PDA

View Full Version : Cutting back ?


dee
11-23-2009, 13:47
Over the last 10 years my Hi Fi gradually died -
Pink Triangle / Helios / Grado Sig 8 . Pip pre / Ear 509 valve amps Magnaplanar SMGa .

Hardly the ultimate , but reasonable .

Now my old Rega 3 , budget phono stage , Linn Classik Movie MK 1 [ very ex-demo £400 from £2000 ] and tiny ancient 1972 RCLs [ LS35a with dynamics ] suit me well .

I have been thinking of a pocket Digibox , yet have dusted off my Canon G2 -
images are acceptable to me , but above all I know this camera ... it's almost vintage in Digital terms LOL .

I seem to be adjusting my expectations - not '' Down sizing '' ?
I HATE that word !
Is it simply being in the moment - whether it's the 509s through the Linn , or M8 to G2 ? Is it being able to let go , and accept what is ? M8 or G2 ?

ASdee deestorts , so I would appreciate your input .

Al Kaplan
11-23-2009, 13:56
I'm just hangin' out, drinkin' coffee, filling my lungs with tobacco smoke, waiting for my Leica M2's an' M3 to die. Time enough to worry about the logevity of electronics later.

Steve Bellayr
11-23-2009, 14:05
I have no idea what you are writing about.

sanmich
11-23-2009, 14:28
subtitles..

where are those damn subtitles??

FrankS
11-23-2009, 14:39
as far as digital music goes, mp3 and other music files are samples of the original and lack some of the complete information. In music at least, "analogue" still rules, imo.

Trius
11-23-2009, 14:46
Yes, for audio analog is still my standard, but there is something to be said for convenience. I have a very nice high end table, but lack a room I can dedicate to music to do it justice. So it sits in storage. (Well, having 3 cats also informs that decision. ;) ) My Denon AVR-888 with only digital sources (whether from the net, CDs or satellite feed) suffice for background listening. And my iPod for on the go is OK, though most of my listening is spoken word.

wgerrard
11-23-2009, 14:56
Dee, I, too, am more than a bit unsure what the heck you're on about.:)

But, think of downsizing as simplifying. I've found that that worry and angst can kill most any kind of buzz, so go for the choice that leaves you feeling the best. Forget about everything "they" say. No one is keeping score.

Remember, you can always change your mind.

Roger Hicks
11-24-2009, 00:07
Dear Dee,

Dunno. With audio, I can certainly hear the difference, but I don't care enough to spend the money -- which is why I have a thoroughly indifferent Dual set-up, the top end of the bottom end, a long way from the bottom end of the top end. How much do you care?

Cheers,

R.

ernstk
11-24-2009, 00:44
Hi Dee

I get completely what you're saying. I think your audio analogy is a good one. I have a very good analog/CD set up which I don't use that much. I have 'downsized' to a simpler system, which still sounds good but gets played more.

I've rationalized my photography to just 3 cameras:

Hasselblad SWC
Leica M4/35mm Summaron
Ricoh GR Digital

I'm trying to focus more on the 'music' and less on the equipment.

Regards
Ernst

Paul T.
11-24-2009, 01:06
My system's a bit basic, Rega 3, Audiolab 8000A, Kef bookshelf (103?).

But around a year ago I loaded about 500 albums onto iTunes, sold every one of my box sets (for loads, the BBC library paid £145 for some, I bought a nice watch with the proceeds) and stuck it all on the iPod. Now I drive around, with the iPod fed into the FM radio via a tiny transmitter, playing everything on random, and it's like a DJ who knows my most extreme, bizarre favourites is crafting a playlist just for me. I'm enjoying my 'CDs' more than I have for years.

Sometimes, with an expensive hi fi, you find yourself listening to the system. I think it's better to listen to the music.

Dave Wilkinson
11-24-2009, 01:34
subtitles..

where are those damn subtitles?? Professor Stanley Unwin would have loved some of these threads! - remember him? (if not - google, he was great!) :D
Dave.

Roger Hicks
11-24-2009, 01:38
My system's a bit basic, Rega 3, Audiolab 8000A, Kef bookshelf (103?).

But around a year ago I loaded about 500 albums onto iTunes, sold every one of my box sets (for loads, the BBC library paid £145 for some, I bought a nice watch with the proceeds) and stuck it all on the iPod. Now I drive around, with the iPod fed into the FM radio via a tiny transmitter, playing everything on random, and it's like a DJ who knows my most extreme, bizarre favourites is crafting a playlist just for me. I'm enjoying my 'CDs' more than I have for years.

Sometimes, with an expensive hi fi, you find yourself listening to the system. I think it's better to listen to the music.

Flanders and Swann,

"But I never did care much for music
It's the high fidel-it-teeeeeeeee''

Cheers,

R.

Wahoo
11-24-2009, 02:12
Dee, I, too, am more than a bit unsure what the heck you're on about.:)


Pink Triangles were a top quality record turntable way back when (about 1980) and cost about £320 (500 USD) without arm or cartridge. They were good but have been outclassed for decades.

It's difficult to describe music listened through a h.q T/T, phono stage, amp and speakers whilst spinning well pressed, dynamic vinyl. It's certainly a revelation.


An old pink triangle with linn ittok (tic-tok) pick-up arm.


http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a276/Suits_Me/cc_1.jpg

alun severn
11-24-2009, 02:20
Well, I'll bite (insofar as I know what the topic is!).... I see another photography analogy here -- one in widespread evidence on virtually every photography forum I have ever looked at: gear talk -- but rarely a mention of what matters in a photograph and why. It has always reminded me of those discussions I seem to recall from my own childhood and early teen years when hi-fi buffs discussed every aspect of technical performance but rarely if ever mentioned music or why it offered peculiar satisfactions...

ernstk
11-24-2009, 02:28
Alun

I think we're actually alluding to the opposite. Strip away the technology and enjoy the music/images...

Ernst

ernstk
11-24-2009, 02:29
Professor Stanley Unwin would have loved some of these threads! - remember him? (if not - google, he was great!) :D
Dave.

Deep joy...

Ernst

robklurfield
11-24-2009, 05:31
ah, the warm glow of tubes and the warm sound of vinyl. the sonic equivalent of (name your favorite film stock). um, maybe like platinum printing; not for the faint of heart, but gorgeous tones when you're done.

Cary, Melos, Fanfare, VPI, Lyra, Audio Physic here. oh, and a cheapie Music Hall CD deck. Keep on spinning that vinyl.

sanmich
11-24-2009, 05:40
Professor Stanley Unwin would have loved some of these threads! - remember him? (if not - google, he was great!) :D
Dave.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=323kQis2zbM

I'm sure native English speaker will enjoy it even more than I did, but it indeed sounds awfully similar to the OP :):)

Chris101
11-24-2009, 07:46
Oh please! Dee's DEElightful mode of comuniDEEcation is always fun to read. I believe she is DEEscribing a way of limiting the equipment one uses to a bare-bones set. Limiting one's opportunities will lead to limited DEEsires as well.

;)

MPerson
11-24-2009, 07:55
Flanders and Swann,

"But I never did care much for music
It's the high fidel-it-teeeeeeeee''

Cheers,

R.

I'm a GNU man myself..............

Roger Hicks
11-24-2009, 08:00
I'm a GNU man myself..............

How do you do? It's so very gnice to gnow you...

Personally I'm in favour of a good wallow. Though the rhyme in the follow-up is even better: "His inamorata/the hippopotama..." Not bad, two six-syllable lines with four words.

Cheers,

R.

bob338
11-24-2009, 09:29
i made the leap to new McIntosh gear a few years ago after getting tired of dealing with the tubes and maintenance. at the same time i sold my old Linn LP12(Ittok, Benz ruby, cirkus, lingo, etc.) and bought a new VPI with a 25lb platter and a new benz cart. i bought just about everything i thought i ever wanted.
i realized recently that i haven't used my turntable since my son was born two years ago and i plug the ipod into the Mc more often than i ever imagined i would. it sounds pretty good if you rip your files into Apple Lossless. my Mc cd player is the model right before they started accepting cdrs and sacds, so it gets used less and less too.
i guess my point is that spending ungodly sums of money on a new system will not necessarily increase your enjoyment of music. i guess if i had it to do over again, i would probably buy the new McIntosh music server system instead of the TT and cd player.
on the other hand, i was at a client's house a few weeks ago who has $500k in his stereo and it was mindblowing! his entire living room consists of the stereo and a couch. but i guess you have to be a bachelor to do that...

bob

Roger Hicks
11-24-2009, 11:29
on the other hand, i was at a client's house a few weeks ago who has $500k in his stereo and it was mindblowing! his entire living room consists of the stereo and a couch. but i guess you have to be a bachelor to do that...

bob

Dear Bob,

Not necessarily. A close friend is very senior in an in-car entertainment company and his in-car stereo is worth 10x as much as our car.

Then again, his car is probably worth a lot more than our car too.

And he's married.

Cheers,

R.

robklurfield
11-24-2009, 12:05
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4132012362/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2489/4132012362_59704af2af.jpg

Dave Wilkinson
11-24-2009, 12:12
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4132012362/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2489/4132012362_59704af2af.jpgVery nice!.....I seem to remember things like that - in the radio receivers, when I was a boy.
Dave.

pakeha
11-24-2009, 12:40
ah, know the feeling Dee. My NAD amp just deestructed. and to top that off my wonderful wife thought the tweeters on B&W DM1400`S NEED TO BE DUSTED!!! When you have had this stuff for so long it is kinda hard to let go and replace with new and improved - and down sized.

dee
11-24-2009, 13:26
It was this factor of beginning to focus on the equipment , rather than the music / photos which I was trying to get across [ ASdee creates constant crossed wires LOL ]
My G2 works for me as do my M8 and the Dig3 . Irrespective of the cost differential .
I can only observe ' real ' people with little comprehension - like through a glass darkly , so have to ask ' obvious ' questions

Makten
11-24-2009, 13:27
as far as digital music goes, mp3 and other music files are samples of the original and lack some of the complete information.
Which of course is the case with a vinyl record too. It's a sample, not the "complete information". There are no microphones, mixers, compressors or recorders that can take the musicians to your home and put them inside your speakers.

ernstk
11-24-2009, 13:51
Which of course is the case with a vinyl record too. It's a sample, not the "complete information". There are no microphones, mixers, compressors or recorders that can take the musicians to your home and put them inside your speakers.

However, being an analogue music signal it is much more 'complete information' than a digital equivalent.

Ernst

Nescio
11-24-2009, 14:02
I propose a life ordinary and without lustre: 'tis all one; all moral
philosophy may as well be applied to a common and private life, as to one
of richer composition: every man carries the entire form of human
condition.

Montaigne (1533-1592)

The first blogger of our time

Wahoo
11-24-2009, 14:36
I seem to remember things like that - in the radio receivers, when I was a boy.
Dave.


Really Dave, was this before or after De Forest . :)

Only last week I read that there are plans to re-open the Blackburn (UK) plant which once employed about 7,000 people making mullard and osram valves/tubes.

The only valve/tube items that I still own are a couple of mono Philips EL 84 powered amps, 'narm Pioneer, 3 quad amps plus pre's and tuners and an ear 834p mm/mc.

Here's a more modern 90's turntable, haven't things changed since your dansette major in blue or red ?




http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a276/Suits_Me/Budgetturntable.bmp

Makten
11-25-2009, 01:47
However, being an analogue music signal it is much more 'complete information' than a digital equivalent.
There's no such rule. An analogue signal can be alot less "complete" than a digital one. It all depends on what gear is used to capture the signal, process it and put it out in your room. As long as the sample frequency is high enough, you can capture every hearable frequency in the recording. How would it be "less complete" just because it was "translated" to digital and then "translated" back to analogue?

Sorry, but there's a whole lot of BS going on among analogue freaks. Anyone is free to like the sound better, but it is by no means "more true". It CAN be, but only because of the signal chain being allover better.

historicist
11-25-2009, 02:59
Vinyl vs. CD, it's like the digital vs. film debate. Both in the sense of being a bit pointless, but they are also rather similar in the way the whole experience of using them feels.

Vinyl may not really sound better (not owning any CDs I can't really say though it strikes me as being a bit unlikely), but it certainly sounds good, and is a lot more fun than cds. It also involves much more hassle, just like film photography does - try moving house with 2000+ records when you can't drive, or getting up in the middle of a LP side to blow dust off the needle, etc. etc.

Sometimes I want to throw them all away and just have a tiny hard disk filled with all my music. But I find when I listen to Itunes, the ease of going from track to track makes me never really listen to a song, just constantly skip here and there. With records once a side is on, it stays on until it is over. I don't like digital cameras for exactly the same reason - not so much to do with the quality, but because they make it too easy to take too many photos.

I agree it can definitely be easy to loose sight of things and think about the gear more than what you actually brought the gear to do in the first place. I'm definitely guilty of that, with hi fi and cameras. But there's a balance to be struck, and once you've heard music on a good system or seen a picture taken with a good lens its hard to go back to listening to mp3s on a laptop or cheap digicams.

robklurfield
11-25-2009, 05:50
Is that one yours??? Wow!
Really Dave, was this before or after De Forest . :)

Only last week I read that there are plans to re-open the Blackburn (UK) plant which once employed about 7,000 people making mullard and osram valves/tubes.

The only valve/tube items that I still own are a couple of mono Philips EL 84 powered amps, 'narm Pioneer, 3 quad amps plus pre's and tuners and an ear 834p mm/mc.

Here's a more modern 90's turntable, haven't things changed since your dansette major in blue or red ?




http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a276/Suits_Me/Budgetturntable.bmp

Al Kaplan
11-25-2009, 06:01
What ever happened to all those 45 RPM singles, the ones with just one song you really wanted and the "flip side" that nobody wanted to hear?

Chris101
11-25-2009, 06:04
I think they have all been melted into bowls that sell in Southern California gift shops.

nathanp
11-25-2009, 07:02
I just typed this after reading the whole thread and then realised that I'd wandered away from the OP's point. Oh well, I'll post it anyway!

I'm finding that these days I can appreciate things like photographs, music or films in one of two ways. On the one hand I can appreciate the technical quality - in photographs this is usually where I notice the tones, bokeh and sharpness, in music it's the tracks where I may not find the song to be that great but I'd notice (and enjoy) the crispness of the hi-hats, the depth of sub-bass, or a fantastic guitar tone.
On the other hand I can appreciate things for their content - like badly recorded punk music with a strong message, a crackly old blues record or in photography terms a blurry, badly exposed shot of something amazing. Occassionally both things coincide and the result is something special but it doesn't mean that something that leans more to one side than the other can't be great.

I suppose that's all pretty obvious to most people but I've never really thought about it very much.

Chris101
11-25-2009, 07:24
Punk's got a message?

Roger Hicks
11-25-2009, 11:07
Punk's got a message?
Dear Chris,

F*** you. F*** the world. F*** everything except (possiblY) the music, but probably, f*** that too.

Seems a clear enough message to me. Or maybe I misunderstood it. The greatest proto-punk band, in my book, was the Blockheads. F***ing Ada, f***ing Ada...

Cheers,

R.

bob338
11-25-2009, 11:43
Dear Chris,

F*** you. F*** the world. F*** everything except (possiblY) the music, but probably, f*** that too.

Seems a clear enough message to me. Or maybe I misunderstood it. The greatest proto-punk band, in my book, was the Blockheads. F***ing Ada, f***ing Ada...

Cheers,

R.


sounds like you learned about punk rock from an episode of Quincy, MD.

bob

Chris101
11-25-2009, 11:43
Shouldn't punks be mostly under 60? Uh, no I guess not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhLAWejWXmw

If you recognize the long-haired guitar player on the right, you will get the connection.

Roger Hicks
11-25-2009, 11:47
sounds like you learned about punk rock from an episode of Quincy, MD.

bob

Dear Bob,

No. British punk musicians, face to face (not many). I'm not familiar with the television programme to which I think you refer (as I say, I'm not familiar with it). But I have to say that the public face and the private face of punk did not always correspond 1:1. Then again, sometimes they did...

Cheers,

R.

Andy Kibber
11-25-2009, 12:05
When I was a teenager, I believed that punk was about the message, not the style of music. Now I believe exactly the opposite. :D

MickH
11-25-2009, 12:10
When I was no longer a teenager it was Quincy M.E.

Ezzie
11-25-2009, 12:15
"If the kids were united, they would never be divided...."

"We“re going down the pub" more like

It was always about the message..

bob338
11-25-2009, 12:23
Dear Bob,

No. British punk musicians, face to face (not many). I'm not familiar with the television programme to which I think you refer (as I say, I'm not familiar with it). But I have to say that the public face and the private face of punk did not always correspond 1:1. Then again, sometimes they did...

Cheers,

R.
hi roger. just rattling your cage!
where i grew up the only punks that acted like that(f**k everything) were the short timer quincy punks who learned how to 'go punk' from moronic tv shows.
for what it's worth, i always thought the message was we're f**ked, not f**k everything.

bob

Roger Hicks
11-25-2009, 13:01
hi roger. just rattling your cage!
where i grew up the only punks that acted like that(f**k everything) were the short timer quincy punks who learned how to 'go punk' from moronic tv shows.
for what it's worth, i always thought the message was we're f**ked, not f**k everything.

bob

Dear Bob,

A far more perceptive analysis.

But we're all f***ed, what is the appropriate response?

Cheers,

R.

Mephiloco
11-25-2009, 13:22
I think tubes for HiFi are largely overrated. When it comes to reproducing sound, solid state is more accurate, for creating sound in the first place, tubes are the way to go.

All my guitar amps are vintage tube amps, all of my hifi equipment (for the most part) was solid state until the hurricane. I've yet to replace the speakers/equipment I lost in the storm and play everything through my computer through some cheap speakers or through my grado headphones.

Edit: it's worth pointing out that the majority of studios these days are digital, so the idea that an analog system being superior is kind of moot, considering the original signal is converted from digital to analog when put on vinyl, so there would be more signal loss on a vinyl these days than on a cd.

robklurfield
11-25-2009, 13:30
just a humble opinion here:

tubes accurate? of course not. especially not flea-powered 300B's running single-ended. for me, it's not about accuracy but about pleasantness of the sound and joy to my ears. an AM radio in a beat up old chevy playing through a little dash-mounted tinny speaker can be pleasing if you love the music it's playing. if I want accurate, I go to a concert. similar to my philosophy of photography. it's all artifice. when I shoot something, it a representation of reality, not reality itself. of course once some seems an image any of us make, the image becomes it's own reality. same as my thousand of vinyl discs. they're a version of reality, but reality itself. that said, solid state is so much more hassle-free than my #$%! tubes needing to be replaced and re-biased, etc. anyway, in the end, with hi-fi, it should be all about the music. but, most of us on this site being guys, probably it's also, too often, about gear lust.
I think tubes for HiFi are largely overrated. When it comes to reproducing sound, solid state is more accurate, for creating sound in the first place, tubes are the way to go.

All my guitar amps are vintage tube amps, all of my hifi equipment (for the most part) was solid state until the hurricane. I've yet to replace the speakers/equipment I lost in the storm and play everything through my computer through some cheap speakers or through my grado headphones.

bob338
11-25-2009, 13:48
But we're all f***ed, what is the appropriate response?

Cheers,

R.



acknowledgment. resolution. pursuance. psalm.



bob

kansas_parker
11-25-2009, 13:56
I, too, was once an analogue only type of person. Then I got married...then I started to have children. Now I only really listen to music when I'm in the car or when my daughter requests it. I still have my records, but no turntable, not even a proper stereo system. It is iTunes only for me. This is one of the reasons why I got into photography in the last couple of years, so I could hang on to something from the past.

For me shooting film isn't about the picture quality...no format will help me with that:) It's about the inconvenience of it. I think technology has handicapped humans, we're meant to work, but we spend most of our energy trying to get out of that work. I spend my workday in a cushy chair staring at a RADAR scope talking to people. Cool, yes. Mentally challenging, yes. Hardly work, though. Loading, shooting and developing film is my work.

Roger Hicks
11-25-2009, 14:46
acknowledgment. resolution. pursuance. psalm.



bob

Dear Bob,

Kyrie.... Kyrie... Kyrie eleison....

(Chose the Electrc Prunes or the Missa Luba as quoted in If..., according to taste.)

Tashi delek,

R.

Wahoo
11-26-2009, 02:55
Is that one yours??? Wow!

I wish.

This one is much more like my disc spinner - 'Nipper' and all that . .














http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a276/Suits_Me/hmv.jpg

:D :D :D

antistatic
12-01-2009, 03:44
For me shooting film isn't about the picture quality...no format will help me with that:) It's about the inconvenience of it. I think technology has handicapped humans, we're meant to work, but we spend most of our energy trying to get out of that work. I spend my workday in a cushy chair staring at a RADAR scope talking to people. Cool, yes. Mentally challenging, yes. Hardly work, though. Loading, shooting and developing film is my work.

Spot on.

Now I must get up and change the CD :D