Topic: Are your speakers analytical/hyperdetailed? List them here!

[av_phile1]

Sir av_phile1,

Paano po nyo magagawa itong Neutrality, Transparency and Accuracy?  How do you achieve no coloration?  Kailangan ko ba ng mga mike, spectrum analyzer to achieve this?  How did you do this in your system?

You don't.   There's only so much you can if your current system is not.  Unless you are a techie adept at modifying.  Just get the gears with the best possible specs you consider to be within the confines of neutrality, transparency and accuracy you can afford.   The simplest separates are often the best in this department.  No tone controls. No video switchng circuits,  fewest audio switches along the audio path, least displays, etc.

Set-up your room with the least possible reverb and room mode activation using SPL meter and a test CD.   Having no accoustic room coloration is ideal and you can get that when you engineer your listening room from the ground up to be a really neutral room.  OTH, you just have to treat it the best way you know while maintaining its liveability. 

I can suspect where you're heading.  Just to let you know, I do not claim to have a neutral, transparent and accurate system.  That's my objective.  But if my simple set-up can give me goose bumps and emotional highs listening to great records, without the aid of any tone shaping devices, I believe I have one foot on one.  And because I can easily identify a good recording from a lousy one, I am one step closer to one.   High Fidelity is both an objective and journey.  Just when you think you're there, you realize there's still an open road ahead.  The journey is basically what underpines this hobby.  And you shouldn't lose sight of the objective.  You may not achieve it, but when you know what you want, every pitstop gets you closer to it.  I'm in one of those early stops.  And at this time, I see no further need to continue with the journey until I find something better. 

[aHobbit]

Quincy Jones, Rod Stewart, Sting, and many artists would always review the take and dictate re-takes to get to the sound they want.

Isn’t this something. These artists use their ears and dictate retakes because they do not want how they sound! How can it be? Because they have on their heads how they should sound like – and this is on the basis of the amp/speaker they are using during reviews!

… This point is philosophically critical…

… A high fidelity audio system should not attempt to make a recording sound better by altering the recorded signal in any way."[/i]

fr:
http://www.audioperfectionist.com/

High fidelity is a scientific term in audio technology – and as usual in scientific findings, ideal condition applies.

And when technology is used in practical life, you now integrate physical limitations.

Thus, an ideal amp should not alter the sound. And we don’t have ideal amp, so employ compensations. From the input of the amp, compensation exists because the path (amp stages) are not ideal. The pre-amp input has compensation, your tone control is supposedly compensating control within the reach of the user of the amp. Up to the output, you still employ compensation – the cross-overs and the matching of drivers also blended together for a compensated sound. All of these things is for the realization of an approximated ideal ‘fidelity’ you formed in your head (in your absence during recording sessions).

Thus, the definition above is true to itself – merely a PHILOSOPHICAL (IDEAL) thing, not at all usable by us earthlings. If a recording can be altered by the studio, to comply to what he has in his head should be ‘hi-fi’-ish sound – using his amp/speakers during review, what prevents you now to accomplish the same, using your amp/speaker in your listening area?

It is true, an amp should not, as a goal, alter the signal – so compensations inside the amps abound. But in the course of your physical limitation (the likes of your speakers, acoustics, etc etc), you also employ your mode of compensation – and what is your goal? To also achieve, what should be hi-fi in your head. This is more practical because you acknowledge that physical things around you will alter the sound and you are now in ‘altering’ mode to reconstruct the hi-fi.

Some audiophile have entertained in their heads that their sources, CDs, amp, cable, speakers, acoustics, ears are perfect – and that any alteration along the path of their ‘perfect’ gears are anti-HIFI – or simply euphonic. So they labour patiently to hear all/every recorded material as is! Good luck!      . may the force be with them.

How do you take an audiophile when he say his new CD player, or amp, or speaker is now sounds closer to the original? I simply thought he is in cloud9 and do not know what he is talking about!    (was he there during the recording?)

O baka spaghetti na ito?     

hifi recording
hifi mastering
hifi system building
hifi system altering

naku fo!     

[av_phile1]

Isn’t this something. These artists use their ears and dictate retakes because they do not want how they sound! How can it be? Because they have on their heads how they should sound like – and this is on the basis of the amp/speaker they are using during reviews!

Precisely why I want to hear exactly what they put into those records.  I want to hear what  was in the head of a famous artist and his collaborative effort with a recording enigneering.   Nothing added or subtracted.  Like I said, the recording can be miles apart from the actual performance of that recording.  So I don't enteratain any illusion I will ever hear the real thing in any playback system.  That's never the objective of Hi-Fi.  But I expect a gooHi Fi playback system to reproduce as faithflly as possible what is contained in that recording. 

High fidelity is a scientific term in audio technology – and as usual in scientific findings, ideal condition applies.

And when technology is used in practical life, you now integrate physical limitations.

Really?     Everything has its limitations. Whether you use technology or not.  I don't know about you,  but I find the applications of technology a liberating thing in my everyday life. 

Thus, an ideal amp should not alter the sound. And we don’t have ideal amp, so employ compensations. From the input of the amp, compensation exists because the path (amp stages) are not ideal. The pre-amp input has compensation, your tone control is supposedly compensating control within the reach of the user of the amp. Up to the output, you still employ compensation – the cross-overs and the matching of drivers also blended together for a compensated sound. All of these things is for the realization of an approximated ideal ‘fidelity’ you formed in your head (in your absence during recording sessions).

I am not interested in what goes on inside an amp.  Not entirely.   For an someone interest in high fidelity, the only things that matter is the diference, if any, between the input signal and the output signal.  If the only difference between them is the amplitude of the current to adequately drive the speakers,  that's just fine.

Thus, the definition above is true to itself – merely a PHILOSOPHICAL (IDEAL) thing, not at all usable by us earthlings. If a recording can be altered by the studio, to comply to what he has in his head should be ‘hi-fi’-ish sound – using his amp/speakers during review, what prevents you now to accomplish the same, using your amp/speaker in your listening area?

Nothing.  As I said, you're free to alter the signal as you want.  That's your listening preferrence.  Call it whatever you want But it's not hi fi.  Capiche?

It is true, an amp should not, as a goal, alter the signal – so compensations inside the amps abound. But in the course of your physical limitation (the likes of your speakers, acoustics, etc etc), you also employ your mode of compensation – and what is your goal? To also achieve, what should be hi-fi in your head. This is more practical because you acknowledge that physical things around you will alter the sound and you are now in ‘altering’ mode to reconstruct the hi-fi.

You will never get the real thing from any playback system.  That's sheer illusion.  The recording itself is miles apart form the performance.  But why add to the alteration?  A high fidelity system will reveal the sonics of a great recording in all its majesty the way it was intended to be heard by the artist and the label.   I have no intentions of mutilating it with tone controls and equalizers. 

Serous audiophiles have no illusion they're getting the real thing and they know reproducing the recorded information as faithfully as their gears and room allow them is the most that a good high fidelity system can do. 

What hi-fi in the head?     Hi fi does not reside in the head, it's a playback or recording standard.  Let's not confuse the word hi-fi with personal notions of how music should sound.  That's a personal assessment that resides in your head.  Not Hi-Fi. 

Some audiophile have entertained in their heads that their sources, CDs, amp, cable, speakers, acoustics, ears are perfect – and that any alteration along the path of their ‘perfect’ gears are anti-HIFI – or simply euphonic. So they labour patiently to hear all/every recorded material as is! Good luck!      . may the force be with them.

How do you take an audiophile when he say his new CD player, or amp, or speaker is now sounds closer to the original? I simply thought he is in cloud9 and do not know what he is talking about!    (was he there during the recording?)

O baka spaghetti na ito?     

hifi recording
hifi mastering
hifi system building
hifi system altering

naku fo!     

Who says audiophiles have this notion that their gears are perfect?  On the contrary, most audiophiles I know are consistently hypercritical and always find fault in their gears.   And I don't know about peple who themselves spend time and effort altering the sound with their tone controls and equalizers,  many audiophiles I know wouldn't as they're very happy with the way their system sounds.  Without tone controls.

[EB]

av_phile1,

Thank you for your response.

Actually, i am not heading to neutrality, transparency and accuracy (walang dagdag o bawas).  Para sa akin kasi, this is not achievable.  However flat the frequency response of your equipment or room is, the REPLICA played in your system is unikley to sound the same as the replica played in the recording studio.  If so, then there is dagdag o bawas so to speak. 

Since i don't think i can achieve accuracy, might as well just ENJOY THE MUSIC

[av_phile1]

It is plain this thread has become an arena between purists and alterists, if I can call them that.  It's another classic debate that will never see the end of it .  Much like between subjectivists and objectivists.  

I have given the definition of High Fidelity as embraced by most seasoned audiophiles in the industry and purists.  Hi fi is an objective.  It's also a standard you can adopt. But like anything else, no one's forcing anyone to adopt these in their listening spree.   I did adopt it.  It actually makes my life a lot simpler.

Asking Hi Fi to sound like the real thing is a delusion.   Wake up.  No such animal.  Hi Fi doesn't do that.. Home playback gears can only hope to be faithful to the original source recording.  And that in itself is already a tall order few systems can accomplish satisfactorily.  Let alone aspire to sound like the real thing.  

But if you think you are closer to the real sounds by using tone controls, good for you.  But think again.

Nothing that equalizers and tone controls can do will ever bring you there.  The best you can do with these is compensate for room and speaker responses to give it a flat character.  But I prefer addressing the room and speaker acoustics directly as they yield more lasting result.    The worst you can do with these, and which is often the case,  is introduce phase shifts and harmonic distortion products that only serve to muddle the original signals.  Nothing's preventing you from using them.  I certainly wouldn't even dream of preventing you from using them.  In fact, there's a perverse satisfaction I get knowing you use them and I don't.      So go ahead.  

I have given you guys my reasons why I don't use them.  I've read your reasons why you use them. We obviously woudn't buy into each other's argument.  So let's just leave them be.    I rest my case.  

[av_phile1]

av_phile1,

Thank you for your response.

Actually, i am not heading to neutrality, transparency and accuracy (walang dagdag o bawas).  Para sa akin kasi, this is not achievable.  However flat the frequency response of your equipment or room is, the REPLICA played in your system is unikley to sound the same as the replica played in the recording studio.  If so, then there is dagdag o bawas so to speak. 

Since i don't think i can achieve accuracy, might as well just ENJOY THE MUSIC

I kinda like your attitude.  Enjoying the music is what we want.  And you can get there through the Hi-fi route or through the euphonic route.  Your call.

   

[bumblebee]

If Hi-Fi is relative, then why do I see recommendations for B&W's, AE's, MA's, Mordaunt's, NAD, Rotel, Denon etc. Would it be acceptable to us if someone say Bose will be better than a Dynaudio? That a Sakura can be more musical than a Krell?

I don't think so.

PS

I think we're confusing Hi-Fi w/ being musical.

[oweidah]

yan ang sarap d2 pdvd dami matutunan! ganda talaga hobby na 'to!
nag-umpisa sa alulong ng aso saan kaya matatapos?
meowwww

[bumblebee]

yan ang sarap d2 pdvd dami matutunan! ganda talaga hobby na 'to!
nag-umpisa sa alulong ng aso saan kaya matatapos?
meowwww

If we start w/ the "alulong" and ended up hearing a sweet meow, that's not Hi-Fi. But, it sure is musical

[oweidah]

Enjoying the music is what we want. And you can get there through the Hi-fi route or through the euphonic route. Your call.

crossroads? seem to come and go......
peace

[aHobbit]

…  I want to hear what  was in the head of a famous artist and his collaborative effort with a recording enigneering.   Nothing added or subtracted…

So who is dreaming?     

Really?     Everything has its limitations. Whether you use technology or not.  I don't know about you,  but I find the applications of technology a liberating thing in my everyday life. 
 

  

…   For an someone interest in high fidelity, the only things that matter is the diference, if any, between the input signal and the output signal…
 

… and keeps on dreaming…. (as if audiophile, as serious as you are, did measure the difference!)        .  You might be refering to the output of your amp, but it is not the one reaching your ears - it is the output of your speakers! 

Nothing.  As I said, you're free to alter the signal as you want.  That's your listening preferrence.  Call it whatever you want But it's not hi fi.  Capiche?
 

… and remains dreaming …  (as if his decision not to alter signal is not called his listening preference as well, solemnly believes his amp/speaker did not alter the signal – see above)

…  A high fidelity system will reveal the sonics of a great recording in all its majesty the way it was intended to be heard by the artist and the label…

…and never stops dreaming…     (as if the amp/speaker synergy in the studio is the same amp/speaker synergy in every home, as if all amp/speaker synergy combination result in the same performance)

Serous audiophiles have no illusion they're getting the real thing and they know reproducing the recorded information as faithfully as their gears and room allow them is the most that a good high fidelity system can do. 
 

…uh oh…  the tone control is part of the gears that will faithfully reproduce the sound!!!     

What hi-fi in the head?     Hi fi does not reside in the head, it's a playback or recording standard.  Let's not confuse the word hi-fi with personal notions of how music should sound.  That's a personal assessment that resides in your head.  Not Hi-Fi. 
 

…hmmn…  I thought that it is your head that makes the notion that if you apply tone controls, it is not hi-fi anymore – but rather euphonic.  And tube lovers that choose different tubes because of its sonic signature ceases to be hi-fi enthusiasts but euphonic enthusiast…   

Who says audiophiles have this notion that their gears are perfect?  On the contrary, most audiophiles I know are consistently hypercritical and always find fault in their gears.   And I don't know about peple who themselves spend time and effort altering the sound with their tone controls and equalizers,  many audiophiles I know wouldn't as they're very happy with the way their system sounds.  Without tone controls.

…that’s always the problem with your ‘most’ audiophiles. They thought it is their gears which are always at fault – not the recording!     


Hay hiho!

Buti na lang pasko na!     

[av_phile1]

Obviously, some posters coiuldn't carry a decent argument.  I shouldn't have wasted my time dignifying  the post of a cranially destitute poster.  For now, I'll refrain from stooping down to the creature's level.

[aHobbit]

If Hi-Fi is relative, then why do I see recommendations for B&W's, AE's, MA's, Mordaunt's, NAD, Rotel, Denon etc. Would it be acceptable to us if someone say Bose will be better than a Dynaudio? That a Sakura can be more musical than a Krell?

I don't think so.

PS

I think we're confusing Hi-Fi w/ being musical.

As usual, brands or cost has nothing to do with sonic performance…

…Or better yet, go straight to the point…  

Can you give us readers when is a certain gear considered hi-fi and when it is not?  

Did the hi-fi convention you maybe basing your hi-fi definition stated it should be +-0 dB from 20-20k Hz at 0%THD from 0-full power (ideal fidelity)?   On the speaker, at what freq peak/dip level before it is considered hi-fi?     Did your mag reviews provide you freq resp curve for you to judge if it falls on your definition of hi-fi?      

Or since when, the presence of tone controls in amp, made the amp not hi-fi anymore – or when you move those knobs, the amp ceases to reproduce hi-fi?          

So how faithful is faithful if it is not really faithful?            

So who is confusing what?  

[aHobbit]

Obviously, some posters coiuldn't carry a decent argument. 

I shouldn't have wasted my time dignifying  the post of a CRANIALLY DESTITUTE poster. 

For now, I'll refrain from stooping down to the creature's level.

hmmn ... as if ...

... look up on the pedestal?

honorable escape! 

Sige na nga - Happy New Year na!     

[bumblebee]

As usual, brands or cost has nothing to do with sonic performance…

…Or better yet, go straight to the point… 

Can you give us readers when is a certain gear considered hi-fi and when it is not? 

Did the hi-fi convention you maybe basing your hi-fi definition stated it should be +-0 dB from 20-20k Hz at 0%THD from 0-full power (ideal fidelity)?  On the speaker, at what freq peak/dip level before it is considered hi-fi?    Did your mag reviews provide you freq resp curve for you to judge if it falls on your definition of hi-fi?        

Or since when, the presence of tone controls in amp, made the amp not hi-fi anymore – or when you move those knobs, the amp ceases to reproduce hi-fi?         

So how faithful is faithful if it is not really faithful?           

So who is confusing what? 

There is a reason why Hi-Fi has the "high" adjective in it. For me, it means to play a recording as accurately as possible. How to achieve that? You've just provided the specs. The better the specs, the better the fidelity.

The result, whether pleasing or not, is another story.

That simple.

[aHobbit]

If Hi-Fi is relative, then why do I see recommendations for B&W's, AE's, MA's, Mordaunt's, NAD, Rotel, Denon etc. Would it be acceptable to us if someone say Bose will be better than a Dynaudio? That a Sakura can be more musical than a Krell?

I don't think so.

PS

I think we're confusing Hi-Fi w/ being musical.

There is a reason why Hi-Fi has the "high" adjective in it. For me, it means to play a recording as accurately as possible. How to achieve that? You've just provided the specs. The better the specs, the better the fidelity.

The result, whether pleasing or not, is another story.

That simple.

True, but you made mention of Sakura and Krell. Bose and others. Can you categorically say Sakura and Bose as not hi-fi? (based on your referenced definition of the hi-fi standard)

Since no recording playback gears can reproduce perfectly, and hi-fi is a standard (exact science, can be measured) which as it seems you knew, at what conditions will a gear (or the sound it reproduced) be not considered hi-fi (just only euphonic - musical) given the specs (assuming you believe them)?

...

hi-fi is not always musical
musical is not always hi-fi
hi-fi is always musical
musical is always hi-fi


nahihilo aqui! 

[docsialu]

gud day, i have a b2 and ra01 combo, and i noticed that its quite makalansing, is that what you mean by hyperdetailed, and is that a bad thing?

[bumblebee]

True, but you made mention of Sakura and Krell. Bose and others. Can you categorically say Sakura and Bose as not hi-fi? (based on your referenced definition of the hi-fi standard)

I didn't say Sakura is not Hi-Fi. Bose pwede pa. But, don't get me wrong. The two brands were mentioned just for comparison. For the sake of discussion.

Since no recording playback gears can reproduce perfectly, and hi-fi is a standard (exact science, can be measured) which as it seems you knew, at what conditions will a gear (or the sound it reproduced) be not considered hi-fi (just only euphonic - musical) given the specs (assuming you believe them)?

...

hi-fi is not always musical
musical is not always hi-fi
hi-fi is always musical
musical is always hi-fi


nahihilo aqui! 

hi-fi is not always musical
musical is not always hi-fi
hi-fi can be musical
musical can be hi-fi

[oweidah]

gud day, i have a b2 and ra01 combo, and i noticed that its quite makalansing, is that what you mean by hyperdetailed, and is that a bad thing?

hi doc, para sa akin hindi po un sobra kalansing ang ibig sabihin ng hyperdtailed -- sobra linaw ang mga instrumento at boses, parang hinimay mo ung orkestra, dinig ultimo mahinang pitik ng cymbals.

depende p0 sa taste nyo kung mas type nyo makalansing na speakers basta hindi tunog lata, hindi p0 kayo naririndi at nakakatagal makinig sa system nyo ok. by the way, kung brandnew pa p0 ang mga gears nyo baka kailangan pa konting "burn-in" bago lumabas ang tunay na tunog. konting pasensya.

just my mamera

[hattori_hanzo]

mga tsong kelan ba lumabas ang word na "HI-FI"? lets be honest here. Ang word na "hifi" ay isang technology na nadevelop way way back as sound engineers discovered and invented this word "hifi" based on acoustics. kaya wag tayong ma confused na dahil ang gears natin sa bahay ay either tubes, hi-fi amp or pro amps ang word na hifi is not justifiably applicable.

Sample. Paano kung ang recoding na nabili mo eh wayway back mga 1930's below, may hifi naba noon?,im sure sablay pa ang sound recording noon, tapos you will play it sa gears mo at present, can you say it is producing a hi-fi? kahit na super ganda at expensive ng rigs mo sa bahay? hmmm?

at isa pa wag nyo inconfused ang brand vs hi-fi. like yung ibang guys here, yung comparison dito kanina sa BOSE vs. krell at sakura, dont tell me dahil hindi pa gaano kilala at local lang ang brand ng gears mo eh hindi na hifi or pleasing? hmmm!!! PLEASE PLEASE dont be a brand idiot!!! hindi komo branded ang gears mo eh super ganda na ng audio mo! match mo nga ang sinasabi mong amp na local sa amp na super expensive with the same ratings at pakinggan mo, Im pretty sure nadali ka lang ng pagiging brand idiot mo, dahil most branded or kahit na high end audio is upto profit too.

kaya sa mga nag mamagaling masyado na kunwari sound engineer kayo or Audiophile kayo.

bago kayo tawagin na Audiophile eh hindi dahil sa nalalaman nyo kung hindi dahil sa expirience nyo.

ang mga manufacturers ng mga audio products tend to mix their marketing by adding technicalities here and there kahit sabihin mo pang high end yan, may halo pa rin marketing yan. dont tel me gumawa sila ng magagandang Amplifiers para ibenta sa inyo ng mahal just for fun?, syempre their upto profits din. kaya wag kayo maging stupid or idiots by merely relying on techical nos. okey!

yung iba pa nga dito may kung ano ano pang sinasabi voltage railings PSU etc etc blah blah blah, kelangan mo pa bang malaman yon? eh may mga engineers na ang mga manufacturers for that. lets admit it, most of us here are merely end users, yung iba nakapag basa lang ng magazine or technical books eh akala na nila magagaling na sa sound engineers na sila. dont be a fool okey.

tell us something na magagamit namin at hindi yung hindi namin maiitindihan at maiintimidate lang kami dahil to tell you the truth, wala kayong right to tell something about someones perception of sound.

             

[obey]

Grabe, init na nitong thread na ito   Sana lang panatilihin nating healthy ang discussions dito.  Huwag nating gawing avenue for personality bashing ang thread na ito. Pare pareho naman tayo ng hobby/hilig.  Kaya nga tayo andito Peace to all!

[oweidah]

dati cables and interconnects nagawi kung saan-saan. ngayon eto naman. anong kasunod? tube brands comparison, bakit mas maganda tumunog ang nos kesa sa mga bagong produksyon? ganyan talaga ang hobby na eto, kanya2 opinion.

now back to the topic pls...analytical /hyperdtailed speakers................................................

[Kevlar]

If Hi-Fi is relative, then why do I see recommendations for B&W's, AE's, MA's, Mordaunt's, NAD, Rotel, Denon etc. Would it be acceptable to us if someone say Bose will be better than a Dynaudio? That a Sakura can be more musical than a Krell?

I don't think so.

PS

I think we're confusing Hi-Fi w/ being musical.

It is relative!  There are no absolutes in high fidelity.

If it were absolute, then we would be able to unanimously
agree on which speaker is the most accurate sounding.

Ultimately, the choice of speakers is based on what we perceive is
more accurate/realistic sounding.  Why else would we
have different choices if we have an idea of what 'the absolute
true sound' is?

- Kevlar

[bumblebee]

It is relative!  There are no absolutes in high fidelity.

Kaya nga "high" e.

If it were absolute, then we would be able to unanimously
agree on which speaker is the most accurate sounding.

Check the FR curves.

Ultimately, the choice of speakers is based on what we perceive is
more accurate/realistic sounding.  Why else would we
have different choices if we have an idea of what 'the absolute
true sound' is?

We choose what we like, what's pleasing. Hi-Fi ends when the ears start deciding.

[ricky]

at isa pa wag nyo inconfused ang brand vs hi-fi. like yung ibang guys here, yung comparison dito kanina sa BOSE vs. krell at sakura, dont tell me dahil hindi pa gaano kilala at local lang ang brand ng gears mo eh hindi na hifi or pleasing? hmmm!!! PLEASE PLEASE dont be a brand idiot!!! hindi komo branded ang gears mo eh super ganda na ng audio mo! match mo nga ang sinasabi mong amp na local sa amp na super expensive with the same ratings at pakinggan mo, Im pretty sure nadali ka lang ng pagiging brand idiot mo, dahil most branded or kahit na high end audio is upto profit too.


tell us something na magagamit namin at hindi yung hindi namin maiitindihan at maiintimidate lang kami dahil to tell you the truth, wala kayong right to tell something about someones perception of sound.

             
[/quot

Right on bro, ;)MEDYO OT po mods. Common na yata  pati dito sa hobby natin ang mga BRAND CONSCIOUS eh kaya they're trying their best to defend what they think is the best out there.Way way back my dad told me that there's only two kind of students, one is yung magaling sa THEORIES and yung 2nd one na magaling naman sa APPLICATIONs,ano ba mas importante?Try to relate this in our hobbies.Would you buy a brand that has a spec sheet that can impress you out of your seat just like that pero when you tried it eh not so impressive pala OR yung may decent specs lang but boy when you tried it you instantly fell in love with it? ako id go for the one i really like and will not consider the popularity,the brand or the price Sa akin basta happy na ako sa tunog nung speakers ko satisfied na ako Kahit sabihin pa na bright,analytical or hyperdetailed or yung worst  na masakit sa TENGA,i really dont care! in the first place who would buy something na hindi nya gusto?meron pala yung mga BRAND CONSCIOUS  ;DSana lang masunod yung mga payo ng marami dito sa atin na audition audition audition before you buy at wag naman sana pintasan or icriticize yung gears ng fellow members natin after he bought it. Lets just try to ENCOURAGE and not DISCOURAGE fellow members.And by the way ako pa lang yata nag post ng speaker brand na analytical dito  ah;D

[aHobbit]

...
musical is not always hi-fi
...
musical can be hi-fi

Simple lang kasi ang ugat ng discussion ni Kevlar at avphile1 eh! 

This is one of my last tirades and judge these hypothetical audiophiles: 

There are 3 audiophiles: si A, si B, at si C. It so happen they have the same audio tast, bought same gear from source to speaker, live in exactly same house and acoustics.

Si A, since he knew he bought the best system his money can afford, decided he will let his system sound as is.

Si B, upon hearing his system, bothered by an unusual sound, tried to correct what he perceived to be the anomaly by using an ‘equalizer’ technique.

Si C, kasi medyo may moolah, bought a audio meter to measure his sound and found out meron siyang peaks and dips at certain frequencies, bought another equipment to correct the dips and peaks sa listening spot niya.


Now, there are another 3 audiophiles, si X, si Y, si Z. As usual same din yung utak nila, bought same systems, and live in exactly the same house and acoustics.

Si X, he knew he bought a good system, and decided nothing to do but to listen to it as it is.

Si Y, listen and decided he wanted more body in the sound so he adjusted what he wanted based on his taste.

Si Z, he bought an audio meter, make measurement and found out every thing is OK, so he listens.


Sino sa kanila ang hi-fi-ish at sino ang euphonics? Si A at si Y ba ang euphonics?



Ang problema kasi, sabi sabi yung iba ng hi-fi, at standard daw yon, at measurable, at objective daw (at hindi relative) and quantity na ito (against being subjective), pero ayaw namang ibigay ang quantification – KAILAN BA SINASABING HI-FI ANG ISANG AUDIO SYSTEM/LISTENING? ANONG MEASUREMENT SA SPECS PARA MA-DECIDE NG MGA NAGBABASA KUNG SILA NGA AY HI-FI OR EUPHONICS LAMANG?   

Tapos biglang sasabihin ng isa, kapag ginalaw mo ang tone dials mo, euphonics ka na!    Tapos tanungin mo, di naman masagot, kung anu ano pa sinasabi!

When is a musical be hi-fi?    If hi-fi is a known standard to you, and is measurable! Wag na tayong magpaikot-ikot ng sagot.
We will not debate on musical since musical is in the ears of the beholder! (subjective)

Ako naman ay nagtatanong lamang at naglilinaw! Mahahaba ang mga sinulat ng iba, hindi naman sinasagot ang tanong.

Kailangan pa bang I-memorize yan?

Mga kapuso ba kayo o kapamilya?     

[bumblebee]

Firstly, the brands I mentioned were just for comparison, for discussion's sake w/c unfortunately registered negative impressions on some of the posters. I apologize for the confusion.

Secondly, it was not my intention to look down on someone else's gears. The ones I've owned are also just entry-levels. But they were enough to introduce me into the world of Hi-Fi and sonic bliss.

I agree that we should audition. I also agree that specs don't matter. But only when I'm choosing gears.

My understanding of Hi-Fi, obviously differs from yours. With Hi-Fi, for me, specs matter. With Hi-Fi, for me, measuring instruments, not the ears should decide.

Again, my apologies to those offended.

[av_phile1]

I agree that we should audition. I also agree that specs don't matter. But only when I'm choosing gears.

My understanding of Hi-Fi, obviously differs from yours. With Hi-Fi, for me, specs matter. With Hi-Fi, for me, measuring instruments, not the ears should decide.

Well, actually, it's really that simple.  High Fidelity is a very simple concept, I am totally amused some creatures can't seem to take it.  They continue to confuse the concept with personal bias and preferences in this hobby.  Well anyway, to each his own. 

[aHobbit]

Well, actually, it's really that simple.  High Fidelity is a very simple concept, I am totally amused some creatures can't seem to take it.  They continue to confuse the concept with personal bias and preferences in this hobby.  Well anyway, to each his own. 

... and his answer was...         

Woe unto you, audiophiles and pharisees!!!     

AMININ ... 
.
.
.
... na hindi alam ang sagot!     

Ay!, ayaw na kitang kalaro!! Galit na kita!   

[aHobbit]

...My understanding of Hi-Fi, obviously differs from yours...

With Hi-Fi, for me, specs matter. With Hi-Fi, for me, measuring instruments, not the ears should decide.

Were you able to get the specs of your system sound after you buy source up to speakers? Or you just assumed if you combine whatever you purchased, the resulting sound will be within the 'unanswered' standard of hi-fi?

Or did you brought an audio meter to check that each of your component is within the 'unanswered' standard of hi-fi? or you only look for that specs of each equipment individually which comfortably falls within the 'unanswered' standard of hi-fi?

And I assume, you will not use your ears if you are to decide if the item you are buying is within the 'unanswered' standard of hi-fi or not!

PEACE on AUDIOPHILE EARTHLINGS!!! 

O bati-bati na tayo ha... laro na ulit tayo bahay-bahayan!