What You Look for in Equipment(Performance/Style/Mystique)

[PhilCohen]

When you are shopping for new equipment, what matters most to you? Is it performance,Style(The appearance of the equipment) or the mystique that a manufacturer has cultivated? Have YouTube "Influencers" influenced your decision or made you aware of a product? To an extent,we are all influenced by advertising.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

#1 - Performance, but to a point. AVP/Amp THD+N 0.001% is great, and 0.0001% isn’t going to make any difference. Speaker In-room FR +/-2dB is great, and +/-6dB is kind of bad.

#2 - Aesthetic. I would never buy anything that I think is ugly.

#3 - Pride of ownership/Company reputation, Warranty and History. The better and the longer the warranty, the more faith I have in the company. Never gonna buy anything I think is “cheap” stuff or buy from companies who can’t back up their products with solid warranty.

#4- cost. Not going to spend too much money on anything. Get as much discounts/deals as possible.

 

[m. zillch]

#1 100% audibly faithful reproduction of its input signal, or as Quad puts it: "Nothing added. Nothing taken away."

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

#1 100% audibly faithful reproduction of its input signal, or as Quad puts it: "Nothing added. Nothing taken away."

If you’re playing a piano, only you know how it actually sounds exactly in your room and seat. But how would everybody else know unless they were in the same room and seat as you? How would everybody else know if anything was added or subtracted?

 

[Alex2507]

#4- cost. Not going to spend too much money on anything. Get as much discounts/deals as possible.

That's my #1. I swear to Christ I'm in the wrong tax bracket for this hobby.

I should have gotten into bird watching or rock collecting.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

That's my #1. I swear to Christ I'm in the wrong tax bracket for this hobby.

I should have gotten into bird watching or rock collecting.

I remember when I had my first $1K 5.1-speaker system, I was so happy. But then I started hanging out on this forum. Next thing I know…

 

[TLS Guy]

When you are shopping for new equipment, what matters most to you? Is it performance,Style(The appearance of the equipment) or the mystique that a manufacturer has cultivated? Have YouTube "Influencers" influenced your decision or made you aware of a product? To an extent,we are all influenced by advertising.

First of all, it has to do the job I want it to and meet my specification, including the connections and facilities I need.

The most difficult aspect is assessing the reliability. I really hate equipment that gives me problems. The reputation of the manufacturer can help here. It has taken about 20 years to be have an AVP of comparable quality to the rest of my system.

This is where you have an advantage in choosing vintage equipment. It has a track record. So if there is good vintage equipment that will meet my needs, then I will usually go for it. However, a good deal of my vintage equipment I have had since new and 60 years and more in some cases. The other issue is that in older equipment there is a circuit and more often than not a good service manual available. That gives you a good chance of being able to service it. Modern equipment is packed in and everything close quarters and built by robot using surface mount hot air soldering. Service manual are never available these days, which is another disgrace. So options for repair are minimal. So this is another reason to use vintage equipment if it will do the job. All my power amps for instance are vintage and of superb quality. I would not swap any of them for any amp made now.

There is far too much modern equipment that proves to be a disgrace. A lot of it is packed with bells and whistles, but does not meet respectable build quality and that includes a lot of gear that looks fancy but good design is not there "behind the hood."

When it comes to speakers, I only have myself to blame, as I have always designed and built my own. I am glad I can and do, as when I hear a lot of speakers there are many I could not tolerate. I choose quality drivers and use crossover components of a much higher quality, than generally found in commercial speakers. I have never heard a commercial speaker I would rather have than my own. So I am really glad I don't have to go speaker shopping.

 

[m. zillch]

If you’re playing a piano, only you know how it actually sounds exactly in your room and seat. But how would everybody else know unless they were in the same room and seat as you? How would everybody else know if anything was added or subtracted?

The goal is not to perfectly reproduce the sound of the piano, at least for me, because as you say where you are seated/positioned and the differing room acoustics/reflections of the venue will alter the sound for that particular vantage point compared to any other. There is no one "correct" sound; there are millions. The goal in high fidelity, at least to me, is to instead attempt to faithfully reproduce the master tape. Fidelity, after all, means "faithfulness". [In a simplistic sense you can think of that 2ch master tape as "one specific vantage point the artists (including their engineers) agreed had the sound/experience they wanted to convey".]

The musicians and their recording engineers worked as a team and painstakingly prepared that 2ch tape after listening to it dozens if not hundreds of versions using different mics, mic placement, different takes, EQ, reverb, effects, mixing, mastering, etc. and they apply their stamp of approval and signature to the final product: the 2ch master tape [these days often a hard drive actually]. They are the artists so they get to decide how to make the "painting" and what hues to use, not me, but in the end they finalized on one version and "signed their name to it".

So how do we test individual electrical components within our reproduction chain to see if their output is indeed faithful or not? One answer: Bypass tests. If you were testing if a piece of glass was truly visually transparent (as opposed to if an amp is audibly transparent) you look through it and then pull it away, you bypass it, and see if you can detect a difference. The goal in both circumstances is for complete, 100% transparency: the incoming signal hitting the glass (or amp) matches its output signal (according to human perception at least). Audio electronics and wires work similarly but with sound instead of light. If you can't detect when the device/wire is in or out of the signal path then you can't argue its output is opaque/murky/compromised/poor or "low fidelity".

Transparency is not everyone's goal but it is mine and that of the brands I look to.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The goal is to faithfully reproduce the master tape.

The musicians and their recording engineers worked as a team and painstakingly prepared that 2ch tape…they apply their stamp of approval and signature to the final product: the 2ch master tape.

Audio electronics and wires work similarly but with sound. If you can't detect when the device/wire in in or out of the signal path then you can't argue its output is compromised/poor or "low fidelity".

Transparency is not everyone's goal but it is mine and that of the brands I look to.

Everyone wants a transparent signal and faithful sound reproduction. Now after that, some people can choose to add or subtract the bass or treble (if they feel it hurts their ears).

So again, unless you are the musicians and recording engineers who have access to THE MASTER 2CH TAPE, how would you know if the CD/Album/Sound you hear is exactly 100% like the Master Tape?

Here’s an analogy. Say your speakers have an anechoic frequency response of +/-1dB, which is almost perfect - like the Master FR. But when you put your speakers inside your room, your room acoustics will alter the sound of your speakers so that your speakers in-room FR is now +/-6dB, which is far far from the Master FR.

So now you have to deal with the music CD/source, AVP and Amps, Speakers, and Room Acoustics to make sure the music sounds like the MASTER 2CH TAPE that you have NEVER EVEN HEARD.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

When it comes to speakers, I only have myself to blame, as I have always designed and built my own. I am glad I can and do, as when I hear a lot of speakers there are many I could not tolerate. I choose quality drivers and use crossover components of a much higher quality, than generally found in commercial speakers. I have never heard a commercial speaker I would rather have than my own. So I am really glad I don't have to go speaker shopping.

I am surprised you don’t post REW graphs of your home-made speakers to show how perfect their in-room FR is (must be +/-0.5dB) or other REW graphs to show how perfect your home-made speakers are.

 

[highfigh]

When you are shopping for new equipment, what matters most to you? Is it performance,Style(The appearance of the equipment) or the mystique that a manufacturer has cultivated? Have YouTube "Influencers" influenced your decision or made you aware of a product? To an extent,we are all influenced by advertising.

Most of the YT 'influencers' are pretty clueless and just want to see themselves on the TVs.

Knowledge prevents the marketing BS mind pollution that makes people believe "It sounds plausible, so it must be true".

Bottom line, any equipment needs to avoid irritating/fatiguing the ears and that definitely can happen. Specs are useful- if the equipment meets current standards and adds no/very low distortions, it should sound neutral. I would advise against chasing miniscule differences in specs in a quest for perfection. Nothing is perfect and those tiny increments are very expensive.

It's too bad brick & mortar stores are so hard to find- listening before buying was very helpful.

If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is- a bit of skepticism is very useful.

 

[highfigh]

I am surprised you don’t post REW graphs of your home-made speakers to show how perfect their in-room FR is (must be +/-0.5dB) or other REW graphs to show how perfect your home-made speakers are.

I think he has but searching might be very time-consuming.

 

[highfigh]

The goal is not to perfectly reproduce the sound of the piano, at least for me, because as you say where you are seated/positioned and the differing room acoustics/reflections of the venue will alter the sound for that particular vantage point compared to any other. There is no one "correct" sound; there are millions. The goal in high fidelity, at least to me, is to instead attempt to faithfully reproduce the master tape. Fidelity, after all, means "faithfulness". [In a simplistic sense you can think of that 2ch master tape as "one specific vantage point the artists agreed had the sound/experience they wanted to convey".]

The musicians and their recording engineers worked as a team and painstakingly prepared that 2ch tape after listening to it dozens if not hundreds of versions using different mics, mic placement, different takes, EQ, reverb, effects, mixing, mastering, etc. and they apply their stamp of approval and signature to the final product: the 2ch master tape [these days often a hard drive actually]. They are the artists so they get to decide how to make the "painting" and what hues to use, not me, but in the end they finalized on one version and "signed their name to it".

So how do we test individual electrical components within our reproduction chain to see if their output is indeed faithful or not? One answer: Bypass tests. If you were testing if a piece of glass was truly transparent you look through it and then pull it away, you bypass it, and see if you can detect a difference. The goal is for complete, 100% transparency: the incoming signal hitting the glass matches its output signal (according to human perception at least). Audio electronics and wires work similarly but with sound. If you can't detect when the device/wire in in or out of the signal path then you can't argue its output is compromised/poor or "low fidelity".

Transparency is not everyone's goal but it is mine and that of the brands I look to.

Human hearing isn't capable of detecting the tiny differences found in electronic testing. Also, anything used for switching between components can add somethiong of its own and the time needed for manually making the change(s) can cause the listener to miss some of the details.

WRT your ideas on the recording process- the musicians usually don't have much, if any, input on the sound- the producer or artist has ideas about what they want to hear in the music and even session greats like Lee Sklar don't have the luxury of tweaking their sound because recording time is very expensive. The session musicians go in, might check out the score to see if it's correct, needs changing and this may occur with the producer, artist(s), etc- they then work on learning the parts and their basic sound and try to nail it in as few takes as possible.

Sometimes, the tape rolls/recording software starts and they start playing. In some cases, there is no music to learn, they just find something to work with and everyone creates their own parts- Billy Cobham's Spectrum is one LP where this happened and if you watch YT videos, look for the ones where Lee Sklar talks about this one. He did an interview with Rick Beato and talked about that one.

Some musicians used a ridiculous amount of time to record their music and it was incredibly expensive, but they sold enough records that the label was OK with it. The 1950s-1970s was a time when session musicians made the records and the band members learned it so they could go on tour. Many times, they checked out the music and got the hang of it, then nailed it in one or two takes, with some parts that defined songs coming from one or more players. They got little or no recognition for their input. They were paid well for their time & talents, but not credited or paid for record sales.

As far as 'faithfully reproducing the master tape", there's only one way to hear it the way they did in the mastering room and that's to have an identical room, identical equipment and climate- even air pressure & humidity affect hearing and if they were working long hours or without resting their ears, the sonic overload took its toll.

 

[lovinthehd]

When you are shopping for new equipment, what matters most to you? Is it performance,Style(The appearance of the equipment) or the mystique that a manufacturer has cultivated? Have YouTube "Influencers" influenced your decision or made you aware of a product? To an extent,we are all influenced by advertising.

When I shop for a piece of gear these days it tends to be something I need specifically, and would look to performance/value, especially over aesthetic (which isn't much variety to begin with with audio/video gear anyways). A brand only means so much these days, but consistency and reputation have value. Youtubers or other social media "influencers" tend to be more a turnoff and seem more self-appointed than particularly useful. Advertising/marketing come with the territory but I don't lean on such.

 

[m. zillch]

Human hearing isn't capable of detecting the tiny differences found in electronic testing. Also, anything used for switching between components can add somethiong of its own and the time needed for manually making the change(s) can cause the listener to miss some of the details.

So, at least as I read this, you are suggesting that if there are indeed audible differences between two things we'll just never know. . . because it is fundamentally un-testable in what you deem a fair and uncompromised manner.

 

[m. zillch]

So again, unless you are the musicians and recording engineers who have access to THE MASTER 2CH TAPE, how would you know if the CD/Album/Sound you hear is exactly 100% like the Master Tape?

You and others I've read seem to get hung up on not having direct access to the master 2ch. tape as being a "stumbling block" but as far as I'm concerned if an electronic component/wire* I'm considering to buy faithfully reproduces a test signal I select then I can safely assume it would also faithfully reproduces the master tape too if I were to borrow/buy it. . . or for that matter properly executed copies of it.


*(my posts' topic, not speakers)

 

[Cos]

1. Performance to Dollar ratio, I need to figure out that ratio. One thing about me, is that I am always looking for the best deal, so not necessarily worried as much about price (within my budget), I want to save to spend more
2. Does it sound good to me, yes specs are important, but I have found many speakers for example that measure well, but didn't impress me
3. Customer Support, I rate this high, because no matter how great the specs, I am going to have questions/issues at some point, if there support sucks, I won't buy no matter the $$ and spec, this includes regular firmware updates etc.
4. Aesthetic, I learned my lesson from "The Sock" GE, loved the sound, hated the look, why not have both
5. Upgradability, I have taken advantage of this with my Marantz AV8802A & My Current Anthem, while not a deal breaker, it's nice to know that I have options without having to buy a new unit

While I do have pride in ownership as up there, it is less important as the ones listed above.

 

[TLS Guy]

I am surprised you don’t post REW graphs of your home-made speakers to show how perfect their in-room FR is (must be +/-0.5dB) or other REW graphs to show how perfect your home-made speakers are.

I don't use REW, but do have FRs from omni mic which I have posted many times.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

if an electronic component/wire* I'm considering to buy faithfully reproduces a test signal I select then I can safely assume it would also faithfully reproduces the master tape too if I were to borrow/buy it. . . or for that matter properly executed copies of it.

*(my posts' topic, not speakers)

An electronic component reproducing WHAT TEST SIGNAL?

 

[m. zillch]

An electronic component reproducing WHAT TEST SIGNAL?

Well I most typically use this one (but not sourced from Youtube):