DBT Report

God, I detest this 'groove' crap.

 

Ah WM,

I see that you're back! I was just about to file a 'missing person report' with Interpol but I thought I'd check the forum one more time, just in case. I'm glad I did, though.

Anyway guys, the player is indeed the Capitole Mk2 which I have never heard but which has been recommended more times than I've had hot dinners. Anyway, being an open-minded guy, I thought I'd put it on the list for an audition. Once the new distributor here in Lawrieville get's his act to together, I'll give it a listen. Considering I am double digit years away from the age of 45 years, I wonder if I should wait until then to check out the player as I might enjoy the sound of the player more - ain't that right WM?

Greg - it looks like you guys have been checking my notes. The Tri-Vista is one player that I have not yet heard (although I've heard the DAC) but I put it on the list anyway where it is in direct competion to the Krell SACD Standard (which I have heard before). Here, the Trivista is around EUR 2,000 more expensive (dealer retail prices) than the Krell SACD Standard so that will be taken into account as well vs the performance of both players and they will be judged more on their red-book perfomance than their SACD performances. Anyway, just to keep this thread "on topic", what has been your experiences with your SCD-1 in terms of CD vs SACD and would you be able to tell them apart in a blind-test? Also, does the SCD-1 groove man, does it really groove, as their prices are so attractive right now?




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.

 

As a moderator, I couldnt possibly agree that terms like 'musical' 'groove' 'slam' 'analogue' make me cringe.

We had the ''crap terminology'' thread about six months ago though?

I think the original thread has died a death though, and this has turned into a kind of ambling rambling ''my pennies are greater than your pennies'' thread.

PS Lawrie, so can you consistently pick out a preference for LP over CD in a DBT?

 

Well, yep the SACD's I have are easily distinguishable from my CDs, but thats hardly DBT

There have been numerous reviews of modded SCD-1 and in all cases I have read the reviewer places it (after mods) as almost equal to anything out there at the time, but I havent read any written since the Krell SACD Standard, Tri-Vista and Accuphase DP 85 were brought to market. My plan is to (eventually) get the SCD-1 *properly* modded and then "take it on the road" to pit it against the big boys.

Until then I cant provide any meaningful views on how it compares to these *names* but nevertheless I do suggest you give one a whirl as it might (and I say might) hold its own. I would love to establish whether this is the case myself.

If it does then its a feckin bargain especially a 777ES at 900 GBP (note the 777 doesnt have balanced sockets and *only* has four feet (the SCD-1 needs five as its weighs 32 kilos ). Then its down to whether you can live with a sony branded machine.

 

cheekily pinched from Killahertz over at HFC
"Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2004 10:28 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeez, it's been a long time since I last posted - but the temptation to add a cat to the assembled pigeons is overwhelming, so...

Stewart Pinkertons cables test is pretty well known in UK hifi circles. Less well known is the long-standing challenge from one Richard Clark (www.carsound.com), in America. Oh, and his challenge concerns amplifiers, not cables, and the pay-off is $10,000.

Yes, $10,000 to audibly differentiate between two amplifiers. The challenge was borne, and remains primarily, within the car audio industry, although it was widened to include domestic amplification. So, let's say you have a Krell, go and buy yourself something from Richer Sounds, a plane ticket to the US, and come back $10,000 better off.

Well, either that or come back wiser, as everybody else who has taken the test has (recording engineers, golden ears, etc, etc). Oh, and a version of the test (amplifiers and cables) was, if I remember right, run at an AES convention, monitored by The Absolute Sound. Hundreds took the challenge, and the results averaged. They were 50:50, or 49:51, ball-park figures, and essentially the product of guesswork. "


I,ve asked if KH can post a link to the challenge .
Just in case there,s some dubious rules that make the test unfair .
But ,
If it is a genuine test , which has been unsuccessfully met , then it would be nice to see the cable sceptics (who are citing the cable challenge in their argument)aknowledge this test and the fact that maybe they are deluding themselves about what they can hear when they compare amps .


DOH ,
just noticed the link in his quote
hope everyones having a good Sunday

 

I like the way this is going.

If there are no differences between cables, amplifiers and (presumably) cdps, then music lovers should be buying the cheapest they can and spending all their money on speakers.

- Assuming of course that there are recognizable differences between speakers.

Otherwise it's Dixons Rules! :kneel:

 

But most people already does that...

 

Originally posted by, well, erm, me, over at HFC.

ps: The carsound link will take you to their main page, from there you can go onto the forums. Using the search feature (set it to search 'Richard Clark on Audio') you can find plenty of info on the 'amp challenge'.

The talkaudio link is a collection of the rules, updates, and specific statements the challenge.

 

Thanks again Killahertz
I had just popped over to post the link to the rules .

 

Great stuff!

It just goes to show that everything we add to our hifi's really sounds the same, it's just that some kit may look nicer and impress your mates.

I'm glad we got to the bottom of this, it's going to save a lot of people a great deal of money in the long term.

From a forum's point of view, I guess it makes this place redundent - after all, ZG's raison d'etre was a place for hifi fanatics to get together on line and discuss the merits of various tweaks and pieces of hardware sonically.

With the realisation that we are all wasting our time has come a very significant reduction in posts from the interesting personalities that originally built up ZG. This is sad. But then I guess there will be a lot of used gear on the market, as ZG owners realise that they can acheive the same for a whole lot less. Good news for the unenlightened.

So the forum has gone full swing. It is now so similar to the HFC effort that caused some to "defect" that it is difficult to understand it's reason for being. After all, why not just go back to HFC and get together over there?

One thing does confuse me though. Given that all this stuff is the same, why are these people posting on the HFC forum and buying the magazine? That seems strange. Surely, given the futility of their quest, they would be better off buying home improvement magazines and trawling the DIY websites? Could it be they want their hifi's to look better? In which case, the industry is way off the mark as most kit is hardly aestetically pleasing. Maybe a lesson to be learned from the success of Bang & Olufsson there.

So given these revelations, and the apathy shown by many of the forums founder members to recent discussion topics, what does the future hold for ZG?

There is a possible clue in the conversion of the forum's owner to the DBT mantra and his realisation that it all sounds the same. If this is the new ZG vibe, then I can only see the forum being used for humourous comments regarding the affliction of audiophilia. That seems a shame, given the original goals.

I'm sure many of the "old guard" will continue to converse by e-mail and hopefully surface somewhere else in the future. But until that time, I would be interested to know what the forum is going to maintain it's levels of traffic with.

 

merlin - so glad you were able to enlighten me as to ZeroGain's aims and it's "original goals". As it's founder I had no idea

As someone disaffected with it you seem to have been posting rather a lot recently. I'm touched by your concern for the forum's future though but I don't think you have cause for concern.

As for the "old guard", that would include me and, amongst others, Joel (the founder of Groovehandle, where it all started in case you forgot) and sideshowbob - both of whom are as ubelieving about cables as I am. I'm mystified why my conversion to cable sceptic should be viewed any differently to their long held views.

If you'd like to set up a forum to chit chat about the latest £2K kettle leads that provide jaw-dropping improvements or other such unlikely tweaks your more than welcome to. You might even get Peter Belt joining you

Michael.

 

Michael,

I have been quite active recently. I see it as trying to stop the cancer. I do note that many others have reduced or even ceased their contributions, although to be fair they have been replaced by others following your current crusade.

Of the old guard, 'tis true what you say vis a vis Joel and Sideshow, although I don't recall them preaching like reformed smokers. But am I mistaken in thinking there was more than three amigos at the beginning?

 

And at the setting of the sun, we will remember them :chop:

 

Bottleneck,

To date, I have only compared my turntable against a few digital sources, and my ears preferred the sound of the turntable. I was also involved in a test of a friend's Rega P9 TT & Rega RB1000 arm vs some digital sources and the P9 was the overwhelming choice. Anyway, your post is a timely one because just this weekend, I was pondering what kind of sound I really preferred, where I am right now and where I'd like to be, system & soundwise. Whether in dealer showrooms, hifi shows or friends' houses, every time I've really and I mean 'really' locked into the music coming from a particular system, whether I was inside or outside the room, there's been either a turntable or valves (or both) in that system.

The best digital I've heard had a tube DAC in the mix. It's hard to explain to anyone what I hear and it would be foolish of me to declare that LP is better than CD or that valves/tubes are better than solid-state but this is my preferred sound and I now aim to pursue it. I use a solid-state amp which to my ears is one of the few solid-state amps I can live with as before that I used tube/valve amps. Therefore, the amp will stay but this means that tubes will have to enter the digital side either by means of a tube DAC or a tube CDP. I am not going to waste any more time auditioning solid-state CDPs as those that I've heard have done nothing for me regardless of their price tags. In the future, the TT might be upgraded to the likes of an SME10 or Avid using the same tonearm I have right now, and I have not ruled out dabbling with electrostatic speakers as they interest me greatly so perhaps with this little summary, you can now see where my preferences lie. My musical preferences are for jazz, (I adore female vocalists) blues, latino, soft rock, and the odd dance music. Btw, I've just bought the Joss Stone debut vinyl LP - what a voice for a 16 year old?




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.