|
fishmech posted:So that's like enough money to get 2 or 3 decent used cars, and they put a Wal-Mart special quality panel in it? Yikes! You may have misread it as "10k". 100k is enough to buy 2 or 3 decent new cars.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:24 |
|
|
Zemyla posted:You may have misread it as "10k". 100k is enough to buy 2 or 3 decent new cars. It's in Danish Krone. Unless cars are significantly cheaper in Denmark, that's base model Fiesta money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Zemyla posted:You may have misread it as "10k". 100k is enough to buy 2 or 3 decent new cars. 100,000 Danish Krone is currently almost US$15,000. $5000 to $7500 is a fairly decent used car these days, or $15,000 will get you a low end new car (like the Chevy Spark or Mitsubishi Mirage).
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
You could even get a Fiesta for that. I know which one I'd rather have 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:02
|
|
|
Well duh, who woudn't want the Fiesta.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:You could even get a Fiesta for that. I know which one I'd rather have It's almost like I pointed that out two posts above you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
so i was agreeing
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
fishmech posted:100,000 Danish Krone is currently almost US$15,000. $5000 to $7500 is a fairly decent used car these days, or $15,000 will get you a low end new car (like the Chevy Spark or Mitsubishi Mirage). Except that cars in Denmark have a 180% tax applied to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Except that cars in Denmark have a 180% tax applied to them. It's a bit more complicated than that. The tax rate is tiered and there are incentives for fuel economy etc., so it's a lot lower on small and less expensive cars. 100,000 DKK will get you a pretty decent city car, like a VW Up or a Peugeot 108 or something roughly equivalent to a Chevy Spark, with some options.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/324/#t7WB6sQUh3Jag2Wl.97 If we're comparing cars to speakers, a Wilson MAXX will run you into decent 5 series or entry level Porsche territory. All that money and the site is "under construction".
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Here's a fun one: http://www.head-fi.org/t/419939/audio-grade-fuses quote:Last year shortly after I got my Darkvoice Figaro I replaced the stock fuse with one from ISOCLEAN POWER. I could tell a slight difference, a level of clarity. The Figaro went up in smoke a few months ago and so I have a few cool parts to salvage from it and one is the Isoclean.  quote:jumpering the fuse or wiring without fuse should give the best performance. quote:Absolutely, the less connections the better. But at the risk of blowing up your equipment. It's for the 10% of the population that likes living constantly on the edge. quote:I too noticed a difference when installing the HiFi Tuning fuse ... I mean, over the cheapo that was in my Havana DAC and Stello amp. It's. A. Goddamn. Fuse.  E: And some more polarity-related shenanigans. Apparently 92% of all music plays in inverted polarity (phase) on 92% of all playback devices: http://ultrabitplatinum.com/30-years-of-digital-and-the-92-solution/ http://ultrabitplatinum.com/polarity-think-piece-a-speculation-regarding-perception-of-detail/ KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 10:33 on Jan 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
 but but but the harmonics  
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/324/#t7WB6sQUh3Jag2Wl.97 Unlike the 5 Series or Porsche, it isn't even good. Audiophile hardware is really weird in that the more expensive it is, the more likely it is tuned for deaf people (Magico + Wilson stuff) or designed by people who still live in the 1960s (Harbeth).
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Chafe posted:Unlike the 5 Series or Porsche, it isn't even good. Audiophile hardware is really weird in that the more expensive it is, the more likely it is tuned for deaf people (Magico + Wilson stuff) or designed by people who still live in the 1960s (Harbeth). How is it tuned for deaf people? Enormously boosted treble? Because that's the impression I've gotten from the audiophile speakers I've heard. Massively boosted treble because it sounds more "open" and "detailed" and counteracts age-related hearing loss. I've even heard some weirdo audiophiles talk about "graduating" from preferring a bass-heavy sound to a more midrange/treble-oriented sound, as if it's some kind of personal spiritual journey or formal education or somesuch nonsense to become a "proper audiophile". KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Jan 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
Reminds me of this: http://m.imgur.com/gallery/NAQy1nK
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Here's a fun one: Audiophile. Grade. Fuses. Just use the loving fuse your equipment is designed for you dumb shitheads. They used that fuse for a loving reason. This guy put the wrong fuse in his amplifier, the amplifier overloaded and released the magic smoke instead of blowing the fuse (probably because the fuse was rated way too high and bigger numbers are better amirite  ), and he still thinks he made the right decision.  Seriously, my mind just boggles. If you have a ruined amplifier and an intact fuse, your fuse didn't even do its loving job. Woolie Wool fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Jan 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:(probably because the fuse was rated way too high and bigger numbers are better amirite A lot of people overestimate the amplifier power they actually need, but audiophiles take this to a whole new level and wildly overestimate power consumtion. Perhaps they're used to class A amplifiers, I dunno. Audiophile manufacturers will overspec power supplies to a ridiculous degree and some audiophiles will have dedicated circuits put in, just to power their precious stereos. The bigger Mark Levinson monoblock amps even advise you to have a separate circuit and breaker for each amplifier "for the best sound quality". And obviously some audiophiles are going to put way bigger fuses in their electronics than what is actually needed, in a misguided attempt to remove bottlenecks in the power supply. And of course everything must be powered by linear power supplies, because switch mode supplies are EVIL and send bad vibrations or whatever into the electronics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Even if you have a class A amplifier you should still only use the fuse specified by the manufacturer, or if you can't get it for whatever reason, a slightly smaller one. Otherwise you're putting your expensive class A amp at extreme risk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Well yeah, obviously. My point was that they expect all amps to have the same crazy power usage as class A amps.Chafe posted:designed by people who still live in the 1960s (Harbeth). I had to comment on this, because for all their faults and stubbornness in sticking with a 1960s speaker design that is known to be flawed in significant ways, Harbeth is actually one of the more reasonable and well-grounded audiophile darling companies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFxiLeQmb5k They're a bit mental for doggedly sticking up for the LS3/5A as the pinnacle of speaker design, but nobody's perfect. Their forums are also surprisingly sciencie-minded.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Chafe posted:Unlike the 5 Series or Porsche, it isn't even good. Audiophile hardware is really weird in that the more expensive it is, the more likely it is tuned for deaf people (Magico + Wilson stuff) or designed by people who still live in the 1960s (Harbeth). I think the Wilsons are pretty neutral, although I've only heard them once. It was also in a super expensive semi-anechoic listening room, so even 200 dollar bookshelves would probably have sounded pretty amazing in there too. Wilson is pretty far into the skinny part of the price/performance bell curve for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Dave from EEVblog posted a really in depth tear down and reverse engineering video of one of those cheapo vacuum tube headphone amps from eBay https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coSt5HWRvv4
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:I had to comment on this, because for all their faults and stubbornness in sticking with a 1960s speaker design that is known to be flawed in significant ways, Harbeth is actually one of the more reasonable and well-grounded audiophile darling companies. The issue with every Harbeth speaker I've listened to is that the cabinets resonant...and its really noticeable when they do and you're left wondering who the hell thinks resonating cabinets sound good. Really, most of these "high end" speakers have strange issues that just make the speaker sound really weird and really should have been dealt with before being brought to the market. Yeah, you get too much treble, too much bass, too little bass, or too much bass distortion but you can argue that audio is subjective and people want this. But then you have other issues like astronomically small sweet spots that are the size of a chair, really strange tonality issues as if the sound is being forced out of a toilet roll, or parts of the speaker literally ring and rattle when played loud. Like I dunno how you don't notice this stuff during development. Chafe fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Jan 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 04:47
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Dave from EEVblog posted a really in depth tear down and reverse engineering video of one of those cheapo vacuum tube headphone amps from eBay I love the bit at the end "While the audio people have a flame war i'll be on the beach"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 13:16
|
|
|
And sure enough, the comments are full of idiotic audiophiles, blathering on about how much better the "tube sound" is and how CD sucks and hi-res SACD/DVD-A is so much better. I loved Doug Ford's summary at the end of the video, that the amp would be better in literally every way if it didn't have the drat tubes in there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
Here's a good one, courtesy of the Sound Science subforum at Head-Fi: http://www.head-fi.org/t/768538/why-boosting-30-hz-by-30-db-sounds-so-good/15#post_11664224 quote:I now know that recordings from the '70s & '80s definitely have sound below 50 Hz. It's just that most of them need a 40-to-50-dB boost around 30 Hz to bring it out, that's all! "Oh sure, there's plenty of bass, you just have to increase the applied power by a factor of 100,000 and make it 32 times louder, then you can hear it just fine!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Yum, tape noise and microphone artifacts
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Chafe posted:But then you have other issues like astronomically small sweet spots that are the size of a chair, ... http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/audiophile-seating-the-balleri-103688
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Foxtrot_13 posted:I love the bit at the end "While the audio people have a flame war i'll be on the beach" Ah, of course there has to be the classic rebuttal of "he didn't test a properly designed tube amp" because that couldn't possibly be a piece of grossly overpriced and underperforming POS, or the fact that it's supposed to be the vendor's responsibility to support their claims and not the other way round. Palladium fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Or the vendor knows that designing a basic, generally competent amp and adding tubes and blinky lights will lead to sales regardless of how bad it sounds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
I just love when the audiophiles start throwing around the "but science doesn't know everything, how about the bumblebee's ability to fly, huh?" thing, as if they were actually going to disprove science, simply to justify their ridiculously expensive cables 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
See that's how rumors get started. My takeaway from your post was that there are special cables in which bumblebees ferry electrons from one end to the other. This contributes to the sweet, organic sound of the audio. Of course a certain amount of buzzing is to be expected, but audiophile. brb going to post this in the head-fi cables forum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/Bx-IaLkpncU There's no way the Orpheus is worth 50k, but if I hit the powerball I will buy a set just to have evaporated platinum transducers in my life
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:I would recommend the Magni 2 or Asgard. The Valhalla is not suitable for orthos. Lyr is kind of overkill. Thanks! Will go for Asgard. I have a Magni laying around but it sounds noisy and the pot causes some fuzzy sounds when I twist it? Kind of Schitty if you ask me. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:https://youtu.be/Bx-IaLkpncU If money was no object I would buy them just because of al the bits moving makes great theatre and looks cool. Not that I could tell the difference between these and a £1k set of gear even of there was a difference
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
One has a working fuse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Dave from EEVblog posted a really in depth tear down and reverse engineering video of one of those cheapo vacuum tube headphone amps from eBay The tubes in a $50 "tube amp" are useless, what a surprise! People are actually willing to defend this piece of knockoff poo poo in the comments?  I mean I won't defend the technical accuracy of my Schiit Valhalla which has a stated THD almost two orders of magnitude higher than Schiit's solid state amps, but at least it's a tube amp where the tubes actually amplify the signal. Fun fact: for Schiit's other "tube amps" (which have solid state output and have much higher output than the Valhalla, which really does not like orthodynamics), they actually sell a set of transistors packaged into a cylinder with a tube pinout so you can plug them in and convert your tube input stage to a solid state one. For extra money they'll even send you a Lyr or Gungir with both tubes and solid state modules for you to compare them. They don't work in the Valhalla though. Oddly enough their top of the line $1700 gonzo amp that's both a stereo integrated amp and a headphone amp and whitens your teeth is solid state with no tube option whatsoever. And my father demoed a multi-kilobuck Gato solid-state integrated amp that completely destroyed his current setup with tube amp and preamp (and the two of them combined cost more at retail than the Gato) so maybe all the tube haters are right. His audio dealer even called his Audio Research VT100 amp a piece of poo poo. I'm pretty sure the Gato will never blow a 6550 tube and damage the circuit board in a terrifying light show with magic smoke either. Tactical Lesbian posted:Thanks! Will go for Asgard. I have a Magni laying around but it sounds noisy and the pot causes some fuzzy sounds when I twist it? Kind of Schitty if you ask me. Have you contacted customer support? Also is your volume at the source set to 100%? Having the source at low volume and cranking the volume knob at the amp is Doing It Wrong and will send the noise floor sky-high. But sometimes Oh yeah and get the Asgard 2 instead of a used original Asgard, it has better performance and fixed a defect in the old Asgard where it would briefly put a small DC current through the output jack if you had the headphones plugged in while you powered it on. Supposedly it's not big enough to damage headphones except for extremely sensitive IEMs but do you really want to risk it? Foxtrot_13 posted:If money was no object I would buy them just because of al the bits moving makes great theatre and looks cool. The old Orpheus was much cooler looking. It had a crazy amp enclosure with swooping curves and wood and chrome instead of a big ugly marble brick that shits out tubes and knobs. The headphones themselves looked like a cross between the HD 600s and Audeze LCD-3s and were absolutely gorgeous. Woolie Wool fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Only extremely stupid people think tube amps are anything more than a gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
grack posted:Only extremely stupid people think tube amps are anything more than a gimmick. Well some people actually buy 20-year-old V8 Ferraris. A lightly used Corvette will be much cheaper, faster, safer, probably handle better, has some actual cargo room, and the gas mileage is much better, but many people, given the choice between the keys to a C6 Corvette and a Ferrari F355, are going to take the Ferrari. Sometimes the sensible choice is just boring, and tubes are cool. I personally don't give much of a gently caress about my amp's measurements, I know they're worse than the solid-state models from the same manufacturer and I don't care. I didn't get it because I wanted to have objectively the best amp, it's a real live tube amp that actually amps with tubes for less than $400, and it's really cool seeing the heaters come on and in replacing the worn out input tubes with ECC88s that were made before most of the people on SA were even born. Do they sound better than the 6N1Ps sounded when they were new? Who the gently caress cares, how many things do you have that were made in 1965?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
Maybe we can have a rule that if you post in this thread defending tube amps you have to post a picture of yourself listening to it. But seriously, that's cool. What we're making fun of is people who believe they sound more pure or have better soundstage or that kind of nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 10:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:24 |
|
|
Apparently I'm a "cable fundamentalist" just like the crazy woo-woo audiophiles, because I doggedly trust in science, measurements and common sense. Because somehow fairytales and proven science have the exact same factual worth  E: Cable believer posted:That's your interpretation, an interpretation from someone who likes to listen to MP3 music. The others' interpretation comes from a lifetime of listening to music that is something special and requires particularly delicate equipment to sound right. I know who I trust the most, and it is not a cable fundamentalist like you. "Particularly delicate equipment" 
KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 12:43 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 10:49
|
|