my friend's setup

Looks expensive ... of course you can't judge the sound by a YouTube clip.

beware of lots of flashing lights, silver knobs and speaker drivers...

Edited by mystic fred - November 06 2009 at 03:15

looks retro, yes, but expensive retro, no?

Nobody has heard of any of the stuff there?

description of video:

Please remember, this is Youtube and as such the audio quality is severely downgraded. This does not represent the absolutely stunning sound quality on the actual system.

All components are 100% original and in PERFECT like new condition and took several years to source together.

Marantz 6200 fully automatic turntable
Marantz HD-880 200w Speakers with Vari-Q plugs
and The BEAST... *The 2325 Receiver rated at 125wpc

*An original wood case will be added when I find a new one.

All the best (reasonable) cables and interconnects are used including an Audio Power Industries Balanced AC line conditioner Model Ultra 116

Recorded in HD on a Lumix FZ35

The song playing is "Winter Solstice"
Yes, that's an original Splendor Solis album by The Tea Party

This video further confirms what I believe to be true, and that is that a lot of  "audiophiles" know absolutely sh*t all about sound.
People spend all this money and time getting audio systems together, and then they have them backed up against a wall and having them in rooms with a poor shape and absolutely zero acoustic room treatment.
If someone actually genuinely cares about sound rather than buying a bunch of stuff they don't understand to boost their own ego, they'll do some proper research on how to actually obtain great sound.
Your friend obviously doesn't actually know much at all.

The speakers are backed up against the walls. This causes a hyped and unnatural low end. Ideally he would have them positioned at least 3 meters away from the wall and would have broadband bass traps behind them.
He certainly shouldn't have them positioned like they are in that room, leading into that hallway anyway.

FACT: Room acoustics are far more fundamental to achieving a good sound than speakers.
30 000 dollars worth of acoustic treatment paired with 5000 dollar speakers will absolutely destroy 200 000 dollar speakers in an untreated room.
If you have dips and nulls in your room due to unnecessary amounts of reflections, you've effectively wasted thousands of dollars on your audiophile level system, because a lot of the detail is being lost in the reflections and the bass response is going to be quite muddy.
You need to spend more money on room treatment than what your speakers and amplifier cost to get the best results, seriously.
He can argue this all he wants, but science proves how much frequencies you're losing/hearing much less of in a room with poor acoustics due to reflections.
There are many cases of people spending upwards of 100 000 US dollars on their system, only to be unsatisfied.
When asked by someone who actually understands audio and sound if they have room treatment, the answer is always "no".

Currently, I'm sitting here in a 3x3m room with studio monitors that are basically copies of mid range Mackie HR624s and I have no intention of upgrading these monitors, at least not on a serious level, until I am able to move my stuff to a bigger room and with serious room treatment.
I could hypothetically put Event Opal or Klein and Hummel 0300D monitors in here, which are pretty much as high end as you can get, but as long as my room acoustics remain poor, they are barely going to sound any better than what I currently have now.



Edited by Petrovsk Mizinski - November 11 2009 at 00:20

Originally posted by Petrovsk Mizinski Room acoustics are far more fundamental to achieving a good sound than speakers. 30 000 dollars worth of acoustic treatment paired with 5000 dollar speakers will absolutely destroy 200 000 dollar speakers in an untreated room. If you have dips and nulls in your room due to unnecessary amounts of reflections, you've effectively wasted thousands of dollars on your audiophile level system, because a lot of the detail is being lost in the reflections and the bass response is going to be quite muddy. You need to spend more money on room treatment than what your speakers and amplifier cost to get the best results, seriously. He can argue this all he wants, but science proves how much frequencies you're losing/hearing much less of in a room with poor acoustics due to reflections. There are many cases of people spending upwards of 100 000 US dollars on their system, only to be unsatisfied. When asked by someone who actually understands audio and sound if they have room treatment, the answer is always "no".

thanks for this.  I will definitely look at room acoustics when I invest in my own system in a couple years.  Who would you talk to to get room treatment done? just any high end audio store?

You need bigger speakers and the volume knob should go up to 11...

I'm happy with my $20 Sony stereophones, but that's just me. I would like better stuff, but I don't need it.

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Originally posted by mono Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak "Room treatment" ... I wonder whether recordings are engineered to require that sort of thing to sound great. Records are mixed and mastered in professional studios in which all room effect is cancelled (therotically, in practice, as much as physically and financially possible). So in order for YOU to listen to the record as the artist intented ("good sound" and "bad sound" are simply irrelevent here), you must have the highest fidelity possible, i.e. : - No room effects (room acoustics correction) - Good positionning (walls, orientation, sweet spot...) - Flat speakers and amplifier (amp-monitors are a great 2 in 1 solution in general) I'm well aware of how studio technology works. I just know that albums aren't mixed to sound best under those ideal conditions ... no musician in their right mind would want their music to only sound good in the studio. Fortunately none of those things are too important anyway ... you can get great results with lo-fi systems, provided that you don't get ensnared by people who talk you into getting ultra expensive hi-fi gear. Can expensive gear and room conditioning improve the listening experience? I think it can. Is it necessary in order to enjoy music? Not at all. If you have $50.000 to spare, go right ahead ... sky's the limit.

Of course "normal" listenning systems are taken into account, but mixing engineers can't do much... you can't have a mix/master that's suitable for all systems.
They just make sure the music doesn't sound awful on other systems.
On your Logitech speakers, you are sure to miss out on a big part of the music. If you simply want to hear the notes, get it in MIDI...
Plus, there are speakers between 20$ and 50.000$. For 300$, you can have an excellent pair of Mackie monitors! So if spending this amount to listen to XXXX$ worth of music is irrelevent, then something is wrong here..... SOUND MATTERS!

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak EDIT: and as far as mixing goes: I'm pretty sure that the priority is to make it sound well on typical hi-fi systems and through headphones ... musicians depend on their typical fans enjoying the listening experience.

Hehe, why mix in a studio when you can mix in your toilet with 20$ speakers while taking a relaxing dump?
If that were true, mixing using professional gear would be almost pointless. Thank God mixing engineers still need to have the cleanest mix possible... Mixing is first performed on high end monitors, and only checked on "low end" (that actually cost around 300$) speakers.
Headphones are rarely considered because they are completely different (acoustically) from speakers (one signal for each ear...).
There is a world of difference between my headphones (Sennheiser HD205) and my monitors.
In general, if the mixing is fine using high end monitors, it will most probably yield the best possible result on a low end system. Headphones are a different issue.
It's not a matter of frequency reponse or noise (or else an EQ would suffice), it's a matter of precision and clarity.
Listenning to a great mix on crappy speakers is like mixing an 18yo single malt whisky with Coke... you lose all the detail.

The first time I listened to "Everyone Into Position" (Oceansize) on my monitors, I was astonished on how much detail I had missed using my previous setup (Wharfedale Pro 2.1).
Of course, not all recordings and mixes are worth being listenned to on high end monitors (I don't think Mastodon would yield a much different result for example ), but there are certain artists that are too keen on sound to played on radom systems.
Post rock, Extreme metal (when well recorded and mixed: Textures, Hacride...) are good examples of the utility of a good sound system.

Sorry if I'm boring people, I happen to like this subject...

Cool, a hot debate!

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak   Exactly ... why bother with a real discussion when you can just make ridiculous exaggerations.

Exaggeration, yes. Ridiculous, no. Is that forbidden here? If someone didn't understand this was an exaggeration, I deeply appologize.

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak   I hope you won't be telling me though that there are no headphones in studios ... Personally I use headphones for pretty much everything ... but I never said that I was a professional audio engineer. It's just a hobby for me, and I have to make some compromises.

It's not a personnal matter... the debate is whether high end systems are worth having.
I am not judging you, I'm judging low end systems.
I never said headphones were not used in studios... they're simply not recommended for mixing.

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak   I disagree. Mixes sounding perfect on high end monitors can be catastrophic on low end systems ... you always have to check. That's why you'll even find cheap "boom boxes" at mastering studios.

You always have to check, I agree.

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak   "all the detail"? I don't think so. "some detail"? Of course. And if you had an even better system than the one you have now, maybe you'd hear even more details. Would that render your current system worthless? I like my current system. I know that there are better ones, but if you tell me that I'm not allowed to like my system then that's offensive.

Some detail if you will (depending on what's detail and what's not...).
I am not saying you need to have the studio's monitoring system or else your system is worthless. I am simply saying that for a small amount of money, you can get quality that is quite close to professional systems. After that, you would need to spend a lot to gain little...
And I'm not telling you what to do here, I'm just giving my opinion...

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak   With all due respect: You never listened to my Logitech speakers. I know that people judge them based on the price tag, and on the fact that they've never heard of Logitech in relation to high audio quality. What I'm saying is that they simply sound great, even compared to a standard low-cost hi-fi system (like my Harman Kardon system with Elac speakers). Is that so hard to understand for you? It's not an attack on the much more pricey system that you may be using ... I'm not saying that my cheap system sounds as good.

...with all due respect, I have! (at least a 2.1 Logitech in the same price range). And I've known Logitech for some time now, even if I never bought one. These are very popular speakers.
I understand that you are satisfied  with your system, and I'm not arguing that! I'm not trying to convince you to throw them away.
My system is 2 x Mackie MR5. These cost 290Euros (the pair at thomann). I find that to be quite cheap for the quality it yields, just like you find your system great for its price range.

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak   BTW: One indication that my system is good is that I hear the differences that you describe, between good recordings and bad recordings. Hacride and Oceansize sound really impressive on the Logitech system compared to small headphones for example, while the difference is less pronounced for many other recordings. Make of that what you will ...

I never said your system was bad.
I said that I was astonished when I listened to Oceansize/Hacride on good monitors, compared to what I had on my previous 2.1 (which I highly recommend by the way: Wharfedale Pro 2.1).

Sorry if I sounded offensive, that is not my purpose at all...
Good day!