I think hifi, true hifi is for instruments and pa/dj gear is for music

danworth81

danworth81

english through n through
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
After getting better amps speakers cables racks and isolation blah blah blah! and having a system that costs about £16,000 I have today set up a set of active KRK's and I just love them, they are on a £100 gemini mixer through my dac and connected with silver high breed cables, they are so musical and they have only been running for a couple hours.

I just think that the more u spend on hifi the worse it sounds for ordinary music, its more instrument orientated.
If u go to a club or a live gig its all pa gear, so why do we try to recreate it in a hifi format?

I know guys who run some major hifi companies in the uk and a good handful of them run PA/DJ gear for music and they have there hifi for classical and jazz well most of them like Jazz fusion!

I am now considering getting rid of my entire system and realise I wont get much for it but I just feel like vowing out!!
 
danworth81 said:
After getting better amps speakers cables racks and isolation blah blah blah! and having a system that costs about £16,000 I have today set up a set of active KRK's and I just love them, they are on a £100 gemini mixer through my dac and connected with silver high breed cables, they are so musical and they have only been running for a couple hours.

I just think that the more u spend on hifi the worse it sounds for ordinary music, its more instrument orientated.
If u go to a club or a live gig its all pa gear, so why do we try to recreate it in a hifi format?

I know guys who run some major hifi companies in the uk and a good handful of them run PA/DJ gear for music and they have there hifi for classical and jazz well most of them like Jazz fusion!

I am now considering getting rid of my entire system and realise I wont get much for it but I just feel like vowing out!!
Click to expand...

I think young Dan as bumped his head:D:D:D
 
It can be quite scary when this happens!
But don't give up and assume that pro audio is automatically better.

Reminds me of time back in the 90s when I had a Cyrus fetish.
I just loved those neat little cast boxes, so beautifully made and each one of perfectly sound design. Trouble is, what with the modular approach to the Cyrus system my 3 boxes of pre/power/CD soon ballooned into about 18 boxes!
I had four monoblocks, then four external PSUs for each of them, then the pre amp had a nice external PSU, then the CD player got an external dac, then of course both the CD transport and dac could take a PSU.....

Then one day, about 5 years after getting onto this treadmill I went right back to those original three boxes and it sounded just the same!
Probably wouldn't play quite as loud if needed but otherwise it sounded great.

So its very easy to get carried away with 'upgrading' and actually find that you've gone precisely nowhere, other than perhaps further into debt.

I do think that really good, revealing systems of domestic or pro origins should play all music well. Some systems are quite clearly skewed to enhance certain types of music, and the best example is the classic Linn/Naim 80s flat earth system that made Steely Dan, Dire Straits, Joan Armatrading, Ben Sidran and anything branded 'jazz fusion' sound stunning, but reduce anything else to a squawking, shrieking mess.
Strangely, as an ex 80s flat earth audio terrorist I have lots of those albums :)

Good systems should be music agnostic and moreover they shouldn't make less than audiophile cuts sound poor. Most music recordings are decidedly average and a system that cannot extract enough to give the listener pleasure from such recordings is not fit for purpose.
 
Interesting...my Linn/naim systems were chosen for their ability to play everything but pop and rock with the bulk being classical, traditional jazz and folk. Regardless, I never had a problem with squawking or shrieking other than some hardness on a few piano recordings but which disappeared after resolving setup issues and taming flutter echo.

I've found most normal recordings have enough information to grab your attention and provide enjoyment assuming the music strikes you and the system is capable of extracting the information. For me, the exception is audiophile recordings with their contrived, unnatural sound. The music is usually just as uninspiring as well.
 
RobHolt said:
Good systems should be music agnostic and moreover they shouldn't make less than audiophile cuts sound poor. Most music recordings are decidedly average and a system that cannot extract enough to give the listener pleasure from such recordings is not fit for purpose.
Click to expand...

Spot on IMHO.

It's not a question of boutique HiFi v Pro gear. It can be far to easy to get swept up chasing this, that or the other when trying to build a system and get distracted from the bigger picture. Basically, you have a room in which you want to enjoy music. You'll need a pair of 'speakers for that, so choose something that suits the room and your tastes. Get an amplifier that can drive the 'speakers/room cleanly and add sources to suit. Yes, somewhat of an over simplification; however, if you can get the basics right there will be no need to spend out on glittery baubles of questionable efficacy.

Regards,

Stuart.
 
I had always been happy with the ma's and I just feel like my system has much more potential.

The Ruarks have a very dry base and seem quite bright, I do like a lively, bit more treble than most I guess type of sound, but these just seem completely bright with hardly any base, I guess they must be a wrong choice for my gear, my amp is smooth tho and it is a little puzzling, they do sound great with classical, jazz and instrumental music but I dont listen to that well apart from some acoustic mixes.

The KRK's on the other hand are just dealing with everything I throw at them with ease and control and their phasing is exceptional.

The Ruarks compared to the ma's do open the sound right up, its kinda like pressing a loudness button minus the base but the soundstage doesnt seem as seperated but is larger and far taller, maybe a vulgar looking deq could adjust, tame and bring out some more base from them? Also provide a basis for some room enhancement for now and the future?

I am sat here looking into actives for the main system in a big way tho and it seems like they are all not completely ugly.
 
danworth81 said:
After getting better amps speakers cables racks and isolation blah blah blah! and having a system that costs about £16,000 I have today set up a set of active KRK's and I just love them, they are on a £100 gemini mixer through my dac and connected with silver high breed cables, they are so musical and they have only been running for a couple hours.

I just think that the more u spend on hifi the worse it sounds for ordinary music, its more instrument orientated.
If u go to a club or a live gig its all pa gear, so why do we try to recreate it in a hifi format?

I know guys who run some major hifi companies in the uk and a good handful of them run PA/DJ gear for music and they have there hifi for classical and jazz well most of them like Jazz fusion!

I am now considering getting rid of my entire system and realise I wont get much for it but I just feel like vowing out!!
Click to expand...

This is almost as nonsensical as the spouting from hi-fi magazines, I'm afraid.

An audio system is designed to replay music. It doesn't have a built-in filter for classical or jazz or anything else. It plays music. There's a perception that hi-fi is only good for plinky-plonky jazz because that's all they play at hi-fi shows. There's also a perception that hi-fi is only good for classical music because the magazines that pander to hi-fi buffs tend to play the music that hi-fi buffs get all prissy about.

High-end audio - especially a lot of American high-end audio - calls on an audience rich enough to spank down thousands on cables and tables. That divides neatly into those who buy status symbols or those who reward themselves for a lifetime's professional career. The former will show off their status symbols with high status music (because they are not music lovers), the latter will have very fixed musical tastes, cemented in place when they were in their 20s... 40 or 50 years ago. So, plinky-plonky jazz reigns supreme to that audience.

Invariably, I've encountered systems that are supposed to be the domain of the 'pipe and slippers' brigade that are used to play loud rock, pieces of equipment you only hear demonstrated using light 1950s jazz playing house music brilliantly and polite electrostatics kicking out electronica.

There are limitations imposed upon domestic audio because of the word 'domestic'. Deep, controlled bass is difficult to recreate in domestic sized rooms and PA-like high sound pressure levels are usually not required. Replacing well-designed hi-fi with similarly priced PA equipment wouldn't necessarily give you deep controlled bass, either. It would create high SPLs, but in domestic environments, this would be unmanageable.

As to the 'guys who run some major hifi companies' who run PA and DJ gear... care to name them? I know a lot of the people who run major hifi companies too and none of them use a PA system for their music. Irrespective of the music they play for kicks.
 
it's funny that true to say that hi-fi has gone in circles from era to era,since the20's and 30's , in the loudspear division it isinteresting to note the emphasis on ( moving coil) loudspeakers for, at the time, moving iron spkrs were moreusually used, the moral is that some of the vintage audio did cocentrate on very odd types of music but 99% made them all sound pleasent and musical, most and i quote most of all audio now a days are based on old technology, even designs like quaoter wave bsed designs on spkrs, like all audio now days are on a personal preference reviews matter not for we all hear things differently, as for the retailer's job must surely, be served as a guidance to gear the client to the point when they have reach a fulcrom point that they feel that they want that audio sound to live with in their home, regardless of brand,
nando.
 
All I want my hifi to do is sound good I dont care about price, status, brand or anything, but I have made the decision that it is all going and I am going active, a mate has an account with Focal so I am gunna give the solo 6 be's a go with a Benchmark HDR, and use my sonos and mac as sources, I hope this is job done?!?

Fnuckle I'm not gunna start rattling off names, as they do not use forums and I am not having people inflick contraversial opinions on them due to their their choices for music reproduction as clearly my thoughts on it are debateable here!
I am also referring to high pressure full on PA systems being played at high levels not just mediocre run of the mill gear that is used for background music :)

I also like the idea of less, plugs, cables, boxes and more space!
If anyone wants some Deltec cables or an Anatek pre and monoblock setup, it will be in the classifieds today! Ruarks and MA's too!

Thanks guys :)
 
Fully agree with Fnuckle above. I've never found one of these mythical systems that can only play one type of music any more limiting than any other rig -a hifi either does the job or it doesn't. If it's a bit bandwidth limited or not the last word in absolute volume levels -no problem - so long as it conveys the message and excitement of the performance.
 
I just think that trying to find and match components and a system for all music types is bloody hard work and I am not a hifi enthusiast in the terms of a lot of u guys like to swap and try loads of different gear, its a real hobby for u and thats fine dont get me wrong!

All Im interested in is music and as I listen to alot of run of the mill stuff I feel that the studio/dj approach is gunna be better for me, I do not want to chop and change things apart from the track Im playing and the amount Im spending.

Apart from the dac and actives the only other thing i'll be getting really is a sonic maximiser or a KRK Ergo for room acoustics and phasing

My gear is listed in the classifieds already!
 
blackdog said:
Fully agree with Fnuckle above. I've never found one of these mythical systems that can only play one type of music any more limiting than any other rig -a hifi either does the job or it doesn't. If it's a bit bandwidth limited or not the last word in absolute volume levels -no problem - so long as it conveys the message and excitement of the performance.
Click to expand...

Speakers are key.
In your Linn/Naim days did the system also use their speakers?

I'll give you an example.
A classic LP12/NAP/Kan system had no real bass and quite gross tonal issues which made the music I've described above sound fast, pacey, alive and snappy - albeit quite different to a live experience.
But by the same token full orchestral sounded hopelessly small and thin, while the beautiful vocals of Ella, Julie London or say Dinah Washington sounded utterly wrong - like singing through a drainpipe. And if you were a reggae/dub fan......
IBLs did much the same and Saras were little better.
Briks and SBLs at least made most music sound reasonable.

Then we had those huge American panel speakers that did massive scale and macro dynamics but made simpler stuff sound wrong. Singers with 5ft wide mouths and violins as large in image as Cellos.
A mig amorphous wall of sound that would destroy the delicacy and intimacy of small scale works.

Hi-FI should surely be about faithful reproduction. Using that measure those systems failed most of the time.
I think some people confuse good h-fi with impressiveness - they aren't the same thing.
 
Rob I cant say u took the words right out of my mouth because u convey so much better than I ever could, I fully agree.
 
RobHolt said:
Speakers are key.
In your Linn/Naim days did the system also use their speakers?

I'll give you an example.
A classic LP12/NAP/Kan system had no real bass and quite gross tonal issues which made the music I've described above sound fast, pacey, alive and snappy - albeit quite different to a live experience.
But by the same token full orchestral sounded hopelessly small and thin, while the beautiful vocals of Ella, Julie London or say Dinah Washington sounded utterly wrong - like singing through a drainpipe. And if you were a reggae/dub fan......
IBLs did much the same and Saras were little better.
Briks and SBLs at least made most music sound reasonable.

Then we had those huge American panel speakers that did massive scale and macro dynamics but made simpler stuff sound wrong. Singers with 5ft wide mouths and violins as large in image as Cellos.
A mig amorphous wall of sound that would destroy the delicacy and intimacy of small scale works.

Hi-FI should surely be about faithful reproduction. Using that measure those systems failed most of the time.
I think some people confuse good h-fi with impressiveness - they aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

Sorry Rob but I never had issues with speakers sounding as you've described other than solo images stretched a bit wide (worse w/large panels like maggies and acoustats as you mentioned.) Fixing instrument size would likely require the diaphragm to move in segments of comparative size...another thread perhaps?

Other than a bit of nasality with first generation Saras, I can honestly say most any speaker works for me. Most offensive tonality issues can be traced to setup or room issues with my experience. TBH, the rest of the chain is where I have problems.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
blackdog said:
Most offensive tonality issues can be traced to setup or room issues with my experience. TBH, the rest of the chain is where I have problems.
Click to expand...

So ur saying the speakers are never at fault? So if I have a bad music reproduction its down to the room and the rest of the chain? So why did my MA's outshine Ruarks at twice the price? I know price isnt everything but my entire system remained identical, just a speaker change or is the speaker like a woman and theyre never wrong?:confused:
 
blackdog said:
Sorry Rob but I never had issues with speakers sounding as you've described other than solo images stretched a bit wide (worse w/large panels like maggies and acoustats as you mentioned.) Fixing instrument size would likely require the diaphragm to move in segments of comparative size...another thread perhaps?

Other than a bit of nasality with first generation Saras, I can honestly say most any speaker works for me. Most offensive tonality issues can be traced to setup or room issues with my experience. TBH, the rest of the chain is where I have problems.
Click to expand...

Those speakers had gross balance issues as even the most basic of measurements would reveal. I can understand that some doubt the correlation between measured and heard but this stuff was gross and I think you'd have to be in complete denial not to be hearing it.

Gross balance issues by design work both ways.
They can accentuate certain aspects of a musical performance while ruining others.

Looking at the FR of a Mk1 Kan or Sara is painful - just looking at it is painful never mind listening!
They got better when they employed someone with the skill to design a decent crossover.
 
i always found that loudspeakers last the longest amongst in the home, one can always chop and chage sources, amps, etc, but the spkrs are your monitors as to the end of sound, after all they are the transducers to your ears, most persons would prefer their personal sound via their own preferable spkrs to try electronics, the thing about upgrading " i think " is like presents, openining the box and be like a kid again, i must say i am like that, regret at times having doing so but it is my nature, can't help it,
nando.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top