This who this whole "A", "B", "C" thing is utter foolishness. We don't listen to a component, we listen to a system and system synergy makes, or breaks the quality of the illusion. Rather than spend time, and money, switching boxes, why not just build a synergistic system?
|
The Brits have been doing it for years. There is a wealth of collective experience both on their fora and in their print media on what constitutes synergy within a system.
I think most of them could tell you that a Linn speaker sounds better with Naim amplification than a Dynaudio, for instance. They take a systems approach.
But if you're comfortable flipping appliances, by all means do so, as you said no need to let someone tell you what works well together better to reinvent the wheel every time You want to take a drive. |
Orpheus, I have subscribed to Stereophile since it was a journal sized magazine edited by J. Gordon Holt. So I feel that I am familiar with it. And having lived in New York and LA and being a member of an audio society in both cities I have hear my share of class A components over the years. And I think that the whole thing if foolishness if one can, or can't, afford class A or B or C or whatever.
I think that the only way that owning synergistically matched components saves one any money at all is that, perhaps, one churns components less. But I think that the true benefit of a synergistic system is that it brings the listener a greater connection with, and appreciation of, the music. I never said that it was about money.
If you are happy with the whole class thing I should be the last to try to dissuade you. But since you brought up turntables and cartridges I will give an example. On VPI tables with the shorter, unipivot arms, IMHO Dynavector cartridges are a synergistic match. Not so Ortofons. So I would rather have a 20XL2, which might be a class B or C cartridge on this type of tonearm than an Ortofon Anna which is clearly a class A phono cartridge. Your mileage may vary.
Unfortunately the last time that I listened to a Polk speaker was when I met Matt Polk and Saul Marantz demonstrating the model 10 speakers at an audio show in the 1970s, so my opinions on the marque will have very little currency.
|
Dave, very nice post. I appreciate your experience and it is something that enriches all of us.
Orpheus, I believe that you are misinterpreting my posts. I did not say that synergy was the "gospel truth", in fact, I said "I think". It's just an opinion; feel free to make of it what you will. Your experience may take you down a different path and others would certainly find value in your journey, as do I. That's pretty clear, isn't it?
Glad that you believe that auditioning cartridges, presumably in your tonearm, is the way to go. Unfortunately, for many of us, there is no practical way to do this. Though it would be nice if it could happen. But that's really true of any component. If you can try it in your own system, you will have the best sense of if it works with your components and suits your own preferences for distortion spectra.
You said that cartridges are too expensive to take anyone's opinion as guidance on. Tell me please, are amplifiers, or speakers less expensive in your system? I always subscribed to the hierarchy that the turntable was much more important than the cartridge, based on personal experience, and allocated funds in that way. Now I do have a Kiseki Purple Heart Sapphire, and a few other nice cartridges, but there was a time when I ran a Shure M91 on the Linn and SOTA turntables with no regrets. I don't think that I would reverse that and run a Lyra on a Music Hall MMF-5, but as with all things, there will be those that differ.
And Tommy, I learned almost nothing from my time listening to appliances in our major metropolitan centers. I learned what works well together on forums that featured components similar to mine. There has been no need to reinvent the wheel. Others were giving in their time and experience and we're happy to relate what components worked well together.
|
Almost forgot, something else that may completely invalidate my opinions. I'm a "source first" believer, so I allocate the largest part of my budget to sources, quite a bit less to amplification and just a wee bit to speakers.
Overall, I am much more sensitive to the electronic types of distortions that one hears in streamers, CD players, phono stages, amps and preamps than I am to loudspeaker distortions. So even if loudspeaker distortions are an order - or two - of magnitude greater than those of electronics, I can somehow tune those out better.
This is not to suggest that finer speakers will not improve a system if they match with the other components.
|
Tom, my apologies if I came off as cranky. It was not my intent at all. I have the greatest respect for everyone here. |
Interesting that your speakers have no sonic signature. I'm sure that many speaker designers are envious.
Me, I want a speaker with a sonic signature and a point of view for that matter. That probably sounds as heretical as a speaker with no sonic signature, but so be it.
I respect speakers that are phase coherent by the implementation of 6db crossovers such as the Vandersteen and older Thiel models, but I don't much care for the sound.
Perhaps it's that I listen closer than 8 feet and the drivers can't sum properly in the near field or perhaps those slow crossovers don't knock the drivers down far enough out of the pass band for me. That's the great thing about speakers, there are so many fantastic models that we can all choose what floats our boat. |
Thanks Dave, I think that it is really both. The modest Theil 1.2s had a measurable peak in the woofer's response above the passband that was only down around 12db. I could always hear it and did not like it.
I think with first order crossovers, the more drivers the better as each has a lot less real estate to cover. And I have enjoyed the 2.2 and 3.6 quite a bit more than the 1.2 and 1.5 as one should for the price.
Orpheus, I too love Carmen McRae and have been listening to her Concord recordings from the end of her career lately. Great stuff!
|
Thanks O, no I'm not as handy as you, but so far, I am more comfortable with the higher order crossovers that you use. Maybe I'll get an invite to Dave's place some time and he can educate me on the virtues of first order crossovers. I'm always up for learning.
Another thing may come into play for me. I'm not really interested in imaging, or sound staging. More heresy, I know. I think that maximally phase coherent speakers preserve this information much better than higher order crossovers.
In the early 80s I had a pair of Spica. TC50s. They had the nice imaging of phase coherent speakers and seemed to have faster roll out of the drivers. But the Bessell crossover alignment never got much traction. I think that Dave Fokos (may be misspelled) did some nice speakers for cj as well as some under his own brand that used the alignment, but I really have not heard much about it since. There must be technical challenges with the alignment. I would love to hear from those more knowledgable about this....Dave...Al?
Let's keep those Carmen McRae recommendations coming!
|
Dave, first order crossovers are referred to as "slow" because the roll offs are slow. I was not disparaging the speakers and, in my limited experience, Thiel speakers sound anything but slow.
My apologies for the confusion.
|
|
Orpheus, thanks for the link! I am somewhat embarassed to say that while in high school, in the mid 1970s, I worked at a stereo shop that sold the ESS speakers.
As far as I know they were the first application of Dr. Heil's principles in an American made speaker. The dipolar tweeters in the larger models were quite nice, if memory serves. |
It's interesting, for me, live music is a visual thing as well as an auditory and olfactory thing. So no record will ever equal the times that I saw Miles, or Dylan, or Kirk or Little Richard or the Stones live.
We can argue all day if the best sonic reproduction equals the sound at a live event, but not seeing Kirk stuff four horns in his mouth from 30 feet away at the Vanguard, the smell of cigarettes, sweat and dope filling my nostrils makes any record seem pale by comparison, YMMV.
|
