"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 ;-)

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:40:49 +0000, Laurence Payne wrote:

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?

Usually, yes.

And with respect to stuff like CD players; being mechanical, they're more
likely to break than stuff with no moving parts, IME.

Best Regards,
Alex.
--
Alex Butcher Brainbench MVP for Internet Security: www.brainbench.com
Bristol, UK Need reliable and secure network systems?
PGP/GnuPG ID:0x271fd950 http://www.assursys.com/

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:40:49 +0000, Laurence Payne wrote:

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?

Usually, yes.

And with respect to stuff like CD players; being mechanical, they're more
likely to break than stuff with no moving parts, IME.

Best Regards,
Alex.
--
Alex Butcher Brainbench MVP for Internet Security: www.brainbench.com
Bristol, UK Need reliable and secure network systems?
PGP/GnuPG ID:0x271fd950 http://www.assursys.com/

David Houpt wrote:
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 11:51:01 +0000, Nick Gorham
wrote:


Err, isn't it all down to personal taste anyway ?

--
Nick


I agree. So I think that it is very difficult to rank order such
players, as many reviewers do, based on their own personal listening
experience and, I suspect, the price of the gear in question. Its
interesting to see how, in Hi Fi World for example, kit that measures
comparatively poorly gets a good review full of flowery, subjective
mush.

Well I guess, if its measures well, they can just fill column space with
talk about how well the numbers were. if not, they can talk subjective
bollox about the "quality" of the sound.

IMVHO, you can either take

position 1: look at the numbers (assuming they are competently
measured), decide below or above what value each number becomes
irrelevent. For example, I don't think a well designed amp with .01%
distortion will sound any worse that another amp with .001% distortion
under similar conditions.

position 2: ignore the numbers, decide they have no meaning, and decide
based on whats in fashion at the time, for example there are amps with
1% distortion that may sound better than amps with .01% distortion.

or the third way...

Spend the money you would have spent on mags on LP/CD (your choice), and
buy what sounds good to you, and as you are not reading the mags
anymore, you won't start having the nagging doubt that you are missing
something "better".

And if you want HiFi as a hobby, instead of just a way to hear music,
start building your own, then if you don't like the sound, you have only
yourself to blame.

--
Nick

David Houpt wrote:
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 11:51:01 +0000, Nick Gorham
wrote:


Err, isn't it all down to personal taste anyway ?

--
Nick


I agree. So I think that it is very difficult to rank order such
players, as many reviewers do, based on their own personal listening
experience and, I suspect, the price of the gear in question. Its
interesting to see how, in Hi Fi World for example, kit that measures
comparatively poorly gets a good review full of flowery, subjective
mush.

Well I guess, if its measures well, they can just fill column space with
talk about how well the numbers were. if not, they can talk subjective
bollox about the "quality" of the sound.

IMVHO, you can either take

position 1: look at the numbers (assuming they are competently
measured), decide below or above what value each number becomes
irrelevent. For example, I don't think a well designed amp with .01%
distortion will sound any worse that another amp with .001% distortion
under similar conditions.

position 2: ignore the numbers, decide they have no meaning, and decide
based on whats in fashion at the time, for example there are amps with
1% distortion that may sound better than amps with .01% distortion.

or the third way...

Spend the money you would have spent on mags on LP/CD (your choice), and
buy what sounds good to you, and as you are not reading the mags
anymore, you won't start having the nagging doubt that you are missing
something "better".

And if you want HiFi as a hobby, instead of just a way to hear music,
start building your own, then if you don't like the sound, you have only
yourself to blame.

--
Nick

Oliver Keating wrote:

Anyway my 2 cents is this:

Speakers should get 60% of the total budget.
Amp should get up to 40% of the total budget
CD player - £100 absolute maximum (even for a very high end system)

Two points:

Please point me at a £100 CD player that sounds better than my DAC.

Given that 60% + 40% = 100%, I can reliably inform you that your £100 CD
player budget will have to be conjured up from thin air.


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

Oliver Keating wrote:

Anyway my 2 cents is this:

Speakers should get 60% of the total budget.
Amp should get up to 40% of the total budget
CD player - £100 absolute maximum (even for a very high end system)

Two points:

Please point me at a £100 CD player that sounds better than my DAC.

Given that 60% + 40% = 100%, I can reliably inform you that your £100 CD
player budget will have to be conjured up from thin air.


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

In article , Nick
Gorham wrote:


position 1: look at the numbers (assuming they are competently
measured), decide below or above what value each number becomes
irrelevent. For example, I don't think a well designed amp with .01%
distortion will sound any worse that another amp with .001% distortion
under similar conditions.

position 2: ignore the numbers, decide they have no meaning, and decide
based on whats in fashion at the time, for example there are amps with
1% distortion that may sound better than amps with .01% distortion.

or the third way...

Spend the money you would have spent on mags on LP/CD (your choice), and
buy what sounds good to you, and as you are not reading the mags
anymore, you won't start having the nagging doubt that you are missing
something "better".

Or: ;-

position 4: Obtain some reliably obtained measurements, combined with some
listening tests that confirm that the kit is basically OK. Then use the
measured values to estimate their impact upon your own requirements, based
upon your own experience, situation, and taste. :-) (Can view this as a
varient upon position 1 if you like.)

The magazines seem to have taken to avoiding measurements as they take time
and money to produce, as well as some level of real understanding by the
reviewer.

They have apparently also decided they are incapable of explaining how
readers can make intelligent use of them. It isn't a "bigger/lower the
better" thing in many cases. It is a matter of what values may be most
suitable for some readers, but not for others. The snag is that the
reviewers have to understand this, and be able to explain it clearly for
the benefit of newer readers.

I fear it is 'dumbing down'. The impression is that they have decided their
readers are too dim to understand, and they can't be bothered to even try
and explain. Easier to say, "I am an expert and X is better than Y, so
there."

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Nick
Gorham wrote:


position 1: look at the numbers (assuming they are competently
measured), decide below or above what value each number becomes
irrelevent. For example, I don't think a well designed amp with .01%
distortion will sound any worse that another amp with .001% distortion
under similar conditions.

position 2: ignore the numbers, decide they have no meaning, and decide
based on whats in fashion at the time, for example there are amps with
1% distortion that may sound better than amps with .01% distortion.

or the third way...

Spend the money you would have spent on mags on LP/CD (your choice), and
buy what sounds good to you, and as you are not reading the mags
anymore, you won't start having the nagging doubt that you are missing
something "better".

Or: ;-

position 4: Obtain some reliably obtained measurements, combined with some
listening tests that confirm that the kit is basically OK. Then use the
measured values to estimate their impact upon your own requirements, based
upon your own experience, situation, and taste. :-) (Can view this as a
varient upon position 1 if you like.)

The magazines seem to have taken to avoiding measurements as they take time
and money to produce, as well as some level of real understanding by the
reviewer.

They have apparently also decided they are incapable of explaining how
readers can make intelligent use of them. It isn't a "bigger/lower the
better" thing in many cases. It is a matter of what values may be most
suitable for some readers, but not for others. The snag is that the
reviewers have to understand this, and be able to explain it clearly for
the benefit of newer readers.

I fear it is 'dumbing down'. The impression is that they have decided their
readers are too dim to understand, and they can't be bothered to even try
and explain. Easier to say, "I am an expert and X is better than Y, so
there."

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Spend the money you would have spent on mags on LP/CD (your choice), or build
your own

Nick is right on the button. Buy the Maplins catalogue for starters. Then
Morgan Jones 'Valve amplifiers' 3rd ed. or similar DIY text and off you go.

=== Andy Evans ===
Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.