Audiophiles - TrueHD audio or Subby?

[Usarka]

What am I better off getting, a new amp with HDMI input to decode TrueHD or Masterwhatsitsnuts, or a subby?

Till now I've go some nice 3 way speakers that handle the bass nicely, a decent centre, couple of good sourounds. Blu-ray player (ps3) doesn't have analogue outputs and no fucking way I'm paying twice as much as the ps3 for a player that does.

Mainly thinking of movies. CD music doesn't matter shit cause it's not good enough quality and I wouldn't use a sub for it anyway.

So what's it going to be punk? Did he spooge five times, or did he fire six? Sub or Amp?

[CookMySock]

You don't have a sub?? WTF?

If your speakers do an ok job with bass, then make sure you get a proper SUBwoofer that goes down to at least 30Hz, and not just a bass boom-box.

I built a sub for my car that had a -3dB point @ 26hz and stuck a kilowatt up it, and it was fucking devastating. It was bad enough playing music through it, but movies would have been really weird.

Steve

[p.dath]

FYI, FreeView don't transmit in DTS or any of the other digital surround options. You have to be able to decode plain old [analogue] Dolby Prologic to get "surround" for FreeView movies so encoded. Prologic can be delivered via plain old RCA audio cables, or fancy optical (but pretty much makes no difference).
Although you will want an HDMI connection to your TV if you can (and assume you TV can display HD).

Just in case you were thinking of running your TV via it ...

[Blackshear]

It would be much easier/more informative to all of us if you could list your current speakers, room size, budget etc.
Some people actually get decent audio from the get go and are really pushing the need for a sub at all.

For example;
I have a single pair of Wharfedale 9.1 bookshelves for my computer/music/movie setup, and I don't feel too much the need for a subwoofer, and these only go down to about 100Hz with respectable amplitude. Once I get my grubby hands on an old stroker and find a chippy though, shit will be so cash.

A GOOD subwoofer will always work wonders for the cinematic 'experience' that you can FEEL.

You just need to ask yourself one question. Will you play 5 movies a year or 6?

[Usarka]

My major life issue is that Blu-Ray has proper "master" sound, and I can't take advantage of it without streaming PCM or the high def signal both of which require HDMi audio. Woe is me.


You don't have a sub?? WTF?

If your speakers do an ok job with bass, then make sure you get a proper SUBwoofer that goes down to at least 30Hz, and not just a bass boom-box.
Steve

WTF yo self!? My floorstanders go down to 32Hz. Your sub must be a cardboard fridge box with a glad-wrap tube periscope.....

[Blackshear]

Ok, so audiophile's pushing it a tad.....
[/SIZE][/I]

I was actually looking at a pair of those last weekend. They've got the funky stationary dust cap right?
If your speakers were worth more than $4k, I'd have told you to bugger off back to valve amps rofl.
I'm not too clued up on all this fancy HDMI receivers, but I believe the PS3 uses HDMI 1.3, and I'm not sure those are cheap.

Offering only my opinion, I would say buy a subwoofer (Not that you REALLY need one) over a new HDMI receiver, as it would be a rather minor upgrade for the price.

[Headbanger]

Fuck I hate subs.

[onearmedbandit]

I have a Yamaha 5.1 component system at home, that while it has 2 HDMI inputs and one output doesn't support TrueHD audio. So I have my PS3 running HDMI to the tv and optical audio to the home theatre. This gives me all the audio quality I need. I could use the HDMI output to upscale older technology, such as a older dvd player or game console but seeing as the PS3 handles all our movie and gaming needs there is no need.

[Usarka]

I have a Yamaha 5.1 component system at home, that while it has 2 HDMI inputs and one output doesn't support TrueHD audio. So I have my PS3 running HDMI to the tv and optical audio to the home theatre. This gives me all the audio quality I need. I could use the HDMI output to upscale older technology, such as a older dvd player or game console but seeing as the PS3 handles all our movie and gaming needs there is no need.

If you set your BD output on the PS3 to PCM (not bitstream which is default i think) then the PS3 decodes the audio and sends it uncompressed to the receiver so you should get high def audio. The receiver will say something like "PCM", or it might even say "Dolby", but it should be just routing the signal to the speakers.

Optical cable doesn't have the bandwidth which is why I was asking about HDMI, so it either does full HD sound in stereo only or degrades the signal to standard DTS/Dolby 5.1.

So I understand....

[Tank]

I have a single pair of Wharfedale 9.1 bookshelves

Im a bit of a movie buff and last year set up a dedicated movie room. Looked at tons of speakers / read what seemed like 100's of reviews. I settled on the Wharfedale 9.1's for the rears and sides (I run a 7.1 setup).

Top speakers and would recommend them to anyone.

[Tank]

What am I better off getting, a new amp with HDMI input to decode TrueHD or Masterwhatsitsnuts, or a subby?

Till now I've go some nice 3 way speakers that handle the bass nicely, a decent centre, couple of good sourounds. Blu-ray player (ps3) doesn't have analogue outputs and no fucking way I'm paying twice as much as the ps3 for a player that does.

Mainly thinking of movies. CD music doesn't matter shit cause it's not good enough quality and I wouldn't use a sub for it anyway.

So what's it going to be punk? Did he spooge five times, or did he fire six? Sub or Amp?

If you are happy with the depth of bass with your current system - then I would spend the money on the amp. You can always add a sub later. Dont forget cable - it cost a ton for good stuff, but makes a hell of a lot of difference.

[Tank]

You don't have a sub?? WTF?

If your speakers do an ok job with bass, then make sure you get a proper SUBwoofer that goes down to at least 30Hz, and not just a bass boom-box.

I built a sub for my car that had a -3dB point @ 26hz and stuck a kilowatt up it, and it was fucking devastating. It was bad enough playing music through it, but movies would have been really weird.

Steve

Good subs mix with a full system and add depth where needed. They should not be over powering. They should not be big ass " fucking devastating" dooof- doooof - that is normally left to little boi racers with their cheap ass shitty sound boxes.

Bright side most grow ouf of this and get some good stuff when they get older.

[vifferman]

Wharfdales. [snortle]<snortle></snortle>

[James Deuce]

With the continued practice of fucking up perfectly good recordings by over-engineering them and then compressing the shit out of them to keep the iPod MP3 weenies free of too many artefacts I don't know why people bother with more than a $40 Logitech 2.1 sub and two transistor radio spec speakers.

Seriously, "CD music not good enough"?

Listen to a CD mastered 25 years ago. Listen to one recorded last week. Doesn't matter what you listen to it on, the frequency range expressed by the older CD will blow your mind. And that is shit compared to a nice piece of vinyl and a decent turntable rig.

Most people set their subs sensitivity too high. It should only kick in when it needs to. Like when James Earl Jones speaks, or the WTC falls down. One with a phase inverter can be great for watching movies and getting the depth necessary to a movie soundstage to present a believable atmosphere.

Digital audio is an oxymoron. I don't know how many of you realise how even listening to a decent DJ or electronica band in a tent at BDO is an analogue listening experience rather than a digital one. Your ears don't turn on and off unless you've got Meniere's disease. Modern recording techniques and most of all, modern listening habits, have just about destroyed audio quality. I like to hear finger noise, squeaking bass drum pedals and instrument harmonics, not generic universally accepted best practice production values.

[Headbanger]

Modern recording techniques and most of all, modern listening habits, have just about destroyed audio quality. I like to hear finger noise, squeaking bass drum pedals and instrument harmonics, not generic universally accepted best practice production values.

Lets hope the recording industry burns in flames and the musicians craft can once again become the mark of quality in regards to an album, rather then the "skills" of the producer and his team of people and gadgets.

When I'm elected President of the World I shall make a law that all albums have to be reordered and signed off as complete within a two week period, They can spend years writing and perfecting their craft if they want, But when they enter the studio they lay it down, get the fuck out, and the album is released.

[Mikkel]

Talk about fucking irony. "Audiophiles" in the title and then this:


Mainly thinking of movies. CD music doesn't matter shit cause it's not good enough quality and I wouldn't use a sub for it anyway.

Jim explained it well enough I reckon.

For music - get a decent stereo (we don't need no stinkin' subs). For movies - knock yourself out, but you can go to the cinema many many times for what a home theatre set-up will cost you.

[Usarka]

Seriously, "CD music not good enough"?

Listen to a CD mastered 25 years ago. Listen to one recorded last week. Doesn't matter what you listen to it on, the frequency range expressed by the older CD will blow your mind. And that is shit compared to a nice piece of vinyl and a decent turntable rig.


Kind of what I meant. The CD sound is limited by the recording not the equipment. But you're right about the engineering........

Rambo 4 in TrueHD sound is currently limited by my hardware.

[Usarka]

Talk about fucking irony. "Audiophiles" in the title and then this:




So an audiophile doesn't care about sound in movies?

My CD setup is as good as I can get it within my boundaries of diminishing returns. My home theatre setup isn't. Maybe I've knocked my head again in the weeken and not getting my point across.......

[Headbanger]

For music - get a decent stereo (we don't need no stinkin' subs). For movies - knock yourself out, but you can go to the cinema many many times for what a home theatre set-up will cost you.

Personally, My Home Theater ranks right up there with my bike, There ain't no way in hell I'd pay to go to the cinema.

Having said that, the bass that comes from my speakers is imo stunning, adding a sub just fucks with shit.

But that,s just me, and my shit is second hand, My cables are cheap, My projector is cheap, My screen is painted plywood, but my big chair is uber comfortable, the beer is cold, and the experience is awesome.

[Mikkel]

Kind of what I meant. The CD sound is limited by the recording not the equipment. But you're right about the engineering........

Rambo 4 in TrueHD sound is currently limited by my hardware.


So an audiophile doesn't care about sound in movies?

My CD setup is as good as I can get it within my boundaries of diminishing returns. My home theatre setup isn't. Maybe I've knocked my head again in the weeken and not getting my point across.......

No, I think you misunderstand. Both what Jim is saying and what I am saying.

The audio quality you get from your CD is - pretty much always - limited by your stereo. (Otherwise, why would anyone be paying major bucks to get a nice stereo?)

I think what Jim was bemoaning is the fact that modern day sound engineering removes everything that is non-ideal from the recording - thus rendering it without character. I guess soul-less would be an appropriate term. And I've never thought about this before, but it would make perfect sense to do so in order to allow easier compression for digital media. Compression algorithms do not like irregularities...

The irony was not that you wanted good sound for your movies but that you were slagging off CDs in regards to sound quality while talking about sub-woofers. Maybe I misinterpreted it and you are in reality a vinyl snob who consider CDs inferior in which case I shall happily retract my initial statement.


Having said that, the bass that comes from my speakers is imo stunning, adding a sub just fucks with shit..

A sub-woofer is a big heavy membrane - often built cheaply in order to provide the biggest bang for the buck. If you want bass with good definition a smaller speaker with longer travel will give a better result as it is more responsive. My 90W speakers have got 4.5" bass units - the still provide a very good sound depth due to the fact they have a long range of travel. Driven by a 60W amplifier they manage to produce all the sound you'd want in your living room.

[bungbung]

FYI, FreeView don't transmit in DTS or any of the other digital surround options. You have to be able to decode plain old [analogue] Dolby Prologic to get "surround" for FreeView movies so encoded. Prologic can be delivered via plain old RCA audio cables, or fancy optical (but pretty much makes no difference).
Although you will want an HDMI connection to your TV if you can (and assume you TV can display HD).

Just in case you were thinking of running your TV via it ...

I'm uncertain about freeview via sat, but freeview via dtt can/does supply 5.1 sound, TV3 movies mostly. (Dolby not DTS)

[p.dath]

I'm uncertain about freeview via sat, but freeview via dtt can/does supply 5.1 sound, TV3 movies mostly. (Dolby not DTS)

I think satellite gives you only stereo.

Via UHF you get a PCM signal - but it is effectively only a stero signal. You need an amp capable of "processing" the left and right channels using Dolby Prologic I or II so that you can get front and rear. Note that Prologic does not give you "true" 5.1. It is a processed signal to give that appearance.

Freeeview could deliver 5.1 DTS or Digital Dolby, but it would chew a lot more bandwidth. And at this stage, I think they would rather deliver more channels, as opposed to fewer channels with 5.1 surround sound.
But who knows what might happen in the future.

[Hoon]

I'd get a sub first. For movies a sub should be the first thing you get as it makes even the shittiest of speaker setups sound better. I've built my Home Theatre up piece by piece over the last 18 months (currently Wharfedales 2 x 9.6's, 4 x 9.1's, 9.1 cs and a Sony sub through Onkyo 304E and Sony Bravia W40" with Windows 7 MediaPC), a 7.1 HDMI amp (looking at the Onkyo SR607) is the last piece of the puzzle but I'm not entirely sold on DolbyHD or Bluray yet. A PS3 was the plan but since getting a media PC 99% of the movies I watch are HD downloads from the net. Not only do you get them months before the titles get released but they are also *cough* free so I can't see myself ever buying a Bluray movie now.
Once my broadband cap/speed improves and I start downloading full bluray rips then I might look at going 7.1 but until then I'm more than happy with 720p 5.1 rips. So yeah get a decent sub - will cost you shitloads less than a 7.1 HDMI amp too.

[bungbung]

I think satellite gives you only stereo.

Via UHF you get a PCM signal - but it is effectively only a stero signal. You need an amp capable of "processing" the left and right channels using Dolby Prologic I or II so that you can get front and rear. Note that Prologic does not give you "true" 5.1. It is a processed signal to give that appearance.

Freeeview could deliver 5.1 DTS or Digital Dolby, but it would chew a lot more bandwidth. And at this stage, I think they would rather deliver more channels, as opposed to fewer channels with 5.1 surround sound.
But who knows what might happen in the future.

DTT can and does supply 5.1 end of story. Look up the specs here:

http://www.freeviewnz.tv/images/uploads/file/FreeView%20DTT%20Receiver%20Spec%20v1_3.pdf

I had a DTT box, now I have a Tivo. They feed my receiver through toslink, and the receiver identifies which system is being used as you change channel.

[Usarka]

No, I think you misunderstand. Both what Jim is saying and what I am saying.


I can't be arsed arguing, but try looking at intent rather than being so semantic. I know what you and Jim are saying and I agree, but yeah I probably put some words in the wrong place and got some stuff mixed up, i'm stupid sue me.

:yawn:

[steve_t]

I vote Amp. Sub can be added later! I have a Sony STR-DA5400ES. It's awesome except some of the HDMI switching can be temperamental. 6 HDMI ins and 2 HDMI outs mean I can have both the TV and projector hooked up and switch between the 2. I also have Wharfedale 9.6R, and 9.1R surrounds. They aren't totally awesome but I think they're great value for money when you can get them so cheap thru that Autosounz guy.
Get good speaker cables but DO NOT SPEND HEAPS ON HDMI CABLES that are less than 3m. It's a have! Cheap ones are just as good if the connectors are soldered well. Sorry for shouting :niceone:

[CookMySock]

My major life issue is that Blu-Ray has proper "master" sound, and I can't take advantage of it without streaming PCM or the high def signal both of which require HDMi audio. Woe is me.LOL you have a simple life then. Can I have it? :lol:


WTF yo self!? My floorstanders go down to 32Hz. Your sub must be a cardboard fridge box with a glad-wrap tube periscope.....It was (I sold it) a 50L ported box with a single 10inch DM/DVC driver with 900WRMS into it. 26Hz @ 130dBA is fucking mind-bending. It's like a mountain on your head. ThuuUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNduuuuuhhhhhhh. MuunNNNNNNNNNTTTTTTTTTT!!!!! Yum.

Really weird in movies, especially in action movies. The 0.00001 percent of the movie that really makes it speak feels like it just removed the corner of your house. Get one!


Having said that, the bass that comes from my speakers is imo stunning, adding a sub just fucks with shit.Thats ridiculous. No sub = dumb.


Good subs mix with a full system and add depth where needed. They should not be over powering. They should not be big ass " fucking devastating" dooof- doooof - that is normally left to little boi racers with their cheap ass shitty sound boxes.Which is why I said to not buy a bass boom-box. And a little bit overpowering bass here and there doesn't go amiss.. (/me tapes eyes back in sockets..)

Get the sub. Get (or build) a good one. You want the (puts on deep voice) deeeepest possible bass extension you can get, with plenty of power behind it as well. Tell them you want a theatrical sub, not a musical one.

Steve

[Kendog]

With the continued practice of fucking up..........other wise words ......
I read you post agreeing with every word.
I feel a night with some old CD's, the surround sound amp set to as straight a path as it can get to the speakers and some cold beers coming on.

[avgas]

Contrary to what EVERYONE has said here......go listen to some stuff to get a perspective.
I used to have many a great audiophile tell me what is "the best". Only to find they were more sold on the idea than the sound.
It took me 2 years to find the computer speakers that sounded 'good' to me (concluded on ATP3's).
My recommendation is pretty simple - walk into a store and say.
"I want a surround sound setup for my PS3" and buy the best sounding 1.
I have spent weeks trying to get the "component" formula for good sound correct.....only to have it obliterated by the next "$500 Polk Audio 5.1" setups.

[steve_t]

Contrary to what EVERYONE has said here......go listen to some stuff to get a perspective.
I used to have many a great audiophile tell me what is "the best". Only to find they were more sold on the idea than the sound.
It took me 2 years to find the computer speakers that sounded 'good' to me (concluded on ATP3's).
My recommendation is pretty simple - walk into a store and say.
"I want a surround sound setup for my PS3" and buy the best sounding 1.
I have spent weeks trying to get the "component" formula for good sound correct.....only to have it obliterated by the next "$500 Polk Audio 5.1" setups.

Huh? I thought the question was "amp or sub"

[vifferman]

Contrary to what EVERYONE has said here......go listen to some stuff to get a perspective.
It took me 2 years to find the computer speakers that sounded 'good' to me (concluded on ATP3's).
My recommendation is pretty simple - walk into a store and say.
"I want a surround sound setup for my PS3" and buy the best sounding 1.
Trouble is, apparently you can't trust your ears. :rolleyes: That's why people buy ridiculously expensive cables and other shit they don't really need.
The other trouble is, unless you can test a system in your own home, listening to or watching stuff you're intimately familiar with, you don't have a good benchmark to work from.

The best you can do really is do a bit of research to narrow the field down a bit, then go out and buy the setup that sounds the best of those that's on offer. Ignore much of the technical audiophile waffle the salesperson tries to baffle you with, and use your ears. Take some of your own media with you.

What you end up with will doubtless be slightly more expensive than you can really afford, but in the long term it will be worthwhile.

Heh.... LIke I can talk.
I went out just to windowshop for a pair of speakers, then came home with five (5!!) AND a subwoofer AND a 115w/channel receiver.
No prior research done (coz I wasn't actually intending to buy anything), no shopping around, and only a rudimentary comparison done.
Having said that, I'm very happy with the setup, but wish I'd spent more and got the next receiver up, and a bigger subwoofer (= more grunt to ramp up explosions and the like).

[Tank]

Trouble is, apparently you can't trust your ears. :rolleyes: That's why people buy ridiculously expensive cables and other shit they don't really need.

I disagree on the cables. Whilst there are deminishing returns on the quality (as there is will all audio equipment) - decent cable does make a huge difference.

[vifferman]

I disagree on the cables. Whilst there are deminishing returns on the quality (as there is will all audio equipment) - decent cable does make a huge difference.
Yes, but not to the degree that some people would have the gullible believe. Sure, if you're talking about say, cheap 1.5mm twin-core cable and spring'clamp connectors compared with decent 4mm low-O2 cable with decent screw connectors, but most of it is just wank factor. It's all about electrons, innit? As long as they're not hindered by excessive resistance due to galvanic corrosion or a small cross-sectional profile or tiny contact area at either end, they'll get through.

It's like I keep saying to #2Son: it doesn't matter if the setup isn't perfect, as there are other factors that come into play, such as the fact that few of use have the ideal home theatre environment, or a squeaky-clean home power supply, or 100% unblemished ears, or even a decent 20+-bit soundtrack! There are so many compromises made along the way that cable costing a zillion dollars a metre isn't going to magically fix the resultant signal that gets through to your brain.

[Headbanger]

Personally I can't hear the difference in regards to cables, When I went from RCA to a dirt cheap optical cable from DSE the change in quality was 100 percent noticeable, when I then substituted in a cable that cost more then my amp there was no discernable difference, at least to me.

And being digital, I'm happy to believe that the exact same data is being sent and received over both.....

[Blackshear]

Personally I can't hear the difference in regards to cables, When I went from RCA to a dirt cheap optical cable from DSE the change in quality was 100 percent noticeable, when I then substituted in a cable that cost more then my amp there was no discernable difference, at least to me.

And being digital, I'm happy to believe that the exact same data is being sent and received over both.....

http://www.pearcable.com/sub_products_anjou_sc.htm
Did you buy a length of these?

[Headbanger]

God damn.

But no, I bought my speaker wire at DSE as well, Though I did shell out the extra $12 for the quality gear......

[bungbung]

Did you see the "review" of the Pear cables?

"..In extended listening sessions, I found the cables' greatest strength to be its PRAT."

Why am I not suprised?

By all means as Vifferman said, effective speaker cables and connections. But lets not get stupid

[CookMySock]

Jeez, forget all the bullshit and go buy a meaty sub, and play the fucker loud FFS. Get pissed and have a party while you are at it, and everyone will go "woah mean mutherfucken sub maaaaaaaan" while you turn it up and smash some windows with it. Forget the faggot overpriced fucking rapunzel speaker wiring, its a rip off.

As u were.

Steve

[Skyryder]

Fuck I hate subs.

Try the Tereyaki Chcken.

Skyryder

[jim.cox]

Forget the faggot overpriced fucking rapunzel speaker wiring, its a rip off.

Good wiring DOES make a difference - but you can pay way too much for flash stuff.

As a general rule go for the largest diamter conductor you can find

Domestic house cable (the 240volt sort) works really well

[Ferkletastic]

Audiophiles are a funny lot. I'm a sound engineer and regularly get regailed with tales of amazing cables and multi-squillion dollar set ups to get that perfect 'warm' sound. It's 95% bullshit, any (decent) cable will do, there is NEVER a need for multi hundred or thousand dollar cables for a home set up. Seriously, no need.

People say they sound better because they desparately want to believe they do. I have trained ears (tonnes of studio and live work and also 3 + years of regular ear training exercises and can honestly say that there is no increase in quality above standard decent quality cables in home set up. Spend the money on your amp and monitors and the rest on setting up your room acoustically. All the super amazing cables in the world won't help if you have a room that's messing up your frequecy response, especially in the bass frequencies.

I agree that modern mastering techniques have compressed the life out of a lot of modern recordings, googling the 'loudness wars" for more info.

As for gear, like has been said, go to a store listen to heaps of speakers, trust your own ears and don't get sucked in by hype.

[bastardsquad]

My major life issue is that Blu-Ray has proper "master" sound, and I can't take advantage of it without streaming PCM or the high def signal both of which require HDMi audio. Woe is me.



WTF yo self!? My floorstanders go down to 32Hz. Your sub must be a cardboard fridge box with a glad-wrap tube periscope.....

Is that a -3dB 30 Hz or an 'overall frequency response' low of 30Hz ? If it's the -3dB i'm impressed ! What are they? I have Polk RTi12's with a 30hz -3dB and theyre fairly meaty. I still Use a Velodyne 10" sub though !

[CookMySock]

Domestic house cable (the 240volt sort) works really wellActually this is a good way to get a cheap 4mm CSA wire. Buy a long extension 1.5mm CSA extension cord and chop BOTH plugs off, cut in half, strip and twist the three wires together, and you have a FAT 4mm twin cable for about $15. It looks the part too - beeeeg!

PLEASE don't leave the three pin plug on one end. Cut it off and throw it out before someone tries to USE it for something useful and electroluxes themselves. :crazy:

Steve

[Usarka]

and the rest on setting up your room acoustically. All the super amazing cables in the world won't help if you have a room that's messing up your frequecy response, especially in the bass frequencies.

........

and don't get sucked in by hype.

That setting up room acoustically thing is something i'm interetested in learning more about. Any tips apart from the usual measurements of speakers and obstacles? Kind of limited in current place, but makes new home shopping just that much harder. doh.

And yes - some writers I know are damn devils. For them I say don't believe the hype.

[vindy500]

lols at the people who say audiophile, and then follow up with wharfedale, sony....

[scumdog]

What am I better off getting, a new amp with HDMI input to decode TrueHD or Masterwhatsitsnuts, or a subby?

Till now I've go some nice 3 way speakers that handle the bass nicely, a decent centre, couple of good sourounds. Blu-ray player (ps3) doesn't have analogue outputs and no fucking way I'm paying twice as much as the ps3 for a player that does.

Mainly thinking of movies. CD music doesn't matter shit cause it's not good enough quality and I wouldn't use a sub for it anyway.

So what's it going to be punk? Did he spooge five times, or did he fire six? Sub or Amp?

Sheesh, I thought that by the thread title this was about to be a bun-fight about whether the audio recording was that of a Harley or a Subaru...:girlfight::crazy:

[Blackshear]

Sheesh, I thought that by the thread title this was about to be a bun-fight about whether the audio recording was that of a Harley or a Subaru...:girlfight::crazy:

Tractors don't have technology :D

[Ferkletastic]

That setting up room acoustically thing is something i'm interetested in learning more about. Any tips apart from the usual measurements of speakers and obstacles? Kind of limited in current place, but makes new home shopping just that much harder. doh.


There are so many variables involved that it's hard to give any real advice online. Some decent tuned bass traps can really enhance sound in a room as lower frequency room resonance can muddy clarity big time, do some googling.

Some acoustic foam diffusers in the ceiling corners is a good fairly cheap trick, but try to avoid too much high frequency diffusion/absorption as you'll quickly end up with a frequency response tuned way too low and lose clarity.

[Tank]

lols at the people who say audiophile, and then follow up with wharfedale, sony....

audiophile was only really mentioned in the title of the thread. But regarding wharfedale - the upshot is that they are not bad speakers. The 9.1's have many great reviews (as mentioned I use them for rears) http://stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/1105wharfedale/

IN NZ there is a tie up with the importer of Yamaha and we get them at very good prices compaired with other countrys.

Are they the best speaker in the world - hell no. But - plenty of bang for buck and in the low end home theater budget (say iro 15k) they match up pretty well.

If I had more money - Id buy better ones - but for me - I like em.

[Tank]

Cheap speakers:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10620183

[Blackshear]

lols at the people who say audiophile, and then follow up with wharfedale, sony....

Got my Wharfedales (RRP: 599 NZ) for $193, from a STORE.
No-one likes cherry finishes, apparently. More than adequate for a gaming computer.

[steve_t]

If I spend $50,000 on some B&W Nautilus speakers and then buy a Plinius amp, am I then allowed to post in a thread that has "audiophile" in the title? :laugh::laugh:

[Blackshear]

If I spend $50,000 on some B&W Nautilus speakers and then buy a Plinius amp, am I then allowed to post in a thread that has "audiophile" in the title? :laugh::laugh:

No, you wont even have enough money left to pay your power or Internet bill rofl.

[Ferkletastic]

If I spend $50,000 on some B&W Nautilus speakers and then buy a Plinius amp, am I then allowed to post in a thread that has "audiophile" in the title? :laugh::laugh:

Don't forget the $21k Everest speaker cables. Then the several years of therapy when you realise it sounds no better than a system you could pick up for a quarter the price. Emporers new clothes syndrome.

Then again, at least your goals are mildly obtainable, I'm still lusting after a SSL 9000 K recording console (around $1.5 mil last time I checked), although I'd be happy to get my hands back on the faders of the SSL 4000 G series I worked with a year or two back. Yum.

[Blackshear]

I'm still lusting after a SSL 9000 K recording console (around $1.5 mil last time I checked)

I'm not sure you really need 9,001 bells and whistles. I could be wrong, but I know I cannot possibly look silly pointing this out :P

[CookMySock]

That setting up room acoustically thing is something i'm interetested in learning more about. Any tips apart from the usual measurements of speakers and obstacles? Kind of limited in current place, but makes new home shopping just that much harder. doh.Get the room nice and quiet and stand right in the middle and do a really loud single handclap - so loud it stings your hands. You will get a loud "clap" noise or you will get a "booiiiiiing" ring come back at you.

"Clap" is good, "boooiiing" is bad. Use egg cartons, mattresses, different wallpaper, wall cladding, foam, thick curtains - whatever measures you are prepared to go to, but you got to get rid of those echoes, or else you are just pissing in the wind.

I have professional "listening rooms" soooo bad, that they go "baaaZOWWWW" with a handclap. A bit embarrasing for their owners.

Steve

[steve_t]

Don't forget the $21k Everest speaker cables...

Whoa! That much? Man, they must be good :laugh::laugh:

[Usarka]

I don't think anyone answered my question. Has anyone actually listened to TrueHD or MasterAudio??????????


(Anyways, I've decided to put the decision off until the outcome of digital radio is decided.)

[vindy500]

Uncompressed audio is worth it

[Usarka]

Uncompressed audio is worth it

Agreed.... Alll my "digitised music" is stored uncompressed as per the original CD.

But the question of the thread.....is uncompressed "HD" audio worth more than a subwoofer considering it's currently only available for home theater via Blu-Ray movies?

Has anyone actually listened to HD audio?

[avgas]

Huh? I thought the question was "amp or sub"
At $5K for either (for good quality) you could find that a nice setup for a PS3 could cost you as little as $1000 for sub, amp, 5 speaker and some chips (yum yum).

I have seen some reasonable cheap setups for less than the price for a cable.

[avgas]

If I spend $50,000 on some B&W Nautilus speakers and then buy a Plinius amp, am I then allowed to post in a thread that has "audiophile" in the title? :laugh::laugh:
No you also have to dry hump it infront of your friends.
And have a set of 1940's wharfdales running original cones at 6 ohm (exact) impeadance. lol

[avgas]

lols at the people who say audiophile, and then follow up with wharfedale, sony....
Yeah they are the Hyosung riders of sound lol

[avgas]

Uncompressed audio is worth it
Compression can be ok.
I was amazed and the millions of freq the human ear cant hear.

[vindy500]

sure, but uncompressed audio sounds better, blue rays hd audio also sounds fantastic. everything is just clearer