Time to update to 2 channel stereo

[lovinthehd]

Also true.

But some guys have 4 different audio systems just because they have 4 rooms and they want something in every room. It’s part of the addiction of the hobby.

For example, you might have a 26’x22’ dedicated HT room with a 5.1.4 ATMOS system. But then you also have a 24x22 family room just “sitting there”. And you think, “hmm, that’s a great excuse to have a 2Ch system in the family room!”

Yep, I can dig it! Mostly with me it has been graduating to larger spaces and using new and old gear to fill rooms up as their number increased. I hate selling stuff, too. I only have five distinct systems at this time, but have enough gear for a coupla more

 

[m. zillch]

I think he meant more 2ch vs multich gear....at least that's the way I took it. 2 ch integrated amps tend to be poor value IMO, tho.

Correct. I have edited my post to make that more clear.

 

[dolynick]

But some guys have 4 different audio systems just because they have 4 rooms and they want something in every room. It’s part of the addiction of the hobby.

This is true. I now have three made up of gear that cost a fair penny in it's day. Putting older gear to use as upgrades happen elsewhere. And I now have the makings of a pretty decent fourth system if I had a place to put it.

 

[m. zillch]

This same basic lie I mentioned is also used to convince people that they can't use universal disc players to spin all optical disc formats if they want the best performance. "You'll need a dedicated one for CDs and for SACDS because the video capable ones (DVD/BD/UHD) are 'compromises'", they'd often insist. Baloney.

In fact I distinctly remember in the early years Sony ES took this to extremes and would have us believe: "Your SACD player for 2ch content shouldn't double as your multi-channel SACD player." Yes, you heard that right, their flagship SACD player could not play multi-channel SACDs! You needed to buy two SACD machines if you wanted "the best".

 

[Happy Joe]

Thinking back; I believe the greatest improvements in my sound and system were the day I got rid of vinyl in the 1980's (The EX taking my record collection helped immensely; basically forcing me to convert to Compact discs...; along with trash canning most of the record cleaning paraphernalia. (No more pops and clicks and no more tracking the hours on the cartridge needle). The second greatest improvement happened I went from 2 ch (stereo to 5.1 with a home built 15"w/refrigerator sized cabinet, subwoofer and self designed active crossover... way back in the stone ages)...

...Life is easier, today!

Enjoy!

 

[highfigh]

I think he meant more 2ch vs multich gear....at least that's the way I took it. 2 ch integrated amps tend to be poor value IMO, tho.

He edited his post and I answered, based on the original.

2 ch integrated amps were sometimes a way to come very close to separate preamps WRT functions and performance, back in the '70s. Then, the major manufacturers decided that more psople should buy an integrated amp with a separate tuner in a pre-packaged system. Many of those weren't great. Then, the first AV systems came about and those weren't great, either. Now, it's all about AV with a supposed shift toward 'higher end' audio, designed by people who weren't involved in audio during the 'hey day', marketed to people who until recently used iPods & ear buds or a boom box, if they're 40 to 60 years old. A lot of people who are getting into audio now didn't have it as kids because their parents didn't care about it, especially after Napster.

People getting rid of their LPs, CDs, tapes and other media caused a market for these and it was because they didn't want to deal with or devote space to physical media. I get that- I know people who had thousands of LPs and they all complained when it was time to move from one place to another. LPs coming back was interesting, but use of cassettes has been increasing, too. Convenient, but not the best-sounding or most durable format.

 

[highfigh]

This same basic lie I mentioned is also used to convince people that they can't use universal disc players to spin all optical disc formats if they want the best performance. "You'll need a dedicated one for CDs and for SACDS because the video capable ones (DVD/BD/UHD) are 'compromises'", they'd often insist. Baloney.

In fact I distinctly remember in the early years Sony ES took this to extremes and would have us believe: "Your SACD player for 2ch content shouldn't double as your multi-channel SACD player." Yes, you heard that right, their flagship SACD player could not play multi-channel SACDs! You needed to buy two machines if you wanted "the best".

Look at the price of those units- they weren't for the mass market, they were made for people who could afford them.

 

[highfigh]

Yep, I can dig it! Mostly with me it has been graduating to larger spaces and using new and old gear to fill rooms up as their number increased. I hate selling stuff, too. I only have five distinct systems at this time, but have enough gear for a coupla more

How many do you need? If you use the 'how many guitars do I need?' question, the answer is 'n+1'.

 

[m. zillch]

Look at the price of those units- they weren't for the mass market, they were made for people who could afford them.

Well I can't recall having ever sold one personally however I had one of them on demo in my high end audio store and used it all the time. When I challenged my audiophile friend, a recording engineer, to demonstrate his "ability" to hear differences between amps in a small token bet, we both agreed it was the best device to serve as the source signal, playing his hand picked music of choice he brought for the occasion. You can see it on the left in this image of the test rig we used:

He sat in the sweet spot throughout the blind test and that's his knee you see (part of) on the pic's left edge.

 

[highfigh]

Well I can't recall having ever sold one personally however I had one of them on demo in my high end audio store and used it all the time. When I challenged my audiophile friend, a recording engineer, to demonstrate his "ability" to hear differences between amps in a small token bet, we both agreed it was the best device to serve as the source signal, playing his hand picked music of choice he brought for the occasion. You can see it on the left in this image of the test rig we used:
View attachment 75457
He sat in the sweet spot throughout the blind test and that's his knee you see (part of) on the pic's left edge.

What's in the system? Some of it reminds me of Krell.

 

[m. zillch]

^The tower speakers he selected to use were Sonus faber sitting atop their heavy stone slabs (marble? granite?). Most of the electronics were made by a now defunct division of Mark Levinson called Proceed.* The AC power conditioner and cables were mostly from Monster. Their highest level at the time called Sigma something-or-other. Their RCA cables and plugs were so ridiculously thick the jacks you connect them to look relatively puny in comparison:

[It was kind of dark behind the gear so I had to turn on my camera's infrared mode ("night vision") hence the lack of true color in this pic.]


*Interestingly, shortly after our private test Mark Levinson happened to announce they were going to phase out but then re-release the dual monaural power amp we used, but re-badged directly as a "Mark Levison", with no changes being made to its electronics; just its outer casing and name plate.

 

[lovinthehd]

How many do you need? If you use the 'how many guitars do I need?' question, the answer is 'n+1'.

That's what we say in bicycle ownership, too