Modern NAD sound vs old NAD sound?
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page| Thread | Last Poster | Posts | Last Post | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Archive through April 24, 2008 | Nuck | 100 | ||
| Archive through April 21, 2008 | unbridled id | 100 | ||
| Archive through April 18, 2008 | David Mitchell | 100 |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1421 Registered: Jun-07 | yup. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 267 Registered: Mar-04 | "And you know who relies on measurements to prove their stuff is better or your stuff is not as good? People who can't hear". Jan are you saying then that it is more personal preference and/or the engineering prowess of the design team? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12515 Registered: May-04 | . I don't understand that question. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 268 Registered: Mar-04 | Oh, I got the impression that you feel that measurements are not very important in determining sound quality. Is this a fair assessment of what you have been saying. If so, I just was wondering what you felt were the most important contributors to the sound quality of an amplifier. |
|
Bronze Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 100 Registered: Apr-08 | Nick, do they sound different? Are you absolutely sure? Would you bet your house on it? You did them as an A/B setup with level matching. John Dunlavy could convince you to be blown away by the difference between the *same* cables! Which isn't to say you can't tell them apart, maybe you can. But even if you can, if someone has a different opinion, doesn't it perfectly cancel your opinion, yielding it meaningful only to you? |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1423 Registered: Jun-07 | Amplifiers are made up of many electronic parts that change the sound of an amplifier that can not be measured. You can have the most perfect measured amplifier known to man, and people will and can still hate the sound it provides. That is what Jan is saying. There is only ONE way to buy audio equipment, that is to listen to it. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 101 Registered: Apr-08 | Nuck, THD is far from antiquated when it comes to speakers. But you're right, modern amps and sources have far too little to hear, which is one of the reasons why the source and amp and cables have so little to do with your final sound. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1424 Registered: Jun-07 | "Nick, do they sound different? Are you absolutely sure" Ah yes, 110 percent positive. My dealer carries Bryston and NAD. They all claim there was a difference. I could also, clearly, without a doubt, hear that the two amps sounded totally different. "But even if you can, if someone has a different opinion, doesn't it perfectly cancel your opinion, yielding it meaningful only to you" Maybe, but isn't that the most important thing to having or Selling a system to someone. The fact that THEY enjoy it more, and that one person can in fact hear the difference. If the person buying can hear the difference, then to them, they can. Therefore they should buy, or be sold, the amplifier most needed by their listening habits. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1425 Registered: Jun-07 | "source and amp and cables have so little to do with your final sound." You see I agree with you on one thing. The M3 is a good amp. But I can not agree with this comment. Like I said before, the changing of Amps and AVR's in my system revealed a HUGE change in sound in my system. Even my WIFE could hear it. Even my friends who don't give a rats A S S about audio could hear it. When I upgraded my NAD 521bee cd player to a Rega Apollo, again HUGE benefit in sound. Grain free, clearer highs, and an all around more musical experience. I would say 60 percent is room and speakers 40 is amps,source,pre |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 102 Registered: Apr-08 | Well, if you ever want to risk a lot of money, let me know  As for personal preference, I entirely agree. What I'm mainly saying is that people shouldn't buy expensive amps or CD players to solve problems that exist in their speakers or room or setup. Once they fix those, sure, go crazy, buy a $50k amp if you feel like it. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 103 Registered: Apr-08 | Well, we'll have to disagree. I sold Rega and NAD and I preferred the sound of the NAD generally. There was something off about the Rega Planet to me, but many of my customers liked it. It seemed colored to me, purposely so. The Planet 2000 sounded normal to me, though I couldn't swear it was better than a C542. None of the differences were ever 'huge'. But then, I find that the more I switch back and forth, the smaller the differences get as my mind randomizes its prejudices and expectations. Once they're sufficiently randomized, the sound differences shrink to something quite a bit less than huge. Most people seem to latch onto the first impressions rather than continue to analyze it, lest the differences go away. Harder to rationalize the extra expense and why ruin the buzz when you're exited? But it's my *job* to analyze these differences and see if they're real or imagined. I can't go stick my neck out with a difference based on what I had for breakfast. But, I'm also very happy that CDs and amps have gotten to be so good. Not for my business sake, but just for musical enjoyment sake. It would be GREAT if a $1000 CD player sounded dramatically better than a $300 player, but I'll settle for a little bit better, perhaps. Of course, i figure maybe my speakers will get far more revealing in the future, so maybe the little differences I buy now will be even more enjoyable in the future. If not, stuff like Masters just makes me feel good. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12516 Registered: May-04 | . "But even if you can, if someone has a different opinion, doesn't it perfectly cancel your opinion, yielding it meaningful only to you" Maybe, but isn't that the most important thing to having or Selling a system to someone. The fact that THEY enjoy it more, and that one person can in fact hear the difference. If the person buying can hear the difference, then to them, they can. Therefore they should buy, or be sold, the amplifier most needed by their listening habits. Aww, Nick, I knew you had it in you. Good going! . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12517 Registered: May-04 | . "Nuck, THD is far from antiquated when it comes to speakers." Aww, c'mon, fishy, your lies just keep getting bigger and bigger. That's a pile of BS! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12518 Registered: May-04 | . "Well, if you ever want to risk a lot of money, let me know." ROTFL What a cheap trick! "What I'm mainly saying is that people shouldn't buy expensive amps or CD players to solve problems that exist in their speakers or room or setup. Once they fix those, sure, go crazy, buy a $50k amp if you feel like it." What you're saying is buy some speakers, they're a cheap, quick sale. Yep, I've worked with you. "Cheap" just keeps coming up with you. . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 104 Registered: Apr-08 | The earth is also pretty much a sphere and it orbits the sun, not the other way around, Jan, hate to break it to you. The easter bunny isn't real, raising taxes doesn't raise tax revenue, Obama really is just another politician, drinking miller lite doesn't get you 6 pack abs and hot chicks in bikinis. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12519 Registered: May-04 | . "Oh, I got the impression that you feel that measurements are not very important in determining sound quality. Is this a fair assessment of what you have been saying. If so, I just was wondering what you felt were the most important contributors to the sound quality of an amplifier." Measurements have their place. There's no point in a designer trying to get a SET amplifier down to 0.0001% T.H.D. There's also no point in a solid state amplifier being introduced to the world with a 5% T.H.D. spec unless the designer acknowledges that is well into clipping into a typical 8 Ohm resistive load. The class T amps have high distortion numbers so they can show a higher wattage capacity. At typical listening levels they still operate at realistic T.H.D. numbers and sound very good. The problem with conventional specs/measurements is they do not reflect the real world conditions the equipment must face and they tend to be incomplete as far as the information you might actually need to make good choices in system matching. Furthermore, as the quote I supplied suggests, there is no measurement for "soundstage" or other qualities which are essential to high quality performance. If you ask me what's important to an amplifier's sound, I'll repeat what I've said many times on this forum. Design, execution and talent. The final quality is an intangible since a designer cannot predict what components/speakers their product will be paired with - it is synergy. There are always a group of high value, low cost products. There have always been high cost, low value items also. In between those extremes you tend to get exactly what you pay for. . |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 269 Registered: Mar-04 | Thanks for your explanation. High value, low cost products. This had been a commonly held view toward NAD. Is it safe to assume you disgree with this sentiment? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12522 Registered: May-04 | . "disgree"? Since we're checking each other's spelling to make sure we can get our leg up high enough on the other guy before we p*ss on him, I assume you meant to spell "disagree". You can read my answer to that question at the top of this thread. My opinions of NAD as a whole have not been shielded from this forum. However, unlike some people presently on this forum I don't begin to think I know so much that I can determine the "value" of an item I am not buying for my personal use. Everybody gets to decide what they require and they should not be called "gullible" for asking for more than NAD has to offer. Only a di*khead would do that. I'm not sure what game you believe you're playing, id, but my opinions have remained very constant over my time on this forum. I've been at this long enough to know what's true and what's not, what's of value to know and what's not. If you think you're going to trip me into any contradictions, you'll be sorely disappointed. . |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 254 Registered: Jul-07 | "Well, if you ever want to risk a lot of money, let me know" John, you really need to let this one go. What you are saying is insulting. You say you have listened and analyzed differences until YOU are satisfied YOU don't hear significant (whatever that means to YOU) differences. Therefore, noone else will, if they get over themselves and their silly first impressions. Is this it ? It this what you're saying ? If so, you need to do some more analysis, because there are other conclusions to be reached based on that data. Whenever other people....MANY other people....get a different result than you, what other conclusion might you reach ? Because if you have thrown those other options out, it presumes you value ONLY your opinion and listening talents. It also assumes you have nothing new to learn. That's great for what's best for YOU, but it's arrogant if you take that to mean you have it all figured out for everyone else. We've all listened to different gear and NOT purchased it. What does anyone have to gain by buying any piece of gear that they don't think is better ? I can understand that some customers can be fooled by "differences" as opposed to "improvements", but not the mass hysteria you seem to be implying. The other point I'll attempt to make is this. You seem to be implying that long term listening is a more reliable judge of differences or improvements than first impressions. Perhaps that's true, perhaps not. In my studies with human perception in other areas, first impressions are actually considered more reliable, as the human mind tends to recalibrate to its current environment over time. Smell is a good example. Have you ever walked into a room and immediately observed a very strong odor...say in a restaurant for instance. Once you are in the restaurant for a while you tend to no longer smell that odor. If you leave and get into a car with someone that has not been in that environment, they will likely smell the odor on you, and you cannot smell it at all. Further, smells you have been exposed to over a longer period (the smell of your home, your car, your dog, etc) may go almost unnoticed until you are away from them for extended periods. It's all very interesting. I've neither read nor done any studies in this regard on audio perception, I'm just raising the point that long term exposure to sonic signatures may not necessarily be a more accurate way of detecting differences. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10097 Registered: Dec-04 | High value/low cost NAD may be, but if someone does not care for the result, then there is zero value, regardless of cost. If someone just wants music and does not listen carefully, or is just a fan of music rather than presentation, then anything could be construed as high value, or good enough. Bear in mind that most of us are true fans of music AND enjoy the gear to get us happy, so caveat emptour(sp)? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 107 Registered: Apr-08 | Nuck, in my long experience, I've found that most of the time people are unhappy, it's with the speakers. they upgrade the CD, amp, cables, and say "well, this fixed that problem" but then later they say 'now i've got a new problem' but that problem sound suspiciously like the exact same problem. but they explain it differently because they're *sure* they took care of that with the other purchase. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 108 Registered: Apr-08 | Nick, long term listening to the same thing will allow you to ignore its 'strong odor'. listening to many different things and going back and forth and listening to different speakers as I do every day, and you start to get a better sense of what is real and what isn't. I'm not saying that here is *no* difference in electronics, of course there is. But if you think they are "huge", even close to what the difference is in speakers, then you should really take part in *one* DBT just to shake up your confidence a bit. One guy put his pride on the line with his $20K speaker cables and couldn't tell the difference between that and really cheap cables. Hurt him, but he admitted that is made him more cautious. I'd also like to add that some people don't need a placebo to really enjoy music, some do. I think those that do are scared that if they truly understand the placebo effect, they won't enjoy music any more. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 256 Registered: Jul-07 | John, what is described as a "huge" difference by one person may not be described that way by another. It doesn't change the differences, only the descriptors. How someone describes the difference is based on what they hear (different for everyone) and how important that difference is to them. If someone uses the term "huge" that's fine. You can use a different term if you like that's up to you, but, again, it doesn't invalidate their experience. And they don't have to take a DBT test to prove it to anyone. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1428 Registered: Jun-07 | Chris is right, HUGE is just a way to express it. JA- I feel the NADT763 does a great job for an AVR when it comes to two channel material as well as multi-channel. When I switched it out for a H/K 635, the two channel material became brutal to my ears. It completely sounded like the music was too "electronic" sounding and no longer natural. I lost bass control and slam, highs were bright. I actually did that A/B test between the two receivers a few times because I honestly at first could not believe what I was hearing. Every time I listened, and more that I listened, more I disliked the H/K's sound all together. I just love music, but could not enjoy it using something that sounded like that H/K did to my ears. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 270 Registered: Mar-04 | "disgree"? Since we're checking each other's spelling to make sure we can get our leg up high enough on the other guy before we p*ss on him, I assume you meant to spell "disagree". Actually, I am not the one checking on spelling errors to "piss" on anybody. Just take it easy Jan, you get all worked up. I know you don't like the NAD sound I just wondered since you have an "open" mind if you felt the presentation they offer was a value for what they asked for it. I don't want or need to trip you up, it gives me no pleasure I just was asking an opinion. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 271 Registered: Mar-04 | "Everybody gets to decide what they require and they should not be called "gullible" for asking for more than NAD has to offer. Only a di*khead would do that". Before John came on this board I never heard you speak this way Jan. What is it that is troubling you, one person's opinion? You are quite opinionated, and I don't see anybody hurling expletives your way? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 110 Registered: Apr-08 | Looks like anyone who doesn't think front end is the biggest part of an audio system gets Jan's fury. I looked back to find out who Wiley was and of the two or three posts back and forth with Jan, Wiley seemed pretty normal, but, unfortunately for him, something similar to what I believe. The one post he said something to the effect that if a person has a mediocre system, speakers will be more important and that if you have really high-end speakers, then you put more money into electronics. Starting to realize why some people might think we're the same person, but we're not. I am assuming that Jan drove Wiley off the board with his constant personal attacks and is attempting to do the same with me, so he can go back to be the unquestioned leader of the forum. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12526 Registered: May-04 | . "Nuck, in my long experience, I've found that most of the time people are unhappy, it's with the speakers. they upgrade the CD, amp, cables, and say "well, this fixed that problem" but then later they say 'now i've got a new problem' but that problem sound suspiciously like the exact same problem. but they explain it differently because they're *sure* they took care of that with the other purchase." Right, if you simply replace their cheap CD player with another cheap CD player and tell them cables are not important, that will not and cannot solve their problem. In your "lonnnnnnnnnng" experience(?) (If you want to play that game of "years of experience", fishy, you've lost to half a dozen of the Old Dogs on this forum, so let's not go down that "argument from authority" path since you don't have any authority there.) you have found it's quicker and easier to sell a difference - a speaker - than an improvement - the front end. You have to be able to hear it before you can sell it. You can't hear it and you can't sell it! Yep, I've worked with you. "Nick, long term listening to the same thing will allow you to ignore its 'strong odor'. listening to many different things and going back and forth and listening to different speakers as I do every day, and you start to get a better sense of what is real and what isn't." Then why haven't you figured out what's real and what isn't. Words, just words. BS supreme! "not saying that here is *no* difference in electronics, of course there is. But if you think they are "huge", even close to what the difference is in speakers ... " That's the problem, you found out you can sell a difference in a few minutes and any fool can hear a "difference". My grandmother could hear the "difference" between speakers and she's been dead for forty years, kinda like your ears. What you cannot sell is an improvement, which is what you can achieve with the front end. You can't sell it because you can't hear it. What do you "sell" when you sell a speaker, fishy? What do you tell people to listen for? I think that might be an interesting way to find out what you can hear. What amplifier and components do you use for your demos? fishy, we already granted you the undoubted ability of speakers to produce large differences even between speakers within a line. When a speaker company produces thirty six products with overlapping price points, there's gotta be a "difference" between models. Moving the same speaker into a corner produces a "large difference" - not an improvement typically but a difference. That there are differences between speakers does not prove the ineffectiveness of the front end. This is not "if X is true then Y must be false". You want to make a quick, easy sale, that's all there is to it. You have no "better" electronics for comparison so you have to make your sale on the "difference" between speakers. If I have no bagels, I will try to sell you another doughnut. It's simple to figure out your stratgey for getting money out of customers. You lie to them and don't show them anything that would disprove your lies or improve their systems. You're a shyster! Now, please, stop with the DBT's and the anecdotal evidence of how you cheat customers. And stop with the f'ing "*"'s on words for Crissake! Who taught you that?! We've all listened for ourself and heard what improvements can be had with better electronics. You can't hear and you won't sell anything that lets a client hear better sound - just something different. That your customers don't get an opportunity to hear an improvement doesn't mean we haven't done a better comparison than you allow your customers. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12527 Registered: May-04 | . "Before John came on this board I never heard you speak this way Jan. What is it that is troubling you, one person's opinion? You are quite opinionated, and I don't see anybody hurling expletives your way?" I'm very opinionated, I never deny that. And my opinion has always been everyone gets to spend their money however they prefer as long as it doesn't hurt someone else or cross the lines of legality or morality. And I get very opinionated when someone comes on this forum kicking down doors and stomping on people they don't know. And that's what fishy has been doing. He's been rude. I also get opinionated when someone spews BS all over this forum hoping no one will call them on it. I've never backed away from any charge that what I said might not be true. I'll discuss anything worthwhile with anyone. That's what this forum is about. But insults evoke insults. What they don't do with me is carry over to another thread. Unless you start kicking in doors again, like fishy has done in the "speakers" thread, I don't hold grudges. And I don't spend my time trying to challenge anyone hoping they can't answer a question. That's for punks! . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 111 Registered: Apr-08 | Jan, I hear just fine, and I'd wager I hear much better than you. The thing is, I know the difference between "huge" and "subtle" and can therefore help people better. To you, an expensive bandaid or herbal tea is as good as open heart surgery for a person with total heart failure. Thank goodness you're not a doctor. Well, I pray you're not. Most of what you say is not worth answering because it's just snide, personal attack. As I said, a DBT will educate you on how good you *really* hear and how much self-deception you use every day. Some people fear them, I find them interesting and useful. I haven't done a true DBT, but have done lots of SBTs. But I also found that I could read the intentions of the switcher in their voice tone and confound them by giving them the opposite answer of what they wanted, just to dick around with them, like when a friend tried to prove to me the cryogenically frozen CDs or green inked CDs sounded better. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 112 Registered: Apr-08 | Ah, big forum bully calling me a punk. How ironic. BS is when you spout something you can't prove. I can prove what I say. You can't or won't, so who is full of it? Who wants to spout without being challenged? I challenged you, as did this Wiley fellow, so you're going spastic. At least Chris and Nick and even Nuck occasionally can recognize that we just have different POVs. A little self-deception is fine, but don't try to deceive other people with unscientific, unprovable nonsense. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 272 Registered: Mar-04 | "I also get opinionated when someone spews BS all over this forum hoping no one will call them on it. I've never backed away from any charge that what I said might not be true. I'll discuss anything worthwhile with anyone. That's what this forum is about. But insults evoke insults. What they don't do with me is carry over to another thread. Unless you start kicking in doors again, like fishy has done in the "speakers" thread, I don't hold grudges. And I don't spend my time trying to challenge anyone hoping they can't answer a question. That's for punks"! Jan, do you think that everything John has said is BS? I don't think you have given him any credit for anything he has said. Perhaps, if you spoke to instead of at John you two could have a productive dialogue. I believe if that were the case the forum as a whole could benefit. Jan, if you want to lead you have to set a good example. I see John has agreed with you on a point you made on the speaker forum, that is a start. Oh, the fishie thing and the constant expletives, come on Jan you are bigger than that. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 114 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, i gotcha. I do think everyone should try a DBT with any selection of gear they wish. Or even SBT. It will shake your belief system, but it will also make you think. Nick, I agree with you, especially if you substitute Yamaha or Carver for H/K, though I'm pretty sure my love of music would allow me to get over it. The big variable with AVRs is setup and internal processing. Some have actual flaws that can dramatically change the sound and certainly setting up the bass management or speaker settings wrong can do that as well. AVRs really are pretty different, so when I am talking about the smaller differences, I'm talking about stereo gear where there are few variables outside design and parts. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 115 Registered: Apr-08 | "Oh, the fishie thing and the constant expletives, come on Jan you are bigger than that." You know, I'm not so sure that he is. Would that it were so. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 258 Registered: Jul-07 | "Chris, i gotcha. I do think everyone should try a DBT with any selection of gear they wish. Or even SBT. It will shake your belief system, but it will also make you think. " With just about every component I've had in the house, I've swapped it in, listened for a few days (or longer) and then swapped it out. I don't know what you consider an "official" SBT, but presumably I'd have to cloak my stereo and have my wife do the switching. I don't think it's really necessary, and my wife would think I've lost my mind. When I have nothing to lose, and don't really know which will sound better, why would I kid myself about which one does ? I just listen, switch, listen, etc. Not scientific, but it works for me. Sometimes it takes a lot of listening to determine the differences, and then decide if they make the music better or worse. Sometimes they jump out at you in the first measure. Those are the times when you stop evaluating, and just sit back and enjoy the music. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 116 Registered: Apr-08 | That's how most of us do it. I put something in and if i like it, i like it. But we just get back to the idea of whether it is good to take that and then stand on it like it's universal fact. You know, the difference between "I like this better" and "It IS better". That's all I'm getting at. A little self doubt is good. One time, when I got attacked on a freeway by some crazy guy, I identified him as white or maybe hispanic, but when they got back to me and said "are you SURE?", well, I said, "well, I *think* so, but I wouldn't swear on it as I had a lot going on at the time" and the black cop said "well, he's darker than I am!" and I said "ooops!" |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 259 Registered: Jul-07 | "But we just get back to the idea of whether it is good to take that and then stand on it like it's universal fact. You know, the difference between "I like this better" and "It IS better". That's all I'm getting at." I understand. The caveat I would put on that though is this. I have heard differences that are substantial enough that I would be quite comfortable saying "It IS better, for ME". I can't say it in absolutes as I only know my own view, but there are times when I can without a doubt say "I like that better!". Whether anyone else does is really up to them. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12530 Registered: May-04 | . You are ignoring the very function of a reference. If you have no reference, you cannot say anything is "better". You can only claim it to be "different" or "similar" to your current position. If you have a basis for comparison that does not vary from day to day or component to component, you can say which example is substantially "better". This is simply the application of common sense. One of my points has always been, "You cannot get anywhere until you know where you are standing." Once you determine your position relative to your goal, you can proceed without risking disaster. No goal? You can't get there. No sense of where you are? Everything is a different direction. A reference point makes everything possible. . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 117 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, we were doing a bit of this today, comparing Revel Studio2s to PSB Synchrony Twos, the NAD M3 to the Peachtree Decco. The listener preferred the Studio2s run by the $800 Decco, while I preferred the $2800 M3 running the Studio2s. We didn't argue about it, it was just fun hearing the differences. He admitted like the lusher sound of tubes while I felt the M3 did a little better in the bass and had more extended treble. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1435 Registered: Jun-07 | If you sold him the Peachtree, then a job well done. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 261 Registered: Jul-07 | I expect I would have purchased the same as your customer. I enjoy a little meat on the bone as well. More Terry Hatcher than Kate Moss....although there is nothing wrong with either. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 118 Registered: Apr-08 | nope, didn't sell him anything, he just came in to listen and talk audio. He's got a nice amp, i forget the name right how as it's a smaller label, but he might want to change his speakers out some day. Nice guy. I have a policy of never asking anyone to buy anything. Not even the 'would you prefer wood or black' or 'would you like to take that home with you'. People like coming in because, while i might mention something they *should* buy, I never actually try to make them buy it today. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1438 Registered: Jun-07 | Speaking of buying, I am off to pick up my new Monitor Audio RS6's. WEEEEEEE |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 274 Registered: Mar-04 | Congrats Nick, heard many good things about those. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1439 Registered: Jun-07 | Just got them hooked up ID and must say they are very impressive. So clear and detailed. Im going to go do some more listening. Cheers. |
|
Bronze Member Username: KbearPost Number: 50 Registered: Dec-06 | Music has PRaT and cannot exist with any quality without it. You should have learned that in first grade, you know, elements of music class. Pace and rhythm are the foundation of music. HOw do you propose they can be taken away and music still exist as music? They cannot! We hear the P&R in the lower frequencies, which have nothing to do in most cases with the effect of the crossover at 2-3kHz. Some designers have weird ideas about their speakers and they can easily manage to screw up the pacing of a speaker. That doesn't mean all speakers are screwed up. Those that lack pacing and rhythm are. Timing is throughout the music but is tied to the pacing and rhythm. Those are just facts about how music is constructed not some magic theory of hifi. What were you doing in first grade elements of music class, fishy? I've always had a bit of trouble understanding PRaT. Though it did make some sense to me it just never really clicked. But this explanation helps lots. Thing is, if PRaT exists in the music then I guess a good system is one that simply does not screw it up. A good system is one that conveys the feeling and emotion of the music and lets it reach the listener. The various sounds within a song must be in correct time and volume relative to each other, if that's the case then I'm guessing PRaT is maintained. But I feel that, if the above is true, a lot of systems probably succeed. I have a Sony boombox that allows me to enjoy my music. Compared to my stereo system though, which is maybe five times the price of the boombox, I'm not sure PRaT is better. What is clearly better are things like detail, transparency, and dynamic range. I guess one could easily argue that these things do contribute to PRaT in certain ways. Nevertheless, it seems to me that if this is what PRaT is most systems should be able to do a decent job at it, since much of it must be on the disc to begin with. There are so many components out there that are extremely well reviewed by both users and pro reviewers made by brands that are well respected. How could these components screw things up so much? Let's ignore the scenarios where components are totally mismatched. I should say that I've not heard components from brands like Rega, Linn, or Naim yet, but I do plan to within the next few months. Maybe it'll be a revelation. I will start a fairly large upgrade on my stereo this summer, and I'll probably end up with a NAD integrated. My budget is under $1,000 for the amp, which kind of narrows things down to NAD, Cambridge, or Rotel. If there are others I'm not aware of them. Considering the speaker I will likely buy (a review said it's a bit harsh in the trebel), the best match is likely an amp that is to the warm and smooth side - of the three that seems to be NAD. But I'll have to get out there and listen for myself before I'm certain. |
|
Bronze Member Username: KbearPost Number: 51 Registered: Dec-06 | I demoed the RS6 a few months back, powered by a Cambridge amp. Very nice indeed. Great finish too. Demoed the BR5 at the same time and enjoyed those too. I'll be buying the BR5 as fronts for a home theater eventually, with likely a CA receiver and DVD player. But that's at least a year off. |
|
Silver Member Username: NoutPost Number: 113 Registered: Mar-06 | There seems to be some shift going on at this forum. I can remember that every single thread where a newbie posted a question about which amp he should get the general reply would be: "NAD". (most of the times partnered with "stay away from Japanese crap, especially Marantz") I can remember that 90% of the threads at the Integrated Amps, Amps, CD players and Speakers section of this forum had NAD as main topic. NAD, your best audio friend, your partner for life. NAD, the search is over. NAD, the answer to all your audio quests. NAD, the best bang for the bucks. It appears most NAD supporters on this forum have upgraded their NAD electronics to fancier stuff like NAIM or Rega or something like that. A couple of years ago "NAD" would be the reply in many threads, without mentioning alternatives, certainly not anything more expensive than this. Now NAD is merely ok for the money, and if you can stretch the money a bit you can buy a Rega or NAIM. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 122 Registered: Apr-08 | I'd say pointing to NAD as the answer to everything is about as wrong headed as claiming its somehow inadequate now. Maybe this board just needs some balance and to stop twisting in the wind or following fads. NAD is one of the most stable, consistently good companies ever. It doesn't deserve to be treated like yesterday's fad because of new marketing slogans like "PRaT" |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1449 Registered: Jun-07 | As I upgrade my components to match more of my needs, and to complete my plan I have had for a while now, I still can say that for price to performance, I really do like the NAD stuff. And no matter what anyone think about it I will still think that. Everyone has their opinion and that is perfectly fine. FWIW NAD just got awarded the Red Dot award, the design award. They join the likes of Porsche and Lamborghini. Good on them.lol. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1450 Registered: Jun-07 | It seems that the new 315bee is suppose to set a new benchmark for entry level gear. Hi Fi News Reviewer has this to say about it... "NAD blew all and sundry away with the C315BEE - not just a successor to the flippin' 3020 but hopefully the vanguard of a new level of performance for entry-level hardware. Indeed, with no hesitation, I think it deserves to win every Product of the Year award available to a two-channel component." I copied and pasted that right from a review on Hi Fi News site by Ken Kessler. My mom wants a cheap two channel system put in her new house, so I was thinking this little amp may do the trick for her. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12537 Registered: May-04 | . "Maybe this board just needs some balance and to stop twisting in the wind or following fads." A stupendously insightful comment made by someone who has been on this forum for one single week. Nah, there's a "stup.." in there but it ain't insightful. "It doesn't deserve to be treated like yesterday's fad because of new marketing slogans like 'PRaT'." Uh, you really, really think "PRaT" is a "new" marketing term? How deep is this hole you're going to dig for yourself? And when are you going to jump in and cover yourself up with this dirt you been shoveling? DL - I'll tell you a bit more about PRaT in a short while. First, I need coffee. . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 124 Registered: Apr-08 | This should be good. Please, give us meaning to the three most meaningless, poorly used words in audio. What part of the amp design gives us these, anyway, aside from the marketing brochure? Nick, unfortunately, that's what I call a "great review, for what it's worth" since, as usual, it's so over the top, it becomes meaningless in the end. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 125 Registered: Apr-08 | I was going to buy an NAD, but found that it didn't have Cromulence, Remaculance and Protrudity |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1452 Registered: Jun-07 | Reviews are usually meaningless. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 126 Registered: Apr-08 | My favorite reviews are "the Amp II SE Jr + blows away the Amp II SE Jr in every way having heard them on two completely different systems in two different rooms 5 years apart with different music". It's at least nice when some of the Brits say stuff like 'well, it lost something in the new version', though that must be frustrating for the marketing guys. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12539 Registered: May-04 | . "Thing is, if PRaT exists in the music then I guess a good system is one that simply does not screw it up. A good system is one that conveys the feeling and emotion of the music and lets it reach the listener. The various sounds within a song must be in correct time and volume relative to each other, if that's the case then I'm guessing PRaT is maintained. But I feel that, if the above is true, a lot of systems probably succeed. I have a Sony boombox that allows me to enjoy my music. Compared to my stereo system though, which is maybe five times the price of the boombox, I'm not sure PRaT is better. What is clearly better are things like detail, transparency, and dynamic range. I guess one could easily argue that these things do contribute to PRaT in certain ways. Nevertheless, it seems to me that if this is what PRaT is most systems should be able to do a decent job at it, since much of it must be on the disc to begin with. There are so many components out there that are extremely well reviewed by both users and pro reviewers made by brands that are well respected. How could these components screw things up so much?" DL - You bring up several important issues to audiophiles and those who simply love music. The first is simply how we listen. Audiophiles are a curious lot who claim to love music but actually seldom go out to hear what they claim is their singular reason for owning a quality system. I began a thread in this forum several years ago ("Do you listen", archived in the "Speakers" section of this forum) which simply asked how many forum members listened to live music on a 1) regular, 2) semi-regular, 3) almost never or 4) never go out schedule. For many reasons it was a thread that drew lots of ire and partially that distemper was in the response to the question itself. Only a small handful of members could say they had any sort of familiarity with live music of any sort. My experience when I was selling audio leads me to conclude this is the average system buyer. They really don't listen to live music and they rarely play any instrument. With that being the case, where do these buyers get their "reference" for what sounds good and what does not? Again from my experience in asking this question of almost every client I spoke to over twenty five years time leads me to believe the vast majority get their reference for "sounds good" from their car stereo! Audiophiles then are astounded when they hear of a music lover who listens through a system they deem "unacceptable". I've sold products to symphony conductors and professional musicians who I find out are listening through rack systems or low priced components set up in horrible fashion for actually getting the best performance from any audio component. I worked in stores with long histories and customers who made their purchases decades before I arrived at that store. Many of them bought components twenty years before I met them and were still using the same electronics after all those years. Some still had the same speakers but many were coming in for replacement speakers as their original AR's, KHL's and Advents began to fall apart at the seams. Understanding how these clients listened was an informative step in my understanding of how people listen and why what I assumed to be the way to listen was just one of many ways to hear. The vast majority of these clients had season tickets to the Symphony and used those tickets on a very regular schedule, they played music as either a vocation or an avocation, they lived with a musician of some sort or they went out to hear various types of music on a regular schedule. In other words, they heard live music regularly and knew what it sounded like in a performance setting and not just in a reproduced version in their home. Many could speaker critically of the performance style of various musicians or the acoustics of a particular venue they had visited vs another where they had heard the same music. Their systems were simply a mechanism which allowed them wider access to the music they could not hear live. Compared to the "typical" audiophile I was meeting, they felt a high quality component should simply get out of the way and allow them access to the music. That typical audiophile client I was selling to wanted to hear the system perform, they wanted to hear extreme detail, soundstaging, imaging, depth and "palpable" space. To draw strict lines of demarcation between one set of system users and another is too simple and doesn't do justice to anyone. But the point remains there as many ways to "listen" as there are buyers. I won't suggest one is right and the other wrong but I know where I have landed on the scales. My consistent point on this forum has been that everyone needs to establish their reference points and define the qualities which are important to them and understand that your priorities are not mine and mine need not be yours. I probably frustrated a fair number of my clients who never listened to live music when they would ask what I owned and what qualities I listened for. My answer was it didn't matter what I owned, many of the pieces I owned were no longer on the market. As to what qualities I listened for, whether I heard PRaT, tone, timbre, dynamics (trying to provide some clues as to what they might hear) they should find what was important to them in the music. In twenty five years of selling audio, I cannot recall ever being asked that question by someone with a familiarity with live music. So the moral of this part of my reply is to learn to listen to music as performed by real live musicians in real spaces with real instruments. You'll never be in doubt as to what you should be hearing when you judge a system's quality. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6784 Registered: Feb-05 | Nick I've listened to that whole entry level series from NAD, with the 315BEE. They are very good for the dollars. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12540 Registered: May-04 | . Let's move on to PRaT. This is a simple explanation of how PRaT exists in music and why you should hear it in almost any piece of Western music. PRaT is not exclusive to Western music but has different contotations when you move away from the classic structure which has dominated "classical" and "popular" music over the last several hundred years. You can hear PRaT in most folk style music from around the world but it is not so easily identifiable when you move to the classical music of Eastern music or indigenous tribes. As I said, this explanation of PRaT is going to be very simple and I hope someone with a P.H.D. in music will tear this apart for inaccuracies. Pacing, rhythm and timing are basic building blocks of Western music. The first, pacing, has been discussed here on many occasions. We had one member, Nuck I think, who timed two identical CD's playing simultaneously on two different players and comparing the "sense" of pacing each deck provided. Switching back and forth between players, the time allocation on each deck tracked identically; in other words, the song played through to its end at, say, 5:45 on each deck. However, switching back and forth between the two players the sense of "drive" or forward motion was not similar. One deck seemed to portray the music with a better sense of movement while the other deck left the music somewhat dragging slowly behind. Both songs finished at the same time but one sounded as if it had taken a much longer period of time to reach its destination. The "sense of pacing" was not similar between the two decks. And this is a "sense" measurement. There are no specifications or measurements per se that can tell you about pacing. Music is a mostly temporal medium and we perceive music by how the composer and the performer slice and dice time into segments and reconstruct it into something that appeals to our minds and hearts. In classical music the conductor sets the pacing for the performers. By varying the pace of the performance, the orchestra will set up and complete ideas and themes and lead you to the next theme. In rock music pacing is everything. The nature of rock is a straight ahead drive that takes you along to the conclusion. In Gospel music, the pace of the music is often slow and solemn to reflect the intent of the words. Therefore, think of rock or most popular music when it is "slowed" in its pace forward. We loose interest. The music no longer has its ability to drive us toward a conclusion. Pace can easily be a measured entity within music as when the performers slow to set up a dramatic spring forward. Or pace can be the Rega table's typical speed issue. If a source product plays the disc at a speed that is too high or too low, the sense of pacing and the drama of the music is altered. That's simple to understand and fairly simple to remedy. What is harder to repair is a component or speaker that seems to slow or speed up the music as it was performed. There are few conventional measurements which can suggest how one component manages this shift in pace. It is real even if it is all perceptual. Performing a comparison between products can illustrate this difference in components and speakers but in all likelihood -- certainly in the case of two CD players or two pre/power amplifiers -- the measurements will be strikingly similar between quite a few components that do not sound at all alike. . |
|
Silver Member Username: NoutPost Number: 114 Registered: Mar-06 | A good explanation, certainly something I have experienced myself. I deliberately chose my current Marantz amp over Rotel and NAD, simply because it has less pace and drive...PRaT can give some serious listening fatigue, in my opinion. I think the most important factor concerning PRaT must be a tight bass and obviously the 'stability' of the amp, the ability to drive speakers well. I for instance never heard any difference in pace and drive between cheap portable transistor radios, there isn't much bass to slow things down anyway.  |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1453 Registered: Jun-07 | Art- Thanks for the info man. I will definitely keep that in mind when looking for a cheap solution for mother. Cheers. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12541 Registered: May-04 | . The next item to be discussed is "Rhythm". Boogie beat. Samba beat. Swing beat. Waltz "time". 98% of any boogie beat is in 4/4 time. The deviation to another time signature is normally used only as a way to point out that something has changed from the traditional 4/4 time keeping. A waltz must be in ¾ time. "Time" is how the composer begins to chop up temporal measurements to set up the "rhythm" they wish to work with. But here's the thing, a waltz is done by "step-step-slide" and then another "step-step-slide". And that's how the music is played. 1-2-3, 1-2-3. A boogie is usually a variation on a swing or blues time which is either a 1-2-3-4 or a 1-2-3-4 beat. In other words alternating "beats" are emphasized to make the music flow and provide a sense of continuing "rhythm". If you have some good examples of the various types of music mentioned here, go listen for the emphasis placed on the particular beats in a song and how changing the beat from a waltz to a BosaNova is pretty dang well impossible because of the structure of the song. But changing a blues beat to a boogie beat is simply a matter of hitting the beats in a different place or with greater emphasis on certain beats. Take a Robert Johnson blues song like "Crossroads" and give it a rock beat and you have Eric Clapton while, if you slide it towards a boogie beat, you have Buddy Guy. Now let's talk about those first grade classes where fishy was too busy flapping his gums to pay attention. Remember when the teacher handed out the toy drums, wood blocks and maybe a plastic ukulele? You guys were 'the rhythm section'. Then she gave other kids bugles and harmonicas. They were the "lead" or melody section. The rhythm section didn't play melodies and the melody section didn't play rhythm. The rhythm section kept the beat to set the rhythm of the music being played. 1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4. When you got a bit better you played 1-2-3-4. The best examples of a rhythm section are found in the swing and big band groups from the mid 20th century. The drums, piano and guitars and upright bass were not solo instruments at that time. They were responsible for the "beat" which meant keeping the time signature for the other performers playing melody, telling them when and where to place their emphasis. The musicians playing melody (following the song's words most often -- "Mary had a little lamb" where the beat is "Mary had a little lamb". Try it with the emphasis on 2&4 and then with 1&3 by making "little lamb" either one beat or dividing it into two beats) listened to the rhythm section or rhythm players to get a sense of where they were in time. In a sense tapping your foot in rhythm or to the beat is the same thing. As music progressed from Gospel to blues to boogie to rock and roll to rock, how the beats were hit and when the performer played on, behind or in front of the beat became signatures not only of the performer but often of the "type" of music they played. Jazz musicians constantly played with the "beats" and the "time" they represented. A waltz played by Guy Lombardo had to be played in strict time with a steady beat. A jazz performer would take that same song (probably not likely but possible) and alter the emphasis on beats and play with the time element to create a new rhythm and therefore a new meaning to the song and a different response from the listener. Listen to early Miles Davis for fairly strict interpretations of a jazz beat in the 1950's and then Miles in the 1980's for a more progressive, free style jazz. With the 1950's Miles it's easy to find the beat. It is set in most compositions by the drummer and bass player, if there's a piano in the group, it too will share rhythm responsibilities. Trumpets, saxophones and vocalists would be responsible for the "melody". (For this simple explanation I'm not going to dicuss improvisation amongst the players.) In 1980's Miles, time signatures are combined with multiple rhythms being set by various performers. Often the time signatures of the players were not linked strictly to a "jazz beat" but flowed from a more organic structure that poses difficulties for many listeners when they are confronted with styles such as "free jazz". In this type of music structure you may have a half dozen beats to follow and as many time signatures all of which can change in an instant. What's this all mean to the audiophile listening for PRaT? Well, if you're listening to John Lee Hooker do his boogie thing, it means you can "get in the groove". If you're listening to your favorite rock group, it means you can become part of the music with your head bobbin' and your hands playing air guitar or you jumping out of your seat to dance around the room. Even with many classical compositions, your feet will tap and your head will nod. A major problem will be faced, however, when the music no longer has a strict beat to follow. "Progressive music", whether it be jazz, classical or rock, with multiple or no clear time signatures and beats will become extremely difficult to follow and understand. You will no longer be able to "latch onto" the interplay of the musicians because the system gets in the way of the music. To go from, "I'll give it an 8. It's got a good beat and you can dance to it", to, "Man, I just don't get that stuff at all", is just a good hifi away. But this can only happen only when the system (or the source disc) does not get in the way of the PRaT existing within the music. . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 127 Registered: Apr-08 | Maybe we should divide amps like speakers into "jazz" amps, "classical" amps, "rock" amps, etc now. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12542 Registered: May-04 | . The finally piece of PRaT is "timing". And it is and it is not what you might be expecting from what has come before. "Time" is what a composer and a musician play with. "Timing" is how all the musicians play with that time together. For the purposes of PRaT, "timing" is the more important because if the timing between musicians is off, the time they keep will not be right. Timing is not much more for our purposes than are the players listening to one another. Think about a work that would be played by bands in ascending age from grade school to paid performer. Whatever that piece might be when you first hear it played by the youngest performers, there is an uncertainty amongst the players which leads to them listening primarily to them self playing individual notes at the first rehearsals. At the midway point in rehearsals they have developed enough confidence in their ability to begin listening. Not so much to only them self but to the player on either side of them. They are now trying to set their "timing" to what they hear from the other close in players. After they've established they can do that well they then pay attention to the conductor and some of the other players- rhythm sections of they are melody instruments and other rhythm players if they are in the rhythm section. Depending on the skill level of each performer the final grade school product will be one where sections of the orchestra are playing "in time" with one another but not the whole group. As skills and comprehension progress through to a high school band, the "timing" of the players to communicate as one whole ensemble rather than many individual sections becomes more advanced. The college level has probably weeded out those without the interest or sufficient ability to progress to the next level and the final performance has more dynamic shadings, a greater sense of pace and an all together greater cohesion of intent. Finally that same piece of music played by the professional orchestra has none of the hesitations or sense of "getting the notes right" that was present in the younger, less accomplished groups. If you've played in a band, you know the slow, steady progression and the "getting it together" of the process. What does this mean to the audio buyer? If the component or speakers cannot step out of the way of the music or the production values of the recording have destroyed the timing of the performance, the rhythm of the playing is disjointed. The performance quality is diminished. "Tight" groups tend to sound loose and ragged. Often the pace of the music suffers because you cannot find the direction in which the music is headed. The play on "time" in certain pieces of music is off and that will make less of the performance. Once again the more complex the "time" being kept by the performers, the more system timing errors plague their interpretation. (System timing errors are not strictly related to "time coherent" speakers though poorly designed speakers can destroy what a high quality system can manage with timing cues.) PRaT is not a new marketing term! It should be obvious how pacing, rhythm and timing are in the music we listen to from any time period as long as we are staying with Western style music. But in 1954 no one spoke of PRaT when considering which audio component to buy. One reason was there at that time there were only mono recordings and they were made without overdubs and (mostly without) edits. All the performers played together at the same time and there was the need for the players to listen to one another to get the performance right. And so the musicians just did what musicians always do. Many of the tube components of that day were also great at displaying PRaT because they had low quality power supplies which swung between voltage peaks without much regulation. 1-2-3-4 also "swung" the power supply. At that time speakers were high impedance, high electrical efficiency items that used very little in the way of "watts". When transistors came along the direction of audio changed. "Watts are cheap" became the motto of the component industry and the speaker manufacturers saw an opportunity to develop products they could not have built with the common 15-25 watt amplifier of the '50's. The burgeoning audio review press was beginning to come around and the "subjectivist" reviewer was searching for ways to describe what they were hearing and what they were not hearing when they compared home reproduction to live music. "Soundstage" and "imaging" became popular qualities to discuss with the growing emergence of stereo recordings. As production techniques changed from the days of mono, direct to tape to stereo to close mic'd, over dubbed products the sound of the source discs changed. "Detail" and "ambience" became the focus of attention. Reviewers were spending pages discussing whether a system could reproduce the subway running under Carnegie Hall. The music itself became a secondary consideration and the music lover suffered terribly for it both from inferior sources and inferior components. Across the Pond two companies thought they could change how hifi was built and sold. They reminded the listener why they supposedly bought a high quality system -- for the music. While companies that knew better strove for the lowest T.H.D. or the highest watts per dollar, the music was getting lost in a system that imposed its own harsh, disjointed, uninteresting to other than an oscilloscope, bipolar transistor sound on the music. A Quad 405 solid state amplifier, while impressive in its specifications and measured performance on a test bench, just didn't "sing" like the old Quad 22 tube amplifier from the 1950's. Linn and Naim, mostly working together, wanted listeners to focus on the music and not the watts and not the "imaging". Their claim was if the music doesn't get your toe tapping, something's wrong with the system because PRaT should be right there in the music. That bit of "Hey, what'd you do to my music" focus is a part of what began the duel between the subjectivists and the objectivists over what measures well and what sounds good. (This is long but well worth the read; http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/182/index.html) Since the early 1970's Linn and Naim and later joined by Rega and other likeminded companies have been telling clients to listen to the music. PRaT is pretty hard to dismiss once you've heard a system screw it up. Speakers such as the AR's and particuallrly the Advents which were designed by both music lovers and engineers wre far better at PRaT than those coming from the established names like JBL. The BBC's insistence on accuracy to the live event brought forth companies whose products were better at sounding real than measuring well. Those (mostly American) companies that one distained PRaT are now much better at it and companies that once gave little cause to imaging and soundstaging are much better at that quality. Systems are more transparent that they were as a whole even a decade ago. But one of the reasons for the return to "vintage" components and concepts is they occurred before the music got all screwed up. And so we are seeing the reintroduction of classic amplifiers and speakers, the LP12 is still going strong, Naim is once again a mainstream brand and triodes and high efficiency speakers are selling in higher numbers each year despite remaining on the audiophile fringe markets. PRaT is still not a successful quality for all companies. Most HT receivers don't have a clue about PRaT. Why? Because they are driven by specs and features. Occasionally a half way decent amplifier sneaks into a HT component but not very often. More infrequently a 5.1 speaker system is designed for someone who is interested in PRaT more than explosions. I recently had a small amplifier in my house for review. It sucked at PRaT! I could switch to any other amplifier in my house - even my vintage Marantz receiver that I bought for $10 - and find PRaT in the music. The better the amplifier I inserted, the more PRat returned to the music. Put this one amp back in the system and PRaT went away. Yes, a transparent system should manage to not destroy PRaT. One of the discussions in "Do You listen" was about how much better some car radios are at PRaT than some expensive systems can manage because the basic AM/FM car radio doesn't try to be anything other than simple transducers and facilitators of the signal. PRat is in all Western style music. The system simply has to get out of the way and allow it to come forward. That was the point of the Linn/Naim approach in the 1970's. If a system can get the pacing, rhythm and timing of the music right, it can probably do most of the other things required of a system. The BBC engineers included the coherence to the sound of the human voice - another intangible "quality" that has no real measurements but is determined by ear. As you'll see when you read the linked article, even though it's from 1990, the battle over what measures well and what sounds good is still present. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12543 Registered: May-04 | . "Maybe we should divide amps like speakers into "jazz" amps, "classical" amps, "rock" amps, etc now." LOL! Just plain LOL! You did just climb out from under a rock, didn't you? You just simply never ever pay attention to anything but the sound of your own voice. Ever heard of "East Coast" speakers and "West Coast" speakers? MyGod! What you don't know is embarrassing just to find out!!! Anyone who is this ignorant of what occurred before he came onto the planet is really truly an embarrassment. Ask one of your "loyal customers" if they ever owned a pair of Advents. Ask them if they paired them with Phase Linear/Crown or McIntosh/Citation. They'll probably know what "East/West Coast" means and how it applies to amplifiers. I suppose from that post you really don't hear the difference between a Rowland Reseach and an Audio Research. Or a Bryston and a NAD. Ya'know? That's pathetic! . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12546 Registered: May-04 | . Hey, fishy! Why don't you take some time and explain something complicated? Like how you got investors to give money to someone who doesn't know sqaut about music or audio. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 129 Registered: Apr-08 | Jan, I'm not saying I can't hear the difference, I'm saying *you* can't hear a difference based on all you babble. |
|
Bronze Member Username: KbearPost Number: 52 Registered: Dec-06 | Thanks Jan. I think I understand and I can relate in that I have definitely heard some systems that just didn't sound right vs. others that did, though it was hard to pinpoint why. Could be a lot of reasons, PRaT maybe being one of them. I look forward to listening to some higher end components over the coming months, including those from comapanies like Naim, and I'll try to focus in on the aspects that you talk about. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12549 Registered: May-04 | . "Jan, I'm not saying I can't hear the difference, I'm saying *you* can't hear a difference based on all you babble." No, you already said you couldn't hear the difference. Maybe you just need another DBT. Sheeeesh, fishy! |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1262 Registered: May-06 | JV, thanks for the education, knowing what something is does not compare to knowing how and why it is. Now I understand why I simply do not find some modern jazz to my liking. This level of information outclasses anything I could ever post and from reading this thread / forum I doubt I am alone in that respect. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1927 Registered: Nov-05 | Oh darn, I will chime in again here for a sec: Mike, I know that was a sincere compliment, but Ashman and his shadow will simply assume it was a brown-nose comment made to get a rise out of them. Just wait, it won't be long. Okay, back to the show everyone And just for the record, I agree with you Mike. As usual JV goes to a lot of trouble to explain things on this forum. But heaven help us if that garners some respect. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1459 Registered: Jun-07 | "This level of information outclasses anything I could ever post and from reading this thread / forum I doubt I am alone in that respect." With ya on that one Mike. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10108 Registered: Dec-04 | Very good, JV. And thanks for using my cdp test from a while back. I was going to post it again, but cannot bother with this troll. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 698 Registered: Dec-06 | Thanks, Jan. Great writeup on PRaT. I've heard it and had it explained to me before.....but never to that extent. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BetamaxCanada Post Number: 48 Registered: May-07 | Have to echo the above re. the PRaT writeup. I've understood it on an intuitive level when listening to music, but never seen it articulated so well. I haven't been on this forum for long but have noticed that, regardless of his communication style, Jan knows whereof he speaks. It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 141 Registered: Apr-08 | It's a great write up on what these things do in actual music, but there's no real mechanism in a preamp amp or CD player for adding or subtracting "PRaT" as it applies to music. Now, is it possible that you can hear a slight roll off as a lack of "PRaT"? Possibly. Could you hear some harshness or graininess as having more "PRaT". I suppose. "PRaT" is something you can infer from the sound of a component or your imagination, but it's not something that is actually in a CD player or preamp and arguably not even an amp. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10117 Registered: Dec-04 | Here we go...here we go baby...watch him flop like a perch in a boat. "PRaT" is something you can infer from the sound of a component or your imagination, but it's not something that is actually in a CD player or preamp and arguably not even an amp JA Infer...Infer. Such violent reaction... you have to beautiful Vivaldi or Verdi, JA. You know both aint like related, right..had to check, you might not confer. So you agree, JA, that all you can do is to mess-up PRaT |
|
Bronze Member Username: BetamaxCanada Post Number: 49 Registered: May-07 | "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12565 Registered: May-04 | . "It's a great write up on what these things do in actual music, but there's no real mechanism in a preamp amp or CD player for adding or subtracting "PRaT" as it applies to music. Now, is it possible that you can hear a slight roll off as a lack of "PRaT"? Possibly. Could you hear some harshness or graininess as having more "PRaT". I suppose. "PRaT" is something you can infer from the sound of a component or your imagination, but it's not something that is actually in a CD player or preamp and arguably not even an amp." Total BS If you'd read the posts on PRaT, fishy, you would understand more fully why "harshness" and "rolled off highs" are not a part of "P", "R" or "T". You would know PRaT is not something you infer from the music and certainly not from your imagination! It is in the music for Chrissake! A component can only screw with the presence of PRaT by being less transparent to the source. This BS above is just another example of you talking out of your @ss and not having a clue. Rhythm is left to the lower frequencies of an instrument or a group. Kick drums set the pacing and rhythm. The left hand on a piano plays the rhythm. How in the world can a kick drum be "harsh" and "rolled off"? Pacing is throughout the music but set by the rhythm instruments. You can have good pacing and still have a component that is tilted in one direction or the other at either frequency extreme or the middle. Timing is within the performance. The little amp that had rotten rhythm could swing timing when only a solo instrument or a "smaller" instrument like a violin was playing. fishy, you don't understand PRaT, you can't hear PRaT and now you want to explain PRaT?! That's one of the problems I have with you. i{ou're the one who tosses a one word smoke bomb into the room and then you expect us to believe you when you say, "Follow me out the door." } My point is exactly your's though I say it far more eloquently since I understand this stuff. There are no single measurements that would indicate whether a component or speaker will be transparent to the PRaT within the music or whether a component or speaker will deconstruct the inherent nature of the music. No single measurement! None!!! You want us to believe your version of how PRaT came into existence - as a "new" marketing term. Read the posts, fishy! No one is selling a component with PRaT! They are selling against those components that cannot reproduce PRaT! If you get that straight in your head, this conversation stops right now. fishy, I know it is impossible for you to get that in your head because it didn't come out of your butt, however, those are the facts. I know it's impossible for you to have this conversation end because so much of your BS is based on not letting that happen. However, those are the facts and your BS is just BS. Here's the explanation for those who wish to pay attention. During the earliest days of transistors into the mid 1980's, measurements became king. Everyone (almost) bought into the "if it measures good, then it is good", thinking that produced the high NFB designs with 0.001% T.H.D. specs into a load resistor. A small group of listeners, Gordon Holt at Stereophile (he was still with High Fidelity magazine at the time and founded Stereophile because he didn't hear the correlattion between measurements and sound), Jim Winey at Magnepan, William Johnson at Audio Reasearch, Kloss at Advent and a committed group at the BBC and the small Linn and Naim companies did what they thought was the purpose of their systems - they listened to music through them. What they heard through many 1970's components was not musically interesting. They didn't care if the amplifier had 0.001% T.H.D., the music was flat. Listening became the final tool in design. They found a lack of relevance between measurements and sound quality and they decided sound quality must come first. You shouldn't take my word for this either. Go read about how companies and products were created. Start with the BBC's LS3/5a, a perfect example of how "voicing" becoming the final product. Or the early Linn/Naim demonstartions. Don't be like fishy and ignore what came before you showed up. Read. Think. These engineers and designers did not dismiss science or measurements as some would lead you to believe. But the sound of voices and instruments they knew well had to be the final arbitter of the final product. This idea that anyone wants to throw out science when they talk about not relying on measurements is absurd and is based in a specious argumentative style known first asa "Logical Fallacy" and second as "arguing from authority". It's like wrapping yourself in the flag to imply your opponent cannot because they don't love the flag as much as you. Both arguments are BS. Run when you hear them. Run when you hear someone say "A" happens and therefore "B" is true, as fishy has done with his stories of his competitors and his sales. PRaT has been here for a long time and will be here when fishy closes his doors and shuts his yap. It's not a new marketing device just because fishy just heard it a few years ago - fishy doesn't hear a lot of things for a long time. Believe your ears and then let someone show you numbers to make you feel better. Don't allow anyone to impose a "measurement" or a "graph" and then tell you "if A" then "you will hear B" as the result of "A". The designers back in the 1970's knew better and so should you. Just ask anyone who tries to sell if "A" then "B", if the designer listened to the product before it was released to the public. If they say yes, then you know what the designer thinks is the most important quality. . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 145 Registered: Apr-08 | Well, then we should be able to get a band of people together, do double blind tests, *prove* which components have PRaT and which don't, then sell a "PRaT Seal of Approval" and make tons of money on licensing. I'm in, I'll operate the DBT, you golden ears can separate the wheat from the chaff. Or is it, in reality, simply a marketing term? When exactly did PRaT come into existence? Did amps not have it before the term existed? If so, what was it called then? If not, how was it invented? Is there a 'big bang' theory? How exactly does a CD "slow down" the pace of music while measuring perfectly in time and phase? Or do time and phase have nothing to do with pace, rhythm, timing? And what happens to PRaT when there are three different arrival times for bass, midrange and treble? Why is it that Jan can't read any graph? If something is audible, we know it is measurable, so why can't we measure PRaT? For what should we be looking? And if it is audible, why won't people do DBTs to prove its existence? Things that make you go hmmmmmm. |
|
Silver Member Username: NoutPost Number: 118 Registered: Mar-06 | I think the whole PRaT thing mainly comes down to the amps firm control of the speakers and the bass delivery of the system as a whole. On a tiny portable transistor radio at work some songs I know by heart often sound like they're faster paced than on my audio sytem at home. The same thing when songs are played at MTV, on my old MONO TV. There are some possibilities why some music sounds slower on my audio than on my tv and radio at work. First of all, my amp's bass is a tad loose and bloaty (which I like ). The radio at work is practically bass-less, my tv as well. Secondly, the speakers I have aren't an easy load, not that my amp struggles to drive them, but I definitely notice a lack of drive compared to other systems I have heard and compared to the TV and portable radio. I do not notice it every second I listen to music, so personally I couldn't care less about the whole PRaT thing. But it does exist. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 700 Registered: Dec-06 | John says you heard no such thing, Nout. John, you look dumber with every post. And your last post already feels like your next. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12568 Registered: May-04 | . It was stupid up to this point; "When exactly did PRaT come into existence?" I stopped reading there just as fishy has disconnected his cognitive capacities to what has come before. Goodfuckinglord, fishy! If it doesn't come out of your butt, you just ignore it! . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12569 Registered: May-04 | . "John, you look dumber with every post. And your last post already feels like your next." Let's just state that fishy's entire argument here hangs on "PRaT". He has words! Words! No meanings, no concepts. He can't put one and one together. He argues by way of, "If I can't hear PRAT, then you can't hear PRaT and therefore PRaT doesn't exist and no one can sell it to you so let me tell you my lies." Yep, worked with you; fishy, You stunk then and you stink now. fishy! Go away! When your only argument is a repeat of, "I will not allow it to happen", you have lost. Go away! . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 150 Registered: Apr-08 | Stryvn, note that you and many others can't actually speak logically about this, you can only make really aggressive personal attacks. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 701 Registered: Dec-06 | And I can hear. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 702 Registered: Dec-06 | Now go away. Dolt. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 152 Registered: Apr-08 | "And I can hear" Didn't say you couldn't, though one wonders if you can hear as well as you think. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 703 Registered: Dec-06 | very whimsical, fishy. You see, I have made no claims to genious. You cannot say the same. And you've been proven to be a fraud. go away. You're insignificant. and wrong and a dolt |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 704 Registered: Dec-06 | and I can hear. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 154 Registered: Apr-08 | Well, at least there's a new insult to be thrown around. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1933 Registered: Nov-05 | That's the trouble with being an insult magnet JA. |
|
Silver Member Username: Jazzman71Phoenix, AZ USA Post Number: 172 Registered: Dec-07 | "Well, fortunately for most everyone here, i'm probably just visiting. I spend too much time on forums as is, just ask my wife! I just thought this thread was irresistible and it's been a lot of fun"--JA Yeah, it's been a real blast, now please leave or I'm calling your wife. Go mow the lawn or take out the trash or something. You have nothing to offer here. This is for people who listen, think and contribute. You do none of the above. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 301 Registered: Mar-04 | "This is for people who listen, think and contribute. You do none of the above". Neil, you crawled out from under your rock great to see you. Your input thus far has been enlightening. Stay strong. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 277 Registered: Jul-07 | "Stryvn, note that you and many others can't actually speak logically about this, you can only make really aggressive personal attacks." And I suppose you CAN speak logically about this John ? Please, make a logical argument, and try not to get all tied up in knots doing so. But try to be brief. The more words you type the harder it is to figure out what it is you're actually trying to say. You're a distinctly left brained type, so perhaps put your thoughts in bullet form so they are clear, concise, and well thought out. And you're as guilty of personal attacks as anyone else, so please don't imply you are an innocent party in that regard. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10141 Registered: Dec-04 | John just keeps spewing the same old refrain. This from a guy who cannot hear any better than NAD produces. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1470 Registered: Jun-07 | Here is a little thing I have just heard since last night on PRaT. Even my wife noticed it. When I A/B the new Bryston Pre against the NAD AVR as a pre, the Music while using the NAD almost seems like its playing in slow motion compared to the Bryston Pre Amp. Bass is heavy, but is slower and therefore makes the song seem..well slower.lol Im guessing what I am hearing is the PRaT of the Bryston. I like it. Cheers. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 175 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, that ^ is why I didn't bother to respond. It doesn't matter whether I speak logically or not, the childishness just continues. Nuck, if you want to prove that you *can* hear better than that, just do a DBT and prove it to the world. Some of these tests will earn you money if you pass. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10144 Registered: Dec-04 | Is this name that componant?' or 'Which do you like'? Because I can name any of my sources blind. That's 4, Johhny, and that's just digital. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10145 Registered: Dec-04 | Do you listen? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12585 Registered: May-04 | . "Nuck, if you want to prove that you *can* hear better than that, just do a DBT and prove it to the world. Some of these tests will earn you money if you pass." "Are your b@lls big enough to challenge me? Well, are they? What you've got to do is ask yourself, "Do I feel lucky?" Well? Do you?" "How about if I wave some money in your face?" ROTFLMAO Total BS!!! Is that how you "sell", fishy? Yeeeesh! . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 177 Registered: Apr-08 | Nuck, I don't believe you can, but if you think can, that's okay too. I listen a lot but the only times I listen to 'components' are when I need to know the sound, figure out what's wrong or when I'm about to buy something. Then I go right back to listening to music. Not sure what your point is. Jan, I don't "sell", I inform people as to what we have, let them listen, then they buy or not buy. "Selling" is for people with the inferior gear. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 710 Registered: Dec-06 | good God he's fullofshit. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10153 Registered: Dec-04 | I listen a lot but the only times I listen to 'components' are when I need to know the sound, figure out what's wrong or when I'm about to buy something. Then I go right back to listening to music. Not sure what your point is. That's what I do, JA. I can name any input that I run blind, and that's 7 inputs. If you doubt me, I welcome you to come to my home, have a dinner and listen to some stuff. That's me putting you in the drivers seat, JA, just where you think you should be. Say dinner for 6, the other members know where I live, and I have visited them and listened to their music on their kits. A welcome invitation would bring up 6 listeners pretty quick, from Texas, Wisconsin and a few Canucks, just for the beer and Northern Pikes. Are you game, big boy? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12587 Registered: May-04 | . "Jan, I don't "sell", I inform people as to what we have, let them listen, then they buy or not buy. "Selling" is for people with the inferior gear." You tell them half truths and lies, show them a graph that says nothing and then you hope they don't run or know enough to call you on it. You mentioned audiophiles coming in and assessing the place. Maybe they're coming in and assessing how deep the cow pooo is in your shop. Then they leave when they get a sense of just how deep it really is. The music lovers stay because they want music. Like I said in a post you didn't bother to read, music lovers never asked me what I owned or what I listened for. Selling is for people with inferior gear? First of all, ROTFLMAO and secondly, I thought all equipment was the same according to you. Total BS . |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1474 Registered: Jun-07 | "Say dinner for 6, the other members know where I live, and I have visited them and listened to their music on their kits." When you coming to Kingston Nuck. Let me know for a dinner, beers, and a kit warming. "A welcome invitation would bring up 6 listeners pretty quick, from Texas, Wisconsin and a few Canucks, just for the beer and Northern Pikes." Make it 7. Man TEXAS!!!??? I am only a few hours away. I could pass gas and you may smell it.lol "Selling is for people with inferior gear? First of all, ROTFLMAO and secondly, I thought all equipment was the same according to you." All the same J.A? Ahhhh s#!t I knew I should had bought that Teac system I seen at Radio Shack. Piss!!! |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 278 Registered: Jul-07 | "Inferior gear" ? How is that possible. Any $200 dvd player will sound almost as good as a $20,000 cdp. There are minimal differences between electronics, and God help anyone who uses any superlatives to describe the differences. Inferior gear ? John, what are you saying ? Have you been telling lies to us all this time John ? I'm so disillusioned John. But wait, all anyone REALLY needs are room improvements or speakers. Hmmmm. NAD doesn't make either of those. So every NAD sale you make is largely unnecessary. Yet you make them. You see how this looks John. You'll have to excuse me, while I gather myself. The disappointment is almost more than I can bear. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 711 Registered: Dec-06 | the guy wears blinders and is fullofshit. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12590 Registered: May-04 | . "Are you game, big boy?" Despite how that reads from this end coming from one lonely guy on the road most of the time ... Nuck, you're wasting your time with fishy. Challenge him to a DBT or better yet, what he prefers, a SBT. Yep, don't change anything out and all the equipment still sounds the same. Yep, yep, yep! All the same, all the same. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 178 Registered: Apr-08 | Nuck, I'd be glad to do it. But let's get actual scientists that we don't know, set up a DBT and then you can tell all 7 of your components by their sound and I'll bet $1000 on the outcome. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 179 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, by "inferior", I mean products that are no better, but 2 to 10 times the price. You generally have to BS people to get that sale. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 181 Registered: Apr-08 | Jan, Stryvn, you're not even worth responding to. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12591 Registered: May-04 | . Then stop responding. We won't mind. We promise. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 280 Registered: Jul-07 | "Chris, by "inferior", I mean products that are no better, but 2 to 10 times the price." So by "inferior" you mean "equivalent" ? You know, I never would have thought of those terms as synonymous. Myself I would have just said "more expensive" or "pricier" but hey that's just me. "You generally have to BS people to get that sale." I hope you're not BS'ing me John about the whole "inferior" thing. Are you John ? You're not trying to sell me that are you ? So, John, is the only "inferior" gear the more expenseive gear ? Is all gear in the same price range NOT "inferior" gear, ie "the same". If so, I'm just wondering why you care about selling any particular brand at all, if the differences are so inconsequential, and inaudible to most of us. Why not sell Rega, Rotel, CA, or any of a dozen other brands ? Especially cdp's. You'd think you'd just carry a Panasonic DVD player or something as a source since that is just as good as the 542, right ? Your Customers wouldn't hear the differences in a DBT would they John ? |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 715 Registered: Dec-06 | I'm going to miss him. no I'm not. Yes I am. wait.... no I'm not..... where'd I put that fcuking chart. I did a dbt.....I don't miss him. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 186 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, i'd say more expensive, but no better, *is* inferior. Most of our customers buy NAD CD players because they *need* a new CD player, it makes them feel good, it's better built, matches their amp, they like the simplicity, the design, it's easily in their budget and they're sure it will sound good. A lot of people call me back and tell me how much they love them and how much better it sounds than their old player. Whether that is real or just that new CD player smell, I don't know, but then, they're not trying to convince other people to of the benefit of spending $1000 or more when that's probably the last thing that should be on the 'to do' list. And I *never* have to convince anyone to buy an NAD CD player. If someone is running a digital source into the digital input on their receiver, you bet, we tell them to just use whatever they have if it it still works. No sense tossing out something that still functions if there's no upside. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 282 Registered: Jul-07 | "A lot of people call me back and tell me how much they love them and how much better it sounds than their old player. Whether that is real or just that new CD player smell, I don't know, but then, they're not trying to convince other people to of the benefit of spending $1000 or more when that's probably the last thing that should be on the 'to do' list. " Interesting. A LOT of your Customers say they think it sounds better. That's funny, because A LOT of people generally think upgrading their source results in better sound too. What a coincidence ! But not you John, you know better right ? "If someone is running a digital source into the digital input on their receiver, you bet, we tell them to just use whatever they have if it it still works. No sense tossing out something that still functions if there's no upside." Hmmm. Just so I understand, plugging any ol' disk spinner, into the digital input of any ol' receiver is just as good as any $1000 source ? So the DAC in any ol' receiver is as good as the DAC in any $1000 source ? The components are just as good ? The sound is virtually undistinguishable ? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 188 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, I never said there was no value in upgrading the electronics, only that many people view this as equal to or more important than upgrading speakers which is clearly an exaggeration of their significance to the total system sound. Spending $10,000 on electronics is like spending $100-$500 more on speakers. Maybe. The DACs in most receivers now are pretty much state of the art. Because of the massive production and competition, DACs are the most precise part in any analog path. It's what happens after the DAC that largely determine the sound. So, if by running the digital in, you're avoiding a whole bunch of unnecessary analog pathway. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 716 Registered: Dec-06 | Spending $10,000 on electronics is like spending $100-$500 more on speakers Ludicrous |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 190 Registered: Apr-08 | Provably not ludicrous, I've demonstrated this to be true. Take two speakers, $500 apart. If you like the more expensive one, no amount of [conventional] electronics expenditure will make the less expensive speakers better than the more expensive speakers, except in your mind. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 312 Registered: Mar-04 | It seems that the fact that better sound is becoming more affordable is causing some folks here stress. If someone points out that perhaps throwing money at a perceived problem may not be the best solution, Jan and his merry band of fools start foaming at the mouth. Why do some of you have your ego so wrapped up in your gear? Just admit you paid too much and get on with life you saps. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 313 Registered: Mar-04 | Spending $10,000 on electronics is like spending $100-$500 more on speakers Ludicrous Why Sterno, expand on that? |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10155 Registered: Dec-04 | id, you are certainly deaf and stupid. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 719 Registered: Dec-06 | Excpet for the fact that everybody here- very knowledgable people who own all sorts of gear, have owned MANY different setups, have heard even more than that, with YEARS AND YEARS of experience, disagrees with John. Well, except for the unbridled pants pisser. (WTF is he babbling on about anyway?) Yet he knows what they hear and they're all wrong? I think Nuck invited him and his magic dbt machine to the GWN. If he'd just take the blinders off and pull his head out of hisass. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12592 Registered: May-04 | . "A lot of people call me back and tell me how much they love them and how much better it sounds than their old player. Whether that is real or just that new CD player smell, I don't know ... " You don't know?! No, it's ... You can't hear! C'mon, fishy, tell us the story of how you got people to give somebody who can't hear the money to start an audio store. Other than, "Goodbye forever", it's the only thing I want to hear from you. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12593 Registered: May-04 | . "And I *never* have to convince anyone to buy an NAD CD player." You are a clerk. "Would you like fries with that? Someone told me they're good, I don't know since none of my senses operate properly." |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 193 Registered: Apr-08 | Jan, I used my own money, a few $hundred at a time, to start the store. It's the guy down the road that sells all the "PRaTty" Euro gear that got a rich guy to give him money for a store. Sometimes, I am a "clerk". I make good product available for purchase. I give people a little guidance here and there on the simple stuff. My job is to make the hard stuff, such as home theater, easy. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12595 Registered: May-04 | . Fishy, I think it's time we turned off the air supply to your tank and let you die. Goodbye, fishy. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 199 Registered: Apr-08 | Well, Jan, let's just see if self-discipline is one of your traits. I suspect it isn't, but please, prove me wrong. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 317 Registered: Mar-04 | "Goodbye forever", it's the only thing I want to hear from you. think it's time we turned off the air supply to your tank and let you die. Goodbye, fishy. Jan, I get the impression your little bubble here would be more comfortable if John would leave. But he does not seem like he will despite your insistent pleas that he does. Why don't you trounce him with your superior knowledge, in a reasonable and honorable way and then perhaps he will leave in shame. Oh, you tried that and fell on your face. Now you have a rotating cast of the mentally challenged who follow your will. Jan, you are the Joseph Stalin of ecoustics. It is a good thing that folks like John and me are here. I know on some level you appreciate John's contribution, just admit it. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 724 Registered: Dec-06 | Why don't you trounce him with your superior knowledge,... He already mostly has. The human contradiction took care of the rest of the trouncing of himself by opening his hole. Can anybody please tell me what the unbridled pants pisser is babbling on about?? |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 287 Registered: Jul-07 | "Why don't you trounce him with your superior knowledge,..." Sorry UB ID, Johnny already knows everything. Can't teach him a thing. Haven't you been paying attention ? Oh ,BTW, you're having a stroke. You may want to dial 911. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BetamaxCanada Post Number: 51 Registered: May-07 | unbridled id -- aptly named, bereft of logic and common sense. The idea that anyone who disagrees with John must be a follower of Jan is just cheap rhetoric in lieu of argument. If it were true, the reverse would also be true: you must be John's sycophant. Don't worry about the mote in your brother's eye, look to the log in your own. Stalin? Sheesh, I think you just crashed the hyperbole meter. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10157 Registered: Dec-04 | Currently compiling a list of forums that JA has crashed. Long list. JA is somply a self serving individual, using posts here to tun up the google count for wild eyed engine users. It is a cheap ploy to run up traffic and interest. JA is history. Like his bunk. Other than to run up hits on his wares, I suggest that I will ignore the troll. even though he went to all the trouble of looking up and running down one of my fav bands(Rush). Go ahead, Johnny, give it a good shot. Any dvd player will do, digitally into a receiver of any name, to good speakers. From gut who figgures NAD is as good as Classe or others. Remind me how you didn't name the gear in your references. Remind me how your charts and graphs are like the phone book. See, I can read and speak, JA, but hearing me read and speak are very far removed from Pavarotti singing it. You are deaf, stupid and a troll. Buh bye. Of course you are entitled to a rebuttle, so please do. I am sure that id will chip in Butch, and have fun with that. I can name all 7 of my sources D7T. You hear nothing but the cold analytical prophacy of audio boredome and musical desparity that is wrong. You hear nothing, do not serve a purpose and are a fallacy of self serving, muck raking, pot stirring troll of an audio web. 3 sites and counting |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 201 Registered: Apr-08 | Funny how many times people say they're going to ignore me. Well, Nuck, Rush is a favorite of mine, I have all their music, learned to play drums by playing 2112 over and over, so, I hardly "ran down" Rush, they just have heavily compressed, harsh CDs for some reason. It sure isn't Pink Floyd quality, but the music is great. Funny also how people who insult, degrade, even threaten other forum members accuse the *other* person of ruining the thread. Always amusing. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 320 Registered: Mar-04 | "The idea that anyone who disagrees with John must be a follower of Jan is just cheap rhetoric in lieu of argument". You would think that but that does not appear to be the case. I hear virtually the same responses only with different names attached. "unbridled id -- aptly named, bereft of logic and common sense". Frankie I am impressed, you have read your Freud. But Franco, it's tongue in cheek, get it? "Don't worry about the mote in your brother's eye, look to the log in your own". Frankie, that was beautiful, you could bake some s'mores and tell more of those around a campfire. Here I figured you had the depth of a parking lot puddle. Well, not a day goes by without a surprise. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 321 Registered: Mar-04 | Nuck, why are you so angry? You should find and outlet for it. Start playing the skin flute perhaps? And Chris, don't you think you are beyond making reference to serious medical problems? Anybody you know have a stroke, did you find it humorous? I know you ARE a stroke but that is a different matter. |
|
Silver Member Username: James_the_godDoncaster, South Yorkshire England Post Number: 670 Registered: Jan-05 | LOL. Looking through recent posts.. and..This thread is still going. I find that VERY SAD!! Just leave like I did and be free. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 210 Registered: Apr-08 | Fortunately, insulting people wears people out eventually. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ZorroPost Number: 80 Registered: Jul-05 | Ok, That's enough children! Man that is one ugly Website mate! http://www.adnm.com/ Is that a reflection of what you think of high quality standards?  unbridled id: He is clearly Johnny's right hand....if you know what I mean!  |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 249 Registered: Apr-08 | yes, yes it is, but pointing it out shows what juveniles you people are. It's in the middle of a total overhaul by a web guy since the existing website I did in my spare time. None of my competitors even have a real site, so I'm sort of ahead of the curve out here anyway. I don't think you are in a position to call anyone 'children'. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 333 Registered: Mar-04 | zeppo, you are back! Thank goodness, the stupidity quotient was not high enough. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ArienPost Number: 44 Registered: Jul-07 | Sorry guys but this is the reason why a lot of us newbies are hesitant to post anymore, this forum has turned into a battleground....again, pardon me, what's happening isn't constructive anymore, please guys, we do respect you, I've started my system with the help of you guys here, I've thought about this post a hundred times but I need to get my concern across...maybe, just maybe, enough of personal attacks and let's get on with what this forum is here in the first place...Thanks |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12640 Registered: May-04 | . Arien - We all agree with your statement but you do know internet trolls exist, right? We have several members here who do not assist on other threads, they just argue they are right. And argue and argue and insult and insult. We have one troll who posts here under five different usernames, he's been banned at least three times and continues on in defiance of the rules. These members aren't here for your pleasure, only for their own and they find pleasure in being a troll. Your post and mine will start this all over again. If you can conceive some way to maintian a troll free zone on this forum, let the administrator know. Brian is a reasonable guy who would certainly like to attract more new members but what's the point of trying to stop unreasonable activities day after day when the poster just gets another username and the same old stuff continues the very next morning? It gets old for those of us reading and even for those of us participating in this crap but eventually things die down. Nine times out of ten the troll has no interest in helping you so you can ask a question and hope for the best. Unfortunately, there is nothing to really stop a troll from entering a thread just because another person they want to insult has already posted there. I haven't been on any forum where unfortunately one of two things happen, either trolls are allowed to remain unabated or every discussion is so heavily monitored it inhibits open discussion. Like I said, if you can come up with a workable plan that suits the majority, tell it to the administrator, I'm sure he'd love to hear it. . |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2714 Registered: May-05 | "It gets old for those of us reading and even for those of us participating in this crap but eventually things die down." If it gets so old, why do you keep it going? Are you uncontrolably drawn to their stupidity? The best way to keep garbage like this tread going is to ignore it. No special tricks, software, filters, blockers, sercet service agents, or whatever else you can conjure up. If you can't see that you make it worse by giving them the time of day, there's something seriously wrong. You've complained about it an uncountable number of times. Truth is, I think you enjoy it just as much as they do. Its pretty sad, actually. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 274 Registered: Apr-08 | "Troll" is a term often used by forum bullies trying to control thought and content. if someone does not immediately cave to the prevailing wisdom, they are labeled a troll, surrounded and viciously attacked. Just calling someone a troll does not make them a troll. It could make a the name caller a forum bully. Stu has it right. if you disagree with someone's comments, state that you disagree and move on. Calling people names and trying to undermine their credibility is done when someone is afraid that people may consider the other idea being presented, not because presenter is a true troll. When you say 'troll free zone', it sure sounds like an 'anyone-that-disagrees-with-me free zone' |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12642 Registered: May-04 | . Arien - See what I mean? It starts all over again. Ain't testosterone a won'erful thing? |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 336 Registered: Mar-04 | Oh Oh Oh Oohoh Hut, Come On! Oh Oh Oh Oohoh Hut, Come On! This time for real, Tired of playing it safe Inside I feel, I've got what it takes To prove to the world, who I really can be I know for sure, there's no stopping me No time to wait on the side, Watching, they all pass me by, I'm gunna be in the game, Watch me play it, Im comin with it ya know, Lets get a start on the show, Turn up the lights at the stage No more waitin' It's my turn now, And you know that I'm ready, It's my turn now, And I'm strong and I'm steady Break down the walls, Gunna go for it all, It's my time, Gunna shine, Show you how, Because it's my turn now Oh Oh Oh Oohoh Ok  |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10243 Registered: Dec-04 | uhh..ok. So you are a troll with mental issues. There's a diagnosis. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 337 Registered: Mar-04 | Schmuck, I thought we are turning over a new leaf? |
|
Bronze Member Username: ZorroPost Number: 83 Registered: Jul-05 | unbridled id, What grade are you in mate? Seriously, are you old enough to use the internet without supervision? Suggestion: Type your posts in Microsoft Word, do a spell check and when you are 100% sure that all is correct then copy and paste to here. Take my advice mate. Bollocks! |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 338 Registered: Mar-04 | I can count on you harpo. Every five days or so you ooze up and perform, bravo! |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 742 Registered: Dec-06 | Cut him some slack, Zorro....he's from the north side of Chicago. They ain't known for an overabundance of brains, man. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10246 Registered: Dec-04 | I cannot comment on that one. My bad typing. A tad dyslexic. Or just not a very good typist. Spell check sends me into a frenzy like an epileptic at a strobe light convention. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 339 Registered: Mar-04 | Ed Gein makes an appearance. Taking time away from the deliverance fantasy I see. The whole gang is coming out of the woodwork, this is fantastic. Schmuck, I think groucho was referring to my typing/pasting; your typing is just fine. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics