Alex Butcher wrote:

I can see the thinking regarding computers - two components that can
be bought for a reasonable price/performance trade-off are CPU and
hard disk. But what parts of an audio system quickly become
obsolete, such that the same thinking can be applied?

Digital components such as CD/DVD players for a start, it would seem.

Obsolete?


An example of the sort of systems I'm proposing would be:

~130GBP CD player
~100GBP DVD player
~150GBP HT receiver

Why both CD and DVD players?


~ 50GBP DVD player
~320GBP HT receiver
10GBP digital cable

Same overall price, but I would expect that the DAC in that ~320GBP
receiver is better than either of the DACS in the ~100GBP-range CD/DVD
players, and further, that the amplifier in the ~320GBP device is
better than the ~150GBP device.

I'm tempted to agree. What would be the upgrade candidate in the latter
system?


I wonder whether anyone could tell
which was the cheaper CD/DVD transport...

If they're all going through the DAC in the dearer HT amp, I think it would
be hard to tell.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
On webcam: Black Cat In Coal Cellar

So until I can find a voice matched centre speaker for my main left/right
that is magnetically shielded (some time never) I'll have to do without
one.



Or a big plasma screen which doesn't care about the field from the
speakers????

David

So until I can find a voice matched centre speaker for my main left/right
that is magnetically shielded (some time never) I'll have to do without
one.



Or a big plasma screen which doesn't care about the field from the
speakers????

David

"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...

I just wonder if this magazine is just designed so that the industry is
able
to flog expensive kit.


WHF isn't unique, but it's probably the worst.

To my mind the only magazine that ever did sensible reviews was Gramophone.
Then Geoffrey Horn packed in and the "usual suspects" from HFN&RR etc. were
drafted in. I stopped reading the audio equipment reviews around that time.

Roy.




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...

I just wonder if this magazine is just designed so that the industry is
able
to flog expensive kit.


WHF isn't unique, but it's probably the worst.

To my mind the only magazine that ever did sensible reviews was Gramophone.
Then Geoffrey Horn packed in and the "usual suspects" from HFN&RR etc. were
drafted in. I stopped reading the audio equipment reviews around that time.

Roy.




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Andy Evans wrote:

Trouble is they are still subjective measurements and therefore of no
value to anyone other than the person who made them

Put it this way - I'd MUCH rather any competent audiophile ranked ten
products in order of preference than gave them arbitrary stars. There's
bad and there's worse.


I would much rather reviwers subjected the kit to some relevant repeatable
tests and published the results. Perhaps then we could avoid the several
thousand pounds power amplifier with several percent distortion receiving a
rave reviw.

Ian

P.S. Isn't competent audiophile and oxymoron ;-)

Andy Evans wrote:

Trouble is they are still subjective measurements and therefore of no
value to anyone other than the person who made them

Put it this way - I'd MUCH rather any competent audiophile ranked ten
products in order of preference than gave them arbitrary stars. There's
bad and there's worse.


I would much rather reviwers subjected the kit to some relevant repeatable
tests and published the results. Perhaps then we could avoid the several
thousand pounds power amplifier with several percent distortion receiving a
rave reviw.

Ian

P.S. Isn't competent audiophile and oxymoron ;-)

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:02:50 +0000, Alex Butcher
wrote:

This raises an interesting point; a while ago, I was planning on building
a modest home cinema/hi-fi rig and my plan was to treat it much the same
as I treat building computers; good quality central components
(motherboard, PSU, DAC/Amplifier) and Human IO devices (monitor, keyboard,
mouse, speakers) and spend what I can afford on the rest (CPU, memory,
video card, CD transports). The logic behind that is that I
don't want to spend large amounts of money on components that rapidly
become obsolete, but instead spend it on components that will be the last
to be upgraded and for which good quality/stability is necessary.

So you're assuming that you WILL upgrade, when prices drop? If not,
it's very strange logic ;-)

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:02:50 +0000, Alex Butcher
wrote:

This raises an interesting point; a while ago, I was planning on building
a modest home cinema/hi-fi rig and my plan was to treat it much the same
as I treat building computers; good quality central components
(motherboard, PSU, DAC/Amplifier) and Human IO devices (monitor, keyboard,
mouse, speakers) and spend what I can afford on the rest (CPU, memory,
video card, CD transports). The logic behind that is that I
don't want to spend large amounts of money on components that rapidly
become obsolete, but instead spend it on components that will be the last
to be upgraded and for which good quality/stability is necessary.

So you're assuming that you WILL upgrade, when prices drop? If not,
it's very strange logic ;-)

"Ian Bell" wrote in message
...
Andy Evans wrote:

Trouble is they are still subjective measurements and therefore of no
value to anyone other than the person who made them

Put it this way - I'd MUCH rather any competent audiophile ranked ten
products in order of preference than gave them arbitrary stars. There's
bad and there's worse.


I would much rather reviwers subjected the kit to some relevant repeatable
tests and published the results. Perhaps then we could avoid the several
thousand pounds power amplifier with several percent distortion receiving
a
rave reviw.

One simple but effective way I have found to test hi-fi is to have it
playing a recording, and then have a microphone positioned in an ideal
location recording the output.

With really high end stuff, the recording will be indistinguishable from the
original, but of course there is degredation directly related to the
speakers/amps, so perhaps a could test would be to record the recording, and
repeat until a blind test reveals the difference between the original and
the recorded, and simply note the number of recordings it took.

Btw - what thousand pound amplifiers have a several percent distortion?

Ian

P.S. Isn't competent audiophile and oxymoron ;-)