[KH]

On 9/18/2010 12:17 PM, Audio Empire wrote:
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 11:38:03 -0700, KH wrote
(in ):

On 9/17/2010 7:31 PM, Audio Empire wrote:
snip

Relative to fatigue, have you ever considered the relatively simple
explanation that the care and feeding required by LP listening (cleaning
and turning, or merely turning sides) provides an intermezzo in the
performance? You simply cannot listen to LP's in the same duration
intervals that you do with CD's (unless you purposely alter your CD
listening patterns), and possibly those enforced breaks and additional
non-music related activities are what breaks up the sessions and reduces
the fatigue you seem to experience with CD?

You certainly have a point there. I had not considered that. Can't argue with
the logic of that hypothesis.

Certainly a logical possibility. Might not be the root cause, but
something to consider.

snip

Well, yes. like everything else, most vinyl is not very good. There are a
myriad of reasons for this ranging from poor master recording, to indifferent
LP mastering, to poor production materials (regrind vinyl vs virgin) to
sloppy production methods.

As I was just discussing with my friend, the quality of mass produced
vinyl hit a real inflection point, IME, in the early/mid 70's, and just
went downhill from there. Out here, we had Odyssey and Tower, and they
and their ilk seemed to help drive the price wars that made higher
regrind levels a necessity for producers. Not a bad marketing strategy,
really, as it was likely more profitable to market dirt cheap LP's
(Odyssey had $2.66 deals on new releases if you bought 3, in mid/late
'70s) that needed replacing often than higher cost pressings that
actually lasted. And here in Phoenix, back then, getting an LP without
any warp was very unlikely.


I recall that in the 1970's when EMI owned Capitol Records and their
classical label, Angel, they used to press Angel records in Capitol's
pressing plants. I have never been able to find out where in the process this
occurred, but Angels always sounded LOUSY. Luckily, the British pressings of
these Angel records (especially of British music - Elagr, Walton, Vaughan
Williams, etc.) were available (for a slight premium) at big record stores
like Tower. Usually they had gold "Odeon" stickers pasted over the EMI HMV
label ('Nipper' looking into the phonograph horn - the same logo that RCA
Victor used here in the states). The British pressings always sounded better.
They were quieter, they had more dynamic range and they simply had better
sound. Often the difference was spectacular - now this is on IDENTICAL titles
made from the same master tapes! I got so that I wouldn't buy an Angel unless
it was absolutely necessary. I even resorted to buying the titles from
England.

Back in the heyday, I could seldom afford UK pressings, but I did buy
several (Genesis, Gentle Giant, etc.) and they were, without exception,
vastly superior to the identical US pressings. Yes, they were much
quieter, and *stayed* that way far longer.


I've never been impressed with B&Ws. In fact I went to a digital audio
symposium recently that had the latest "Statement" B&Ws (don't remember the
models) and some smaller B&Ws on stands. different demos used either the big
pair or the smaller. Even though the smaller B&Ws didn't have the bass of the
larger ones, everybody agreed that the smaller 2-way speaker sounded much
better and more musical than did the large three-way floor standers.

Actually, I've always been a B&W fan (still have half a dozen pairs),
and I do like what their "house" sound used to be, but that's a personal
preference. The bigger B&W's (800 series) sound, IMO, very good at high
volumes, but do not do well at lower levels. When the CDM line came
out, I was surprised - never heard any of them that I really liked.
And, I've never been a Wilson fan, although I've gone and demo'd most of
their line as they've evolved over the years. Never heard a Watt-Puppy
I'd own (much less PAY the price for), and although the newer MAXX's
sound really good, they're ludicrously priced and too large for "normal"
rooms. When I heard the Sophia 2's however, I was hooked. As one
reviewer put it, they are the Wilson's for folks who don't like
Wilson's. And they still sound full when played a low volumes, as the
B&W's never did. Still over-priced, but I got a demo pair at 40% off
retail when the model 3's came out, so they were Expensive vs. "are you
crazy?"

Myself, I have Martin-Logan Vistas with a pair of self-powered Paradigm
subwoofers. To me they are the most transparent speakers I've ever owned. I
simply love 'em! I used to own a pair of Magnepan Tympani IIICs (all EIGHT
panels) and a Pair of MG3.6s. I recently heard the new Maggie 1.7s and I
think that they are the best speakers Winey& Co. has ever produced, bar
none!

All fine speakers IMO. One thing I think we can all agree on is that
speakers are colored. So they, at least, will subject to real sonic
preferences. Planars/dipoles just never sounded quite "right" to me.
Couldn't afford any in the "old" days, although I drooled significantly
over those big Mangneplanars when they came out, and now I have too many
box speaker years under the belt to consider changing.

Keith Hughes