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

[Nostromo]

Likewise, your Luxman D-10X is very exclusive/expensive and it's appearance, size, weight, etc., are all perfectly good reasons for you to get more enjoyment from it than from far cheaper alternatives but in terms of actual audio performance/fidelity, it is audibly identical to units costing 1/100th of the price.

Well, to my ears and on my system, it sounds way better than my previous Sony 5400ES, so that's all that matters. I don't intend to defend or discuss the issue any further.

[PaulR]

Which compressed file type did you use, @PaulR? Not all are lossy, and the lossy ones can be difficult to recognise by ear.
Do you need a portable medias player?

I believe it was .aac (I can double check when I get home)

I would need a portable one mainly because I don't have space to store my CDs nor a stereo system, portable one would be....my best option for now.

[Nostromo]

@Nostromo That's some beautiful gear.
Those Elipsas certainly do not have an over exaggerated top. Serblin was on top of his game at that time.

Thank you. No, they don't. However, they manage to provide a very detailed sound without being fatiguing.

[Daverz]

After reading all the negative comments and noting how often this thread has been closed (I went back only 30 pages, which was enough), I was hesitant to list my system, but here goes.

I have Sonus Faber Elipsa SE speakers, Mark Levinson No.380S preamp/No.335 power amp, Luxman D-10X CD/SACD player, SOTA Star Turntable/SME V tonearm/Soundsmith The Voice cartridge/Musical Surroundings Nova II phono preamp, and a Roon Titan Music server. I absolutely love the sound and have no plans to upgrade anything.
 

I love the engineering of the SME stuff, but most of it is way too pricey for me.  I was, however, able to get a good price on a used SME 309 (a straight 9 inch arm, not a 3009).

[Nostromo]

I love the engineering of the SME stuff, but most of it is way too pricey for me.  I was, however, able to get a good price on a used SME 309 (a straight 9 inch arm, not a 3009).

Very nice! I bought a gently used turntable/tone arm, so it was more affordable.

[71 dB]

You and your writings nuked this thread to dead.

He has provided information and insight hardly nobody else has. If this thread gets "nuked" by that then maybe this thread deserves to die?

[Harry]

He has provided information and insight hardly nobody else has. If this thread gets "nuked" by that then maybe this thread deserves to die?

Go away Poju, you were responsible also for nuking this thread and you well know it.

[71 dB]

Go away Poju, you were responsible also for nuking this thread and you well know it.

Yes, I know, but I don't accept this discrimination towards engineering minded people. As if he or me didn't have valuable things to say. It is not our fault you don't want to learn anything from us. It is pretty harmless if you keep your beliefs about audio stuff, but what about more serious things? Also, are you telling everyone who disagrees with you to go away? Have you even tried to understand other people?

[Harry]

Yes, I know, but I don't accept this discrimination towards engineering minded people. As if he or me didn't have valuable things to say. It is not our vault you don't want to learn anything from us.

There is not possibly anything I want to learn from the likes of you or others about HiRes equipment. Period. Create your own thread, and you will see I will not participate to nuke the pleasure of others.
This thread was not meant for the likes of you and others, it was meant for sharing a enthusiasm for audio gear, not for people that think that all this is snake oil. I will not comment further, all is said.

[71 dB]

It maybe that the "studio monitoring conditions" were part of the problem but only a part, there are various other factors. In addition to the loss of level proportional to distance (roughly according to inverse square law) we also have the loss of high freqs due to "air damping", which is proportional to both distance and frequency. We will lose 8kHz content (assuming 20°, 45% humidity) at the rate of 3.5dB per hundred feet, which increases to about a 12dB for 16kHz content.

I believe you are using ISO 9613-1:1993 here, right? I did the calculations myself and got the same values.

[71 dB]

There is not possibly anything I want to learn from the likes of you or others about HiRes equipment. Period.

Why?

Create your own thread, and you will see I will not participate to nuke the pleasure of others.

Why not have all the discussion in one thread? How could we possibly nuke your pleasure when your pleasure is based on your own ears as you have stated? Are you afraid that isn't the case? Nobody here is suggesting you have a bad sounding system. Of course you don't. All we are suggesting is that it is possible to have as good or at least almost as good sound with significantly less money. I wish I could throw as much money at audio gear you do (being so rich it doesn't matter), but I can't. Most people can't. What do people with less money do? They spend the little money they have wisely and that's were all the engineering knowledge becomes valuable. If you feel my posts are pointless to you, just ignore them then. Ultra-rich people can afford spending "too much" money on things and they often do exactly that.   

This thread was not meant for the likes of you and others, it was meant for sharing a enthusiasm for audio gear, not for people that think that all this is snake oil. I will not comment further, all is said.

Not everything is snake oil, but some things are. This is about being aware of this and also acknowledging that placebo effect and expectation bias have an effect on how we hear subjectively.

I have told what audio system I have:

NAD C565BEE CD player
NAD T758 AV Surround Sound Receiver
Cambridge Audio azur 650BD (mainly for SACD)
Hifi 6/2 DIY speakers (L, C, R, RL & RR)
Hifi 55/2 DIY passive subwoofer (for extending bass response from 50 Hz to 25 Hz for L & R)
Sennheiser HD-598 headphones
DIY headphone adapter with crossfeed.

I will be using it as long as it works and when something stops working, I am forced to spend money and buy something new to replace it. I don't know how much you can appreciate my audio system when your net streamer alone has cost probably more than my entire set-up!

[Harry]

Why?

Why not have all the discussion in one thread? How could we possibly nuke your pleasure when your pleasure is based on your own ears as you have stated? Are you afraid that isn't the case? Nobody here is suggesting you have a bad sounding system. Of course you don't. All we are suggesting is that it is possible to have as good or at least almost as good sound with significantly less money. I wish I could throw as much money at audio gear you do (being so rich it doesn't matter), but I can't. Most people can't. What do people with less money do? They spend the little money they have wisely and that's were all the engineering knowledge becomes valuable. If you feel my posts are pointless to you, just ignore them then. Ultra-rich people can afford spending "too much" money on things and they often do exactly that. 

Not everything is snake oil, but some things are. This is about being aware of this and also acknowledging that placebo effect and expectation bias have an effect on how we hear subjectively.

I have told what audio system I have:

NAD C565BEE CD player
NAD T758 AV Surround Sound Receiver
Cambridge Audio azur 650BD (mainly for SACD)
Hifi 6/2 DIY speakers (L, C, R, RL & RR)
Hifi 55/2 DIY passive subwoofer (for extending bass response from 50 Hz to 25 Hz for L & R)
Sennheiser HD-598 headphones
DIY headphone adapter with crossfeed.

I will be using it as long as it works and when something stops working, I am forced to spend money and buy something new to replace it. I don't know how much you can appreciate my audio system when your net streamer alone has cost probably more than my entire set-up!

Your audio equipment is a good set up, and certainly able to create  a excellent sound. so yes I can appreciate your system.

[StudioGuy]

You and your writings nuked this thread to dead.

Firstly, clearly this thread is not dead or if it is, why are you responding to a dead thread?
Secondly, what sort of thread would be killed by someone posting the actual facts and refuting falsehoods?

Create your own thread, and you will see I will not participate to nuke the pleasure of others.

As the only thing I (and 71dB) have "nuked" is falsehoods, you're saying that "the pleasure of others" is posting falsehoods?!

I believe you are using ISO 9613-1:1993 here, right? I did the calculations myself and got the same values.

Yes, I used this simple online calculator which does adhere to that ISO standard.

Well, to my ears and on my system, it sounds way better than my previous Sony 5400ES, so that's all that matters. I don't intend to defend or discuss the issue any further.

I wasn't referring to "your ears" but to the sound itself. Obviously to perceive sound your ears have to be connected to your brain and that's what does the perceiving. It is of course entirely up to you whether "all that matters" is your personal perception (ears) or if the sound itself is actually "way better" (or audibly identical). But as this is a public forum and as the rest of us do not have your personal perception then your personal perception obviously cannot be "all that matters" to anyone else, what does "matter" are the actual facts about the sound itself.

[71 dB]

Your audio equipment is a good set up, and certainly able to create  a excellent sound. so yes I can appreciate your system.

Thanks Harry! 

[Fëanor]

Unfortunately though, some in this thread have tried to justify such expensive audiophile equipment in terms of audible audio performance rather than just by those other factors. For example, the procedure/usage of vinyl records is enjoyable to many; the handling and cleaning, the needle drop, seeing the turntable rotate, the sleeve artwork, etc., are all good reasons for preferring vinyl over say CD but some will then argue that vinyl is actually superior in terms of audio performance/fidelity. That argument is factually untrue, probably the result of some false direct or indirect marketing, and therefore would negative comments. Likewise, your Luxman D-10X is very exclusive/expensive and it's appearance, size, weight, etc., are all perfectly good reasons for you to get more enjoyment from it than from far cheaper alternatives but in terms of actual audio performance/fidelity, it is audibly identical to units costing 1/100th of the price.

My "audiophilia" goes back 55+ years.  In latter decades my understanding and appreciation have evolved considerably, especially in the last 20 years or so.

I've always had the advantage of very limited funds to indulge my audiophile interest. That is, I had to seek high VALUE in financial terms from the components I purchased.  Consequently, I believe, I was more open than many audiophiles to objective testing & measurement. Note that contemporary testing, e.g. at Audio Scient Review, is more comprehensive than was it back in the day of Julian Hirsch, (no disrespect to that gentleman).

Today we have the advantage of a much better understand of which forms of distortion are more or less benign.  Amplifiers, (for instance), can be design to produce less of the disagree able types -- or indeed, virtually no distortion at all. Many current class D amps and some others fall into the latter category.

In the recent 15 years or so I discovered that well-measuring but relatively cheap components often sound better than very expensive equipment. That is, especially when it comes to detail, transparency, crisp dynamics, and articulate bass.

Sad maybe, but much of the romance of my early audiophile years has been sapped by high accuracy, very moderately price equipment that sound better than the plutocratic alternatives.

[71 dB]

Yes, I used this simple online calculator which does adhere to that ISO standard.

There's a link to the actual math. I can't say I understand it completely (I guess it's time to study what "oxygen relaxation frequency" means and why it's much higher than "nitrogen relaxation frequency"    ), but I copied it to Libreoffice Spreadsheet because using online calculators is lame. 

[Todd]

Secondly, what sort of thread would be killed by someone posting the actual facts and refuting falsehoods?

This is not an unusual occurrence with audiophile threads.

But as this is a public forum and as the rest of us do not have your personal perception then your personal perception obviously cannot be "all that matters" to anyone else, what does "matter" are the actual facts about the sound itself.

This reminds me of an exchange I had on the Stereophile forum almost twenty years ago, where I heard something in a recording that more "experienced" audiophiles did not.  That is, the other posters were old and had very expensive gear.  It even made it into a review: https://www.stereophile.com/content/simaudio-moon-evolution-supernova-cd-player-page-2.  The nonsensical explanations offered by audiophiles were refuted by cold facts.  Audiophilia is rife with that sort of thing.

[drogulus]

    I have a question.

    Suppose I was a horrible person who stuffed NAD innards into a Collososaurus integrated and demoed it for an audiophile panel? What would they say?

    1) Why does it sound less open and airy than it should?

    2) There is another system. 

    3) Magnificent!!.. there is so much more spaciousness and detail than you get from lesser gear. You are certainly getting what you pay for.

   

[Kalevala]

I have a question.

    Suppose I was a horrible person who stuffed NAD innards into a Collososaurus integrated and demoed it for an audiophile panel? What would they say?

    1) Why does it sound less open and airy than it should?

    2) There is another system. 

    3) Magnificent!!.. there is so much more spaciousness and detail than you get from lesser gear. You are certainly getting what you pay for.

   

I'll have to share this with an audiophile friend (who loves and has NAD components over the years.  He also subscribes to various well-known audio magazines and watches various audio channels on YT). 

K

[Todd]

The Lexicon BD-30 placed the Oppo BDP-83 electronics in a fancy case and cost seven times as much.  The Lexicon garnered some positive reviews, with at least one claiming it performed better than the Oppo.  Theta, Anthem, and even McIntosh did the same thing with varying Oppo models.  Oppo never took legal action, perhaps due to revenue; management was likely happy to sell in bulk. 

Multiple stereo manufacturers have used public domain circuit designs in amplifiers and preamplifers for decades (thanks, RCA); almost all speaker makers rely on long established crossover designs and third-party drivers, though some drivers are "customized"; dynamic speaker cabinets all rely on the same modeling for tuning, though materials change.  Modern components and materials are definitely better than in decades past.  Even better is modern marketing.