TheFlash

Bluesound Node 2 vs "pimped" Node 2i with linear PSU

Recommended Posts

Super Dealer
59 minutes ago, DomT said:

Keith your statement is not true. Completely transparant hifi does not exist and especially if we are talking about more than one component with cables etc.  Every component has an element of colour.

And the artist’s intentions were formed in a specific studio and mastering suite (if they attended the latter). You always say that we are listening to the room not the equipment and therefore unless we listen back to the recording in the exact same room as the artist recorded in then we will hear something different than what the artist intended.  (But you would also need the same electronics used for all albums and recreate the acustics of each mastering suite for each album). Your arguments just don’t all hang together and this is why it’s so frustrating to read them. But it’s your choice as your preferences are your own. You are so busy telling most of us that we are wrong and yet you clearly wrong as well based on these statements.

I am off to make some coffee. I do not know how the coffee machine works and I really don’t care because the coffee tastes great. 

Dom that simply isn’t true, cables with low values of LCR are audibly transparent over the lengths used in domestic audio , low distortion solid state electronics are audibly transparent and have been for forty years.

Re creating the sound of the original mastering studio may be of interest from a ‘vintage’ perspective   Ie hearing the sound that The engineer might have heard but it doesn’t change the fact that we can only hope to reproduce the file/record/cd ( the only artefact we have) as accurately as possible.

Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer
24 minutes ago, MGTOW said:

Say that you have such a machine and it consistently produces good coffee that you enjoy very much, then you buy some different beans, reputed to be excellent and maybe a bit different and make your coffee with them. The coffee is still great, in fact it is exactly the same as before, wonderful. But is it what you wanted and what you paid for. Your decision!

In this analogy, are the beans, the music (great recordings/poor recordings) or are they a change in equipment, say a power supply, for this threads sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PuritéAudio said:

Dom that simply isn’t true, cables with low values of LCR are audibly transparent over the lengths used in domestic audio , low distortion solid state electronics are audibly transparent and have been for forty years.

Re creating the sound of the original mastering studio may be of interest from a ‘vintage’ perspective   Ie hearing the sound that The engineer might have heard but it doesn’t change the fact that we can only hope to reproduce the file/record/cd ( the only artefact we have) as accurately as possible.

Keith

So everyone should get studio monitors as that's what the studio used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Dealer

Only if you want to re-create the ‘sound’ of that particular mastering studio at the particular period of the recording.

Remember before low distortion monitors appeared in the 80’s ( ATC for example) studios would have used something horn loaded, distorted but with headroom or in a BBC studio a monitor with less distortion but also less headroom.

Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PuritéAudio said:

Only if you want to re-create the ‘sound’ of that particular mastering studio at the particular period of the recording.

Remember before low distortion monitors appeared in the 80’s ( ATC for example) studios would have used something horn loaded, distorted but with headroom or in a BBC studio a monitor with less distortion but also less headroom.

Keith

I'm talking about todays monitors, which should be fairly accurate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer

High fidelity (often shortened to hi-fi or hifi) is a term used by listeners, audiophiles and home audio enthusiasts to refer to high-quality reproduction of sound. ... Ideally, high-fidelity equipment has inaudible noise and distortion, and a flat (neutral, uncoloured) frequency response within the human hearing range.

This is what I think Keith aims for, when recommending equipment, it also happens to be what I like in a system, but a lot of people do not, and like to add a bit of tonal colour, shall we say. A touch more Bass(warmth) or added treble (detail and air) or a more pronounced mid range to promote vocals. We are all different, and also have different hearing, whether that be age related, or the way we were put together. So one size does not fit all, but aim for "High Fidelity" if it is not for you, then tune to your liking. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, greybeard said:

In this analogy, are the beans, the music (great recordings/poor recordings) or are they a change in equipment, say a power supply, for this threads sake.

Morning, When I wrote the thread I was very much considering the beans as the music in this instance.

In the case of evaluating equipment by substitution, I would think that a 'neutral and transparent' system would help but other factors come into play, not so clearcut for me.

These arguments about hardware tend to get a bit 'snippy' and fractious, which is why I was trying to avoid them. There is a rather predictable 'groupthink' about what a hifi system should and should not be and do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer
2 minutes ago, MGTOW said:

Morning, When I wrote the thread I was very much considering the beans as the music in this instance.

In the case of evaluating equipment by substitution, I would think that a 'neutral and transparent' system would help but other factors come into play, not so clearcut for me.

These arguments about hardware tend to get a bit 'snippy' and fractious, which is why I was trying to avoid them. There is a rather predictable 'groupthink' about what a hifi system should and should not be and do. 

For what it's worth, I think I would like your system :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All very interesting but not the topic of the thread.

I think that Keith makes some valid points and probably has his tongue in his cheek for most of them.

One of Keith’s points is whether anyone would have the ability to choose or pick out, on sound quality alone, a pimped Node 2i or stock Node 2i on a blind test,  let alone the virtues different power supplies. It’s this question that brought me here a long long time ago.

Unless I’ve missed it somewhere, nobody has actually done this have they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer
3 minutes ago, Lord J said:

All very interesting but not the topic of the thread.

It happens, it's The Wam :)

A blind test, not as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer
1 hour ago, PuritéAudio said:

Only if you want to re-create the ‘sound’ of that particular mastering studio at the particular period of the recording.

Remember before low distortion monitors appeared in the 80’s ( ATC for example) studios would have used something horn loaded, distorted but with headroom or in a BBC studio a monitor with less distortion but also less headroom.

Keith

only you will not do so as each mastering suite has different monitors and have different rooms.  Keith used to say that we listen to the room.  Now he says something different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer
35 minutes ago, MGTOW said:

Morning, When I wrote the thread I was very much considering the beans as the music in this instance.

In the case of evaluating equipment by substitution, I would think that a 'neutral and transparent' system would help but other factors come into play, not so clearcut for me.

These arguments about hardware tend to get a bit 'snippy' and fractious, which is why I was trying to avoid them. There is a rather predictable 'groupthink' about what a hifi system should and should not be and do. 

There seems to be two groups - one says "I like how my music sounds on my system" and the other group says "your system is not very good because it measures poorly". Both groups come up with justifications for their position.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, BeeRay said:

I'm talking about todays monitors, which should be fairly accurate?

The speakers that you list in your info are, stripped of their pre-amp functions, perfectly capable near field monitors and are used as such my many pro users. Assuming your setup is decent, you already have a good idea of what a modern monitor sounds like, much more so than most contributors on here.

One of my favourite speakers is the Unity Audio 'The Rock', a pro level compact monitor in the £3K class. Different in just about every way possible in technical and construction terms but both speakers offering insight into the music that I find exceptional.

Unity Audio describe The Rock as 'brutally honest monitoring', enough to send many on here ducking for cover!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Dealer
3 minutes ago, DomT said:

only you will not do so as each mastering suite has different monitors and have different rooms.  Keith used to say that we listen to the room.  Now he says something different.

Every room completely dominates ( alters)  the sound of the loudspeaker In the low bass below a few hundred hertz, you can see this in any acoustic room measurement.

But you can, passively treat the room , as in traditional mastering studios with literally metres of rockwool  behind the walls above the ceiling below the floor , obviously this probably isn’t ideal for a domestic room, you can use EQ to reduce the peaks ( boomy bass) in the Fr this is very effective, and you can try using subwoofers destructively, perhaps in a ‘sink-source’ arrangement , two subs behind your listening position mirroring the main speakers but in inverse phase, these would cancel the bass nulls.

If you use a decent full range loudspeaker that is about as good as it gets.

Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MGTOW said:

The speakers that you list in your info are, stripped of their pre-amp functions, perfectly capable near field monitors and are used as such my many pro users. Assuming your setup is decent, you already have a good idea of what a modern monitor sounds like, much more so than most contributors on here.

One of my favourite speakers is the Unity Audio 'The Rock', a pro level compact monitor in the £3K class. Different in just about every way possible in technical and construction terms but both speakers offering insight into the music that I find exceptional.

Unity Audio describe The Rock as 'brutally honest monitoring', enough to send many on here ducking for cover!

Yes I think my system is very neutral and fairly accurate, it's great on good recordings however it does show up lesser recordings, digital can sound hard/harsh. If I was to change the sound I would go for something warmer, which would favour female vocals and is probably easier listening. But my room is not great, could do with some treatment but I can't be bothered to do that apart I will add some curtains which may reduce some of the reflections. I will try a few other tweaks but I don't want to spend much money on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.