Ramblings about system goals, listening fatigue, diminishing returns

I really thought that manufacturers were profit driven, so how can they set a standard of excellence ????

This is partially true. Manufacturers have to turn a profit, or it is not a viable business, but they don't have to strive to maximize that profit margin at the expense of quality and/or their reputation--which will eventually kill the business anyways.

"Standard of Excellence" is a relative term--perhaps better stated as the best you can buy at this price point. All products are built to a price point to "fit" into the market. It is the "bang for the buck" concept that is reflected in so many inquiries here on AK--the "what is the best XXYYZZ that I can buy for $500?" type of threads. So SOE is about maintaining/improving product quality and reputation in a given market price bracket, which in turn, fuels the first part by increasing sales and thus total profit revenue as well.
 
Less gear in the middle and maybe only 1 to 3 speakers setup at a time.

I did. I missed the speaker variety.
I know and that's why I said the above. Even in my system I have three different power amp/speaker setups that I can select for different music. But they are at least placed at a proper hight, toe in, spaced apart and off the walls for the best sound stage and imaging I can get in my room. I also know I can do better and have less in the room but I like a bit of options.

You can still have the variety just store it out of the room and swap them around once in a while. What you have going on now is you can't really hear how any of those speakers sound. Anyway you where asking how to get better SQ with old equipment, well this is just a free to do, and a tip to get better sound out of any equipment.
 
Since I feel my previous post might have had a bit too much....passion, shall we say.....let me simply state what is on my heart.

I have been at this since I was in diapers. I have what many would admit are speakers of very high esteem (McIntosh XRT 20's) and yet, when someone comes on here, regardless of how long they've been with us, and makes comments that might seem absurd (hey, this cheap thing is as good as that EXCEPTIONALLY NOT CHEAP THING) I just let it slide.

De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum. Thanks to the member formerly known as bentpencil, who had this as his sig (or was it mhardy?) I see things in this light.

In matters of taste, there are no absolutes.

So, please everyone, let's just try to see things from a viewpoint other than our own. We're not audio police. We're enthusiasts.

So.......be enthusiastic!
 
I know and that's why I said the above. Even in my system I have three different power amp/speaker setups that I can select for different music. But they are at least placed at a proper hight, toe in, spaced apart and off the walls for the best sound stage and imaging I can get in my room. I also know I can do better and have less in the room but I like a bit of options.

You can still have the variety just store it out of the room and swap them around once in a while. What you have going on now is you can't really hear how any of those speakers sound. Anyway you where asking how to get better SQ with old equipment, well this is just a free to do, and a tip to get better sound out of any equipment.
Yes, your so right about the speakers. I was able to move them about a little bit. The toe improved, the height isn't wrong on all of them and at least they're not completely cornered on the back side walls any more.
The CS99A and Kenwood KL777A like the floor, the Dynaco likes the ceiling, the Advent are almost strait on, the Wharfedale doesn't can where they are after the tweeter swop and the best place for the MachOne is a different house. So the still drastic compromises aren't as severe as they were. I don't want it to grow into another room least it take over the house.
I am intrigued at the thought of significant improvement to a 70s receiver.
 

Attachments

  • P2160001 (1).JPG
    P2160001 (1).JPG
    70.6 KB · Views: 13
  • P4160002.JPG
    P4160002.JPG
    86.3 KB · Views: 11
The setup in the room is what I'm talking about and you might like to try it. A conventional set up with proper speaker placement out from the walls and height putting the tweeter at head height while sitting. Less gear in the middle and maybe only 1 to 3 speakers setup at a time.

View attachment 1187736

And this is good advice. Thank you, Dan.
 
And this is good advice. Thank you, Dan.
Yes it is. I think it was 4-2-7 that prompted me to eliminate some a few weeks ago. Or it may have been E-Stat.
Anyway it made a big difference. The speaker personalities are much more distinct now. I'm going to leave it the way it is for awhile because I don't want to move speakers in and out of the room and I'm trying to avoid hoarding. I'm finally listening to music more than playing with or listening to gear.
As a side note single large organ music really likes multiple speakers here.
 
I really thought that manufacturers were profit driven, so how can they set a standard of excellence ????

This is partially true. Manufacturers have to turn a profit, or it is not a viable business, but they don't have to strive to maximize that profit margin at the expense of quality and/or their reputation--which will eventually kill the business anyways.

"Standard of Excellence" is a relative term--perhaps better stated as the best you can buy at this price point. All products are built to a price point to "fit" into the market. It is the "bang for the buck" concept that is reflected in so many inquiries here on AK--the "what is the best XXYYZZ that I can buy for $500?" type of threads. So SOE is about maintaining/improving product quality and reputation in a given market price bracket, which in turn, fuels the first part by increasing sales and thus total profit revenue as well.

Business use different models but no business is going to be profitable if they don't produce a product that enough of the public desires. You can't honestly think that a business would build something with only profit in mind without even considering market appeal. The past models were, you had a item that you thought the public would want and you would proceed to build the item and then your price would be determined based on the cost of doing business. You depended on the fact that your product was, or had something that the public wanted over your competitors. I am pretty sure these basic ideas hold true, but you do have to be mindful of the fact that a low cost item has more market appeal if all else items are equal than a more expensive item. You can't just sell something that has large profits if the product is not what the market wants.
 
and at least they're not completely cornered on the back side walls any more.
Do whatever pleases you most, but the most significant limitation I see is the massive cabinet destroying what could be a diffraction-free center image.

I am intrigued at the thought of significant improvement to a 70s receiver.
Which is extremely easy to achieve today. Don't forget about the source(s) either.
 
Do whatever pleases you most, but the most significant limitation I see is the massive cabinet destroying what could be a diffraction-free center image.


Which is extremely easy to achieve today. Don't forget about the source(s) either.
Is the cabinet destroying the visual center image or the sound center image, or both? The cabinet can play a part in the sound too right? In any case I ain't changing my cabinet.
I haven't even started exploring different sources. But I will now because the lap top power cord transformer now has a buzz as of last week. Don't know why. Unplug power cord from lap top no buzz. I don't have another cord handy to test.
I'm already tired of the music from cable tv. I'll try my android phone next.
 
Is the cabinet destroying the visual center image or the sound center image, or both?
Strictly in audible terms. I'm unconcerned with the visual effect. There is no consistent left to right soundstage.

The cabinet can play a part in the sound too right?
Only in negative terms. It creates diffraction. It kills the illusion of a coherent center image.

Imagine attending a concert where sixty percent of the center stage is filled with a giant box with performers located on either side of it.

Some folks get it. :)
 
Last edited:
Business use different models but no business is going to be profitable if they don't produce a product that enough of the public desires. You can't honestly think that a business would build something with only profit in mind without even considering market appeal. The past models were, you had a item that you thought the public would want and you would proceed to build the item and then your price would be determined based on the cost of doing business. You depended on the fact that your product was, or had something that the public wanted over your competitors. I am pretty sure these basic ideas hold true, but you do have to be mindful of the fact that a low cost item has more market appeal if all else items are equal than a more expensive item. You can't just sell something that has large profits if the product is not what the market wants.

Exactly so.....

The cost of building the unit is in itself the limiting factor therefore the more expensive units that have higher quality internal components contribute effectively to the design. When price point is considered to make a profit it is impossible to create excellence and a profit at the same time. When making a profit irregardless of who’s making the equipment, every unit is somewhere between excellence and out right crap due to price point. So any unit can be improved beyond OEM....
 
when someone comes on here, regardless of how long they've been with us, and makes comments that might seem absurd (hey, this cheap thing is as good as that EXCEPTIONALLY NOT CHEAP THING) I just let it slide.

Let it slide?
But that's the issue with a lot of things and people doing all their learning from reading on the internet. Most likely how the OP has got their beliefs and perpetuation of the same in their comments here for another new to the hobby to learn by.

I can fully understand SQ is subjective,but when you even eliminate the subjectivity as in never hearing and generalizing due to a price point keeping from even have hands on testing. Then to go spread fallacies on something you never heard and don't know about on a open forum, questions need to be asked, and or the statement challenged.

As you see in my first comment to the OP

Pleas do show a vid or photos of your testing with these two units. I know I know the $6000 CDP is fictional because you never had one. Clearly your assertations above are based on nothing more than reading others Mythical beliefs on the internet.

I always love to see the assertion that one can spend a few dollars and get to 90% of the best SQ on earth.

^ A bit of hyperbole perhaps, but an opinion echoed by those with far more experience than I.
A lot can be learned through reading and comparing the opinions of others.
Part of the response back to me.

And you can see that it's the perpetuation of a mythical internet belief and where they leaned from.

And this is good advice. Thank you, Dan.
Yeah I know how quiet is enjoying the hobby but I'm just trying delicatly to get them to expand their thinking of other ways to enjoy it. Like getting the best SQ we can with what we have. You know me I wasn't all SQ when I got here either, in fact I was changing a bit just before I signed up. I'v had all sorts of old gear and running stacked speakers in all 4 corners of the room with quad. I enjoy the SQ and music today more than what I was doing before.
 
Last edited:
Yes, your so right about the speakers. I was able to move them about a little bit. The toe improved, the height isn't wrong on all of them and at least they're not completely cornered on the back side walls any more.

Yes it is. I think it was 4-2-7 that prompted me to eliminate some a few weeks ago.

Yes I did see you take the time and effort to move your speakers around a bit and you liking the results. Just keep thinking of the less is more and that you can always tweak what you have.

You mentioned having, wanting and needing all your gear in one room. I know people that have a collection like yours all in their one room. They will have it all displayed, but they have their system wall setup conventionally. They can then easily swap in different speakers and receivers to listen to as needed.
 
Last edited:
The people with much better sound than I don't have to take the time to point out the things I can do to improve what I have. They would get along just fine without me. Without them my system would sound like trash for a while longer as I figured it out on my own. I find them to be very patient as I progress. I've just been told I need to get the big box out of the middle of the stage. And that's true. So yet another change. Every suggested changed has yielded instant improvement. My part is to listen without attitude or arguing and not waist their time.
 
Last edited:
Very humble attitude you show. When I first saw your avatar I had many of the same suggestions for better sound. However, around these parts there are some ego's that don't take well to constructive criticism. Consequently I posted nothing.

Let it be known that I totally agree with E-Stat and 4-2-7. Their suggestions, especially E-Stats mirror what my system has evolved to be in the 50+ years I've been involved with this "hobby".

If you must have unused speakers in a room you should at minimum short their input terminals.
 
The people with much better sound than I don't have to take the time to point out the things I can do to improve what I have. They would get along just fine without me. Without them my system would sound like trash for a while longer as I figured it out on my own. I find them to be very patient as I progress. I've just been told I need to get the big box out of the middle of the stage. And that's true. So yet another change. Every suggested changed has yielded instant improvement. My part is to listen without attitude or arguing and not waist their time.
Or to save all that moving around just to try it, move your speaker out from the wall and the cabinet face parallel to the backs of the speakers
 
Very humble attitude you show. When I first saw your avatar I had many of the same suggestions for better sound. However, around these parts there are some ego's that don't take well to constructive criticism. Consequently I posted nothing.

Let it be known that I totally agree with E-Stat and 4-2-7. Their suggestions, especially E-Stats mirror what my system has evolved to be in the 50+ years I've been involved with this "hobby".

If you must have unused speakers in a room you should at minimum short their input terminals.
I remember reading about shorting the unused speakers. I use them all regularly. Sometimes within minutes of each other. I wonder if they have some damping benefit.
I don't have ego room right now, to busy having fun.
Most people understand this is the road I want to go down for now and try to help me with that I want, not what they want.
I assumed from the start many people had silent opinions and didn't want to insult me or start a ruckus.
 
Back
Top Bottom