unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Try some big-assed studio monitor headphones. Very easy to slip a mic on beneath one, and you can crank your volume without bugging anyone around the house.
If I wanted to go any higher with headphones, I'd look at higher end Sennheiser or AKG headphones..mcminty wrote:
Currently I have a pair of HD555's, powered by a Firestone Audio Fubar 3 DAC/amp. While I like them immensely, I often don't feel like wearing headphones while I do work in my room.
Because they really aren't that great at designing ampli-mcminty wrote:
Ya know, just as a point to make.. whats the obsession with SNR? If you have a look at Cambridge Audio's flagship model receiver, the Azur 840A, its SNR is only >93dB. If the dynamic range of a CD is 93dB.. then why didn't they design the amp (and the cheaper ones) otherwise? I'm sure they would have easily been able to create one with 105+..
45 isn;t too bad, as long as it's a solid 45, not like a "oh it's there we'll list it" kinda deal. Also, if possible, apply a crossover when you get the sub - it'll pull some of the extra low end out of the tops, so they'll be tighter for their more limited range.mcminty wrote:
Just to update this thread, last night I had an interesting talk with my uncle about all things audio. I'll be looking into the Cambridge Audio 340 system, or if I can get a good price, the 550 system. A local place priced them today at A$690 and A$1230 respectively (which includes the amp and CD player). I did have a play around with the 340SE.. but didn't really like the volume knob. The 550 series seems a lot more solid..
Also, my friends have been thinking of something to get me, so I've suggested they chip in for a phono preamp - my record player is still goodish, and I'll upgrade the cartridge down the road.
As for Freezer's earlier comments, well.. stop knocking one out over system specs. They will not be able to tell you what something sounds like. Cambridge has an incredibly solid design history (like most UK audio brands), and while they will typically output lower watts than your suggested Japanese counterparts, it'll still sound better. Quality over quantity... I'll trust my uncle on this.. since he's been in the hi-fi business and electrical engineering for 25-30 years..
Speaker-wise, my uncle suggested some Kef Coda 8's. They seem pretty solid from various reviews, although I'm not sure where I can find them. He suggested buying from a local seller on ebay (would cost me around A$250 as opposed to around 700 new), but mum went mental at the suggestion of ebay.. They go down to 45Hz, so down the road I'd add a small sub to round out the very bottom of the low end.
I thought you were above that. But it seems you've swallowed the audiophile bullshit, just like everyone else.mcminty wrote:
As for Freezer's earlier comments, well.. stop knocking one out over system specs. They will not be able to tell you what something sounds like. Cambridge has an incredibly solid design history (like most UK audio brands), and while they will typically output lower watts than your suggested Japanese counterparts, it'll still sound better. Quality over quantity... I'll trust my uncle on this.. since he's been in the hi-fi business and electrical engineering for 25-30 years..
Uh-oh. Here we go again. Inb4 Fre--nvm.mcminty wrote:
As for Freezer's earlier comments, well.. stop knocking one out over system specs. They will not be able to tell you what something sounds like. Cambridge has an incredibly solid design history (like most UK audio brands), and while they will typically output lower watts than your suggested Japanese counterparts, it'll still sound better. Quality over quantity...
At least explain thatFreezer7Pro wrote:
Sigh, why won't you listen to reason?
Given what I heard yesterday, I must agree.ghettoperson wrote:
Definitely get the 685's, they're fucking fantastic.
It has been proven over and over and over again that there is no audible difference between any two properly designed transistor amplifiers driven below clipping. If you hear a difference between two such, either one is faulty, or your testing methodology is flawed. I'm willing to bet that it's the latter in this case.mcminty wrote:
At least explain thatFreezer7Pro wrote:
Sigh, why won't you listen to reason?
Best advice in this thread so far.ghettoperson wrote:
Oh and ignore Freezer
Have you ever.. listened to two amplifiers.. swapping back and forth between the two during playback? If you can't tell the difference, then maybe it's your ears that are the problem.Freezer7Pro wrote:
It has been proven over and over and over again that there is no audible difference between any two properly designed transistor amplifiers driven below clipping.
I guarantee that you didn't do the test at matched levels. Comparing audio gear properly isn't as easy as you may think.mcminty wrote:
Have you ever.. listened to two amplifiers.. swapping back and forth between the two during playback? If you can't tell the difference, then maybe it's your ears that are the problem.Freezer7Pro wrote:
It has been proven over and over and over again that there is no audible difference between any two properly designed transistor amplifiers driven below clipping.
Yes, I do know that for a proper test they need to be within +/-0.1dB, and that it's near impossible to do at your average audio store.Freezer7Pro wrote:
I guarantee that you didn't do the test at matched levels. Comparing audio gear properly isn't as easy as you may think.mcminty wrote:
Have you ever.. listened to two amplifiers.. swapping back and forth between the two during playback? If you can't tell the difference, then maybe it's your ears that are the problem.Freezer7Pro wrote:
It has been proven over and over and over again that there is no audible difference between any two properly designed transistor amplifiers driven below clipping.
If you'd take those two amplifiers, bypass the tone controls and whatnot, and make sure they're outputting at the same level within +/-0.1dB, you wouldn't be able to tell them apart. Read up on the Richard Clark amplifier challenge if you don't believe me.
The distortion of the amplifier is so small in comparison to that of the transducers that it simply doesn't matter. Almost any amplifier will have way under 0.1% distortion - probably closer to 0.01% - throughout its power range, whereas most (good) speakers land at 1% or more. SNR too matters less, as most amps will have a noise floor WAY under that of the room they're used in.mcminty wrote:
Yes, I do know that for a proper test they need to be within +/-0.1dB, and that it's near impossible to do at your average audio store.Freezer7Pro wrote:
I guarantee that you didn't do the test at matched levels. Comparing audio gear properly isn't as easy as you may think.mcminty wrote:
Have you ever.. listened to two amplifiers.. swapping back and forth between the two during playback? If you can't tell the difference, then maybe it's your ears that are the problem.
If you'd take those two amplifiers, bypass the tone controls and whatnot, and make sure they're outputting at the same level within +/-0.1dB, you wouldn't be able to tell them apart. Read up on the Richard Clark amplifier challenge if you don't believe me.
As are you saying that for two "properly designed transistor amps" there is no audible difference, is it to say that corresponding differences in SNR, THD, etc between the two amps are largely irrelevant?.. As you claim they should sound the same?
My suggestion is for you to get the cheapest amplifier/receiver with enough power you can (within some limits, of course). Don't fall for what the salesmen tell you, as long as it's a class A, AB or D amplifier, it'll sound just like all other amplifiers. Put more money into the speakers as well as possible sound treatments for the room, as they're what matters the most.mcminty wrote:
Dude, you should have just laid it out like that in the first place. You come across as a lot more.. reasonable.
So what was your suggestion anyway? Yamaha's "Hi-Fi" amplifiers, at a comparable price to the Cambridge gear, have pretty much similar specifications. Worse in some areas, better in others. Yamaha's AV receivers, at a similar price to Cambridge and completely useless to me with 7.2 channels, are worse in their specifications...
Interesting point you made about the speaker distortion usually being above 1% for good speakers. B&W lists <1% 100Hz - 22kHz, <0.5% 150Hz - 20kHz for the 685's 2nd and 3rd order distortion.
As for what I'm actually doing; next week I'll be going to the shop I've been talking to about the Cambridge gear. I'm going to have a listen to a few things (mostly some other speakers, although I'm pretty set on the 685's.. gotta do business the right way since they are willing to give a massive discount ) And I guess I'll take it from there..
