arnyk wrote:
> Do those features have anything to do with sound quality?
F3 here is in the vicinity of 30hz. These widdle speakers shake.
The boxes weigh a lot and the drivers are very secure.
Two phrases can guide your life:
"Don't fart around"
"Sign me up"
Your question is not valid
Julf wrote:
> Occasionally some exotic, small-volume speaker manufacturer uses
> audiophile-brand cabling, but if they do, they make sure it gets
> mentioned in every review - and that is the only reason to do it.
My shop-builts have higher-quality wire and everything is
soldered...20377
I have a Sony ES deck that could make a cassette that was just about as
good as the source CD.
It served great purpose while Avis caught up with technology..
B4L
banned for life's Profile:
1. Massive wattage with unbridled amperage. (My LR speakers can dip
below 1 Ohm on the woofer side of the biamp.)
2. You cannot pay too much for a good tweeter.
3. Never underestimate a paper woofer. (SS 18W/8531G springs to mind.)
As a corollary: bass response is no longer pinned to driver
The first full digitally produced album
Never mind there was no digital playback then
I have to think despite the genius of Steven Wilson that this is the
first truly recoverable album.
life, banned, look it up
banned
Mnyb wrote:
Loudspeakers are always riddled with compromises even the most expensive
ones the art is actually tuning 1000's of compromises against each other
and as always I dont think the most expensive audiphile exotica is the
answer ;) in this world the price is an intergral part of the
Only USD 12,500 or so... I hope they do not have a purchase limit...
http://hub.audiogon.com/2013/03/magico-s1/
I remain worth every cent
BFL
Did I mention that it is a two way speaker?
banned for life's Profile:
AndrewFG wrote:
My favourite example is Dire Straits Love Over Gold, where the Japanese
CD was notably better than the USA or European releases, and where the
Japanese SACD is perhaps even better.
+
The typical Japanese listening area is much different from elsewhere.
b
ralphpnj wrote:
All versions of the Transporter absolutely support, i.e. play,
24bit/88.2kHz flac and wav files. The problem could be with the support
for m4a/alac files.
Ahh !
Relax to playback of an arcane format. Welcome to the Bene Gesserit !
Life
SBGK wrote:
agree 100 %, I hope they carried out double blind tests before coming up
with these lists.
for sure
banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269
View this thread:
pkfox wrote:
Hi All, just downloaded Android app for Squeezebox and can't get it to
connect to my local server - is it limited to squeezeserver.com ? if so
how do I access my local music using this app ? my sb server is on my
wired LAN and Android device is connected by WiFi ( to the same
Ikabob wrote:
Thank you for the information.
Is there a simple SP strip that is made out of very high quality
materials?
I would endorse (as below) Panamax.
bfl
banned for life's Profile:
mlsstl wrote:
Just a quick comment -- your uncertain worry may be affecting the
perceived sound quality far more than any actual physical change. Our
subconscious dramatically affects our perception no matter whether the
subject is audio or something else.
You didn't say what equipment
jh901 wrote:
What does this mean?
Digital source is inherently accurate means that the source file will
(in the SB environment,) be delivered exactly.
Arguments can be made about the various codecs used to convert one
format to another but natively supported formats are presented to the
Daverz wrote:
I do pay attention to things like measurements, but ultimately long-term
listening enjoyment is all that matters (within my budget).
Great attitude. Let's not forget ease of use. Having all your music
available wherever you are is a modern marvel that is not a free option
in the
TheLastMan wrote:
My take on this is:
1. Hi-fi from different brands usually sounds different in all sorts of
ways from other brands - but as the gear gets more expensive / more
accurate the differences become smaller.
2. True high fidelity, as the name suggests, reproduces music warts
aubuti wrote:
I don't think anyone has made that hyperbolic conclusion except you. I
think any of us would agree that some components or systems sound better
than others, and that some have a sound that we prefer even if one
doesn't claim it is better. The conclusion from the first link in
JJZolx wrote:
They wouldn't sell their Rolexes when they discover that a Timex works
just as well. Most high end audio gear is electronic jewelry. Especially
for a certain age-group.
I'd be willing to bet that at least a few of the testers now question
the value of their gear. It often
magiccarpetride wrote:
I would much rather listen to a well recorded, well mixed and mastered
mp3 than to a shoddily recorded/mixed/mastered 24/192 FLAC.
+1
Try the recently remastered Blue In Green from Kind Of Blue - Miles
Davis
(Of course, I'm not listening to an MP3 version)
SlimChances wrote:
Yet My Golden Ears require at least 24/196 to listen to Muskrat Love
The Captain and Tennille (1976)
Love your pic. Now I know how some here hear so well. I wasn't away of a
Beats version.
bfl
+---+
Mnyb wrote:
+1
Same same and add that I have to mail order everything , the town I live
in does not have decent record store.
+1
So far as I know, decent music stores do not exist here either. Even
back when stock was deep, employees were shallow.
bfl
SBGK wrote:
another one wiv wordz and stuff
http://www.audiostream.com/content/hd-music-download-sites
a download thread
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f13-audiophile-downloads/
a download quality thread
ralphpnj wrote:
I know that you may find this incredibly hard to believe but there
people who don't have and don't want an iPad, iPhone or any kind of
smart phone. Plus Airplay isn't all that great, especially when one
takes into account all the file formats it does not support, which is
23 matches
Mail list logo
