Never will be on the same page

One thing audiophiles could not ever come to agree upon is good sound. Everyone has his own interpretation of good sound, I supposed. If both continue to argue, it will only boil down to whose has a higher listening standard. Pay no heed, do as you might for the betterment of your system, that's paramount objective. Many are swayed by brand, technology, measurements, parts and components, even celebrity designer for the wrong reasons. A victim to marketing ploys? The power of marketing has increasingly pervasive, even seasoned audiophiles could sometimes buy into their claims. Wannabe don't stand a chance of the marketing slaughtering. The rule of game is sound quality being the steadfast objective of audioing.

Personally, I resent overwhelming advertisements and reviews. Perception requires huge budgets and I like to think there's no conspiracy. But someone needs to bite the advertising bills, a king's ransom. On the contrary, some high ends do not worth its salt for what they offer in terms of sound. To avoid fallen prey to these ploys, exercise your judgement.

I'd describe the speaker and amp relationship as intriguing whereby in some cases the measurements mean little. Two capable amps, one on the be the opposite sides of the same coin, no parallel output stage, no global feedback, linear power supply against parallel output stage, high speed global feedback and switching power supply. How would the outcomes be? To further illustrate, Peter Breuninger an ex-senior writer for the top magazines including: The Absolute Sound (TAS), Stereophile, and Listener Magazine was waxing lyrical about the marriage of YG Acoustics and Audionet electronics, and went on to declare a match made in heaven. What are the major contributing factors? What compose the chemistry? Substituting with another equally spec-ed amp, the sound loses its magic. Either the engineer didn't get it or some hidden secrets they aren't telling us.

To be responsible for my posting, I excuse myself talking about things that I have not laid my hands on. It isn't right. Forgive me if my posting in any way offended you, words come straight from my head. I have my likes and dislikes, so do you. I can accept that. But, what is the common reference point we can rest upon to start a constructive discussion? Perhaps, we never will be on the same page. Usually I mum about other's system because I am sensitive about people reactions. When I visit audio home, I engage eagle eye on the host's system and room. Apart from fundamental flaws, attention to little details matter. Why is the so and so here, why is so and so there? Those kinds of questions.

A friend once asked me how long would a concrete wall "break in" as he finds amusing when audiophiles claimed two years "break in". If one has a fair bit of construction knowledge, he will know that concrete wall cures at a right ratio of aggregate, water and cement, normally to cure in less than an hours on the outside, the curing will still continues on the inside. Go check on water hardness if you are fanatic. Observe the change of the concrete wall from pale grey to lighter grey, the hardness reading gets up. Thus, the concrete wall settled after moist in the concrete wall completely dried up.

Another frequent asked question I get why my components aren't aligned perpendicular like most other do. They are arranged in varies degree of toe in, in an irregular pattern. Hmmmm.... they sounded best that way. Before you start staring at me like a weirdo, experiment for yourself before you slam your judgement on me. My approach has been "experiment, experiment and experiment."
You derive conclusions from experimentations. Not bowed down with laws and prejudgement.

Fundamental things such as these have great impacts on sound. The resonance control on the caps, transformer and the chassis too affect the sound. So, I am not surprised to see some applied damping materials on them to hold them steady, isolated transformer and dampening aluminum chassis or even applied screwing at a specific torque. Measurement doesn't tell everything, nothing beat hearing. But, I can't help some is hinting tweaking is a joke per se. If scientists today failed to reveal the secrets of Stradivari, do I convince myself science has answers to everything in audio?

And the latest trick is stripping off plastic wrap from capacitor especially at the signal section, it is claimed further opening up the sound. I couldn't validate this because I have not done A-B benchmark. All these things might be weird for engineering people, but the truth lies in critical listening.

Anyway, I occasionally record my sound with a hand phone to establish monitoring. Plenty of debate on hand phone recording. Wo..wo..wo.... hold your horses, hold, hold, I do not use hand phone recorded materials to benchmark against others. Different hand phone, different recording distance, different volume, different ear piece and the list goes on, subject to debate. Hand phone could not fully capture the bass, that's the limitation. I use it to pick up room noise. The louder the hiss, haze, fog or whatever is an indicate the more undone room acoustics. I recommend clean sounding recording to begin with, that way you could tell the noise is attributed by the room.
   

A third row seat

Audioing is an effort of righting the wrongs. There is no perfect system but a system with least wrongs. Pin down the problems, deal with it. Without tweaking, what are your avenues of getting the sound right if the problems do not lie at your components?

Like a dog with a bone, I enjoy my time tuning. I can't help without realizing, I could go off track sometimes. What my system sets apart from others is less laid back. On The King's singers The Beatles Connection, I am seated at second row. The presence is amazing, can almost reach out and touch them. Most of all, The King's Singer's vocal harmonization is incredible, from vocal range to across the plane of the speakers. There is so much depth in the music. The vocal shed a hint of British voicing, to many probably a little leaner. Love it.

Thing takes a turn playing La Fille Mal Gardee by The Royal Ballet Production, a strong ballet and dance influence piece. Under the baton of Lanchbery, he is gentle with this score. He threw a spacious scene to allow you to fill your wildest imagination. The rhythm smooths flow, moving from section to section. It is a joyous piece. This is one of the CDs that makes you forget about the system flaw finding, sit back and relax. Soundstage width is one of my system setbacks, an inherited weakness of a small room I have got to live with. Life sucks sometimes.

Early pressing, 1985

Lost and found, my prized bid shipping was delayed for more than a month. Better come than never. I was so glad to see Carol Kidd All My Tomorrow in my mail box. Carol Kidd All My Tomorrow requires no further introduction among audiophiles. Mine is 1985, early pressed. This CD is now fetching USD99 in open market now.

I pop the CD in and play. The sound is fantastic and I don't remember it has so much more subtleties. Vocal is so well articulated and not overly detailed, the hallmark of Linn record. Her voice is buttery smooth, dense and with occasional flirtatious runs and riffs. Relatively free of grain is her most compelling signature. Keep things simple and tidy, it was emotional. Whites do not do runs and riffs that much compares with the Blacks. She delivers the songs with care, not going overly "promiscuous". The phenomenon of music growing on you does not get better than this! I repeated thrice playing this CD straight on one occasion.

Well, some CDs above-mentioned are not necessary audiophile-approved but they deliver ton of music. They serve a different set of check points. I hope you enjoy as much as I enjoy them. More exciting time ahead.

Adios, audio amigos.