Any Home Audiophiles Out There

[andrewpogany]

ps Every single in-wall and in-ceiling speaker install I have ever heard, and that includes really high $$ stuff in listening rooms of high end audio/video stores sound like shiite (moslem...what did you think I wrote?) Don't do it.

pps THD. Fagetaboutit. Human ear can't detect below 1 to 3 percent (if memory serves, not positive) THD anyway, so it doesn't matter if it's .003 or .01 or .1. You can't hear it anyway. It was a big Consumer Reports-ish audio dummies oriented stat scam that started in the 70's (and apparently persists today).

Besides, if you spend a grand on any amp or reciever today, I assure you the specs (whatever the specifics) will be extremely good. So again, do NOT get hung up on the THD thing at all.

 

[West R Lee]

Thanks guys....Andrew, I'll check out the Paradigms (sp). And BTW, I went out and bought 300 ft. of 14 gauge Monster Cable and wired the house in-wall.

West

 

[fronobulax]

stat scam that started in the 70's

Welcome.

Interesting you see "scam". I agree if you can't hear the difference it shouldn't matter but there are always some people who will claim if they can measure the difference then there is a difference. What I recall was a generation obsessed with power specs and the sanest way to compare power specs was when you had an RMS value, a load and THD.

 

[West R Lee]

Well, What I can say is that the same week I bought my Yamaha back in the 80's, a good friend bought a Pioneer with much more power. He also bought some Cerwin Vega when I bought the Infiniti's. The Yamama has a 60 watt amp, the pioneer had a 100. There was no comparison in terms of sound quality, the Yamaha/Infiniti combo blew the Pioneer/CV combo away in terms of clarity in the higher power ranges. The Pioneer was about as "loud', but you couldn't listen to it as it sounded horrible cranked up.......way too much distorion.

Another issue, and one of the big reasons I bought the Yamaha was that it was touted as having what they referred to as "discrete circuitry"....a system of weeding out bad or inferior components, while keeping only the best for production......with the inferior stuff sold to other companies. I think that showed in the 80's Yamaha recievers and amps.

West

 

[andrewpogany]

Hi again West,
I now admit that I am a recovering HiFi snob, years ago having subscribed to both Audio and Stereo Review mags. Don't hate me for that

Way more important than THD figures, is a concept called Dynamic Headroom. Also in play are a myriad other factors as far as how the amp(s) are made. Which are some of the reasons Yam stuff is really good. And if memory serves, by "discrete", Yamaha means that for a 5x100 watt receiver, there are actually 5 separate little guys in there (as opposed to partitioning channels off of one big amp).

BTW, when you compare 2 diff amp/speaker setups like you did (and just to add to all the cornfusion), you also need to factor in the "efficiency" ratings of the speakers (measured in deciblesSPL/1watt/1meter). The higher the efficiency (also called sensitivity), the louder the speaker will be for a given amount of power. And just make things even MORE confusing, a higher efficiency speaker is not necessary a better sounding speaker at all. As I recall, CVega are pretty efficient (if not very good sounding) and Infinitis (like my old ADSs) are not quite so efficient (but way more accurate and better sounding.

[quote from Stereos.About.com article link below]Speakers range in efficiency or sensitivity from about 85dB (very inefficient) up to 105dB (very efficient). As a comparison, a speaker with 85 dB efficiency rating will take twice the amplifier power to reach to same volume as a speaker with 88 dB efficiency. Similarly, a speaker with a 88 dB efficiency rating will require ten times more power than a speaker with a 98 dB efficiency rating to play at the same level....[/quote][/size][/size]


So how far down this audo rabbit hole do you want to go?
Here's some 'homework' for ya. Tons of other stuff out there. Hope it helps you. Again, you pretty much can't go wrong with any new good Yamaha (or HK or Denon or Onkyo or Pioneer).

Lemme know what you decide to do. It's always more fun to spend someone else's $$ - you've got me vicariously interested!

Andy


http://www.audioholics.com/education/fr ... -rms-power

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages ... 09459.html

http://stereos.about.com/od/stereoscien ... ppower.htm

 

[jp]

Good advice about the Niles switching unit, Andrew. My extent of newer audio products is very limited. Despite trying to decipher the THD foo for West, I don't usually care about the specs that much either. I've got an old Marantz 2252B pushing pretty power hungry Polks, but it does me just fine.

I may have mentioned this here before, but it's kind of funny how so many musicians I know have massive music collections and the crappiest stereo systems. Walls of records and CDs, being played through the classic black plastic junk. It took me a long time to upgrade myself. Why buy new stereo gear when you can buy more music or more gear!

 

[andrewpogany]

JP

First of all, thx for the posts on my 12string dilemma. I am very happy with going with the "gut" on that one. I love this thing already, only mine for 6 or 7 hrs or so. Orange Glo (Billy Mays ain't lie'in) is the bomb man. Cleans and moisturizes and revitalizes. Someone make some wrinkled old guy human skin Orange Glo will ya huh? et

On the 70's hifi stuff. Look, first of all, I agree that some of the best musicians I've known have had the crappiest stereos. BUT, crappy is not the same as outdated. And outdated does not mean not good by any means. I have spent big $$ (for me at least) on Nak, B&O, etc etc stuff; and I have had the perverse pleasure of hearing HUGE $$ systems with multiple Mark-Levinson amps and all kinds of wierd cool and unbelievably - and I mean that...totally unbelievable - stuff , and to this day, my ultimate fav system I've ever heard was my buddy's dad's system growing up in the late 70's - and who was a humble postal carrier but a huge music fan in Cleveland - involving a top of the line 60's/70's Marantz system (with "oscillascope(sp?)"...totally cool) and one pair of huge hutch sized Bozak 1500 speakers.

We used to crank the Beatles and Stones and shake that little house to its foundation when noone was home .

So do NOT kick your 70's amp and speaker stuff out the door if it still makes you smile.

 

[andrewpogany]

Hey Pooh-bah dude (BTW I am immensely em 'bare-assed' by my 'is it a Waverly?' (as opposed to Westerly) post on the '87 12 string post...now I know it is a RI axe, but still.....rookie mistake....


Anyway, what did you end up doing with the home hi-fi?

 

[West R Lee]

Well guys, after all of the discussion, and after being told so many times that it would be tough to improve on my 15 year old stereo, and after much study and checking the new ones in stores, I thought I'd let you know that we're moved into our new home. I hooked up the old Yamaha and Infiniti SM122's, along with the Yamaha sub.........it's been almost 2 years since I'd heard it. I agree with those that told me so, it just doesn't get much better.

I thank you guys for all of the input. I think I'm pretty content for now.

West

 

[capnjuan]

... and to this day, my ultimate fav system I've ever heard was my buddy's dad's system growing up in the late 70's ... involving a top of the line 60's/70's Marantz system (with "oscillascope(sp?)"...totally cool) ...

Hi Andrew; close enough on the spelling. The only Marantz product with a built-in 'scope was the Marantz 10B ($2,499 BIN) :shock: that relied on 21 vacuum tubes ... Saul Marantz's last word in tube tuner design. The red X/Y grid on the left is where the 'scope's output showed up. Other later Marantz products had tuning indicators ... no other had scopes. Should have looked like this one; could have been in a walnut case too:

John

 

[jp]

Well guys, after all of the discussion, and after being told so many times that it would be tough to improve on my 15 year old stereo, and after much study and checking the new ones in stores, I thought I'd let you know that we're moved into our new home. I hooked up the old Yamaha and Infiniti SM22's, along with the Yamaha sub.........it's been almost 2 years since I'd heard it. I agree with those that told me so, it just doesn't get much better.

I thank you guys for all of the input. I think I'm pretty content for now. West

Glad to hear it, West. With two little boys always tugging at my sleeve, it's not so often I get to enjoy my system. And although as with guitars, we always yearn for more and better, I really love my old 2-channel system too!

On the 70's hifi stuff. Look, first of all, I agree that some of the best musicians I've known have had the crappiest stereos. BUT, crappy is not the same as outdated. And outdated does not mean not good by any means. . .

Missed responding to this, Andrew. Don't misunderstand me at all. I can differentiate quality despite the vintage, just like with guitars and amps. When I mean crappy, I mean Soundesign-Emerson-etc, junk. :roll:

Hey Capn,
He may have been talking about these . . .

http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/pics/2110.jpg
http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/pics/2110L.jpg
http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/pics/f_2130b.jpg
http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/pics/2500.jpg
http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/pics/2600.jpg

People pay top dollar for these beasts, especially the 2500 and 2600!

 

[capnjuan]

Hi JP and thankee ... I had a 10B and thought it was the only model fitted with a scope. J

 

[capnjuan]

The Marantz 10b and except only the Marantz 10r - possibly a broadcast or studio model - was the last Marantz tube-driven FM tuner with a built-in oscilliscope. In the mid-60s, Saul Marantz sold part interest in the company and manfacturing was moved to Japan in 1966. (Wiki)

Index of Marantz equipment.

 

[jp]

The Marantz 10b and except only the Marantz 10r - possibly a broadcast or studio model - was the last Marantz tube-driven FM tuner with a built-in oscilliscope. In the mid-60s, Saul Marantz sold part interest in the company and manfacturing was moved to Japan in 1966. (Wiki)

Index of Marantz equipment.

Knowing your penchant for tube gear capn, I figured you were talking about that series. I only knew about those models because I seriously geeked out on Marantz stuff for a while, mostly the solid state classics, since the tube stuff was totally out of my price range. I have a 2252B integrated amp which puts most modern equipment to shame. Also have a 6350Q turntable which does the job well enough for my pedestrian listening skills

 

[capnjuan]

... I have a 2252B integrated amp which puts most modern equipment to shame. Also have a 6350Q turntable which does the job well enough for my pedestrian listening skills

Hi JP; my kid still has his 2270 receiver ... +/- 35 years old and still going strong. Before we moved to Flourida, my system included a 10b and 7c ...both in walnut cabinets. The chrome-plated Mac75s drive people's blood pressure up but it's the baked enamel Marantz 8bs that still bring down the hou$e ... :wink:

 

[West R Lee]

Well I've finally found a receiver with ALL of the new gadgets and substantially better sound quality as my 17 year old receiver.......just don't have the $5400 (list) to buy it. Actually have found this one new on eBay from a couple of sellers in the $2300 range......still can't afford it!

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/prod ... TID=558249

And the unbiased review.

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/rece ... asurements

West

 

[capnjuan]

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/prod ... TID=558249
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/rece ... asurements

Holy Semolians West ... Investment-grade performance ......... and price :shock: :shock: :shock:

 

[West R Lee]

Bad boy ain't it Cap, but by the time I can afford one, all of the gadgets will be obsolete.

West

 

[capnjuan]

... by the time I can afford one, all of the gadgets will be obsolete.West

We have a '70s Sony 50 wpc receiver; back then, it would've come close to being rated 'mid-fi' gear. Lots of features, inputs / switching ... stuff like taping dubbing loops.

With some effort, we can use it for FM, Cable TV FM, CD/DVD, and piping TV audio. Before the flat-screen, getting TV audio out of the TV and in/out of the receiver meant flipping switches on the back of the old TV and changing input selectors on the receiver ... even more switches when piping DVDs to the old TV and exporting the audio to the receiver.

When Mrs. Juan starts in on me about the switch flipping, I usually say "But Honey ... it works fine and sounds good" ... to which she usually replies: "... when it comes to actually using it though, which is the 'fine' part?".

I don't know how much longer I can hold out. The Yam is an absolute gem ... but ... as you say ...

John

 

[West R Lee]

... by the time I can afford one, all of the gadgets will be obsolete.West

We have a '70s Sony 50 wpc receiver; back then, it would've come close to being rated 'mid-fi' gear. Lots of features, inputs / switching ... stuff like taping dubbing loops.

With some effort, we can use it for FM, Cable TV FM, CD/DVD, and piping TV audio. Before the flat-screen, getting TV audio out of the TV and in/out of the receiver meant flipping switches on the back of the old TV and changing input selectors on the receiver ... even more switches when piping DVDs to the old TV and exporting the audio to the receiver.

When Mrs. Juan starts in on me about the switch flipping, I usually say "But Honey ... it works fine and sounds good" ... to which she usually replies: "... when it comes to actually using it though, which is the 'fine' part?".

I don't know how much longer I can hold out. The Yam is an absolute gem ... but ... as you say ...

John

Show her the prices of the new units built to handle all of that. :shock: That might work?

West