MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
ourmaninthenorth - MemberWoppit - you're going to have to get a sense of humour over this, or you'll end up like all the other sheep naimees....
Ha. Ha.
The last phone call I ever made to a hifi dealer (probably the best respected Naim dealer in the East Midlands). I swear on the life of my kids this is how it went....
Me: Do you stock Lavry DAC’s?
Them: No, we used to, but we didn’t make enough margin on them to justify the hassle of importing them
Me: OK, Thanks. Were they any good?
Them: Yes, a couple of they guys who work here replaced their Naim CD5(??) with them. They thought they were great.
Me: Isn’t the Naim CD(???) expensive.
Them: Yes, they are 10 grand.
Me: OK thanks. Goodbye
Why the dealer chose to be so candid, I’ll never know. I’d spent a lot of money there, and he’s admitted that something that costs 10k can be replaced with something sounds better and costs a grand. (Even more, as you don’t need a preamp + PSU + PSU, so that’s more gear that got sold).
I went ahead and bought the DAC, and you know what, it wiped the floor with my high end British CD player. About that time, I bought a pair of decent Active monitors. Job done. Never thought about upgrading since.
I know a lot of people who rate Naim gear, but I don’t know anyone who rates it who has listened with an open mind at the alternatives. The almost total lack of penetration into studios by hifi manufacturers speaks volumes.
The almost total lack of penetration into studios by hifi manufacturers speaks volumes.
About what?
As an active member of the Naim community during the Larvy days, no one was replacing a top of the line Naim CD player with a Larvy DAC, lower end models yes CD5's etc.
The almost total lack of penetration into studios by hifi manufacturers speaks volumes.
And studio equipment is very different to home equipment for many reason, your comment is toss. Its like riding an XC bike on a DH race, both bikes to a non cycling enthusiastic but to us very different tools.
About what?
..the fact that the audio performance is not very good for the money? It's a lifestyle product sold to impressionable men.
There is no difference between studio and home in terms of what is being asked. Quality is quality.
The almost total lack of penetration into studios by hifi manufacturers speaks volumes.
plenty of 'audio' manufacturers have a toe in both camps. PMC, ATC, bryston, Harbeth, Nagra, Benchmark, Dynaudio, focal amongst others
And studio equipment is very different to home equipment for many reason, your comment is toss. Its like riding an XC bike on a DH race, both bikes to a non cycling enthusiastic but to us very different tools.
This.
Thought you meant the excellent Gary Fisher bike of the same name, which is now of course no more, given that Trek have swallowed GF products whole. So if anbody does have an ancient or not so ancient Hi-Fi, don't replace it, ride it. It's a wonderful ride and will soon be a collectors' item!
To be fair, my dad is a huge music fan and has never thought too much about top end hifi. He had lots of Rega kit before. I played him some stuff through my system recently and he realised there is a whole other world of proper hifi that does in fact get you closer to the music, he went out, listened to everything he could find and now has 3 Naim Olive systems because he said they were the best stuff he heard. No buyer preference or brand loyalty, just a good set of ears that knows his music inside out.
Naim is good kit.
I feel duty bound to confess that the treble dial on my 3020i is turned to the left slightly as the wooden floors since moving meant everything sounded a bit bright.
I also have the spikes of my floorstanders sat on 2p pieces so they don't mark the floor. They sound better tails up.
treble dial
🙄
😉
I also have the spikes of my floorstanders sat on 2p pieces so they don't mark the floor. They sound better tails up.
I find them better end on...
Hi-fi threads - always a larf
Torminalis, I counteracted the muddying of the soundstage this caused by painting the edges of my cds green (i also painted the edge of my ipod green, but the effect wasn't as pronounced) and I sat on some half squash balls to isolate me from the sofa.
Turnerguy, I tried end on and found it lifted the tweeters fractionally too high. I will admit that 'tails up' is a bit of a compromise though...
stumpy01 you have a gloss finnish on your floor? i had the same problem,a friend suggested wire wool, but i find it makes my ears itchy.
blutac works better than spikes on a hard floor imho
... What about directional cables? Personally I find my elections zapping backwards and forwards at up to 20000 times a second work best when the little arrows point towards the amp...
Had a quick scan of this thread and can't help but think its gone a bit off topic and really solved the OP's problem.
Buy a copy of What Hi-Fi - its not the best mag by far but it does have a handy database at the back with lots of components, costs and ratings. This should bring you roughly up to speed with whats good / bad and how much things cost today.
Then pop down to your nearest Richer Sounds store and see what deals they have going. I guess it vary from store to store but when I last popped into my local store (years ago now) the prices were very competitive and the help and advice was very good with no pushy sales and a full demo in a proper room.
With around £1000 to spend on a whole system you are going to be looking at a fairly low end / budget solution but it should still produce a good enough sound.
The most important thing is to have a demo and listen. A certain amp might have amazing reviews and cost more than you want to spend. But if you don't like the sound or can't justify paying extra for a slight increase in quality then there is no point in buying it.
I used hate my dads setup but it was his system and he liked it the way it was. Even after he listened to my more expensive and "better" system. Use the reviews as a rough guide but trust your ears.
hope that helps.
Don't forget to [url= http://www.pwbelectronics.co.uk/ ]'Belt Up'.[/url]
This chap was taken very seriously by the Hi Fi press.
Putting little foil triangles on your cd's and a piece of paper under one of your chair legs is just the first step to better sound.
No, of course you can't measure the effects, silly.
Can't just be me who remembers him being taken very seriously seriously by Jimmy Hughes etc.
Further article from [url= http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-112 ]'Stereophile'.[/url]
...just remember where Hi Fi magazines get their money from i.e. advertising.
Have a look in them for sure ...
..but then go and listen to a set of AVI ADM's ... Internal DAC , 4 amps individually designed for each driver and all the other myriad advantages of an active set up 😀
Not quite on the same level as the Quad NAD or Naim audio but for something completely different and simple to use try the Vita R4i
http://www.ruarkaudio.com/
Amazing sound, no messy cables ipod dock, cd player, usb input and dab radio.
So impressed with mine I got the R2i and R1, you could even link them wirelessly together (with the right bit of kit) for the same sound right through the house and buy an ipod for less than £1k.
Just an idea 🙂
I find the reviews comments in HiFi World to be more reliable.
I remember when Audiolab was the darling of What HiFi when I was buying my first system, and I found their stuff very disappointing and ended up buying Quad amps.
For £1000 the OP will be able to put together a system that sounds very good with judicious use of the 2nd hand market.
The AVI active speakers might be a good idea but possibly a stretch of the budget.
AudioGold have an AVI pre/power amp for £600 for example, and AudioGold seem to price a little on the high side:
http://audiogold.co.uk/products-page/hi-fi-power-amplifiers/avi-s2000mp-pre-amp/
Hmmmm...
So studio equipment is perfect due to required application, OK so all studio kit must sound the same then...? Surely must be the case as sound engineers need 'perfect reproduction' to master our music.
No I here you say.... Ahhh, a bit like bikes then. No such thing as perfect just millions of people with their own opinion about what's good. Wine, food, houses all the same. You can't quantify perfect so everyone has a go.
Definitely go active though. Always seems to me to be a more cost effective route to better sound.
The problem with Hi-Fi mags is that they are very much biased towards NEW=better.
How many revisions of Mission speakers have there been since the 90s. All award-winning and better than the last. But I'm pretty sure if you put their latest up against a pair of Rega Kytes, or something else that was just done 'right' from the 90s (or earlier) they would still be given a kicking.
It's basically a minefield. I would find someone you trust, take their advice and settle back and enjoy. I basically became happy with my Hi-Fi as soon as I found Larry and Ed at http://theaudioworks.co.uk/ before that I'd been buying the latest and greatest (and discounted) from Marantz/Pioneer/NAD/Mission/QED/etc without ever really settling.
I think Alex has nailed it.
Go down to your local independent and listen to a few systems and buy the one YOU like. Don't get dragged into other peoples opinions or items on sale or feel like a bargain.
Get one that is nice on your ears.
But do consider seriously if you REALLY want to keep a cd player.
Buy a copy of What Hi-Fi
What Hi-Fi's online review of a USB cable [url] http://www.whathifi.com/review/silver-line-usb ][/url] :
[i]"Its performance is energetic and lively. It’s rhythmic, and does a good job of handling timing. Overall, it’s an entertaining listen. So far so good.
Unfortunately, the detail and texture isn’t all there. The Silver-line robs instruments of their characteristic textures, resulting in a less faithful reproduction.
And it’s not particularly subtle, making it difficult to differentiate between the different levels of sound."[/i]
That's a [b]USB cable[/b] 😯
I would have great difficulty taking anything they say seriously about...well...anything, really.
...glitchy bump...
That's a USB cable
What's your point? They used a cable and wrote about how the system sounded with it in place (presumably as opposed to some other cable, which made a difference). Duh.
What's your point? They used a cable and wrote about how the system sounded with it in place (presumably as opposed to some other cable, which made a difference). Duh.
You kill me Woppit, you really do. A triumph of marketing over actual tech. Have you ever heard of a bit parity algorithm?
You kill me Woppit, you really do. A triumph of marketing over actual tech. Have you ever heard of a bit parity algorithm?
there are problems with USB and DACs apparently, which is why async USB seems to be the current flavour.
This must be why people hear differences with different USB cables - not that the cable is better or not, just that the system is working better with it. If you can hear differences with different USB cables that their is a fault in the system.
HiFi World seems to have meaningful reviews of old equipment, ones that I am familiar with seem to be correct.
You need a dealer that will let you trial the gear in your own home as well - differences in rooms and furniture (and background noise) mean that a system that the best at the dealers might not sound the best at home.
Torminalis - Member
What's your point? They used a cable and wrote about how the system sounded with it in place (presumably as opposed to some other cable, which made a difference). Duh.
You kill me Woppit, you really do. A triumph of marketing over actual tech. Have you ever heard of a bit parity algorithm?
No. What is it?
By my understanding (and I welcome the chance to learn more if anyone knows better) USB is a standard, a combined software/hardware standard that ensures conformity, you know, standardisation. There is no improvement to be had above and beyond the standard by employing better hardware because it is inherently limited by the software element.
If you use a cable that is below the standard then it is not USB. It is a bit of wire with USB connectors. Same with HDMI.
Asynch dacs use another protocol that sits on top of USB to ensure a consistent and predictable flow of data but the quality of the wire will make no difference at all, unless it is sub standard, in which case, as I said it ain't USB.
Oh and there are "audiophile" rj45 cables too which is even more hilarious given Ethernet error correction etc..
What's your point?
Here's another one [url] http://www.whathifi.com/review/furutech-formula-2 ][/url]
[i]"In our tests we found this well-built cable – connected to an Audiolab M-DAC – enabled our digital music system to deliver extra bass, insight and depth than more basic designs."[/i]
USB is a way of getting digital data (a stream of 1s and 0s) from one place to another. As Torminalis says it either works or it doesn't. If it doesn't then (like Turnerguy says) there's a fault in the system.
In your music system the 1s and 0s represent the audio data (in some sort of encoding). Imagining that a USB cable can modify those 1s and 0s in a way which subtly and consistently changes the tonal balance or rhythmic attack of the music encoded in them is so far off the mark that... well, I don't really know where to start.
When you connect your digital camera to your laptop, do your digital photos gain extra vibrancy, colour separation and sense of perspective, depending on which brand of USB cable you use to copy them over?
No, mine neither.
loved that USB cable review!
air as the transmition medium probably has more of an influence on the sound you perceive than any cable,
hmmm.. the quantity of cable and connectors (wordclock cables from Altai and regular phono leads used instead of a coax lead) and generic (but quite nice) VCAs etc that your average signal goes through (even in top dollar studios) etc etc, before going anywhere near a 2 track master ... sure lets talk about 1m of cable changing the subtle timbre of a recording!
kit does sound different, no dispute, but really...so much hype, back to the music please.
*goes to clean air purifier filter and adjust humidiy levels in the listening room*
I think becoming an audiophile/namist stops you enjoying music. This threads funny.
Have you ever heard of a bit parity algorithm?
Well, if there's error detection and correction taking place, isn't it possible that a particular USB cable will drop fewer bits than another, even when both are compliant with the USB standard?
Maybe a DAC which is having to correct fewer errors will output a different analogue signal to that from a DAC which is correcting more. Conversion is happening in real time, and correcting errors is an overhead.
Agreed - people have the right to have any hobby they like , no matter how geeky. But for me if I started worrying about this stuff it would kill music for me
I haven't read the actual review, but I think it's safe to assume that the "USB" cable mentioned was being compared against another "type" of "USB" cable, otherwise, how would the reviewer be able to comment on it's individual performance in relation to the system of which it was part?
If that is the case, then possibly the other cable, or cables, were of the "non-'USB'" type that Torminalis mentioned. That being the case, I still don't see why it's risible that the reviewer could hear differences in music reproduction, something with which Torminalis presumably agrees, given his comment:
If you use a cable that is below the standard then it is not USB. It is a bit of wire with USB connectors.
The debate about cable affecting sound has been done to death elsewhere many times, of course...
Cable stuff really is snake oil in DB tests the most golden eared [u]always[/u] fail to recognise the uber cables. Even for a million dollars of James Randi's money. Digital cables even more so.
However no-one trumps this shyster.
... and is being revived to be done to death again, it seems...
it's safe to assume that the "USB" cable mentioned was being compared against another "type" of "USB" cable
No it isn't. USB is a standard. there are iterations of it to increase the data throughput but USB 2.0 is perfectly capable of transmitting far larger amounts of data than any current conventional codec would require.
Bear in mind that USB transmission speed are measured in MB/s (about 35 MB/s for 2.0). A flac conversion of a CD rarely exceeds 1200kb/s. Quick back of a fag packet calculations make me think that you have about 30x redundancy in USB 2.0. You could effectively stream 30 separate CD's across a USB cable before it started bottle necking and affecting the sound quality.
They are comparing like with like and are making a complete hash of it. They sound like ******* idiots to anyone who has even a minimal knowledge of data transmission protocols.
I was particularly fond of this comment from the user comments section:
The missing detail is also a concern, is it possible that the data missing [i]was absorbed by the metal artifacts[/i] in the internal construction of the cable?
Oh my sides, it is too good.
I'm going to bite 🙂 I'm not for one minute saying that What Hi-Fi are good at reviewing, or that they really heard those differences, or that a posh USB cable is a good investment. I agree that it was probably total rubbish but...
Even though bits are bits, error checking, etc, etc... DACs are incredibly sensitive devices. Any interference from a nearby cable, computer, etc is probably going to have some effect. You've basically plugged in an aerial to the device.
I think that the manufacturers of 'audiophile' DAC cables aren't going to suggest that it communicates better data*, etc. Just that it's going to do less harm in terms of EM and RF interference.
[b]Of course, there are a lot bigger problems to eliminate first, for just about everybody, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make.
[/b]
* of course, some probably do and they should be laughed at.
Haha those what hifi reviews read like the bike radar C456 reviews........... What is this piece of shite I'm riding...
I'm a bit confused - was there only one cable being used? If the reviewer heard a degradation in performance using the cable, what was he comparing it to?
Torminalis 1:
If you use a cable that is below the standard then it is not USB. It is a bit of wire with USB connectors.
Torminalis 2:
No it isn't. USB is a standard.
So - [i]can[/i] you get USB and "USB" cabling, or not?
PS: The review isn't available, but as the product is called "Silver Line USB", I guess it's one of Torminalis's "It is a bit of wire with USB connectors.", yes?
Bump. You there, T?
Dunno why that review isn't loading directly from the URL but it's still there if you browse from the home page.
Home > Reviews > Audio Interconnects (digital).
Fourth one down.
You could stick a USB connector on either end of a gibbon but it would not be a USB cable was my point. I would be very surprised if anyone manufactures things that have USB connectors that are not USB standards compliant.
As for RF interference and shielding, this is where I start to get hazy because I am a programmer and not a physicist or an electronic engineer. I believe that the majority of RF interference would come from the power supply and most DACs have a separate (usually external) power supply with varying degrees of shielding. The bus at the DAC end will only pick up interference if there is a design problem I thought? It should be sufficiently isolated that interference would not make it as far as the actual DAC components. If anyone here can give a definitive answer I would be very interested to hear but for now, I am still happy to say that a USB cable is possibly the least consequential component in any system assuming it meets the requirements of the standard.
Not hugely detailed, is it.
It seems that there are various types of "USB" cable available, then...
I would guess that the cable was being used in comparison with their favoured model (although they don't say what it is).
Doing so, they obviously think that the review type offered a degradation of sound, in a AB comparison.
So - I don't see ([i]apart[/i] from the claim that you can't hear differences between cables) why this is risible?
Even Torminalis seems to agree that there is a difference between "proper" USB and "a bit of wire with USB connectors".
You could stick a USB connector on either end of a gibbon but it would not be a USB cable was my point.
And a comparison between your "proper" USB cable and a double-ended gibbon would show up as a difference in audio performance, was mine.
eh Woppit - what's your argument? He's agreeing with you. But that isn't what What Hi-Fi are saying, they're saying that they can tell the difference between every USB cable they've tested!
At least this one tells us what DAC they're using and which cable they're comparing it to.
http://www.whathifi.com/review/wireworld-ultraviolet-5-usb
Well, I guess if you fancy trying it, most hi-fi shops will lend you one to try for yourself in your system.
USB is a standard. A cable will either meet it or it will not. If it doesn't meet it then it will not be manufactured. The double ended gibbon is a construct of this debate and does not actually exist in the real world.
Even if your hardware exceeds the minimum resistance/capacitance/impedance the transmission software that governs encoding and decoding of the data will not allow you to exceed the performance. The only way you are going to significantly degrade the quality of a USB connection is to run cables that are too long.
I am pretty confident that there is no one in the world that would be able to tell the difference between a £2 cable and a £2000 cable, assuming they both met the USB standard.
Then I must have misunderstood:
You kill me Woppit, you really do. A triumph of marketing over actual tech. Have you ever heard of a bit parity algorithm?
I have heard the difference between cables, so I've no problem with the concept (please let's not start that argument all over again).
So from that POV, I see no problem in that aspect of the review.
It's the lack of information about the test itself that I find poor. Just a sort of "take it or leave it that's all your getting". But at least it wasn't a page and a half of gibberish from Alvin Gold... 😉
[url] http://www.usb.org/developers/compliance/ [/url] if you're interested Woppit.
So - I don't see (apart from the claim that you can't hear differences between cables) why this is risible?
Because USB cables carry bits (encoded as voltage transitions) and the relationship between those bits and the actual audio waveform that they represent is very indirect. If the cable connection is rubbish enough to cause bit errors then it's going to have very different and much more obvious effects on the output sound than the subtle tonal and rhythmic ones they're claiming.
The only vaguely plausible idea that's been offered is Alex's - analog signals off the cable (either the actual intended USB signal, or RF interference, power supply noise etc picked up uinintentionally) leaking into parts of the DAC circuitry where it's not supposed to go. Parasitics in analog and mixed signal systems can have insidious effects. But that's an issue in the DAC design and its what you pay hardware engineers to get right - after all the USB signal itself is far stronger than anything that's going to piggyback along on it.
USB is a standard. A cable will either meet it or it will not.
Oh, I think I see what you're saying. All the cables reviewed as "USB" are USB because they have to meet performance standards, whatever materials or construction methods are used, is that it?
Yes, that's what he's saying, see the link I posted above for the actual compliance schedules.
Not that it's a particularly difficult thing to make a USB cable that works - the tests are mostly about interoperability of the devices you're connecting.
Gotcha.
(As in - I understand, not - You're a sunk 'Argie' submarine and I write for a scuzzy rag owned by an improbable Aussie Pensioner).
Back to non USB chat... old mate of mine has some nice cheap tannoy kit in just now
Sub and some bookshelfs http://www.thehomecinemacentre.co.uk/index.php/special_offers/promotion/i.us_i700_light_oak/
I'm being very entertained by this USB 'audio quality' nonsense. I wonder if anyone has done back-to-back audio comparisons of fibre-optic connectors, and deduced that a really expensive one is better than a cheap one because the glass is from Stuben or Swarovski?
Hmmmmm, someone seems to think price makes a difference to sound quality:
http://www.bestcovery.com/best-digital-optical-audio-cable-toslink