It was confirmed to me today

[Goosemaster]

My system is no slouch, yet my system is no champion🙁

Onkyo sr600
Mirage Frx-5
Athena asp400


I love the way my system sounds. The highs are crystal clear, the mids rich and untinny, and the bass is thick and thoarty.

And yet, it sounds like absolute rubbish compared to what I heard tonight.

An original copy of a les paul duo on a bennington[sic] turntable, a pair of epi monitors, and a gorgeous lookign Harman Kardon Amp.

I am not going to lie and say that I went "oh SH!T" and "OMFG," because I didn't

Once I heard Les paul strum in his own special way, I did what I always do when I hear the divine: I put my head down towards the floor, closed my eyes, took in the acoustics, and smiled.

The warmth of the audio is what hit me first. Strangely, I still don't know what the fvk that means. Think of it as the hum of a vacum tube put to music. It truely sounded like some divine wooden reverberation rather than a boxy or tiny mess.

The bass was perplexing. the epi's were only about 2-3ft high, and yet I heard bass the likes of which my Athena 10'' 400watt could never produce. It was so throaty and so clear that my grin just kept on growing.

And then she put on some Louis Armstrong. I have superbit this and HDCD that, and yet, at that very moment, I felt as if I had never heard the great Satchmo in my entire life before that moment.


The grin will be on my face for weeks.


In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

 

[Zim Hosein]

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

 

The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts. I've heard live music before that gave me chills, and I've heard 128 kbps music that gave me chills.

Sorry, "audiophiles" annoy me.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

Everyone has their different sh!t that they're into. Aren't you a runner? It's like how you could tell the difference in running shoes b/t a $50 pair and a $150 pair, whereas ppl who don't give a sh|t about running say it's all the same.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

I hear ya, but the difference was not minute. It was fvking obvious.

<---violinist.
<---saxophonist

 

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Everyone has their different sh!t that they're into. Aren't you a runner? It's like how you could tell the difference in running shoes b/t a $50 pair and a $150 pair, whereas ppl who don't give a sh|t about running say it's all the same.

See, that's the thing; the cost of the shoes doesn't matter to me - it's the FEEL of it that matters.

That's what I hate about "audiophilia" - it seems like a scam to me where manufacturers say, "Simpler is better, analog is where it's at. So buy our $15,000 speakers and get a $2500 turntable, and you can get the ultimate in simplicity."

Sorry, but that's bullsh!t and it's all marketing. When I try on shoes, I buy based on FEEL.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

Pretty much.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

I hear ya, but the difference was not minute. It was fvking obvious.

<---violinist.
<---saxophonist

That's probably why you can tell such a difference.

horns/strings are just so spooky real on analog. CD simply can't reproduce that.

 

[revnja]

:thumbsup:

Welcome to the club, my friend.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

I hear ya, but the difference was not minute. It was fvking obvious.

<---violinist.
<---saxophonist

That's probably why you can tell such a difference.

horns/strings are just so spooky real on analog. CD simply can't reproduce that.

..and this was rock and roll😛

I didn't get a chance to listen to classical😛


:thumbsup: to Les Paul

 

[Goosemaster]

The albumn was an original by the way. She had an original elvis albumn as well:Q
She's also played them to death and they don't have a scratch on them😀

No hiss, no scratches. It was unreal.


The mids were just incomprehensibly good.



Just so we know that we aren't audio snobs, we both agree that skimping on audio equipment is a nono, but both agree that keeping albums locked away in plastic is jsut as bad.

Once your dead you're dead. That's why you should enjoy them at their finest while you can.

 

[spidey07]

Heh, that's the problem.

The better the stereo and its ability to reproduce everyting, it starts to show the harshness of CDs (and the fact that a good 95% of them are recorded in utter crap)

 

[Ronstang]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

Pretty much.

I agree too, and have known this since the inception of the CD and digital music. I even once tested a CD side by side with the LP album on a really good system with a friend who was an audiophile and on the same system you could hear that the LP sounded better....if you don't count the pops and clicks...HAHAHAHA.

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Bah, I will stand by MP3s and my consumer-level speaker system for EVER!!

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Ronstang

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

Pretty much.

I agree too, and have known this since the inception of the CD and digital music. I even once tested a CD side by side with the LP album on a really good system with a friend who was an audiophile and on the same system you could hear that the LP sounded better....if you don't count the pops and clicks...HAHAHAHA.

What really odd is that I ehard no pops or clicks. It was just a clear, vibrant, bliss.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

myth.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

I hear ya, but the difference was not minute. It was fvking obvious.

<---violinist.
<---saxophonist

On a hgih end rig, I'd doubt that analog is much better than digital ifat all. blind fold tests among audiophiles can't even tell teh difference.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Everyone has their different sh!t that they're into. Aren't you a runner? It's like how you could tell the difference in running shoes b/t a $50 pair and a $150 pair, whereas ppl who don't give a sh|t about running say it's all the same.

See, that's the thing; the cost of the shoes doesn't matter to me - it's the FEEL of it that matters.

That's what I hate about "audiophilia" - it seems like a scam to me where manufacturers say, "Simpler is better, analog is where it's at. So buy our $15,000 speakers and get a $2500 turntable, and you can get the ultimate in simplicity."

Sorry, but that's bullsh!t and it's all marketing. When I try on shoes, I buy based on FEEL.

Have you heard $20K stereos? Your analogy is like saying $10 KMart flip flops are the same as $100 Nikes. I doubt you'd say they are the same.

 

[thirdlegstump]

Nothing like the smell of 8 12AX7's and 4 EL34's burning in a guitar amp.

 

[CFster]

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

fact.

-edited.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

In the music world, Analog is simply better than digital.

I concur :beer:

fact.

-edited.

HEY!

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

I hear ya, but the difference was not minute. It was fvking obvious.

<---violinist.
<---saxophonist

On a hgih end rig, I'd doubt that analog is much better than digital if at all. blind fold tests among audiophiles can't even tell teh difference.

I think the most impressive aspect of my experince is that all of the equipment was 30+ years old and that such beautiful amplification can be had with so little.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Nothing like the smell of 8 12AX7's and 4 EL34's burning in a guitar amp.

Macs don't have tubes dude.

Well their amplifiers do, but not the computer.

😉

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

$400 headphones
$2500 souce (CD player)
$2000 amp

equals $20K stereo with big speakers, etc.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: jumpr
The only way I could tell the difference between a CD on $100 speakers and analog on $10,000 speakers is if:

1) I was drunk
2) I was high
3) I was crazy

Honestly, if you get a huge grin on your face from hearing analog music but don't get that same grin while listening to it from a CD, then you're nuts.

Sorry.

I hear ya, but the difference was not minute. It was fvking obvious.

<---violinist.
<---saxophonist

On a hgih end rig, I'd doubt that analog is much better than digital if at all. blind fold tests among audiophiles can't even tell teh difference.

I think the most impressive aspect of my experince is that all of the equipment was 30+ years old and that such beautiful amplification can be had with so little.

Admitadly, alot of the older amps are as good, if not better than todays. Tehy hold their value for a reason.

spelling errors = :beer)