Technics was owned by Panasonic, which is also a sister company to JVC, all of which are owned by Matsushita Electric of Japan
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Stereo Receiver Recommendations
- Thread starter james t kirk
- Start date
Isn't it all about the most accurate reproduction of the original sound, as the artist and producer intended? I am always suspicious of people that say they don't like certain equipment because the sound is too pure, they like equipment that makes the original "richer". To me, it is not the place of the stereo to add to the signal, it is its place to faithfully reproduce it. So I would buy one from the specs., the signal to noise ratio and things like that. What am I missing?
Papi Chulo said:Technics was owned by Panasonic, which is also a sister company to JVC, all of which are owned by Matsushita Electric of Japan
No, JVC is Victor Co. of Japan, not owned by them.
C Dick
I don't pay much attention to specs. In essence you are right ; all things being as they should be. Initially, I went for flattest and most accurate sound, but especially when [older] digital enters into the equation that goal isn't always easy on the ear drums/mind. If you have a near "perfect" source there's more leeway up stream. If you go solid sate it can, but not in all cases, sound hard or etched, whereas tubes are more musically rich in general and can be more faithful to "live" sound. For me, personally, in the end I want a balance of detail and refined musicality along with dynamics and all the other nuances. I'm not so concerned with bass and highs, but the whole "stage", so to speak.
When I bought my first "high end" CD player, I listened to almost every one that I could which were considered among the best at the time, but none of them were working for me ... they may have had inner/outer detail, "kick ass" tight bass, killer transients etc, but they just weren't working for me .... they lacked refinement and weren't involving ... until I heard the one, which I now have the upgraded model of ... I knew it was the right one for me ... ... fuck, this kinda sounds like a romance novel. There's nothing worse than going out with a chick who makes you wince once in a while when she laughs and although she's hot and intelligent she lacks charm, charisma, warmth and wit and you're just not content. OK, it could be worse ...
Certain things are important to me, like delineation of instruments, timbre as well as some of the forementioned .. as my stereo sounds now, it feels like I'm turning up the musicians, not the volume, if that makes sense.
You can read as many tests and perspectives as possible, and analyze, but in the end you just have to listen to the whole. It's always fun to go check out $20,000 to $ 100,00 systems, to give you an idea of what you like and what's possible. It's also possible to get most of that for far less.
It's better someone more eloquent and technically knowledgeable than myself should expound on this, if need be.
I don't pay much attention to specs. In essence you are right ; all things being as they should be. Initially, I went for flattest and most accurate sound, but especially when [older] digital enters into the equation that goal isn't always easy on the ear drums/mind. If you have a near "perfect" source there's more leeway up stream. If you go solid sate it can, but not in all cases, sound hard or etched, whereas tubes are more musically rich in general and can be more faithful to "live" sound. For me, personally, in the end I want a balance of detail and refined musicality along with dynamics and all the other nuances. I'm not so concerned with bass and highs, but the whole "stage", so to speak.
When I bought my first "high end" CD player, I listened to almost every one that I could which were considered among the best at the time, but none of them were working for me ... they may have had inner/outer detail, "kick ass" tight bass, killer transients etc, but they just weren't working for me .... they lacked refinement and weren't involving ... until I heard the one, which I now have the upgraded model of ... I knew it was the right one for me ... ... fuck, this kinda sounds like a romance novel. There's nothing worse than going out with a chick who makes you wince once in a while when she laughs and although she's hot and intelligent she lacks charm, charisma, warmth and wit and you're just not content. OK, it could be worse ...
Certain things are important to me, like delineation of instruments, timbre as well as some of the forementioned .. as my stereo sounds now, it feels like I'm turning up the musicians, not the volume, if that makes sense.
You can read as many tests and perspectives as possible, and analyze, but in the end you just have to listen to the whole. It's always fun to go check out $20,000 to $ 100,00 systems, to give you an idea of what you like and what's possible. It's also possible to get most of that for far less.
It's better someone more eloquent and technically knowledgeable than myself should expound on this, if need be.
Papi Chulo said:Technics was owned by Panasonic, which is also a sister company to JVC, all of which are owned by Matsushita Electric of Japan
Matsushita has several brands under its wing: sanyo, zenith, national, and panasonic, etc. JVC is a totally different company not related to matsushita, other than they're both japanese companies.
sanyo was catered to the low-end market, panasonic to the mid-level and technics for the higher end. but it seems technics fell victim to bland marketing and like oldsmobile (ala gm) got lost and buried by the competition. they stopped selling the technics branded hi-fi several years back and about the only technics you can find now are the turntables which are still in hi demand for the dj market.
there are tons of brands out there at different price points. if you want a relatively consumer end receiver, just stick with yamaha or sony. most of the common "japanese" stereo components are not even made in japan any more. they're made in taiwan, philippines, malaysia, china, etc. i found that some the stuff made in th 1990's back in japan are far superior in quality to some of the stuff made today.
As I get older, I find that I can't hear the nuances in the music as much as I did when I was 20. My high end is definitely much lower now. Take that into consideration when you are looking for new hardware.
Go to Bay Bloor radio, and listen to various brands.
I am partial to Yamaha and Denon. And remember, just because a company makes a great CD player, does not mean that it can make a great tape deck.
Go to Bay Bloor radio, and listen to various brands.
I am partial to Yamaha and Denon. And remember, just because a company makes a great CD player, does not mean that it can make a great tape deck.
My 2 cents worth ....
For what it's worth, I've always had good luck with a Kenwood amp.
Course, we're talking about the old fashioned 2 channel stereo systems and not the new-fangled "surround sound" 5.1 gadgets.
Thinkin' about upgrading my speakers, and I think the old rule of thumb spend half your budget on the speakers generally works. If the speakers produce crap the amp won't really help too much.
P.D.
For what it's worth, I've always had good luck with a Kenwood amp.
Course, we're talking about the old fashioned 2 channel stereo systems and not the new-fangled "surround sound" 5.1 gadgets.
Thinkin' about upgrading my speakers, and I think the old rule of thumb spend half your budget on the speakers generally works. If the speakers produce crap the amp won't really help too much.
P.D.
james t kirk said:Never the less, I would like a decent unit with great lows and high, a depth of sound so to speak.
I'm not looking to spend a king's ransom either, but open to suggestions.
Are you planning for a new set(s) of speakers as well and how old are your current ones ?
If you are not in a rush, educated yourself by reading up reviews, the mag What Hi Fi is a good start. Narrow down the few brand names and possible models you like , start hitting the stores to hear it and get more info.
I don't know what your budget is like and what type of muzak you listen to, as pool mentioned, Rotel is a pretty respected brand. A friend of mine had a very basic set up with his mid size Missions and the sound was simply warm and full for day to day CD pop and rock listening.
Pool and Garrett: thanks for the explanations. My conclusion from what you have said is that there is indeed more to a stereo than just specs., but that I would not be able to hear the difference. I am not an audiophile of any kind, 90% of my listening is in the car, and my factory sound sounds fine to me. I am going to get some higher end speakers for my PC, that will likely be all I need for a while.
C dick...buy what sounds good to YOU not the specs.
Most of us as we age cannot hear certain frequencies anyways!
You can blow thousands on audio gear but what you realy want is something that sounds good to you. Not a reviewer in a magazine.
Spec are ok to tought as well lookee here at MY new system...but if it sounds like crap who cares?
Determine the room the system will be in. How far away from the speakers will you be? What's the wall covering? All of these things make a difference.
Simply go to a store that will allow you to try the system in your enviornment and bring it back if you think it sounds different from the store. Many will do this. You'll eventually find the system that sounds good to your ears and not written specs.
Don't rule anything out. Go and have a listen with a clear mind.
Most of us as we age cannot hear certain frequencies anyways!
You can blow thousands on audio gear but what you realy want is something that sounds good to you. Not a reviewer in a magazine.
Spec are ok to tought as well lookee here at MY new system...but if it sounds like crap who cares?
Determine the room the system will be in. How far away from the speakers will you be? What's the wall covering? All of these things make a difference.
Simply go to a store that will allow you to try the system in your enviornment and bring it back if you think it sounds different from the store. Many will do this. You'll eventually find the system that sounds good to your ears and not written specs.
Don't rule anything out. Go and have a listen with a clear mind.
Cynical
Aren't most consumer audio products third party engineered and built these days anyway?
I mean the the audio companies just tenders out a spec to the third parties who pick pre-engineered modules and combine them together to get the targeted price range.
It may say Sony, Technics or Harmon Kardon on the outside, but they might be built on the same production line.
Aren't most consumer audio products third party engineered and built these days anyway?
I mean the the audio companies just tenders out a spec to the third parties who pick pre-engineered modules and combine them together to get the targeted price range.
It may say Sony, Technics or Harmon Kardon on the outside, but they might be built on the same production line.
I have deep-rooted dislike for misleading marketing, esp. when it comes to technology. Audio equipment marketing among the worst.
Before the purchase of any audio equipment or accessories, I highly recommend reading this article:
The 10 Biggest Myths in Audio:
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
It's written by sound engineers who have no vested interest in selling equipment, only in educating.
Hope it's of use to someone here.
Before the purchase of any audio equipment or accessories, I highly recommend reading this article:
The 10 Biggest Myths in Audio:
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
It's written by sound engineers who have no vested interest in selling equipment, only in educating.
Hope it's of use to someone here.
smiley1437 said:I have deep-rooted dislike for misleading marketing, esp. when it comes to technology. Audio equipment marketing among the worst.
Before the purchase of any audio equipment or accessories, I highly recommend reading this article:
The 10 Biggest Myths in Audio:
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
It's written by sound engineers who have no vested interest in selling equipment, only in educating.
Hope it's of use to someone here.
That link was very very interesting.
I especially like the "cable lie"
Completely makes sense...
I agree that it is an interesting article.
My primary disagreement has to be with "the cable lie" : )
My whole journey began because of cables. I initially purchased better cables for what was at the time an HK cd player Denon integrated & Camber speakers. As an aside, I now know that putting Camber speakers with these components wasn't the best. Once I added "better cables" - nothing too fancy - there was more detail, but in a nutshell it sounded horrible. My thinking being [right or not] that I was hearing the "faults" /limitations in my components more clearly, I did "research" into what direction I should take. I changed the source to a mission cd player, which made a huge difference. The Denon was next and replaced by separate preamp/ amp - another leap in the right direction, but not as big as replacing the source.
OK, this is where it gets interesting (at least to me). I then changed cables for better ones. Every time I added new cables the increase in performance was huge ! At this point I'd yet to replace the speakers, which, when I finally did, was another major leap. At this point I was contented for the time being - the difference between this system and my previous one was just silly - once you realize what can be done it just makes you giddy.
Anyway, years later I upgraded all the components, except the speakers, which brought me to another level entirely. But I still had the same interconnects and speaker cable. So, obviously I had to experiment with other cables, right ? I actually went though various ones before I settled ( buying used you can easily resell so there's nothing to lose ) The differences in sound ( or maybe more correctly how they transport the information) is insane. My current interconnects make the ones that I had sound muddy, although I still like the sound of the carbon interconnects. Some of the speaker cables I tried had amazing transients, delineation and solid tight bass, but were too "thin" for my liking.
There is no denying the difference cables can make. Why or how, I don't know. Some may be colored or voiced, and in a sense act like tone controls, but that's not how it sounds for many of them. There's just too much of a difference in the sound as a whole.
In retrospect, I think if I'd changed the initial cable for good budget quality cables with shielding, it would have actually helped, rather than exasperated the situation. Just bad synergy and they weren't shielded. I have ultra link (abt $40) on my DVD player for analog and have tried them in mass market systems. They make a difference.
As for the listening test lie, obviously I disagree and the best way to confirm, if in doubt, is to switch stuff around, and see if the gf / wife notices any difference without letting on. In my experience, they will comment.
The passive biwiring lie I tend to agree with - I've never heard any significant difference and sometimes it can seem worse.
The power conditioner lie, I have mixed feelings on. I've found that my amp and preamp sound better plugged straight into the wall, while my cd player sounds significantly better with some type of filtering, but my experience with PLC is minimal. I'm skeptical at this point as to whether a dedicated line will make a difference, so I'm procrastinating on that. However, I spent this year working on absorption and isolation as well as power chords, which I was skeptical of to say the least. The difference is phenomenal. The first power chord I tried I hadn't reached my seat before I did a double take. Why, I have no clue. Most are sheilded though. The best way to sum it up is, I felt like my components now sounded like how they should (not that they sounded bad before)
The CD treatment lie - some do nothing, but some work. I treat all my CDs with finyl.
The golden ear lie, I totally agree with, if I understand it right. It's more abt knowing what to listen for and awareness.
In the end, if you're happy with the sound you have, all the power to you ( conditioned or not), but I feel it's a shame that some people are missing out. I'm not trying to sell anyone anything either - just trying to share something I think could enrich your life : )
My primary disagreement has to be with "the cable lie" : )
My whole journey began because of cables. I initially purchased better cables for what was at the time an HK cd player Denon integrated & Camber speakers. As an aside, I now know that putting Camber speakers with these components wasn't the best. Once I added "better cables" - nothing too fancy - there was more detail, but in a nutshell it sounded horrible. My thinking being [right or not] that I was hearing the "faults" /limitations in my components more clearly, I did "research" into what direction I should take. I changed the source to a mission cd player, which made a huge difference. The Denon was next and replaced by separate preamp/ amp - another leap in the right direction, but not as big as replacing the source.
OK, this is where it gets interesting (at least to me). I then changed cables for better ones. Every time I added new cables the increase in performance was huge ! At this point I'd yet to replace the speakers, which, when I finally did, was another major leap. At this point I was contented for the time being - the difference between this system and my previous one was just silly - once you realize what can be done it just makes you giddy.
Anyway, years later I upgraded all the components, except the speakers, which brought me to another level entirely. But I still had the same interconnects and speaker cable. So, obviously I had to experiment with other cables, right ? I actually went though various ones before I settled ( buying used you can easily resell so there's nothing to lose ) The differences in sound ( or maybe more correctly how they transport the information) is insane. My current interconnects make the ones that I had sound muddy, although I still like the sound of the carbon interconnects. Some of the speaker cables I tried had amazing transients, delineation and solid tight bass, but were too "thin" for my liking.
There is no denying the difference cables can make. Why or how, I don't know. Some may be colored or voiced, and in a sense act like tone controls, but that's not how it sounds for many of them. There's just too much of a difference in the sound as a whole.
In retrospect, I think if I'd changed the initial cable for good budget quality cables with shielding, it would have actually helped, rather than exasperated the situation. Just bad synergy and they weren't shielded. I have ultra link (abt $40) on my DVD player for analog and have tried them in mass market systems. They make a difference.
As for the listening test lie, obviously I disagree and the best way to confirm, if in doubt, is to switch stuff around, and see if the gf / wife notices any difference without letting on. In my experience, they will comment.
The passive biwiring lie I tend to agree with - I've never heard any significant difference and sometimes it can seem worse.
The power conditioner lie, I have mixed feelings on. I've found that my amp and preamp sound better plugged straight into the wall, while my cd player sounds significantly better with some type of filtering, but my experience with PLC is minimal. I'm skeptical at this point as to whether a dedicated line will make a difference, so I'm procrastinating on that. However, I spent this year working on absorption and isolation as well as power chords, which I was skeptical of to say the least. The difference is phenomenal. The first power chord I tried I hadn't reached my seat before I did a double take. Why, I have no clue. Most are sheilded though. The best way to sum it up is, I felt like my components now sounded like how they should (not that they sounded bad before)
The CD treatment lie - some do nothing, but some work. I treat all my CDs with finyl.
The golden ear lie, I totally agree with, if I understand it right. It's more abt knowing what to listen for and awareness.
In the end, if you're happy with the sound you have, all the power to you ( conditioned or not), but I feel it's a shame that some people are missing out. I'm not trying to sell anyone anything either - just trying to share something I think could enrich your life : )
pool said:I agree that it ...
*edited by moderator to reduce scrolling : )*
I agree.
PS Is your MSN working?
smiley1437 said:I have deep-rooted dislike for misleading marketing, esp. when it comes to technology. Audio equipment marketing among the worst.
Before the purchase of any audio equipment or accessories, I highly recommend reading this article:
The 10 Biggest Myths in Audio:
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf
It's written by sound engineers who have no vested interest in selling equipment, only in educating.
I do not think Aczel is a sound engineer (could be wrong). I believe he is just another audio critic. He also had some ethics issues in his review magazine (The Audio Critic). Aczel has an axe to grind like everyone else. Also, most of his assertions are either wrong or overstated. For example, he does state that cable construction techniques do matter. Well, guess what teflon is not cheap. While I do not agree with boutique cables in the thousands, to say a coat hanger will do the same job is ridiculous (and one he basically contradicts). Another interesting one is power conditioners. Bryston, used as part of the argument against, now make one. Maybe they are bowing to market pressure, but the difference can be very distinct (especially on video sources).
I do not think you need to spend big bucks to get good sound. You also do not need golden ears. However, the hobby has a snob reputation, a lot of scammers, and people generally do not care about music reproduction that much. As long as it is loud, they are happy.
If Aczel has an axe to grind, I think it is at least a relatively noble axe, considering that his efforts are against what he feels are 'snake oil' salesmen.
I should probably have said right off the bat that if one is happy with their audio equipment, by all means enjoy it to the full and don't let anyone (including me) tell you different!
I just have problem with the way audio marketing preys on the uninformed, that's all.
BTW, as ridiculous as it might seem, a coat-hanger CAN be used for digital audio with no degradation in sound - http://codebunny.org/audio/cdtransports.html.
But, as I said before, if you like what you hear, who am I to tell you different? I'm very happy that you are enjoying the sound you are getting.
As a side note - if anyone here wants to give ABX testing a try, a useful site is http://www.pcabx.com.
You can download the ABX comparator to your computer and test your own ability to distinguish (with statistical certainty) between various audio sources, like a 64k mp3 vs a 192k mp3, or even a full size WAV rip. Due to the ideomotor effect (in this case, the presumption is that a file that is 192k MUST be way, way better than a 64k file), most people THINK it would be obvious, but here's a spoiler - it will be MUCH harder than you'd think, even for fairly low-bitrate files.
I should probably have said right off the bat that if one is happy with their audio equipment, by all means enjoy it to the full and don't let anyone (including me) tell you different!
I just have problem with the way audio marketing preys on the uninformed, that's all.
BTW, as ridiculous as it might seem, a coat-hanger CAN be used for digital audio with no degradation in sound - http://codebunny.org/audio/cdtransports.html.
But, as I said before, if you like what you hear, who am I to tell you different? I'm very happy that you are enjoying the sound you are getting.
As a side note - if anyone here wants to give ABX testing a try, a useful site is http://www.pcabx.com.
You can download the ABX comparator to your computer and test your own ability to distinguish (with statistical certainty) between various audio sources, like a 64k mp3 vs a 192k mp3, or even a full size WAV rip. Due to the ideomotor effect (in this case, the presumption is that a file that is 192k MUST be way, way better than a 64k file), most people THINK it would be obvious, but here's a spoiler - it will be MUCH harder than you'd think, even for fairly low-bitrate files.
I owned a higher end JVC and was happy with it.. btw.. they were owned by Matsutshita until very recently
My next receiver will be Harmon Kardon http://www.harmankardon.com/product...=CA&Language=ENG&cat=REC&prod=AVR 745&sType=C
My next receiver will be Harmon Kardon http://www.harmankardon.com/product...=CA&Language=ENG&cat=REC&prod=AVR 745&sType=C
