audio component performs has always been a vocabulary problem. I think Linn tried to help us with the idea of "tune" as a primary descriptor of what an audio component does, to a greater or lesser extent (a.k.a. "pitch accuracy").
  25. I could be wrong but I think this was a rumor that began as a dinner conversation and became wildly blown out of proportion. Just my comprehension of this particular topic, it's hard to say what they are working on next given the fact they make full systems as opposed to only being a speaker company, for example.
  • Create New...