What audio system do you have, or plan on getting?

[71 dB]

After my pipe repair I put my audio system together again. I experienced some problems with the sound. I thought the reason is dust from the repair. I vacuum cleaned my amplifier. It seemed to help. A week ago trying out multichannel modes my amplifier went crazy. I panicked a bit, but then I realised the connection of main speakers wires to the speaker terminal were not as good as I had believed! I was able to get the system working tightening the terminals. At that point I realised these are the only 2x0.75² (~18 AWG ?) wires in my system, the original wires from early 90's when I bought my first pair of loudspeakers and got into hifi. My speakers are 8 Ω, so they don't require very thick wires.

My system has 5 identical* small (6 litres) speakers and a  passive subwoofer (55 litres) for frequencies 25-50 Hz. So, the wires to main speakers go first to the subwoofer and then the high pass filtered ( > 50 Hz ) part from the passive subwoofer to my main speakers. All other speaker wiring is done with 2x2.5² (~14 AWG ?). Makes not much sense to have 2x0.75² from amp to passive sub! So, I bought 10 meters of 2x2.5² for 17 euros. The speaker terminals of my amp seem to give much better connection when thicker wire is used.

My amp has got an ISC -circuit which measures the impedance of the speakers connected and optimizes the amp parameters for that impedance level. The faulty connection must have confused my amp for this reason. Now thanks to the new wires and good connection the amp is working perfectly. 


____________________________________
* Multichannel system works best if all the speakers are identical.
Not only are the frequency responses identical, but also phase responses.
A common mistake in multichannel systems is that the center speaker has
different phase response to the left/right speakers.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Listened to plenty amazing gear @highendsociety's Munich #highend2017, but nothing was more fun than hijacking @MartinLoganLtd's playlist! pic.twitter.com/d4zVG0sFRu

I'm really beginning to think that electrostats are about the only clear and obvious game-changer in HiFi... where the increase in quality is painfully obvious and due to systemic reasons.
HD800s sound greater than most but the most expensive headphones that have come since... but Stax sound amazing and are to the HD800 what the latter were to all other headphones 5 years ago.
And the same -- or at least similar -- with speakers. A well-built unit like these simply does things that are amazing, though subtle. I'm looking forward to doing a nice A/B/C/D comparison between these speakers above, their entry model, and two conventional speaker pairs some time this year.

[aligreto]

Listened to plenty amazing gear @highendsociety's Munich #highend2017, but nothing was more fun than hijacking @MartinLoganLtd's playlist! pic.twitter.com/d4zVG0sFRu

I'm really beginning to think that electrostats are about the only clear and obvious game-changer in HiFi... where the increase in quality is painfully obvious and due to systemic reasons.
HD800s sound greater than most but the most expensive headphones that have come since... but Stax sound amazing and are to the HD800 what the latter were to all other headphones 5 years ago.
And the same -- or at least similar -- with speakers. A well-built unit like these simply does things that are amazing, though subtle. I'm looking forward to doing a nice A/B/C/D comparison between these speakers above, their entry model, and two conventional speaker pairs some time this year.

Personally I find that electrostatics are best in the mid range and are at their best in reproducing the human voice and acoustic music. I, for one, look forward to your eventual comparisons and results 

[Todd]

I'm really beginning to think that electrostats are about the only clear and obvious game-changer in HiFi

"Game-changer" is hyperbole generally reserved for new technology, not old tech that has been around for decades.  Martin Logans are usually just hybrid electrostats with standard dipole horizontal dispersion characteristics and good vertical dispersion characteristics, which can also be had with planars and symmetrical dynamic driver arrays.  There's nothing magical or unknown going on.  Some people like the sound, some don't.  One beautiful thing about them, though, is one can rely on the "measurements don't tell the whole story" approach more because certain key measurements (eg, CSD) are always terrible, but with such a design, these don't really translate well to real world audible results.  Personally, I dislike dipole designs (irrespective of driver type) precisely because of their dispersion characteristics. 

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Personally I find that electrostatics are best in the mid range and are at their best in reproducing the human voice and acoustic music. I, for one, look forward to your eventual comparisons and results 

"Game-changer" is hyperbole generally reserved for new technology, not old tech that has been around for decades.  Martin Logans are usually just hybrid electrostats with standard dipole horizontal dispersion characteristics and good vertical dispersion characteristics, which can also be had with planars and symmetrical dynamic driver arrays.  There's nothing magical or unknown going on.  Some people like the sound, some don't.  One beautiful thing about them, though, is one can rely on the "measurements don't tell the whole story" approach more because certain key measurements (eg, CSD) are always terrible, but with such a design, these don't really translate well to real world audible results.  Personally, I dislike dipole designs (irrespective of driver type) precisely because of their dispersion characteristics. 

The technology is certainly old; about 100 years. And yes, what they do well will still depend on taste and preferences. It certainly appeals to MY preferences, it seems. Which is total transparency, directness, clarity... lightness. Hybrid electrostats seem reasonable compromises if they work well; A pure electrostat that would be great at doing bass and moving air in large rooms would have to be rather big -- to the point of being either impractical or too expensive.

[SonicMan46]

My stereo equipment needs are modest - I have a NAD receiver w/ only analog audio inputs, rebuilt EV speakers from the late 70s, and a Yamaha multi-CD player (also a HDTV & Blu-ray Player) - problem is my HDTV has only an optical audio output, so I cannot plug in its audio to my decent sounding speakers - use an inexpensive soundbar instead.  SO, I'm looking to replacing my receiver w/ a new one accepting digital inputs - found the Cambridge unit below (likely will purchase from Crutchfield up the road to me in Virginia - 2 day free shipping + have some credit) - pics below of the front & back of this unit - assume I can just Toslink my HDTV to the digital port in the back; wondering about comments on Cambridge and also any specifics about their receivers.  Thanks - Dave
.

[Parsifal]

I was an NAD fanatic back in the day, but I had bad experiences from them in recent purchases and stay away.

I recently got a Yamaha RXV-379 which I am quite happy with.

[asin]B00V5VJ3TM[/asin]

It's not a Ritzy brand like Cambridge Audio, but has a very pleasant sound to my ear. (I use it for casual video viewing, not for serious music listening).

[HIPster]

My stereo equipment needs are modest - I have a NAD receiver w/ only analog audio inputs, rebuilt EV speakers from the late 70s, and a Yamaha multi-CD player (also a HDTV & Blu-ray Player) - problem is my HDTV has only an optical audio output, so I cannot plug in its audio to my decent sounding speakers - use an inexpensive soundbar instead.  SO, I'm looking to replacing my receiver w/ a new one accepting digital inputs. Thanks - Dave

Hi Sonic Dave!

I bought one of these for a friend a few months ago.  She had the same issue as you here:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005K2TXMO/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

This Fiio works really well; may be just what you need?

Cheers. 

[SonicMan46]

I was an NAD fanatic back in the day, but I had bad experiences from them in recent purchases and stay away.

I recently got a Yamaha RXV-379 which I am quite happy with.

[asin]B00V5VJ3TM[/asin]

It's not a Ritzy brand like Cambridge Audio, but has a very pleasant sound to my ear. (I use it for casual video viewing, not for serious music listening).

Hi Scarpia - had a Yamaha receiver back in the late 70s-early 80s which was replaced w/ my first NAD receiver, then in the late 90s bought the NAD C740 which 'broke' w/i a year; fixed under warranty and has been fine ever since, so near 18 years of use - BUT, will not accept any digital inputs.  Your receiver looks nice, however, I have a 4+" height w/o major changes in stereo furniture and not interested in other than 2-speaker sound - I'm liking the reviews on the Cambridge unit and the $500 cost is the same that I paid for my NAD back in the late 90s - thanks for the comments.  Dave

[drogulus]

My stereo equipment needs are modest - I have a NAD receiver w/ only analog audio inputs, rebuilt EV speakers from the late 70s, and a Yamaha multi-CD player (also a HDTV & Blu-ray Player) - problem is my HDTV has only an optical audio output, so I cannot plug in its audio to my decent sounding speakers - use an inexpensive soundbar instead.  SO, I'm looking to replacing my receiver w/ a new one accepting digital inputs - found the Cambridge unit below (likely will purchase from Crutchfield up the road to me in Virginia - 2 day free shipping + have some credit) - pics below of the front & back of this unit - assume I can just Toslink my HDTV to the digital port in the back; wondering about comments on Cambridge and also any specifics about their receivers.  Thanks - Dave
.

     Is your HDTV recent enough to have Audio Return Channel (ARC). Most do, and I think most have for some years. You connect your devices to the correctly labeled receiver inputs (cable, DVD/BD, media player, PC, and the TV is connected to the HDMI out, which feeds video from the inputs to the TV while the TV can be selected as source and destination for the other sources. On my system cable is button 1, USB player 6, TV (for streaming) is 8, and if the streaming is wonky or I want to play 4k files, Roku is 3. You only use the one HDMI on the TV and 4 on the receiver. I don't have a DVD/BD player.

     I would recommend Marantz if your budget can handle it, one of these:

     

     I have an older non 4k version without HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2, which this model has. It's quite similar to receivers by sister company Denon, only fiercer. At $499 it's a good deal.

     

[Parsifal]

I would recommend Marantz if your budget can handle it, one of these:

     

     I have an older non 4k version without HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2, which this model has. It's quite similar to receivers by sister company Denon, only fiercer. At $499 it's a good deal.

I've been happy with my Marantz gear (2 channel integrated amp, no A/V features). You can't go far wrong with Marantz.

[drogulus]

I've been happy with my Marantz gear (2 channel integrated amp, no A/V features). You can't go far wrong with Marantz.

     This is a 7 channel amp, which means the power transformer has to be heavy enough to drive all channels to respectable levels, so for 2.1, 3.1, 4.1 operation it will have plenty of reserve power.

     I don't know why small slim receivers are not in demand. Only a few people can stand to be in a room with a 100 w/ch played loud.

     

[SonicMan46]

I bought one of these for a friend a few months ago.  She had the same issue as you here:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005K2TXMO/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

This Fiio works really well; may be just what you need?........

Hi HIPster - bought my LG HDTV in 2011 - looked at those Toslink-RCA adapters on Amazon back then and a lot of mixed comments - likely have improved since then, i.e. translating more audio formats.  BUT, my NAD receiver is 20 years old and Father's Day just passed, so went ahead and 'pulled the plug' on that Cambridge receiver shown earlier - size is identical to the NAD so will fit in my stereo console, as is; plus, I liked the simplicity of the controls, so setup should be quit.  Thanks for the recommendation which is certainly worth a try for others in a similar situation.  Dave

P.S. thanks Scarpia & Drogulus for your additional comments - much appreciated.  The Cambridge receiver got great reviews on the Crutchfield website and also on Amazon (except for one silly 1*) - have not bought a stereo component in 6 years, so looking forward to its arrival.

P.S.S. also, I checked my LG HDTV's manual and found the page below mentioning ARC (Audio Return Channel) & SPDIF - have doubts that this would work w/ my 20 y/o receiver w/ only RCA analog inputs - don't know?

[drogulus]

     ARC is where you connect by HDMI into the receiver then HDMI out to the TV. You only connect to the TV once, because video goes out to the TV while audio goes back the same way. The TV is a source among other sources while it's a destination, too.

     Let's say I want to watch cable, I press input 1 on the receiver remote and cable is routed to the TV, now I want to watch Amazon Prime from the TV, I press 8 on the Marantz remote and choose Amazon on the TV, then I want to watch 4k files on my Roku, I press 3 on the remote and navigate to the file I want.

     All of this doesn't have to happen now, just connect the TV headphone out to your receiver and use the receiver headphone out to replace it. Connect all your devices to the other TV inputs and use the TV remote instead as the controller.

[Todd]

I'm contemplating swapping-out/"downgrading" my bedroom system to something more affordable.  Schiit officially released its Vidar amp today.  $700 for 100 Wpc into 8 Ohms, and bridgeable to 400 Wpc into 8 Ohms.  The already available Freya pre, a switchable Passive/JFET Buffer/Tube pre, is also only $700, so $1400 for regular stereo and $2100 for a monoblock setup.  The amp uses a beefed up version of the amplifier topology found in their superb Jotunheim headphone amp.  Decisions, decisions.  If I do buy, I'm gonna wait for a few production runs first, and let any kinks be worked out. 

[NikF]

I'm contemplating swapping-out/"downgrading" my bedroom system to something more affordable.  Schiit officially released its Vidar amp today.  $700 for 100 Wpc into 8 Ohms, and bridgeable to 400 Wpc into 8 Ohms.  The already available Freya pre, a switchable Passive/JFET Buffer/Tube pre, is also only $700, so $1400 for regular stereo and $2100 for a monoblock setup.  The amp uses a beefed up version of the amplifier topology found in their superb Jotunheim headphone amp.  Decisions, decisions.  If I do buy, I'm gonna wait for a few production runs first, and let any kinks be worked out.

Indeed. That's the way to go about it.

[Senta]

So...we bit on a receiver for Amazon Prime day, got this for a steal:

Onkyo TX-RZ610



It's sad this thing is currently hooked up to just an LG soundbar though!

Wondering what speakers would go well with this, in about a 14 x 20 rectangular room (carpeted), mid-size apartment - with both upper and lower neighbors though, who likely don't love classical music as much :/

[Todd]

Not so much anything I plan on getting, but one of the things I like about audiophile gear is how stoopid some of it is.  The $1200 Shun Mook record clamp was probably my favorite stupid expensive product to this point, with some other Shun Mook products being nearly as silly.  Maple Shade also offers some dubious products.  I also got a kick out of the supertweeter craze.  (No one really offered a credible explanation of how they would work with media that couldn't go above 22.05 kHz.)  But I think Audiophile.Rocks (http://audiophile.rocks/index.html) is now maybe my favorite audiophile snake oil purveyor.  They offer painted wood and "crystal" tweaks, all of which use their proprietary H2U2 piezoelectric quartz crystals to perform magic.  Years ago, my young daughter painted a river rock for me, which I put on top of my preamp.  I swear it did magic things, too.  Maybe I can go into business peddling such rocks.

Oh, yes, the company also sells $4,400.00 USB cables, $2,200.00 SATA cables, and one power cable that costs a very reasonable $25,000.00 for two meters.

[Rinaldo]

Oh, yes, the company also sells $4,400.00 USB cables, $2,200.00 SATA cables, and one power cable that costs a very reasonable $25,000.00 for two meters.

Wow, and here I thought those AudioQuest HDMI cables on Amazon couldn't be beaten. The user reviews are still golden.

Speaking of reviews, this one for the crystal thingies is also priceless. And quite meta towards the end, when the 'reviewer' speaks about gullible audiophiles buying worthless gadgets.

[Todd]

Speaking of reviews, this one for the crystal thingies is also priceless.

Coconut Audio, the 'manufacturer' of the crystal tweak reviewed, is now Audiophile.Rocks.  From the latter's web-site (bold added):

"Year 2010-2016 our company name changed to Coconut Audio because we used real coconut shells in our early tweaks and cables. We were excited to share our technology and gave away many free cables and tweaks. Our main business was auctions starting at $1 which resulted in personal bankruptcy."

Strange, no mention of fraud lawsuits.