JustMe wrote:



I will also continue to use my 8000CD which, to my ears, is the best CD
player I have heard at the price to date.

*Exluding the Philips CD Mech problem which wasn't their fault anyway and
hurt many manufacturers.


Interesting, as the 8000CD is meant to have no sound of its own.

If you like a bit of colour and character to your hi-fi, wouldn't you have
bought a Naim CD player?

I will also continue to use my 8000CD which, to my ears, is the best CD
player I have heard at the price to date.

*Exluding the Philips CD Mech problem which wasn't their fault anyway
and
hurt many manufacturers.


Interesting, as the 8000CD is meant to have no sound of its own.

"Meant to"? What's your feeling?

If you like a bit of colour and character to your hi-fi, wouldn't you have
bought a Naim CD player?

I've not heard any Naim CD players in a familiar context, although what I've
read of the CDX sounds like I might want to hear it for myself.

I used an Arcam BB500 with a DVD transport for a while - this was lovely
and, I guess, coloured. The Audiolab 8000CD just seems to lift a cloud off
of any disc I play - I prefer it.

JustMe wrote:

I will also continue to use my 8000CD which, to my ears, is the best CD
player I have heard at the price to date.


Interesting, as the 8000CD is meant to have no sound of its own.


"Meant to"? What's your feeling?


I haven't heard the 8000CD myself (though a hi-fi shop here had its successor,
the Tag CD20R at 40% off) but if it is anything like the traditional Audiolab
approach to sound, then it should be (using the usual terms given to such kit)
colourless and analytical.

Myself, I would rather get an Audiolab DAC than a CD player as I have multiple
digital sources.


I used an Arcam BB500 with a DVD transport for a while - this was lovely
and, I guess, coloured. The Audiolab 8000CD just seems to lift a cloud off
of any disc I play - I prefer it.


Interesting. I am not familiar with the Arcam Black Box in question (is it
multibit? bitstream? much older than the 8000CD?).

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...


At the other end, you have gigs where everything is note for note perfect,
and the performance sounds exactly like a replica of the CD.
I tend to find those gigs boring. If I wanted a replication of the
performance on CD, I would have stayed at home.


**Ah, you're talking about Madonna concerts.



But you don't get all those dance moves and impossible yoga poses on the CD!

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...


At the other end, you have gigs where everything is note for note
perfect, and the performance sounds exactly like a replica of the CD.
I tend to find those gigs boring. If I wanted a replication of the
performance on CD, I would have stayed at home.


**Ah, you're talking about Madonna concerts.



But you don't get all those dance moves and impossible yoga poses on the
CD!

**That's why CD is dead. DVD is the medium of the near future.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , JustMe
wrote:
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Fine words Mr Lesurf, but I suspect I'm not the only one here who
likes to 'hear his kit working' as well as listening to the music
occasionally..... ;-)

Agreed. From what the "engineery" people in this group seem to say, I'd
say I fall into that camp too.

I'll wait for Jim to build me an "every amp in one" to make the ultimate
judgement ;o)

That might require a very large case just to fit the large multiway
selector on the top for all the variations the user can dial up. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

Can't you built a little logic circuit for the amp-switching - maybe a PS2
socket on the front and a make/model search function?
New amps could be added via USB2 flash upgrade, for a fee.

I will also continue to use my 8000CD which, to my ears, is the best CD
player I have heard at the price to date.


Interesting, as the 8000CD is meant to have no sound of its own.


"Meant to"? What's your feeling?


I haven't heard the 8000CD myself (though a hi-fi shop here had its
successor,
the Tag CD20R at 40% off) but if it is anything like the traditional
Audiolab
approach to sound, then it should be (using the usual terms given to such
kit)
colourless and analytical.

Myself, I would rather get an Audiolab DAC than a CD player as I have
multiple
digital sources.

That's why I kept the BB500, but the Audiolab sounds best without the
Arcam's influence.

I used an Arcam BB500 with a DVD transport for a while - this was lovely
and, I guess, coloured. The Audiolab 8000CD just seems to lift a cloud
off
of any disc I play - I prefer it.


Interesting. I am not familiar with the Arcam Black Box in question (is it
multibit? bitstream? much older than the 8000CD?).

I didn't know the answer, so looked it up. 1 Bit DAC, 20 Bit filter,
apparently. In my experience, single bit DACs have been more fun and less
"analytical", but that might be coincidence and the spec might be wrong!
It's a lovely DAC, though.

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , JustMe
wrote:

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"JustMe" wrote


Just one problem. It's boring to listen to.

Looking at a piece of glass can be boring as well. Although I suppose this
depends upon whether you prefer to look at a bit of stained glass or
*through* a window at the scene beyond. :-)

FWIW I use audio equipment to listen to music, speech, films, etc, and
hence don't really want to get the impression that I can 'hear the amp' at
all. However your choice is your decision, not mine. :-)

Well, some would argue that this is the be all and end all of hifi. I'd
argue, as Mike said, that "it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that
swing". I spent the money on the gear to get the maximum pleasure from
my music. If a "straight wire with gain" wont give me that, then a curly
wire with gain will provide me with better value for money.

Fairy snuff.

I've had a couple of valve amps - an Armstrong

Which one?

Looking at the pics on your Armstrong site - it brought back all sorts of
memories and smells - the 222 looks right. I also had a receiver from the
same range - the one on the top left of the "200ads.jpeg" image also
matches.

The amp belonged to my granddad and the receiver to my dad. The receiver was
originally built into a large wooden cabinet, with a Garrard SP25ii
turntable fitted into a cut-out on the top. Both were used with, I think,
Goodmans Sandwich (?) speakers and came bundled with an 8 track recorder
with two cartridges - The Carpenters and Zager and Evans )

I used to have trouble getting hold of the proper two-pin speaker plugs for
the amps and often used to push bare wire into the sockets and blu-tac them
in place - I was young! Used them with all sorts of speakers - and speaker
combinations - and gave them incredible abuse (both in terms of dragging
them around and in how I hooked up the outputs to various combinations of
totally inappropriate speakers in ways that would quickly damage most amps
that I own today - or trigger some sort of protection).

Never once did they fail.

In the end I sold them. Thinking about that now, I wish I hadn't.

"JustMe" wrote in message
...
Following recent discussions about distortion and an amp's ability to
reproduce without colouration, I though I'd relay a recent experience.

In an earlier thread I had pointed out that my favourite amp would be
described by many on here as noisy and of inferior design on the basis
that
the sound may be coloured or because its performance seems to be sensitive
to it reaching an optimum temperature.

I swapped this amp (an Alchemist Kraken APD6a II) for an Audiolab 8000LX
which had been packed up for a short time. Many on here will be familiar
with this amp, if only by reputation.

The first thing I observed was how much more comfortable I was with the
look, feel, ergonomics and operation of the Audiolab. I can put things on
top of it, for starters (I don't block the air from circulating though the
vents, don't worry), the buttons are all cool to the touch - not *hot*
like
the Alchemist, both the input and record selector switches feel the same
and
it all operates with a great deal of assurance. It also has a lovely 1/4"
headphone jack on the front panel, which is very useful.

Just one problem. It's boring to listen to. I've been running the
Alchemist
in exactly the same setup for a few months and in switching to the
Audiolab,
and having listened for about a weeks now, I'm totally uninspired. The
sound
is very clean and aesthetically it's all very balanced and even handed,
which is fine on paper, but it doesn't entertain me.

If I were a recording artist, first and foremost I'd want those listening
to
my music to be entertained, inspired & moved by it. The Audiolab doesn't
do
that for me, the Alchemist does. For all its supposed colour, for all its
foibles, operational quirks - whatever you like - it is by any sensible
measure of what a hifi should be and do, better.

It's a similar difference that I experience when listening to vinyl
compared
with CD...



A friend had a 8000, was so bland compared to my Cyrus 2 (at the time)

Steve

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:41:48 GMT, "Steve Batt"
wrote:


"JustMe" wrote in message
...
Following recent discussions about distortion and an amp's ability to
reproduce without colouration, I though I'd relay a recent experience.

In an earlier thread I had pointed out that my favourite amp would be
described by many on here as noisy and of inferior design on the basis
that
the sound may be coloured or because its performance seems to be sensitive
to it reaching an optimum temperature.

I swapped this amp (an Alchemist Kraken APD6a II) for an Audiolab 8000LX
which had been packed up for a short time. Many on here will be familiar
with this amp, if only by reputation.

The first thing I observed was how much more comfortable I was with the
look, feel, ergonomics and operation of the Audiolab. I can put things on
top of it, for starters (I don't block the air from circulating though the
vents, don't worry), the buttons are all cool to the touch - not *hot*
like
the Alchemist, both the input and record selector switches feel the same
and
it all operates with a great deal of assurance. It also has a lovely 1/4"
headphone jack on the front panel, which is very useful.

Just one problem. It's boring to listen to. I've been running the
Alchemist
in exactly the same setup for a few months and in switching to the
Audiolab,
and having listened for about a weeks now, I'm totally uninspired. The
sound
is very clean and aesthetically it's all very balanced and even handed,
which is fine on paper, but it doesn't entertain me.

If I were a recording artist, first and foremost I'd want those listening
to
my music to be entertained, inspired & moved by it. The Audiolab doesn't
do
that for me, the Alchemist does. For all its supposed colour, for all its
foibles, operational quirks - whatever you like - it is by any sensible
measure of what a hifi should be and do, better.

It's a similar difference that I experience when listening to vinyl
compared
with CD...

A friend had a 8000, was so bland compared to my Cyrus 2 (at the time)

Excellent! Amps are not *supposed* to have character, that's the job
of the performer!............
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering