Lower-end
products
November 24, 2003
I have been reading through your website
lately, and I am very impressed.
I was wondering if you have ever
considered reviewing a more mainstream product? I am currently going to college studying
electronics and therefore cannot afford a very pricey stereo system. Currently I own a
Kenwood AR-404 receiver and a pair of JBL N26II speakers. A few more paychecks and I'll
have the JBL PB12 subwoofer as well).
I know these are not by any means
audiophile parts, but it would be nice to hear what someone who really knows what he's
talking about thinks of these lower-end products, from a price: performance standpoint. So
far, the only information I have found on how my system compares to the competition is
from a bunch of schmoes at www.audioreview.com who don't have any idea what they are
talking about (in my opinion of course).
Any insight you could give would be very
much appreciated.
Reid
As you can see from my answer below, I do intend to review more products in a
"mainstream" price range, although that doesn't necessarily mean from mainstream
companies.
But that doesn't answer your
question, which concerns the system you do have -- and there are several ways to answer
it. The first and most obvious is that it doesn't really matter what I think if you derive
musical pleasure from listening to it.
I don't mean that in a facile way.
Even if I thought you'd made terrible choices, my opinion doesn't matter if you're
satisfied.
I once knew a very gentle, wonderful
audiophile named Ben Holt, who told me that he'd never heard a hi-fi that had been
thoughtfully assembled that didn't teach him something. I was struck at the time by how
neatly Ben had dodged the "like" issue, but upon reflection I came to understand
what he meant.
I'm not a great musician -- or even a
very good one -- but I've played in concert bands, orchestras, and rock bands enough to
appreciate how hard musicians have to work to sound good together. Part of that is
achieving a "blend" of solo and group sounds. Add to that the fact that I want
to hear too much music to afford expensive seats -- so I tend to pay for "back of the
hall" tickets. As a result of both budget and inclination, I've grown used to that
back-of-the-hall sonic blend -- a sound that many other listeners might find too
"mushy," at least compared to a fifth-row center perspective.
Who has the right to tell me I'm
wrong?
I certainly don't have the audacity
to tell Mr. Fifth Row Center he's wrong. We just hear things differently.
That's probably not the answer you
were looking for, so here's an answer that might be: I think your system probably sounds
pretty darn good.
I've heard a lot of expensive hi-fis
that don't sound all that great, and I've heard some budget rigs that do. The difference? The good-sounding ones were set up by
people who cared and the not-so-good ones
weren't. Does that sound too simplistic? It isn't -- not really.
When you care about music and the way it sounds in your
room, you notice things. You poke, you prod, you move the speakers in relationship to your
listening position and each other. You tweak, in other words. People who simply trust that
the "best" components produce the "best" sound don't do this. And you
can hear it.
And, as someone who has owned both Kenwood and JBL
products, I know that both companies can make surprisingly good-sounding gear -- and that
enterprising music lovers can do wonders with it.
Hope this kind of, sort of begins to address your
question -- but watch this space for more on the subject of bang-for-the-buck audio, and
visit www.goodsound.com, which is
all about budget audio.
NHT ST4?
November 20, 2003
Dear Wes,
I loved your recent Amphion
Xenon review. I recently auditioned the Creons (the next model down) and was
impressed, although they could have had a bit more punch down low. Have you had a
head-to-head listen to these two speakers?
I find the basic design philosophy of
these speakers quite intriguing (slim cabinet, midrange above tweeter, side-firing
woofer), so much so that I spent some time tracking down similar designs.
Well, guess what I found? (You're
probably ahead of me here). Yes, the NHT ST4. Very similar in dimensions, although not
quite as deep. Same size midrange, tweeter, and woofer -- and about one-fifth the cost of
the Xenons. No contoured "dimple," though.
I read the very positive ST4 reviews in The
Abso!ute Sound and elsewhere, and decided to give them a whirl. Now I was auditioning the ST-4s in less-than-ideal
conditions (an un-soundproofed room in a hi-fi chain store, and driven with a Yamaha
receiver), but I have to say I was quite impressed. Not as detailed as the Amphions and a
poorer soundstage, but acceptable nevertheless.
It got me to wondering, What is the price
of true "high end"? More specifically, how would the NHTs and Amphions compare
on a level playing field (same high-end components, controlled conditions)? Now I'm not for a moment saying the ST4s would give
you everything the Xenon or Creon can, but it would be an interesting exercise, assuming,
of course, you're not way ahead of me and have already done this. If you have, I would be
very interested in your comments. If not, how about it?
Peter
How about it, indeed? The NHT ST4s
are a superb high-value audio product -- exactly the sort of thing I ought to be writing
about. So I will. I called NHT and they'll deliver a pair early in the new year. Watch for
the review after that.
I haven't compared the ST4s to the
Xenons, nor have I really heard the Creons, other than under show conditions. But in
questioning the entry level for audio ecstasy, you raise a fascinating
point: Do you need to spend megabucks for a real high-end-audio experience?
These days, I don't think so. That's
not to say that some products don't have to cost more. Limited distribution,
inefficiencies of scale, and lots of labor-intensive manufacturing processes all
contribute to high hi-fi prices. But companies that care about the musical experience can
make good-sounding stuff that doesn't break the bank.
This is most obvious in the world of
loudspeakers. There are lots of so-so speakers out there, but the general quality level of
loudspeakers today is pretty high -- at every price point.
Nobody loves reviewing hand-made,
high-quality audio gear more than I do, but over the next year, I'll be making a
concentrated effort in finding the really good high-value stuff. The NHT ST4s will fit
very nicely into that plan.
Docking an iPod
November 17, 2003
Wes,
I have a question. What cable(s) do I need to run my iPod
through my home system?
My home system consists of a Krell KAV-300i integrated amp,
a Wadia 830 CD player, and Dynaudio 1.8 speakers. I have Kimber Kable 8TC and Cardas Cross
interconnects.
I read your article in Stereophile about the Apple
iPod, but I am not sure exactly what cables you use to play your iPod through your stereo.
Thanks in advance, and I appreciate any feedback you can give me.
Frank
I always use the iPod's docking station when connecting
it to my big rig (it bypasses the iPod's internal volume control, which makes a noticeable
improvement at higher-bit-rate playback). I connect the docking station to my preamplifier
with a one-foot Kimber mini-to-RCA cable (available from HeadRoom). Actually, I've bought several of the connectors and docking
stations and now have one at each of the systems scattered around the house -- all I have
to do is pick up the iPod and drop it into the docking station in the room in which I am
working. It makes for a nice addition to my playback options....Wes Phillips
The best speakers
November 9, 2003
Hi Wes:
I read your excellent review of the Sophias, but I was wondering: if you had the
money to spend and wanted the ultimate, would you go with the Wilson/WATT Puppy 7s, Kharma
Ceramique 3.2s, Avalon Eidolons, or Rockport Technologies Antares?
Just wondering,
DK
This is a very difficult question to answer -- and not
just because I haven't lived with all of these loudspeakers, any of which would have to be
on the shortlist of world's greatest speakers.
The difficulty doesn't lie in the greatness of the
loudspeakers given candidates like these -- that's a given. It lies in the matter of
personal choice, and, to no small extent, environment.
For example, I heard the WATT/Puppy 5s in David Wilson's
living room back in 1999. He played a recording he'd made of Hyperion Knight playing the
Yamaha digital grand piano sitting between the loudspeakers and had the piano play back
Hyperion's performance for comparison. I thought the difference between the two was
startlingly small -- until David walked to the other end of his living room and played the
same disc on a pair of WAMMs.
To coin a phrase, wow.
As good as the WAMMs were, I can't even imagine owning a
pair. It's not the price, 'cause we're fantasizing here, right? But I like my living room,
which could make the WAMMs sound as good as the Wilson living room, and I like my current
reference gear, which is very good, but probably not good enough to escape the ruthless
microscope of the WAMMs -- and maybe not even good enough for the current WATT/Puppy.
So, you see, given my choice of the three Wilsons I have
heard, I'd probably choose the Sophias because I really, really liked them and they worked
really well in my room with my gear. I haven't heard the new WATT/Puppies under the same
conditions (although I'd love to, hint hint), so I'm not certain, mind you.
It reminds me of a story that ethnomusicologist Tom
Turino told me when we lived in Cuzco, Peru. Tom's a guitarist and was fascinated by
charango music. He tramped around the campo, interviewing charango players and recording
them. To keep from being completely alien from the musicians he met, he carried his own
charango, a beautifully crafted instrument made by the most highly praised luthier in
Cuzco. He'd always play a few numbers with the musicians he interviewed and he'd trade
instruments with them for a few numbers.
Whenever a musician truly admired his charango, Tom
would generously offer to trade instruments with him. You have to understand that most of
these back-country charangos were fairly crude -- "some of them used 8d nails for
frets," Tom told me -- and Tom's instrument was beautifully crafted from Myrtle and
fine spruce. Yet no one ever took Tom up on his offer. Musician after musician told him,
"This is a very nice charango -- for you. But for the music we play, mine sounds
better."
Loudspeakers are like that. Each of us has to find the
one that sounds best to us. That may or may not be the same as a loudspeaker that actually
is the "best." That's what makes the search so fascinating.
CD upgrade strategy
November 3, 2003
Wes,
I have been following your website for some time now, and I
am very happy to let you know that I have based my system on it -- and my own
subsequent follow-up visits to dealers, of course: Arcam A85 amplifier, JBL S38II Studio
series three-way loudspeakers, SAEC interconnects and Monitor speaker cables
(four-stranded German-made), and a Philips DVD727K (24-bit/192kHz audio DAC) DVD player.
The Philips is just my interim option, but I'm having
problems choosing a CD player. Given the very quick life cycle of technology, I am nervous
about putting a huge sum of money into a pure CD player out of fear of seeing it
superceded by a better multi-format player in almost no time -- and at a fraction of the
cost of a quality CD player.
I also require compatibility with my present system,
especially when you consider that I do not have a dedicated room, complete with
sound-absorbing panels, isolation table, or any of that stuff. I seriously enjoy a
wide-ranging repertoire of good music, from Shostakovich to chamber music to jazz
fusion to soft and hard rock, but I also live a normal life like everybody else.
From the short time that I have been acquainted with the
A85, I am completely enamored by its openness and accurate rendition of rich detail and
its wide-open soundstage feel. The JBLs are forward but accurate, fast, and possessed of
extended, tight bass. I think they're a very good match for the Arcam. I used to own a
pair of JBL 4301Bs (very, very nice sound, indeed) but, unfortunately they were stolen
Should I purchase the Arcam FMJ CD33T or simply the DIVA
CD73 or perhaps the DIVA CD82?
I am at a complete loss -- help sort me out!
Tom
First, take a deep breath -- everything is going to be
all right.
I can't tell you what the future will bring regarding
formats. My suspicion is that DVD-A will linger around without gaining a lot of market
share, simply because the Consortium has done such a dreadful job selling average
listeners on its benefits -- and this despite the huge base of consumers who already have
DVD players.
That doesn't mean Sony has done wonders with its promotion
of SACD, however. Like many audiophiles, I resent having been forced to buy the same tired
old "classics" on SACD (Blonde on Blonde, the Glenn Gould Goldberg
Variations, various Bernstein releases) only to see them remastered as they should have
been in the first place and sold to us as "newer and improveder."
I also just didn't get the "stealth" SACD
campaign -- remastering the Rolling Stones catalog on hybrid SACD/CD discs and then not
even labeling them as SACDs. However, at a recent Sony press event, David Kawakami (head
of Sony's SACD division) explained that the long-term goal is to establish a beach head of
titles that people own because they are better-sounding CDs and then teach them the
benefits of SACD. That approach makes a certain amount of sense -- assuming you buy the
assumption that the mass market cares about higher-resolution sound.
I just don't know.
So, if it were me, I wouldn't be so concerned about a
universal player (although I understand their appeal). I'd concentrate on the best CD
playback I could afford -- and if that also meant I got SACD capabilities, I'd consider
that gravy.
You've listed three extremely fine CD-only players, any of
which will substantially improve upon the performance of your Philips. You should listen
to all three and try to balance the differences you hear against the cold, sobering
reality of the budgetary issues.
And don't forget the Arcam upgrade path -- you can buy a
CD73 now and change the DAC later to make it an '82 or even '93 when finances allow.
That's a pretty cool deal.
|
