Pbr

Isobariks divide opinion sharply, always have done. They can't generate a stereo image to save their lives for example, but if like me, you consider stereo imaging to be a con trick designed to draw ones attention away from the music, this is of no importance.

tiggers

In the case of Isobariks I think I just haven't been lucky enough to hear the right system. I have never heard them in active mode for instance and when I have heard them there have been many other compromises in the remainder of the systems.

LS3/5A's however will just never sound right to me. I know they have their fans and it's all down to personal choice, but no matter when I've listened to them I have always been completely unimpressed. They are just not for me I guess.

Cheers,

tiggers.

dba

same here Tiggers,the clarity required in voice from the LS3s in a studio enviroment is different to my listening tastes

I know what you mean re stereo imaging PBR,its not that for me,becuase i dont really know what it means tbh,but quite simply the briks ive heard just sounded awful,and maybe the lack of any sort of imaging needs getting used to,i dunno.And my god they are ugly

hedgehog

Amplifiers sound different because of distortion, much of "hi-fi" is a discussion about preferred distortion rather than accuracy, Rupert Neve even put a button on some of his desks to introduce distortion to appeal to this audience. If I add the same distortion to the signal from my amp as a Krell Boulder then it will sound exactly the same. My base amp will be very linear and many in the "hi-fi" community will describe it as sounding "flat" or similar until the plug-in distortion modules are added. This is exactly because it will sound flat. The same thing is often seen with microphones and most people listening to a vocal recording will prefer a £100 Shure to an extremely expensive mic just because the Shure has a bit of a presence boost while the expensive mic might indeed have a flat frequency response. I wonder just how much processing on desks across the world is expended in EQ to make a hugely expensive mic, that the artist wanted to use, sound like an SM58 that, the artist thinks, sounds good in the mix!

On another matter the 3/5a is a very old loudspeaker indeed in terms of both the design and implementation. I did some work with the chap who designed them (or maybe it was the 5/8s now that I think about it, I must get a memory upgrade) and he must be retired about 15 years now. He was a fantastic designer. Clearly the world moves on a lot in 15 years and the 3/5 was far from a new speaker even at that time, at a guess that design might be nearly 30 years old. Today none of that range are really suitable monitors as each had its own faults which have been eliminated with the development of new technology. In saying that they were fairly good speakers in their day and pretty flat within the design parameters which is just why those that escaped to the "hi-fi" market were often considered "flat" or "uninvolving" or whatever the term is for lacking in distortion. In the role as portable monitors for carry-in type outside broadcasts where the programme material was often small ensembles and speech they were ideally portable and gave a reasonable representation of what some part of the spectrum would sound like on something like a 5/8.

Amazing how the world moves on, I believe Mackie do a small monitor LS for something like £1000 - £1500 that would probably replace all those old designs and offer considerable improvement in flexibility. I am sure it would make an ideal hi-fi LS as well with the addition of one of my extremely expensive distortion modules, send a stamped self addressed envelope for a price list :-)

hades

Going back a few posts, as I've given up reading all of this (no patience, I know)

Someone asked about isolation of speakers on a wood floor. For isolation of anything, I'd seriously suggest trying Nordost pulsar points - I was amazed that the difference was so blatant. Tried 3 sets in my Dad's system in a blind trial once (his is ~£3-4k of system), it took him seconds to say "wow - what have you done? I need to order some". PM me if you want the contact details for an extremely good dealer who stocks them (and lots of other great gear) and is happy to do suitable home trials.

And going back a way - Telboy, I agree with you. Having a set of Ruark Equinoxes myself (the later versions with the factory silver wire upgrade), set up nicely with pulsar points, Blue Heaven II cable, and a nice big ATC power amp feeding them, they definitely keep on improving the more you feed them. Am a big Ruark fan, a lot of their speakers show the benefits of much higher end partnering gear. I also agree re: putting the money into ampifiers - my pre/power combo is significantly the most expensive bit of my system.

To answer the original question, I think my system just about counts as "high end", but at the lower end of it. However, unlike a lot of people, I've actually reached a stage where at the moment, I'm totally happy with it and don't feel the need to upgrade at all.

Finally, I'm not convinced about hedehog's grand plan. IMHO, the thing that distinguishes true "high end hi fi" is the ability to change "character" dependent on what you're listening to. To my mind, this implies that the character is added by the recording rather than the equipment. I'm also far from convinced that building a "totally pure,flat" system is quite as easy as you imply. However, feel free to prove me wrong.

Vegescoob

hedgehog. When I was thinking about this some years ago it was on similar lines to you. I envisaged, as you say, flat (neutral?) amp with a digital preamp with control of various parameters. Much like your box of switches. One might describe some of these parameters as timing depth richness. Plus of course every version of valve layout known to man and Audionote.
I see though a problem in marketing. "yes well it nearly sounds like a Conrad Johnson but it's not quite right". And no hifi reviewer would accept that his/her ears could be fooled.

dba

i think its actually flat in the 'flat earth' sense,ie the Naim/Linn sound,where PRaT is everything,as opposed to 'round earth ie everything else.Its a reference to the listener,rather than the sound itself

RobJenks

Agree with all these points but would add that listening at night will produce more revealing qualities in the sound due to less "traffic" on the power supply.
Other factors which are worth mentioning is the layout of cables/interconnects as they all inter react with each other. My amps -MAS Solitaires - are particularly sensitive to this and are in fact a real pain.

RobJenks

I tend to be a bit alternative with hi-fi and have developed a means of improving sound quality by the use of "big Ears".
I came across this when trying to focus on a piece of music- I cupped my hands around my ears and the difference was breath taking.
Of course I could'nt go around like this so I have made "Big Ears" when seriously listening.
The first set I made were from paper mashie - Approx 300mm long x 100mm wide-I attached them to a safety helmet.
These were pretty crude , as they were my
Now I have a pair just under 1 metre tall and use for really really serious listening.
These I have sculptured from a block of polysterene and covered in fibre glass. These I have attached to a crash helmet -visor removed.
My wife thinks I'm crazy , but I'm an audiophile and prepared to go to any lengths to get "as near to the original sound " as possible.

RobJenks

I tend to be a bit alternative with hi-fi and have developed a means of improving sound quality by the use of "big Ears".
I came across this when trying to focus on a piece of music- I cupped my hands around my ears and the difference was breath taking.
Of course I could'nt go around like this so I have made "Big Ears" when seriously listening.
The first set I made were from paper mashie - Approx 300mm long x 100mm wide-I attached them to a safety helmet.
These were pretty crude , but they were my prototype.
Now I have a pair just under 1 metre tall and use for really really serious listening.
These I have sculptured from a block of polysterene and covered in fibre glass. These I have attached to a crash helmet -visor removed.
My wife thinks I'm crazy , but I'm an audiophile and prepared to go to any lengths to get "as near to the original sound " as possible.

TelBoy

Time of day i definitely agree with - 10pm onwards is always a winner. Length and layout of interconnects i'm not so sure about from personal experience...

CoobyS

I've been in and out of this hobby and found the best thing was DIY tweaks rather than spending all-out money for really expensive stuff.

My twisted pair network cable used for speakers (cost me nothing) sound much better to me than a set of £100+ per meter monster cable...

I've also dampend and sheilded my Marantz 67ose CD player (cost less than £2)...and it sounded better than the 67 KI sig i borrowed from my friend.

Oh, and the green marker trick on CD to absorb laser scatter (not sure if it's true as haven't blind tested)

The 'big ears' mentioned above make a phenomenial difference!

There are loads more, but it's been a few years now...

redwrx

My point about distortion was ....

if you put distortion in to the amp, it will only amplify that distortion and give you distortion out.
if you put a poor signal in, you only amplify a poor signal.
if your vinyl source has a crackle, then the crackle gets amplified ......no matter how good the amp... and hence my reasoning on why the most important part of the system should be the source....rather than an immence amp, with a reduced quality feed signal...


This really is a very good informative thread.... im also learning a bit from reading it. Well done to the thread starter.


But like others have said, it really is down to preference. I always wanted a Linn turntable from when i was a kid. I eventually justified the expense to get one.... in cost terms i cant afford to match the expense of the turnatable, as the rest of the system together only matches that.. but i get a buzz out of listening to it. Even if i had the money to better it, i wouldnt change it.


Frank

redwrx

I agree with Telboy...

time of day makes a difference too ...........late night listening - quality.

Vegescoob

Perhaps we do need a HiFi forum. We have a DIY one. This thread is covering so many aspects of HiFi it's becoming impossible to contribute to every discussion. A dedicated forum would mean threads covering different aspects. It's obvious there's a lot of interest in this area.

TelBoy

To be honest, it depends what you mean by "really expensive". If you're talking about spending £1,000 on a CD player instead of £500 then yes, it can be marginal. Step into the world of Krell, Levinson, Audinote, McIntosh, Jade and so on and it isn't. No DIY tweak in the world can match the leap forward in performance that these machines can offer, and that's *before* you've started pulling them apart and upgraded the capacitors!! Same with amplification - nothing can compensate for the kick-*** bass and control of a top notch set of amplifiers...

Green pens? Done that been there...

C h a z II

Best Upgrade I ever made to my system was power cables. I was lucky enough to have a Nordost £1750 lead to take to bits. Have since made my own for a fraction of the cost. Did a vblind listening test at work, everybody preferred my cable We now have them on the Komri's to give the bass more control. If anyone would like one I would consider making a limited run. I would like to make them comercially but there is sooo much paper work associated with making a mains cable. These will only work on earthed appliances with the "kettle" style plugs.

fatscoobyfella

Just a few details of the show as promised....

Renaissance SAS hotel manchester
29th and 30th of January
Room 404..

Come and have a listen!!

Cheers all..

www.manger-audio.co.uk

tiggers

Perfect as I should just be back from the US by then - I will definitely come down and have a listen.

Regards,

tiggers.

hades

Re: the debate on where should the money be spent, whilst "rubbish into an amp, rubbish out" is true, that's not the whole story.

The whole point to getting a "perfect" sound is to reproduce as accurately as possible the sound data recorded onto the CD, vinyl or whatever. Every link in the chain introduces a distortion or loss - the recording medium itself, the CD/record player, the interconnects, the amplifiers, the speaker cables, the speakers. To that you can add in other distortions from underdamped vibrations and mains feed.

The trick is to reduce the total loss incurred in the system. At extremes, bellwire in an otherwise sorted £100k set-up will be the thing that causes the most loss, and the biggest gain will be to change it, rather than further upgrading the amplifier, for example.

From an analogue electronics point of view, the higher the gain of an amplifier (noting that analogue stage of a CD player is, from an electronics point of view, purely a small number of very low gain amps), the harder it is to avoid distortion. There are only two potential high-gain amplifiers in a hi-fi system:- phono pre-amplifiers (only relevant to record decks), and power amplifiers. Hence, I suggest these are the places where the best engineering needs to be focussed.

OK, avoiding distortions in the lower level signals is still important, good retrieval of the information is clearly key, converting the electrical to accoustical energy is also somwhat vital. However, on balance, the important thing is to reduce the total losses between the original recording and your ear. If "big ears" helps that too, that's a bonus!

There are a few simple things that often get overlooked that make a huge difference to all of this. I would tell you what they all are, but wouldn't want to undermine my knowledge advantage over the rest of the world

Vegescoob

hades. Oh, go on, do tell us pleeeeeeease.

Alan C

I'll be there. Shouldn't look to odd wearing my Scooby hat, so you can instantly recognise the guys who should get the 'speacial seating', wine & extra extended sessions?

fatscoobyfella

WINE?????..not sure about that..but feel free to stop as long as ya like..the room that we could afford[404] is away from the main area of the show anyway.Heck of a lot cheaper!!! so cant really see it being packed out,suppose its down to how much attention we can muster up..

See ya there..

Gary

C h a z II

The owner of Linn Hi-Fi when I asked him what I should spend my money on (to make my system better) told me.

"Buy some more music"

TelBoy

Anyone who owns Linn, LP12 excepted, *would* say that!!

the moose

Some of the worst speakers I ever had were Linn. Meant to to be good, appalling load of cack in reality.

Alan C

Not a hijack as this excellent thread has digressed a little, so this will hopefully only add to that value, but just after some general comment.

I've spoken to Chaz and I'm wawaiting some detail on his cables (below), but as I'm using a Sugden A21 CD & Amp combo (that both use a valve o/p stage) I'm looking to manage the mains in order to improve the sound futher as I believe that Valve stages are more susceptible to mains 'poisoning'.

I’ve had both units for a few months and had them on the same extension lead that is fed by a US made mains cable that has an RF choke on the line (can’t remember the make right now (not AudUSA) but it cost me £70+ in Cyprus some years ago). The sound has always been superb, but I was interested in the crossover effects and moved the Amp to a separate switched extension lead and switched off the other kit in my AV rack. I fed the CD from the Filtered lead on another mains point. The extension in Bass was very noticeable and I also picked up an increase in separation / soundstage.
Therefore I am now seriously considering the Isotek Mini-sub as I’m sure this will further improve the sound with proper management of the RF filtering and crossover.

At £500 this is a considerable outlay, so any cheaper alternative that you guys can give that offers similar performance gains would be of interest. I am looking at another cable only option from Supra or Isotek with RF choke and cable screening to simply filter the input using the separate mains point.

tiggers

What vintage were they? Their early speakers had to be driven properly, but when they are they sound superb (apart from the Isobariks which I have still never heard sounding really top notch - down to me not hearing them in a proper system rather than the speakers I think).

Their later models I am less familiar with, but a top notch source and amplification are needed to make the Linn speakers sing.

tiggers.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Again, I think whether a speaker (or complete system) is 'good' depends to a large extent on what you're listening to and what you want from the music.

I heard a demo some years ago of a Linn setup playing one of my own rock CDs. The soundstage was remarkable - the drummer was clearly not only in the middle, but also at the back of the stage, with two guitars to the left and right and in front of the drummer, with the vocalist right at the front in the centre again. It was an incredible experience and not one I've ever heard before or since - but, for all its technical excellence, it didn't really excite me. Why? Because it sounded like four separate musicians all jamming away, rather than one band. The separation was at the cost of overall cohesion - no doubt this would work well with some kinds of music, but not mine, sadly.

tiggers

And that is the reason I am a Naim man. Imaging and soundstage are not Naim's strong points, but for rock music they're hard to beat in terms of sheer power, control and general musical enjoyment.

tiggers.