Rattle, speaking personally my hearing is wrecked, partly thru genetics and partly from a life spent with rockets, bombs, bullets and sharp pointy things with whistling jet engines. However, I think many of your generation have their hearing wrecked by discos and i pods played too loud and their hearing in their 20s may be as bad as mine in my 70s. Hi-fi is a dead loss if you can't hear it properly.
BTW, when I bought my first CD player it was a Marantz seperate unit and it cost £500, VAT free for export! This was about 1978!
|
Hi-fi is a dead loss if you can't hear it properly.
As someone whose hearing was damaged by industrial noise in the late 1950s, I agree. I can't hear certain high frequency sounds at all so high fidelity sound reproduction is lost on me.
|
|
Everyone thinks that digital is automatically better - CDs were the start of this fraud in the 80s.
|
I only have to switch between analogue and digital signals on TV through my surround sound to experience a noticeable difference.
HD offers a great picture, but compared to analogue channels the sound is terrible.
|
Daveyjp, what you are noticing with the switch between analogue and digital TV is the difference between low and high quality digital sound. Analogue TV has had NICAM (Near Instanteneous Companded Audio multiplexing) digital audio for about the last 15 years.
The difference is that NICAM is a high quality format, whereas the audio used in freeview is decidedly lower quality. I also heard somewhere that the compression used actually removes some of the phase information that Dolby Surround uses to encode the rear channels, although I can't back up that statement with any sort of reference or certainty.
|
|
|
|
Everyone thinks that digital is automatically better - CDs were the start of this fraud in the 80s.
i think most people were happy to swap the snap crackle pop form anything other than decent quality vinyl for the background silence of CDs, and the convenience of track selection.
I do agree in principle that " digital is automatically better" is nonsense and always has been, whether applied to CD or DAB.
|
I do agree in principle that " digital is automatically better" is nonsense and always has been whether applied to CD or DAB.
Add TV to that also.
|
|
|
|
|
One thing could be that they don't build houses anymore, they build rabbit hutches which they call houses so people see houses - bit like "The Emperors Cloths"
In my study/office (read dining room!) I have a perfectly adequate Sony CMT-CPZ1 DAB connected to this computer and I am fairly impressed with the sound but ... when I play the same CD's through my Arcam/Cambridge Audio/Denon/Aiwa/ Tannoy system in the lounge, you can almost see the difference.
Great names btw - Marantz + Pioneer, not japcrap.
|
|
Typical Britain. Motorcyclists called Honda that in the 70s as did Motorists Toyota and the such like,,,,who's laughing now ?
|
...who's laughing now ?...
The Japanese - in reasonably high fidelity.
I think purists still prefer the smaller, British makers, although we are tallking quite high-end stuff.
A properly set up hi-fi sytem is a treat to listen to, and need not cost a lot, say £200 each on an amp, CD deck and speakers.
I have something a little better than that, but don't get around to listening to it as much as I'd like.
Too busy, or so I tell myself.
I might just have a dabble with the remastered Beatles CD set due to be released, I think, tomorrow.
Although at £160 or so, it's a bit expensive.
|
|
I opted for a TEAC system - wired to a pair of floor mounted Mission Speakers although they don't feature in my current re-modelling of the lounge - need something smaller. May opt for the OE Teac speakers which currently serve in the under used office upstairs.
|
Room acoustics play a big part.
There are high ceilings in the current Ifithelps Towers which make for a harsh, echo-prone sound, whatever the system.
I was once told of a 'clap test'.
Stand in the middle of the room and clap your hands firmly, once.
If you can hear an echo, the room is less than ideal for hi-fi.
If all you can hear is a single clap with next to no reverb, the job's a good 'un.
Edited by Pugugly on 08/09/2009 at 11:25
|
If you can hear an echo, the room is less than ideal for hi-fi.
Mitigated by a choice of soft furnishings though
|
|
|
|
|
Great names ..... ..... , not japcrap >>
Japanese Koi Carp:
Standard ploy used by trawlermen (out trolling on t'internet) is to throw in a juicy worm, amongst an otherwise plausible excuse for a day of innocent fishing, to catch the unwary coy carp, thereby create thread (fishing line) drift and catch a few more koi, and hope that a few more juicy worms get chucked in to the pool and start a flaming war between the carp.
Edited by jbif on 08/09/2009 at 10:48
|
A partern I have noticed is I seem to prefer jap CD players but British designed amps. I am the sort that would much rather spend time getting the tonal balance right rather than use the tone controls so all the buttons on jap amp I just look and think I wish they had spent the money on a better power supply.
I do have hearing loss myself and it does result in having to crank up the volume a bit to hear the higher frequencies but my mid range hearing is perfect. And anyway my hearloss was from around 15khz which is a problem when you're a kid but if its no worse then most people my age can only hear that range anyway.
One thing about HIFI too is it is one area where the British still do very well in. I remember a top Gear Eposide where Clarkson was talking about the differences between the japs and brits. He showed to amps a £1000k Arcam and a £150 Yamaha (he did not mention the price difference as suspect it he didn't know) the Yamaha had a lot more buttons and concluded it must be better. I just that though that completly missed the point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still perfectly happy with my 1979 NAD 7030 tuner amplifier (3020 amp plus tuner, built in Japan at that time to UK specifications), Hitachi D-75s, the firm's first metal tape cassette deck, Thorens 160 turntable and Audiomaster MLS1 speakers.
All of it was expensive in real terms compared to much better specification hi-fi equipment today, but there is still some excellent kit around at present at prices that represent terrific value.
With regard to DAB and similar transmissions' quality levels these days, see:
www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/digital_radio_samples.h...m
Freeview radio stations are broadcast at much higher standards...:-)
|
I've never experiened the NAD 3020 but the 30wpc always put me off as I like my low end to be fast but then NADs in my experience always sound a lot more grippy than their power output figures suggest.
My big question is how would the NAD 3020 compare to a basic £150 Marantz or Sony amp in todays world?
|
>>My big question is how would the NAD 3020 compare to a basic £150 Marantz or Sony amp in todays world?>>
It would do very well I suspect based on my 7030, which has a >3dB clipping margin (thanks to 60w output transistors for a 30watts per channel amp), will drive virtually any loudspeaker you put in front of it and sounds fully in control at all times.
Marantz (then part of Philips) was more noted for its CD players (as you would expect from Philips, whose own marker in this area was the 104), with a budget Rotel amp the real NAD challenger at the time.
|
|
|
Way back when I was in my 20's I got a nice separates sound system and linked it up to Mission speakers.
I would regularly play some vinyl or the new fangled CD things or even tapes making sure Dolby B was selected on my metal tape.....
Anyway this was entertainment, I would sit and listen to the music as the TV only had 4 channels and mostly was rubbish.
However nowadays I have hundreds of rubbish TV channels which take so much longer to flick through, I have all my music on an ipod that can sit on a docking station linked to my Panasonic surround sound system. However very rarely would I now sit in my living room and purely listen to music so therefore can accept average sound quality. I regularly listen through earphones on the bike, again an average sound quality. Sometimes even listen through the laptop!
Kids and pals are in the background, neighbours Subaru is grumbling away on his driveway, dogs are barking etc etc, it would be money wasted to try and get a very decent sound system.
Guess what I am saying is priorities change, as with many modern day toys.
|
Get a pair of Grado SR60s that will soon give you some HIFI back, they work well on poorer sources too. I do use my computer as a source but I have a sound card designed for the job.
My original point is that for less than what some people pay on an all singing dancing disco light HIFI from comment you can get a budget seperates system. £200 at some where like Richersounds will get you a lot of HIFI although the problem I discovered is it leaves you wanting more.
I am also limited due to neighbours but if I play music loud I do it during the day when people are at work.
|
|
|
I think you've summed it up pretty well there BobbyG. Other than maybe the home theater set there aren't that many people who just sit down and listen to music anymore, they take it with them in compressed form. Many / most people value convenience much higher than the ultimate sound quality.
I still have my seperates system ( my NAD3020 was nicked many moons ago, replaced by a Kenwood somethingorother) but there isn't time/room to set it up properly in a house full of pets and kids, so it sits in a corner gathering dust: my Pure DAB mini system and Logik WiFI radio are my main music devices these days.
|
glass of malt whisky in one hand and dark side of the moon under a shure cartridge
and you could be in heaven
|
>>>glass of malt whisky in one hand and dark side of the moon under a shure cartridge<<<
Or Pipers under an Autofon with a herbal cig!
|
|
|
|
|
but the 30wpc always put me off >>
Actually it's 20watts per channel as the model number indicates (last two letters).
|
they have started making these again,
www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/p?openform&pc%5Efs%5...A
mine are from 1996 and apart from a play with sennheiser open backs ive never found a better pair of cans
or speakers to beat my ditton 44"s
|
>>>they have started making these again,
www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/p?openform&pc%5Efs%5...A<<<
Crickey , I had a pair of these years ago, think I threw them out after one of my house moves in the end ... can't remember exactly why, probably because I bought some Koss open backs.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 08/09/2009 at 13:48
|
|
My Dad still uses the Rotel seperates system he bought back in 1980 (ish) at great expense at it still sounds absolutely marvellous. It would knock most modern stuff into a cocked hat. I had custody of it for a while but reluctantly gave it him back when I moved into SWMBO's place.
|
|
|
|
>>as the model number indicates (last two letters).>>
Digits even....:-(
|
|
|
|
From memory NAD specified their amps properly i.e. 20W was the RMS figure into 8 ohms, with both channels driven, with 1% THD. One minor irritant I did have to fix on my 3020 and several friends' ones was the mains switched went iffy after a while, causing crackling and intermittant power up. A good does of switch cleaner spray cured them for a few more years. I don't think I ever got the '20' LED to light up on my 3020, nevermind the '35' or whatever the top power level LED was.
|
|
|
|
My old 3020a is doing fine. Bought 2nd hand 20 years ago and now acting as the amp to my eldests ipod and my old nad cd player.
Power ratings need to be taken with a pinch of salt, they are not very important in my experience.
(currently listening to R4 through Denon TU-260LII, Arcam 8R and some ancient Bose things from before bose became lifestyle)
|
|
I can remember drooling over the Marantz section of Lasky's, must be 30 or more years ago now, all those luvly silver units with their blue backlights ... couldn't afford it then of course so I had to settle for Pioneer PL12D etc., etc., etc. + Wharfdale Lintons which I later upgraded to a pair of B & W thingy's.
|
|
Re: Marantz ... still sort after = tinyurl.com/mo9n9g
|
I just donated my 1970s Marantz amp + an old tv to next door neighbour' soon who has just had a family split.
This fully justifies collecting my new Project USB turntable from a local shop later this week.
The nasty little ion turntable can now be reserved for playing her ladyship's scratched and worn disco records.
Ah ! Bisto Vinyl !
|
For me both cheap digital and anaologue sources sound awful. The cheap plastic turntables have far too much treble bias and the cheap CD players sound harsh. When you move up the range CD's can sound pretty warm but also dynamic. I am a big fan of vinyl and CDs and to me I don't have a preference they are just different.
As for the person who said their analogue TV sounded better. Well if it is stereo it will use NICAM which is digital anyway but I too found that NICAM sounded better than freeview. NICAM had a nice lively sound to it. I used to have a Toshibia NICAM VCR I used purely as a source into my amp and connected to a 14" portable.
|
|
I suffered a major breakdown in the late 70's due to v***l (LP's) I still can't bring myself to say the v word, I was told by the trickcyclist that I had conflicting synapse between my frontal lobes and my hypothalamus due to using a Zerostat AND an anti-static mat at the same time, my condition only stabilized when I discovered the CD and Lithium ... batteries?
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 08/09/2009 at 22:01
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
