Let's move on..........

[frankmarsi]

What ‘da, as you people twist wires I’m over here A-B ing two classic CD players, the Magnavox/Phillips624 (lesser than the Mag.630) and the Marantz CD67Mk.2, both budget players, but still heralded. The tune-age is Porcupine-Tree, “In-Absentia”, something all of you's should catch and love, ya wanna live?

I find very little difference in the two players, and is that all too simple for Stereoph—le mag? The yrs. of each player are 1990 & 1998 respectively. The latter one’s sound is only a touch ‘brighter’.

I give my 4 LST’s and 2 Phase Linear400’s an absolute free and un-distorted main vehicle of comparison. My amps can power my speakers to ‘euphoric’ levels and are a perfect use in such conditions. The 2 players are extremely close, the early one has more round bass, the newer more mid and highs, a boon for older AR’s, however slightly less 'big' bass with the newer player.

Shut-up, these things must be done so all out there can benefit!

Why is this site seeming boring lately? Let’s talk about each member’s individual systems and talk about how these AR speakers are holding-up.

Don’t be afraid to speak, my own system looks like the B&W bkgrd. studio of the original “Frankenstein” film. Wires and boxes and amps all over the place, most would laugh at the condition it’s in.

FM

5-16-07

[soundminded]

>What ‘da, as you people twist wires I’m over here A-B ing two

>classic CD players, the Magnavox/Phillips624 (lesser than the

>Mag.630) and the Marantz CD67Mk.2, both budget players, but

>still heralded. The tune-age is Porcupine-Tree,

>“In-Absentia”, something all of you's should catch and love,

>ya wanna live?

>I find very little difference in the two players, and is that

>all too simple for Stereoph—le mag? The yrs. of each player

>are 1990 & 1998 respectively. The latter one’s sound is

>only a touch ‘brighter’.

>I give my 4 LST’s and 2 Phase Linear400’s an absolute free and

>un-distorted main vehicle of comparison. My amps can power my

>speakers to ‘euphoric’ levels and are a perfect use in such

>conditions. The 2 players are extremely close, the early one

>has more round bass, the newer more mid and highs, a boon for

>older AR’s, however slightly less 'big' bass with the newer

>player.

>Shut-up, these things must be done so all out there can

>benefit!

>Why is this site seeming boring lately? Let’s talk about each

>member’s individual systems and talk about how these AR

>speakers are holding-up.

>Don’t be afraid to speak, my own system looks like the B&W

>bkgrd. studio of the original “Frankenstein” film. Wires and

>boxes and amps all over the place, most would laugh at the

>condition it’s in.

>FM

>5-16-07

>

It seems to me that whenever discussions get even slightly deep about reproduction of sound, it degenerates into a contentious battle. I find it hard to understand why people get so emotional and why they throw objectivity out the window in what should be a rather dry examination of facts. Do people get emotional over the performance of camera lenses or the torque curve of an automobile engine? It is what it is and the physical principles which govern them are what they are but in this hobby like almost no other, disagreements end up in rancorous flame wars. I can't understand why.

BTW, about a year ago, I compared a newly acquired 2006 $40 Toshiba DVD player with a 24 bit 192khz chip with my old 1991 $200 JVC 1 bit 8x oversampling chip and after careful listening on duplicate factory made cds, I couldn't tell any difference at all. Just as surprising to me, the fixed level output of the JVC unit was identical to the output of the DVD player. I therefore concluded that both players operated flawlessly and see no reason to buy anything more expensive. What's more, I consider anything which performes audibly differently from these two to be flawed, no matter how much they cost. Although the Toshiba unit cost 1/5 as much in absolute dollars and probably less than a tenth as much in dollars adjusted for inflation, and can reproduce video images, I prefer the JVC unit for audio because I like its disc handling, it's display, and features better. However, I did go out and buy the 5 disc DVD version for a whopping $78. Same audio chip, same performance.

[Carlspeak]

Dear FM and Soundminded:

It seems to me we've digressed a bit from the subject at hand (e.g. Acoustic Research speakers). I recommend the discussion of upstream electronics for any classic speaker be taken up in the "OTHER" section or, a new discussion area be created (at Mark's discretion, of course) for electronics.

The is the CLASSIC SPEAKER PAGES, not the "What feeds" the Classic Speakers pages.

IMHO, with regard to audio, the only gear which has a significant effect worth a/b-ing are the transducers present in the audio chain. And those are:

the recording microphone (we don't have any decision power here), vinyl record turntable/cartridges and lastly, the loudspeaker. The rest, I relegate to "minutiae" regarding fine audio reproduction - but most certainly fun to trial and discuss as part of our apparent love for all things audio.

However, as you've both (and others) pointed out already, you won't find significant differences between CD players, preamps, amps, interconnects and speaker wire (of proper gage and length). Thru these items pass 1's and 0's, electrons and not much else.

It's all about the music

Carl

Carl's Custom Loudspeakers

[Guest matty g]

Wake me up when you start testing phono cartridges and open reel decks.

Matt