Anyone heard the GBP7000 NAIM CD Player?

Henry,

have you seen the wanted ad on hififorsale? the guy is after dcs, levinson etc. Not sure how much he will offer, but might be worth finding out?

Robbo

 

Crickey, must have been hairy this afternoon, for Graham N to be dragged to the keyboard to post!!!!! the orchestra pit getting a tad cold today maybe?
I think here there are lots of +/-'s for both camps, with serious bull being quoted from either end, why not let 'Wolfy & Double binders' (great name for a band eh?) start an FAQ thread on it and stick it in chat, that way people may peruse it at they liesure.
However It is getting very like mana & yawn inducing
Perhaps maybe we should apply mana to double blind test?, but keep it under 37 levels, else the aural overload may cause premenant damage.
I do agree with Graham of the point of Aural dullness, after 60 mins of so of testing, you do lose the 'plot' and have to return to the start point, for a reference, remember 'Short controlled bursts' Wm

 

Thanks Neil. Hmm, don't know why but at first look this ad seems a bit shady to me. It would appear to be a business called "Zim Audio" - never heard of them before. Just phoned the land line number and got an answering machine which appeared to be more domestic than business. Will call the guy again tomorrow to see what's what.

 

Henry,

He's been posting ads for a few months. No idea if he is any good. I'd make sure that I got cash in my hand before parting with any kit though.

 

We Don't Want To Hear

I think the treatment of poor old DAT is a tad unfair, he has not in any way been offensive, or even been illogical in the formation of his arguments.

I do get this awful feeling that his major crime is to argue with faith, which of course has historically brought in the inquisition. At least the Inquisition over here gives you the chance to bugger off before consigning one to the flames, which is a big improvement over previous such champions of Orthodox thought.

Of course as many of you may know I don't altogether agree with DAT, although I do thi.nk some of us magnify small differences out of all proportion, but in a world of blind believers which is what a lot of Hi Fi people have become, I find such scepticism refreshing.

 

What is the difference between faith in blind testing and faith in testing with binoculars?

Everyone is a believer, nay?

 

Or , we both have truths, are mine the same as yours?

 

Re: We Don't Want To Hear

OK, I shouldn't have told him to bugger off so, dat19, apologies for that.

I'm quite sure that there are things I couldn't tell apart in a proper sceintific blind test situation but despite that in some cases I'd still maintain there were important differences worth paying extra for. I maintain there are important and worthwhile differences in hifi gear that cannot be distinguished in a double blind test so I don't find harping on about them (tests) to be useful or constructive.

If this were a forum about expensive watches and someone were to come in and go on and on about how a Swatch does everything an Omega/Tag/Breitling etc does at a fraction of the price how well do you think that person would be received? People don't buy a Breitling because it tells the time better than a Swatch (FWIW I have a "Calvin Klein" watch which I know to be a Swatch on the inside and I knowingly paid more for it than the equivalent Swatch simply because I preferred the look of it).

Michael.

 

ARh......... but Mike, could you have told the difference in a blind blind test mate besides most ferrari owners secretly hanker after reliable cars or is that another 'bind myth'

 

Dangerous analogy territory here. Perhaps people don't buy Wadia because it sounds better than Arcam?

The 'double blind test' is an abstract expression of the scientific method. There's no formal type of test, just a set of requirements that have shown themselves to be necessary for the result to be meaningful.

There are many people (clearly including some here) who believe that the 'scientific method' is the peer of healing with crystals. There's no arguing with such.

It would be nice to see two amplifiers that measure the same, and are both operated within their limits, being proven to sound different. But it hasn't been done. Let alone two cables that measure roughly similarly. Or in directionality. Or even more obscurely running in.

But if paying attention to cable directionality, or paying £7000 for a CDP improves your listening experience then that is surely all that matters from the individual's pov.

OTOH people selling snake oil at huge margins should be run out of town.

Paul

 

Perhaps. Perhaps they perceive it to sound better even if under scientific conditions they couldn't tell them apart but if they want to spend their £4K on that then I don't have a problem with it.

Also, whilst I agree with you in some regard about snake oil vendors they wouldn't exist if people weren't buying it. If someone is mug enough to pay thousands of pounds for a cable that's no better than a £50 one then they only have themselves to blame. OTOH if they think they hear thousands of pounds worth of improvement then who am I to tell them how they should spend their money?

As an example, many people would regard the "green pen tweak" for CDs as pure snake oil but in my experience it definitely works so I'm happy to part with my cash for it regardless of what the science says.

Michael.

 

Re: Re: We Don't Want To Hear

Good point. The thing is audiophile CLAIM certain expensive hifi toys sound better then cheaper one and watch collectors DO NOT CLAIM their expensive toys keep time more accurately then cheaper watches.

I had a wonderful friend who collects mechanical chronographs as he calls them. He has passed away since. I must admit they are beautiful miniature engineering marvels.

Unfortunately, (for being my usual irritating self) I ask why do these Swiss engineers have to go to such great length since the discovery of quartz movements which keeps time more accurately and cheaply. I was told to even ask that mean I have missed the point completely.

 

Re: Re: Re: We Don't Want To Hear

I think thats right (no offence)
some thing just come down to workmanship and craft.
I can appreciate a beutiful paint finish on a motorbike - dont go any better tho
I appreciate good wine - cheap stuff still gets me drunk tho
etc etc

A piece of genuine craftsmanship is a joy to behold

 

But they just have to go on and on about the effects all this viperian viscocity is having on their systems. No one on here seems to mind too much when this forum's naimophobes (no naims, eh) wade in with another attack on Salisbury's best / worst. Yet, turn the tables on the tweekers and ask for some evidence of the beneficial effects of oleaginous extract of serpent and they start waffling about they are only interested listening to the music or how it's all about the special (and no doubt secret) application of foofoo dust, haha.
Which is quite funny, since between the cable listening and ye olde magick tweacking you have to wonder how much time is actually spend listening to music rather than hifi in certain circles.
FWIW, I'm just a sceptic. I don't know enough to be a complete athiest (or otherwise). I think I've heard cable differences in the past, then again, on other occasions I haven't. The simplest explanation for this, in the absence of any public and verified proofs to the contrary, is that any changes are in my head.
So in short, if you think cables etc work, great. But don't be surprised when people who don't think the same way you do ask for some evidence. I do not spend time (anymore) listening for differences between cables or indeed worrying about how I'm going to find the money for a cheap-at-half-the-price 500quid interconnect.
Christ, it's Monday and time to go to work already

 

Wolfgang,

If the new CDP sounds similar to your old CDP then it should be able to imitate your 'wife' voice indefinitely and further auditioning will not expose it.

I think we haven't really been talking about the same thing. To summarize: I think A/B demming CD players is useful to an extent, but ultimately inadequate. I find CDPs all have very similar "voices", but it's not the "voice" that matters to me, so I don't really care if player A "sounds" like player B (indefinitely or otherwise). I'm interested in what the players communicate, but perhaps I'd better abandon analogies now, because I don't want to start sounding like Peter Belt.

 

someone mention tinfoil?

 

Thank you for replying. Analogies can be useful but ultimately fails. For the record we agree that CDP are very similar nowadays. One need to have lengthy audition to know how good it is. A/B comparison is useful if used in the right context.

How I wish everyone is as calm as you when talking about hifi related subject.

 

**** statistics. I'm not in it to satisfy some anal retentive statistician. 13/16 isn't as good as 5/5 or however many times the test was performed before we got bored and wanted to hear/do something else.

As for not hearing the "tings" on track 5 at "...fade away and die" at 1min, 11secs, it's a lose-lose situation here with those nerdy "scientific" types - I hear them then I imagine them, I don't hear them then I'm deaf.

I don't hear them because my system doesn't reproduce them and this may in itself be due to the fact that I have NOT carried out any of RKR's mains spur/fuses upgrades.

 

Re: Bake off hearing tests

Chaps,

I did say that this thead was getting warm - now it's got even warmer since I last posted. Dat19 and Paul Duerden have made some good points. The nay-sayers to blind testing are simply quivering at the prospect that they may have bought into hype rather than substance. I must say though, that if I had spent a lot of time and cash modifying my CDP, or had dumped a huge wad of cash on one of the audiophile favourites, I'd be non too willing to take part in a blind test of other players against my mega-buck player. What if I preferred the sound of a much cheaper player that cost several thousands less. So this reluctance is perfectly understandable. It's called fear. I can't see any other reason for pouring scorn on the idea can you?

So what do you guys do at these much publicised bake-offs? Do you sit there listening to music on just one system set-up or do you constantly test and tinker with kit? I suggest it is the latter and if that is the case, how about sitting back for a change and let someone else tinker with the kit on your behalf - albeit behind a big velvet screen. Then you'd be using only your ears to listen instead of choosing based on the aesthetics, brand and perhaps big-ticket price of the player. You are clutching at audiophile straws dude and you know it.




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.

 

lawrie,
i think the point of myself and those others mentioned by dat is that it takes longer than a few minutes to decide if you like a component or not. when tony and i visited jj at som, we listened to some very, very round earth kit. now neither tony or myself are round earth types so when we put on some sonus faber speakers that had some flat earth leanings we both sat back and said - best speakers all day. in fact 15 minutes later we were thouroughly cheezed off with them and their incredibly boomy bass. in a blind test we would have found that the sf's were preferred which would have been totally the wrong conclusion after extended listening. of course you could say that blind testing could go on longer but i cannot see the possiblity of blind testing over the days or sometimes weeks necessary to fully evaluate a preference as viable.

as for what goes on at bakeoffs, well, why not see for yourself, the next time someone posts about one sign yourself up. no we don;t do blind testing as a rule, usually as there is too much kit to hear in one sitting anyway. it's more about hearing some new components and listening to other peoples music - and perhaps finding something new that you like.

cheers


julian