GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk6 => Topic started by: DWGTI on 23 September 2009, 10:45
-
If you have it as an option, whats it like? Do you have any pictures?
-
yup i do - its the nuts. honestly, well worth the money. had it on half blast with the missus a couple of nights back - dizzee nearly blew my ears off it was so loud and clear :laugh:
well worth the money, i highly recommend it! there is a pic on one of the threads of the pics of my car - but i can't be bothered to search for the link :grin:
-
yup i do - its the nuts. honestly, well worth the money. had it on half blast with the missus a couple of nights back - dizzee nearly blew my ears off it was so loud and clear :laugh:
well worth the money, i highly recommend it! there is a pic on one of the threads of the pics of my car - but i can't be bothered to search for the link :grin:
Aww man I cant wait to hear it. Any idea which thread?
-
yup i do - its the nuts. honestly, well worth the money. had it on half blast with the missus a couple of nights back - dizzee nearly blew my ears off it was so loud and clear :laugh:
well worth the money, i highly recommend it! there is a pic on one of the threads of the pics of my car - but i can't be bothered to search for the link :grin:
Any visible signs of the system matchboy, like speaker badges etc or is it totally stealthy?
-
Exactly what I want to know Mac7. Dont you work shifts, always seem to be on when im on??
-
Any visible signs of the system matchboy, like speaker badges etc or is it totally stealthy?
The only visible signs as far as i know/seen are the speaker badges on the two above the dash in either corner (and they are small speakers but pack a massive punch) - other than that its as stealthy as jason bourne :laugh:
-
Any visible signs of the system matchboy, like speaker badges etc or is it totally stealthy?
The only visible signs as far as i know/seen are the speaker badges on the two above the dash in either corner (and they are small speakers but pack a massive punch) - other than that its as stealthy as jason bourne :laugh:
Sweet. Out of curiosity is there an amp? Is it under the passenger seat? Something I read somewhere, may be alot of rubbish.
-
i don't know about an amp - i haven't seen one but then again i haven't looked under the seat! in the V5 we had which had the tip top stereo the amp bit was part of the unit under the stereo screen - but there is none of that in the GTI.
its well worth the money, it sounds awesome, and its discreet enough that the speakers won't attract attention to any scum element having a look in your cabin!
-
cheers mate Im defo getting the dynaudio! Cant wait. Still trying to arrange a DSG test drive. God I love the Mk6!
-
its a lovely car mate, you will love it - i can't believe how better it is to my mk5 GTI - and the dynaudio is the finishing touch!
-
You're making me wish I'd got the Dynaudio too! The thing is, unlike most people here, I actually didn't want the big colour screen on the console.
I was fiddling with the iPod connector on Saturday, while my cousin was in the car, and suggesting it might be fun to tour the town centre late in the evening with all the windows open and the "Judex crederis" from the Berlioz Te Deum blaring out at full volume....
Rolfe.
-
its a lovely car mate, you will love it - i can't believe how better it is to my mk5 GTI - and the dynaudio is the finishing touch!
Should be alot better than my current Mk3 GTI then :smiley: . Still love the old girl though!(hope she didnt hear that) might not start! :grin:
-
You're making me wish I'd got the Dynaudio too! The thing is, unlike most people here, I actually didn't want the big colour screen on the console.
I was fiddling with the iPod connector on Saturday, while my cousin was in the car, and suggesting it might be fun to tour the town centre late in the evening with all the windows open and the "Judex crederis" from the Berlioz Te Deum blaring out at full volume....
Rolfe.
that would be quite funny :grin:
-
its a lovely car mate, you will love it - i can't believe how better it is to my mk5 GTI - and the dynaudio is the finishing touch!
Should be alot better than my current Mk3 GTI then :smiley: . Still love the old girl though!(hope she didnt hear that) might not start! :grin:
what spec have you gone for? when do you get it?!
-
Havent even ordered it yet, still to test drive a DSG.
-
go for manual :wink:
-
Go for DSG :wink:
-
Has anyone tested the standard setup vs Dynaudio?
Although I've specced that latter, I must admit I'm a bit ignorant with the stereo side and most quality cars kinda sound the same to me. OK, when you play it loud it does starting distorting a bit, but I don't have the stereo up load anyway.
Many years ago, when seperates were all the rage and you'd build your stereo with best in class units, I sat in a sound room to check out various options. TBH, they all sounded very similar to me and in the end I just went for the units that had good reviews in the mags.
-
There isn't a huge difference between class units. And nowadays, there's a lot of blatant nonsense surrounding high-end home audio, like little stickers you can put on your speakers or "treatments" for CDs to give them a better class of bits and bytes - homoeopathy for the audiophile.
However, nobody is going to pretend that a pocket tranny is going to sound as good as a Linn system, for example. The big question is, is the difference between the 310, the 510 and the 510 with Dynaudio in the "pocket tranny vs. Linn" bracket, or in the pink stickers for your speakers bracket. I suspect its somewhere in between actually - that there is a difference, but it may not be as enormous as we like to think.
Listening tests are very subjective, particularly if you can't switch instantly from one version to the other, and they're enormously affected by volume - we're all inclined to rate the louder sound as better irrespective of anything else.
I'm not disappointed by the 310, but I'd like a listen to the Dynaudio some day.
Rolfe.
-
i have not listened to the "normal" stereo but i will say that there is a massive difference between the normal stereo on my mk 5 to the dynaudio on my mk 6. its so noticeable that even my missus has commented on numerous occasions about it - and she has no interest in all that stuff. put it this way, its like watching football on standard definition against high definition - when you're watching SD it looks good and you're happy; when you watch it in HD you realise how much better it is and you'll never go back! :laugh:
-
I have dyno audio in my golf and its pretty good,if you are alone in the car the clarity is pretty good,the whole system is matched and is set up for the car.A car is not the best place to listen to music,if you want perfection you would go and listen to the music live.
-
There isn't a huge difference between class units. And nowadays, there's a lot of blatant nonsense surrounding high-end home audio, like little stickers you can put on your speakers or "treatments" for CDs to give them a better class of bits and bytes - homoeopathy for the audiophile.
However, nobody is going to pretend that a pocket tranny is going to sound as good as a Linn system, for example. The big question is, is the difference between the 310, the 510 and the 510 with Dynaudio in the "pocket tranny vs. Linn" bracket, or in the pink stickers for your speakers bracket. I suspect its somewhere in between actually - that there is a difference, but it may not be as enormous as we like to think.
Listening tests are very subjective, particularly if you can't switch instantly from one version to the other, and they're enormously affected by volume - we're all inclined to rate the louder sound as better irrespective of anything else.
I'm not disappointed by the 310, but I'd like a listen to the Dynaudio some day.
Rolfe.
Between the electronics, no, or at least incredibly unlikely, at least not to the human ear.
Between the different speakers, Dynaudio and standard, yes, in all probability there is. How much, well that would depend on various things and only a (double) blind test would be much use determining that given the problems associated with audio testing and comparisons. Then there's preference to add to that; not everyone likes the same speakers for good reason. And then to top it all, you have the considerable amount of ambient noise in a car to add to the mix.
My (educated) guess is that when a Golf is tootling along, even if you could tell the difference between the standard speakers and the Dynaudio, there wouldn't be the awesome difference that the exorbitant price disparity would imply. Certainly not enough for me to shell out that kind of money and this is coming from someone that spent 6K on the front 3 speakers in my living room at home. ;)
-
I run a high end A/V business and I have listened to both standard and Dynaudio and there is a fair increase in performance with the Dyaudio. What I would add is that if you play all your music through an ipod the quality will always be compromised than if you listen through CD. If for example I sat in a standard GTI and played a well recorded CD in the RCD 310 or RCD 510 then downloaded the same album onto an ipod through itunes and played it through the Dyaudio system it would sound better in the standard car.
Itunes compresses the music down to around 128 kbps, dependent on your settings, whereas a standard CD has a compression rate of around 1600 kbps.
If you want to get a better sound with your ipods go into the itunes set up and select the download compression to max which I think is around 320 kbps which is a lot better than default settings.
-
If you want to get a better sound with your ipods go into the itunes set up and select the download compression to max which I think is around 320 kbps which is a lot better than default settings.
i did not know that, v helpful, ta!
-
Anything else about A/V I'll be happy to answer, about cars though.....erm......let's see.....erm over to you lot!!!
-
Indeed, thank you. I find the sound quality OK with iTunes, but that sounds worth doing. I may decide at some point to re-scan my CDs to try to sort out the mess that is the music folders, so if I do that, I know what else to do.
This is part of why I much prefer to buy CDs rather than download from the iStore. I get the music in the least compressed format, I get it in hard copy off my computer so I don't really need to back it up, and I get the informative insert booklets.
Rolfe.
-
There's still some life left in CD's!
You can get certain Mp3 players that allow you to put the music onto them at Windows Media Lossless which is as near to CD quality as you can get but you wouldn't be able to use itunes to do this.
-
iTunes does in fact offer the Apple Lossless Encoder. Obviously with a lossless (as opposed to "lossy") encoder, the file size will be considerably larger.
-
Or alternatively put all your CD music onto a HC SD card at Lossless compression and stick it straight into the car hifi. Personally I can't be arsed with all that as it would take hours and hours depending on your collection but if you have the spare time go for it.
Word has it from a reliable source, me, that in the not too distant future VW will offer the same Bang & Olufsen upgrade to top of the line models as found in the current Audi A4. It is planned for GTI, R20, top Toureg ect. I don't know exact timings but would expect an announcement within the next 6-8 months. This will make a big difference to the sound as it is tuned for the specific car and in the Audis sounds fantastic. It won't however be the same as the A8/Aston Martin versions which are minimum £5000 upgrades :sad:
-
that in the not too distant future VW will offer the same Bang & Olufsen upgrade to top of the line models as found in the current Audi A4.
This will make a big difference to the sound as it is tuned for the specific car and in the Audis sounds fantastic.
my missus has this in her A4, I can confirm also that it does indeed sound awesome!
-
iTunes does in fact offer the Apple Lossless Encoder. Obviously with a lossless (as opposed to "lossy") encoder, the file size will be considerably larger.
Yeah its better but not the same as lossless but then ipods were designed as portable devices where storage is key not audio quality. They are perfect for listening to through headphones just less so when used as an audio source.
-
iTunes does in fact offer the Apple Lossless Encoder. Obviously with a lossless (as opposed to "lossy") encoder, the file size will be considerably larger.
Yeah its better but not the same as lossless but then ipods were designed as portable devices where storage is key not audio quality. They are perfect for listening to through headphones just less so when used as an audio source.
So true. Which is why I prefer to have the CD on my shelf as a master copy.
However, I find an 8Gb iPod takes an awful lot, at the standard compression rate. And they're marketing much bigger ones too. If 8Gb will swallow the entire Ring cycle without noticing it (as it will), I wouldn't say storage capacity was the problem. Transfer times, maybe, but you can always run them in the background while you're doing other stuff.
Rolfe.
-
Absolutely, and the capacity is getting bigger all the time. Hard Drive technology has improved no end over the last couple of years. Apple have done such a great job with the ipod as well.
-
Were listening to music in a car, its hardly the ideal place for serious music listening.
Convert your music to mp3's with Lame at 192k variable and you will have very decent quality. Certainly nothing lossy/lossless is needed for the car.
-
I was in the local Bang & Olufsen store the other week they have some speakers in there for £18,000 :shocked:
-
Were listening to music in a car, its hardly the ideal place for serious music listening.
Convert your music to mp3's with Lame at 192k variable and you will have very decent quality. Certainly nothing lossy/lossless is needed for the car.
Kev you are absolutely right, I'm just a bit anal when it comes to things like this.
-
I was in the local Bang & Olufsen store the other week they have some speakers in there for £18,000 :shocked:
If you had the money I could sell you a very nice 103" screen for £90,000.00. Being a forum member I'm sure we could sort you out a very good deal though :wink:
If you wanted those speakers as well we could do something really special :grin: :grin: :grin:
-
Bargin, i`ll take two :wink:
-
Bargin, i`ll take two :wink:
I thought so, PM me your card details and address and I'll get them ordered up :grin: :grin:
-
iTunes does in fact offer the Apple Lossless Encoder. Obviously with a lossless (as opposed to "lossy") encoder, the file size will be considerably larger.
Yeah its better but not the same as lossless but then ipods were designed as portable devices where storage is key not audio quality. They are perfect for listening to through headphones just less so when used as an audio source.
I'd bet you couldn't tell the difference between a CD and the same lossless encoded track played through a new generation iPod hooked up to any of the Golf stereos. I'd even bet that no one here could differentiate between a 320K encoded mp3 and a CD, especially in a car that was actually moving; you could probably drop that to much more coarse encoding too and get away with it for most driving conditions or even any time the engine is running.
Seems like there's some subjective audiophile ignorance showing its ugly head here. I'd bet you'd even recommend people to use $$$ external DACs too. :rolleyes:
For those that don't know, there's a lot of ignorance and myth in the audio world, considerable amounts of which is championed by "high end" A/V salesmen that make their biggest profits from selling ridiculously over priced cables to the unsuspecting public.
-
Which is why a £50 HDMI lead will give 10x the picture quality of a £5 HDMI lead. Allegedly... :wink:
-
What did I say about homoeopathy for audiophiles? :rolleyes:
Rolfe.
-
iTunes does in fact offer the Apple Lossless Encoder. Obviously with a lossless (as opposed to "lossy") encoder, the file size will be considerably larger.
Yeah its better but not the same as lossless but then ipods were designed as portable devices where storage is key not audio quality. They are perfect for listening to through headphones just less so when used as an audio source.
I'd bet you couldn't tell the difference between a CD and the same lossless encoded track played through a new generation iPod hooked up to any of the Golf stereos. I'd even bet that no one here could differentiate between a 320K encoded mp3 and a CD, especially in a car that was actually moving; you could probably drop that to much more coarse encoding too and get away with it for most driving conditions or even any time the engine is running.
Seems like there's some subjective audiophile ignorance showing its ugly head here. I'd bet you'd even recommend people to use $$$ external DACs too. :rolleyes:
For those that don't know, there's a lot of ignorance and myth in the audio world, considerable amounts of which is championed by "high end" A/V salesmen that make their biggest profits from selling ridiculously over priced cables to the unsuspecting public.
No no no Adrian youv'e got me all wrong, I agree with you completley. What I do is about as far removed from the audiophile world as you can get. The difference between lossless and 320 kbps is so minimaml to the human ear that most probably couldn't hear but the difference between normal ipod compression, lets say 64-128 there is a huge difference.
The audiophile business is ridiculas and one that I'm no part of. I just sell very expensive products to the very wealthy. Looks and badge and just as important as performance :wink:
-
I run a high end A/V business and I have listened to both standard and Dynaudio and there is a fair increase in performance with the Dyaudio. What I would add is that if you play all your music through an ipod the quality will always be compromised than if you listen through CD. If for example I sat in a standard GTI and played a well recorded CD in the RCD 310 or RCD 510 then downloaded the same album onto an ipod through itunes and played it through the Dyaudio system it would sound better in the standard car.
Itunes compresses the music down to around 128 kbps, dependent on your settings, whereas a standard CD has a compression rate of around 1600 kbps.
If you want to get a better sound with your ipods go into the itunes set up and select the download compression to max which I think is around 320 kbps which is a lot better than default settings.
Where on the itunes settings is the download compression rate. I noticed the sound quality coming from my iphone was pants!
-
No no no Adrian youv'e got me all wrong, I agree with you completley. What I do is about as far removed from the audiophile world as you can get. The difference between lossless and 320 kbps is so minimaml to the human ear that most probably couldn't hear but the difference between normal ipod compression, lets say 64-128 there is a huge difference.
The audiophile business is ridiculas and one that I'm no part of. I just sell very expensive products to the very wealthy. Looks and badge and just as important as performance :wink:
Okay, sorry dude, my mistake and my sincere apologies for tarring you with the audiophile brush. I'm a bit of an A/V aficionado and I usually get a little peeved at those silly people that promote cable risers, magic rocks and 1m HDMI cables that cost $1000. ;)
-
Go into iTunes Settings > General > Import Settings > Import Using: > Setting. That's on a Mac, but probably the same on a PC.
-
I found that the std gti speakers have improved a great deal over the mk5. not sure if this is down to the improved interior quality or the sound proofing.
Many people werent totally satisfied with the sound upgrade package on the MK5 so opted for after market stuff which gives you much more bang for your buck. Seems like this has obviously been addressed by vw this time around, but I will still be going aftermarket. I like to tailor my sound to suit the kind of music I like...
much like my hifi at home :wink:
DL do you stock B&W?? I think I blew one of mine a couple of months back :embarassed:
-
I found that the std gti speakers have improved a great deal over the mk5. not sure if this is down to the improved interior quality or the sound proofing.
Many people werent totally satisfied with the sound upgrade package on the MK5 so opted for after market stuff which gives you much more bang for your buck. Seems like this has obviously been addressed by vw this time around, but I will still be going aftermarket. I like to tailor my sound to suit the kind of music I like...
much like my hifi at home :wink:
DL do you stock B&W?? I think I blew one of mine a couple of months back :embarassed:
If you "blew one" then it's most likely that you were under-powering them - contrary to popular belief, it's very uncommon to over-power speakers (mainly because most people don't have such powerful amps and if they did, turning the gain up so much would result in deafness and/or an awfully distorted noise that no one wants to listen to) and usually damage is caused when people turn up the volume and their amplifiers cannot keep up with the demand for power; then the signal will clip and the voice coil on their tweeters will burn out.
-
Im running a musical fidelity amp (which was quite expensive in its day :grin:) so I doubt underpower would have caused it. im quite sure my dad was listening to it a while back and didnt realise it was on mute, so pupmed the power right up whilst also flicking the mute switch. :huh:
Atleast thats my theory anyway... I think I may need to have a listen to it again just to be sure.
thx
-
I only sell Bang & Olufsen I'm afraid R32.
With regards itunes, on a pc you need to go first to; Edit, Preferences, Import settings, then Custom and finally choose 320kbps. I think that's right anyway. I'm doing this from memory typing on my phone so sorry if its wrong!
-
For me, 320k is a complete waste of space guys, you'd be very hard pushed to hear quality over 192kbps, honestly if you can hear it over 192k then you will be classed as superhuman, don't believe the people that claim they can either. If your listening to something like an audio book then even 128k will be more than enough.
I'm not sure which encoder itunes uses as I would never entertain that on my PC. So I have dug around and found LAME encoder for itunes which seems to be an add-on for it. I would strongly recommend using this.
http://mac.rbytes.net/cat/mac/audio/itunes-lame-encoder/
If you have the option of using a variable rate then I would recommend using that rather than constant, what variable will do is that when you have a quiet part of the song it wont encode it, it will leave it alone so you then get the benefit of it not encoding hiss etc and your end result will be a smaller mp3.
-
Kev, seriously you can really hear a difference between lossless and 192kbps. I have all this set up at work and the difference is huge. I'm in no way an audiophile and don't even really listen to music that much but I really mean it there is a big noticable difference between 192 and lossless/cd quality. If however you only use your ipod and a dock or a pair of headphones I can understand that you would not notice the difference in sound. You'll probably disagree but if ever you are in Cambridge pop into the shop!!
-
next time i'm in cambridge i'm gonna pop in and look at all the stuff i can't afford to buy!!
-
Sorry I read your post again, 192 against 320 there isn't a great difference. I just always stick anything at the highest quality!! As I said earlier I can be a bit anal, sorry!
-
Sorry I read your post again, 192 against 320 there isn't a great difference. I just always stick anything at the highest quality!! As I said earlier I can be a bit anal, sorry!
:wink:Bummer!! :laugh:
-
I had an interesting experience when I first got my iPod. As I said, I didn't have iTunes on a PC at the time (slow dial-up at home and no admin privileges for office computer). A friend loaded up some stuff she thought I would like from her own collection.
It sounded, well not horrible, but uninvolving and two-dimensional. I thought, oh dear, that was a waste of money wasn't it.
However, I was trying to learn a piece of music at the time, so I showed up with a CD of the Brahms German Requiem and asked her to put it on the iPod for me, which she did. I was only thinking of it as a learning tool.
I was blown away. I couldn't take the earphones out of my ears. The difference was astonishing.
When I asked my friend about this, she came up with some complete BS about how her files had been copied and recopied over several computers, so they must have degraded. Well, even I know better than that. We're not talking about magnetic tape here. I can only imagine that he own files were at a higher compression, and had lost that je ne sais quoi.
I agree, once I plug the iPod into the Linn Majik amplifier and play it through the Linn Toukan speakers, it's not quite the same thing. But using the standard iTunes settings to copy a CD, then playing it through the earphones, it's definitely "good enough".
Incidentally, I noticed something else interesting. One day I was absolutely compelled to listen to the Berlioz Te Deum, which I didn't have a CD of (just a cassette tape which some day I must convert). So I went to the iStore and bought a recording of it, while I was at work (yes, I did torture these admin privileges out of IT in the end). I was so keen to listen that I plugged the iPod's earphones into the audio jack of the computer and listened to the beginning while it was still downloading.
I didn't much care for it. I wondered again about compression, or if I'd just chosen a poorly engineered recording. However, I waited till it had downloaded, changed the earphones to the iPod itself, and listened again. It was great. After some discussion on another forum, the opinion was that my office computer has a poor sound card. Just shows again that the iPod is well engineered to give a very acceptable sound in the context it's supposed to be used in.
I just wish iTunes was about 200% more intuitive though, and track naming was rational and consistent.
Rolfe.
-
I had an interesting experience when I first got my iPod. As I said, I didn't have iTunes on a PC at the time (slow dial-up at home and no admin privileges for office computer). A friend loaded up some stuff she thought I would like from her own collection.
It sounded, well not horrible, but uninvolving and two-dimensional. I thought, oh dear, that was a waste of money wasn't it.
However, I was trying to learn a piece of music at the time, so I showed up with a CD of the Brahms German Requiem and asked her to put it on the iPod for me, which she did. I was only thinking of it as a learning tool.
I was blown away. I couldn't take the earphones out of my ears. The difference was astonishing.
When I asked my friend about this, she came up with some complete BS about how her files had been copied and recopied over several computers, so they must have degraded. Well, even I know better than that. We're not talking about magnetic tape here. I can only imagine that he own files were at a higher compression, and had lost that je ne sais quoi.
I agree, once I plug the iPod into the Linn Majik amplifier and play it through the Linn Toukan speakers, it's not quite the same thing. But using the standard iTunes settings to copy a CD, then playing it through the earphones, it's definitely "good enough".
Incidentally, I noticed something else interesting. One day I was absolutely compelled to listen to the Berlioz Te Deum, which I didn't have a CD of (just a cassette tape which some day I must convert). So I went to the iStore and bought a recording of it, while I was at work (yes, I did torture these admin privileges out of IT in the end). I was so keen to listen that I plugged the iPod's earphones into the audio jack of the computer and listened to the beginning while it was still downloading.
I didn't much care for it. I wondered again about compression, or if I'd just chosen a poorly engineered recording. However, I waited till it had downloaded, changed the earphones to the iPod itself, and listened again. It was great. After some discussion on another forum, the opinion was that my office computer has a poor sound card. Just shows again that the iPod is well engineered to give a very acceptable sound in the context it's supposed to be used in.
I just wish iTunes was about 200% more intuitive though, and track naming was rational and consistent.
Rolfe.
Your thoughts are spot on Rolfe, It depends on what bitrate is used, it depends on the quality of the original format, most importantly the endocer used. The advice given already is fine, and my advice is fine too, my advice was to give the best encode possible at a bitrate thats good quality at a very good file size. Of course standalone CD with a seperates system will be completely different and again vinyl, with a marble turntable, stanton or ortafon needles, valve amps with some classic floor standing speakers will blow your socks off, but this is listening to music in the car, it shouldnt be taken this seriously.
-
I had an interesting experience when I first got my iPod. As I said, I didn't have iTunes on a PC at the time (slow dial-up at home and no admin privileges for office computer). A friend loaded up some stuff she thought I would like from her own collection.
It sounded, well not horrible, but uninvolving and two-dimensional. I thought, oh dear, that was a waste of money wasn't it.
However, I was trying to learn a piece of music at the time, so I showed up with a CD of the Brahms German Requiem and asked her to put it on the iPod for me, which she did. I was only thinking of it as a learning tool.
I was blown away. I couldn't take the earphones out of my ears. The difference was astonishing.
When I asked my friend about this, she came up with some complete BS about how her files had been copied and recopied over several computers, so they must have degraded. Well, even I know better than that. We're not talking about magnetic tape here. I can only imagine that he own files were at a higher compression, and had lost that je ne sais quoi.
I agree, once I plug the iPod into the Linn Majik amplifier and play it through the Linn Toukan speakers, it's not quite the same thing. But using the standard iTunes settings to copy a CD, then playing it through the earphones, it's definitely "good enough".
Incidentally, I noticed something else interesting. One day I was absolutely compelled to listen to the Berlioz Te Deum, which I didn't have a CD of (just a cassette tape which some day I must convert). So I went to the iStore and bought a recording of it, while I was at work (yes, I did torture these admin privileges out of IT in the end). I was so keen to listen that I plugged the iPod's earphones into the audio jack of the computer and listened to the beginning while it was still downloading.
I didn't much care for it. I wondered again about compression, or if I'd just chosen a poorly engineered recording. However, I waited till it had downloaded, changed the earphones to the iPod itself, and listened again. It was great. After some discussion on another forum, the opinion was that my office computer has a poor sound card. Just shows again that the iPod is well engineered to give a very acceptable sound in the context it's supposed to be used in.
I just wish iTunes was about 200% more intuitive though, and track naming was rational and consistent.
Rolfe.
A couple of things; first, the encoding algorithms used is just one factor. Another important one, more so in the past few decades is the mastering quality. A lot of music these days has little dynamic range due to sound engineers attempting to make everything so loud (do a google for "loudness wars"). This actually is okay for those environments with a lot of ambient noise, e.g. a car, but for home audio, it's awful. Really, really, awful. Although this trend tends to be more restricted to popular music rather than classic.
Yes, it was probably your sound card; very poor DACs may make an audible difference but most audio electronics these days have pretty good ones, that are at least good enough that quality differences are inaudible to Joe Average. The new iPods DACs are actually quite good. Of course, there may have been some other issues with your sound card too.
Oh, and iPod earbuds are really crappy. If you want good sound you should get yourself a better set of IEM; like the Shure 530 for instance. :)
-
I had an interesting experience when I first got my iPod. As I said, I didn't have iTunes on a PC at the time (slow dial-up at home and no admin privileges for office computer). A friend loaded up some stuff she thought I would like from her own collection.
It sounded, well not horrible, but uninvolving and two-dimensional. I thought, oh dear, that was a waste of money wasn't it.
However, I was trying to learn a piece of music at the time, so I showed up with a CD of the Brahms German Requiem and asked her to put it on the iPod for me, which she did. I was only thinking of it as a learning tool.
I was blown away. I couldn't take the earphones out of my ears. The difference was astonishing.
When I asked my friend about this, she came up with some complete BS about how her files had been copied and recopied over several computers, so they must have degraded. Well, even I know better than that. We're not talking about magnetic tape here. I can only imagine that he own files were at a higher compression, and had lost that je ne sais quoi.
I agree, once I plug the iPod into the Linn Majik amplifier and play it through the Linn Toukan speakers, it's not quite the same thing. But using the standard iTunes settings to copy a CD, then playing it through the earphones, it's definitely "good enough".
Incidentally, I noticed something else interesting. One day I was absolutely compelled to listen to the Berlioz Te Deum, which I didn't have a CD of (just a cassette tape which some day I must convert). So I went to the iStore and bought a recording of it, while I was at work (yes, I did torture these admin privileges out of IT in the end). I was so keen to listen that I plugged the iPod's earphones into the audio jack of the computer and listened to the beginning while it was still downloading.
I didn't much care for it. I wondered again about compression, or if I'd just chosen a poorly engineered recording. However, I waited till it had downloaded, changed the earphones to the iPod itself, and listened again. It was great. After some discussion on another forum, the opinion was that my office computer has a poor sound card. Just shows again that the iPod is well engineered to give a very acceptable sound in the context it's supposed to be used in.
I just wish iTunes was about 200% more intuitive though, and track naming was rational and consistent.
Rolfe.
Your thoughts are spot on Rolfe, It depends on what bitrate is used, it depends on the quality of the original format, most importantly the endocer used. The advice given already is fine, and my advice is fine too, my advice was to give the best encode possible at a bitrate thats good quality at a very good file size. Of course standalone CD with a seperates system will be completely different and again vinyl, with a marble turntable, stanton or ortafon needles, valve amps with some classic floor standing speakers will blow your socks off, but this is listening to music in the car, it shouldnt be taken this seriously.
I'd disagree with the vinyl comments; poor dynamic range, pops and hisses, and all the other typical analogue issues. Valve amps are just over hyped, expensive, underpowered, room heaters that add distortion. They look pretty though.
-
I've got a Linn Sondek, that I always expect to sound better than it does. I think it has issues, maybe the stylus, but it came back from the repair shop with an interesting bill, sounding just the same.
Rolfe.
-
I had an interesting experience when I first got my iPod. As I said, I didn't have iTunes on a PC at the time (slow dial-up at home and no admin privileges for office computer). A friend loaded up some stuff she thought I would like from her own collection.
It sounded, well not horrible, but uninvolving and two-dimensional. I thought, oh dear, that was a waste of money wasn't it.
However, I was trying to learn a piece of music at the time, so I showed up with a CD of the Brahms German Requiem and asked her to put it on the iPod for me, which she did. I was only thinking of it as a learning tool.
I was blown away. I couldn't take the earphones out of my ears. The difference was astonishing.
When I asked my friend about this, she came up with some complete BS about how her files had been copied and recopied over several computers, so they must have degraded. Well, even I know better than that. We're not talking about magnetic tape here. I can only imagine that he own files were at a higher compression, and had lost that je ne sais quoi.
I agree, once I plug the iPod into the Linn Majik amplifier and play it through the Linn Toukan speakers, it's not quite the same thing. But using the standard iTunes settings to copy a CD, then playing it through the earphones, it's definitely "good enough".
Incidentally, I noticed something else interesting. One day I was absolutely compelled to listen to the Berlioz Te Deum, which I didn't have a CD of (just a cassette tape which some day I must convert). So I went to the iStore and bought a recording of it, while I was at work (yes, I did torture these admin privileges out of IT in the end). I was so keen to listen that I plugged the iPod's earphones into the audio jack of the computer and listened to the beginning while it was still downloading.
I didn't much care for it. I wondered again about compression, or if I'd just chosen a poorly engineered recording. However, I waited till it had downloaded, changed the earphones to the iPod itself, and listened again. It was great. After some discussion on another forum, the opinion was that my office computer has a poor sound card. Just shows again that the iPod is well engineered to give a very acceptable sound in the context it's supposed to be used in.
I just wish iTunes was about 200% more intuitive though, and track naming was rational and consistent.
Rolfe.
Your thoughts are spot on Rolfe, It depends on what bitrate is used, it depends on the quality of the original format, most importantly the endocer used. The advice given already is fine, and my advice is fine too, my advice was to give the best encode possible at a bitrate thats good quality at a very good file size. Of course standalone CD with a seperates system will be completely different and again vinyl, with a marble turntable, stanton or ortafon needles, valve amps with some classic floor standing speakers will blow your socks off, but this is listening to music in the car, it shouldnt be taken this seriously.
I'd disagree with the vinyl comments; poor dynamic range, pops and hisses, and all the other typical analogue issues. Valve amps are just over hyped, expensive, underpowered, room heaters that add distortion. They look pretty though.
I'm not going to debate this, for a number of reasons. Infact just one reason, thats a load of tosh what you just wrote.
I have working with Linn on my CV, I also have had 2 recording contracts, I've have had my music chart in the Scottish dance charts, I also have sound technology qualifications and I have played a gig in front of 20,000+ people at dance event.
i have heard and tinkered with almost all forms of music playback. I have heard music played back from a £20 sonly walkman right through to a £400,000 Linn system that would make grown men cry.
Have a little think about what you just said, and if you want to debate it properly it really needs it own thread but not in the mk6 section.
-
Mmmm. Any thoughts on why my Sondek isn't the bees knees? Louder passages just seem to go all blurry. I'd think it was clipping, but the same music played from another source is handled quite adequately by the amp and speakers.
Rolfe.
-
Mmmm. Any thoughts on why my Sondek isn't the bees knees? Louder passages just seem to go all blurry. I'd think it was clipping, but the same music played from another source is handled quite adequately by the amp and speakers.
Rolfe.
It's a cracking unit you have there Rolfe, you checked the cart/needle, looks ok ? when was the last time you replaced it ? Also, does it do it with all vinyl you use ? Do you use the same interconnects when you used another source, if you did you can eliminate them, if not, check they are ok.
Its weird that it happens just when there is a loud extract in the music, almost as though speakers, cabling, amp/power amp/receiver could be the cause.
If you have eliminated it down to the turntable, then have a look at the arm/needle as i say and ensure that the baseplate is not loose and make sure there is no vibration going to the deck at all. As i say, its quite weird why its only at louder points in the music your listening to. :undecided:
Would be nice to know what your exact system is and what alternate system you used to test.
-
Between the electronics, no, or at least incredibly unlikely, at least not to the human ear.....
Between the different speakers, Dynaudio and standard, yes, in all probability there is. How much, well that would depend on various things and only a (double) blind test would be much use determining that given the problems associated with audio testing and comparisons. Then there's preference to add to that; not everyone likes the same speakers for good reason. And then to top it all, you have the considerable amount of ambient noise in a car to add to the mix.
......Seems like there's some subjective audiophile ignorance showing its ugly head here. I'd bet you'd even recommend people to use $$$ external DACs too. :rolleyes:
For those that don't know, there's a lot of ignorance and myth in the audio world, considerable amounts of which is championed by "high end" A/V salesmen that make their biggest profits from selling ridiculously over priced cables to the unsuspecting public.....
A couple of things; first, the encoding algorithms used is just one factor. Another important one, more so in the past few decades is the mastering quality. A lot of music these days has little dynamic range due to sound engineers attempting to make everything so loud (do a google for "loudness wars").... but for .... audio, it's awful. Really, really, awful. Although this trend tends to be more restricted to popular music rather than classic.......
I'd disagree with the vinyl comments; poor dynamic range, pops and hisses, and all the other typical analogue issues. Valve amps are just over hyped, expensive, underpowered, room heaters that add distortion. They look pretty though......
WOW :shocked: That was like reading my posts on audio forums for the past 10 years!!
I thought there was only a few of us on the net, people like David Clark(home/pro audio), Richard Clark(autosound2000/pro audio), Mark Eldridge(MSE), Gary Biggs(JBL), Andy Wahmyer(JBL) were brave enough (to speakout against the instilled truth) on the net.
I have working with Linn on my CV, I also have had 2 recording contracts, I've have had my music chart in the Scottish dance charts, I also have sound technology qualifications and I have played a gig in front of 20,000+ people at dance event.
i have heard and tinkered with almost all forms of music playback. I have heard music played back from a £20 sonly walkman right through to a £400,000 Linn system that would make grown men cry.
Have a little think about what you just said, and if you want to debate it properly it really needs it own thread but not in the mk6 section.
I seem to have missed some posts or skipped some so not sure what you agree or disagree with.
Im interested in what you actually did at Linn. I have worked for a highend English home audio company myself in the south :wink: in the design and test section and it opened my eyes to the utter BS in the audio industry i was let in on so many secrets and lies that are fed to people. Stuff is often used not for sonic grounds but because the marketing men want it!. In the electonics side of a system you can think of them as an electonic linear systems. So within the well documented human ears very low levels of been able to notice a difference like 1% THD for tones 3% for music, less ~30db channel seperation (defined by the size of the human head) , things like amplifiers can be looked on when used in there linear range as 'linear systems' so are defined by frequency responce, Gain, noise & distortion. Wiring in the audio frequency range can be defined by there LCR properties. etc etc. Theres no vodoo in audio just electonics + mechanics.
-
Between the electronics, no, or at least incredibly unlikely, at least not to the human ear.....
Between the different speakers, Dynaudio and standard, yes, in all probability there is. How much, well that would depend on various things and only a (double) blind test would be much use determining that given the problems associated with audio testing and comparisons. Then there's preference to add to that; not everyone likes the same speakers for good reason. And then to top it all, you have the considerable amount of ambient noise in a car to add to the mix.
......Seems like there's some subjective audiophile ignorance showing its ugly head here. I'd bet you'd even recommend people to use $$$ external DACs too. :rolleyes:
For those that don't know, there's a lot of ignorance and myth in the audio world, considerable amounts of which is championed by "high end" A/V salesmen that make their biggest profits from selling ridiculously over priced cables to the unsuspecting public.....
A couple of things; first, the encoding algorithms used is just one factor. Another important one, more so in the past few decades is the mastering quality. A lot of music these days has little dynamic range due to sound engineers attempting to make everything so loud (do a google for "loudness wars").... but for .... audio, it's awful. Really, really, awful. Although this trend tends to be more restricted to popular music rather than classic.......
I'd disagree with the vinyl comments; poor dynamic range, pops and hisses, and all the other typical analogue issues. Valve amps are just over hyped, expensive, underpowered, room heaters that add distortion. They look pretty though......
WOW :shocked: That was like reading my posts on audio forums for the past 10 years!!
I thought there was only a few of us on the net, people like David Clark(home/pro audio), Richard Clark(autosound2000/pro audio), Mark Eldridge(MSE), Gary Biggs(JBL), Andy Wahmyer(JBL) were brave enough (to speakout against the instilled truth) on the net.
Take a look over on audioholics.com you'll find quite a few more people that actually know a little about the science and engineering behind audio. ;)
I'm not going to debate this, for a number of reasons. Infact just one reason, thats a load of tosh what you just wrote.
I have working with Linn on my CV, I also have had 2 recording contracts, I've have had my music chart in the Scottish dance charts, I also have sound technology qualifications and I have played a gig in front of 20,000+ people at dance event.
i have heard and tinkered with almost all forms of music playback. I have heard music played back from a £20 sonly walkman right through to a £400,000 Linn system that would make grown men cry.
Have a little think about what you just said, and if you want to debate it properly it really needs it own thread but not in the mk6 section.
Dude, you're right, it's not the place for a technical discussion on the merits (or lack thereof) of analogue and vinyl. Although I will say that your personal claims have little or no relevance when it comes to the objective superiority of one technology over another. Maybe you should join one of the A/V related forums out there and debate your point of view; audioholics.com or avsforum.com for instance? The high end section on avs usually has some lively debates going on. :)
-
So have we decided if dyno audio is any good ? :wink:
-
Its Dynaudio :wink: (i wish GTI owners would get the name right :drool: ) and yes imho for the price and what you get and since its oem it is an ok deal but then im into sound quality audio in a big way both home and car, more so car nowadays as i enjoy the engineering/tunning challenge :evil:
-
So have we decided if dyno audio is any good ? :wink:
I think the answer to that is people should listen and make up their own minds if it's worth the extra $$$. They certainly shouldn't assume it's worth the extra given the environment is a car. But FWIW, Dynaudio are generally good speakers.
-
I have dynaudio in my car,in the car a scrapped i had a sony head unit and alpine speakers all round,it was fitted by a proffesional audio company about 10 years ago and to be honest was as good as the dynaudio set up in the golf.imo :grin:
-
I have dynaudio in my car, the 307 had a bose unit which was good but imho not as good as the dynaudio. Seriously anyone considering whether to go for it really needs to listen to a car without and a car with and then make their own opinion. For me it was definitely worth the extra dosh as I love listening to music on the move.
-
The basic system in my 11.5-y-o Peugeot was very good, and I'm not convinced the 310 is as good. There seems to be a bit more sibilant in radio speech, and I'm not sure the music is as involving. I did think that nearly 12 years later, the basic Golf system would be at least as good as the basic Peugeot system was then, but maybe not.
It's still not bad though, and I'm not necessarily complaining. It's only a car audio. I really didn't want that big TV screen in the middle of my console.
To continue the derail for a bit, I know my Linn amp has some complete BS attached to it. Some years ago, I needed new speaker cables, and I remembered that the dealer had been going on about biwiring the speakers as a great thing to do. So I thought, why not. I ended up with a couple of chunks of inflexible sugarally, which I was told had to be plugged in in one direction only. I thought there was an improvement but there was no way to do a listening comparison and I now know I fooled myself.
If was only when I moved house, and the stiff Linn cables simply wouldn't fit the geometry of the new room, that I realised quite how much BS it had been. I had to buy new cables again, and to their credit I didn't get any guff about direction, or even the merits of biwiring, from the second dealer. However, it was only when trying to figure out how to wire them that I realised there was nothing on the amp to differentiate treble and bass connections. A little bit of discussion on another forum made it clear to me that the two sets of outputs on the amp are identical. There is no feasible way that biwiring can possibly make any difference to the sound of my system. And yet the instruction manual for the amp waxes lyrical about the great benefits to be gained from this "upgrade".
Mr. Tiefenbrun, I'm ashamed of you.
Rolfe.
-
The basic system in my 11.5-y-o Peugeot was very good, and I'm not convinced the 310 is as good. There seems to be a bit more sibilant in radio speech, and I'm not sure the music is as involving. I did think that nearly 12 years later, the basic Golf system would be at least as good as the basic Peugeot system was then, but maybe not.
It's still not bad though, and I'm not necessarily complaining. It's only a car audio. I really didn't want that big TV screen in the middle of my console.
To continue the derail for a bit, I know my Linn amp has some complete BS attached to it. Some years ago, I needed new speaker cables, and I remembered that the dealer had been going on about biwiring the speakers as a great thing to do. So I thought, why not. I ended up with a couple of chunks of inflexible sugarally, which I was told had to be plugged in in one direction only. I thought there was an improvement but there was no way to do a listening comparison and I now know I fooled myself.
If was only when I moved house, and the stiff Linn cables simply wouldn't fit the geometry of the new room, that I realised quite how much BS it had been. I had to buy new cables again, and to their credit I didn't get any guff about direction, or even the merits of biwiring, from the second dealer. However, it was only when trying to figure out how to wire them that I realised there was nothing on the amp to differentiate treble and bass connections. A little bit of discussion on another forum made it clear to me that the two sets of outputs on the amp are identical. There is no feasible way that biwiring can possibly make any difference to the sound of my system. And yet the instruction manual for the amp waxes lyrical about the great benefits to be gained from this "upgrade".
Mr. Tiefenbrun, I'm ashamed of you.
Rolfe.
Rolfe, depending on where you go to buy your AV kit, you really should demo a system in your own home so that you can decide if there are any benefits, every room is accoustically different and even what you hear in a dealers wont sound the same in your house.
Regarding bi-wiring, it is all down to personal preference, it may be making a difference, but you cant hear it, it may be that in your system you wont get any benefit from it. Like fine wine drinkers, they have particular ways of tasting, smelling etc to get the best from their experience. Me ? A bottle of wine at a fiver is good enough. Like sound, if you dont know what your listening for the bi-wire experience may be getting lost on you, where-as like the wine connoseur, you know what to listen for and will appreciate it more.
-
No, what I'm saying is that the way the Majik is wired up, it's impossible for the biwiring to make the speakers do anything differently.
Rolfe.
-
No, what I'm saying is that the way the Majik is wired up, it's impossible for the biwiring to make the speakers do anything differently.
Rolfe.
Its going to be difficult enough for me to get a pass from the missus to buy a GTI (she says a car is a car to her), there is NO way I can start bringing "biwiring" for better sound quality into the negotation process!!! :tongue:
-
Regarding bi-wiring, it is all down to personal preference, it may be making a difference, but you cant hear it, it may be that in your system you wont get any benefit from it. Like fine wine drinkers, they have particular ways of tasting, smelling etc to get the best from their experience. Me ? A bottle of wine at a fiver is good enough. Like sound, if you dont know what your listening for the bi-wire experience may be getting lost on you, where-as like the wine connoseur, you know what to listen for and will appreciate it more.
As Rolfe says, Bi-wiring as utter rubbish. It's a useless tweak promoted by audiophools that have no idea about audio/electric science. This has been shown so many times in objective double blind tests that it's incredible that there are any gullible people left to believe in it. :rolleyes:
Even Bi-amping, which uses seperate amplifiers, is only really effective in certain specific applications, like those that use an external crossover.
-
Regarding bi-wiring, it is all down to personal preference, it may be making a difference, but you cant hear it, it may be that in your system you wont get any benefit from it. Like fine wine drinkers, they have particular ways of tasting, smelling etc to get the best from their experience. Me ? A bottle of wine at a fiver is good enough. Like sound, if you dont know what your listening for the bi-wire experience may be getting lost on you, where-as like the wine connoseur, you know what to listen for and will appreciate it more.
As Rolfe says, Bi-wiring as utter rubbish. It's a useless tweak promoted by audiophools that have no idea about audio/electric science. This has been shown so many times in objective double blind tests that it's incredible that there are any gullible people left to believe in it. :rolleyes:
Even Bi-amping, which uses seperate amplifiers, is only really effective in certain specific applications, like those that use an external crossover.
Could you post up some results of those tests, I'd be interested to see them.
-
Never mind tests, it's axiomatic that if the two sets of outputs from the amp are delivering an identical signal, then it doesn't matter whether they're connected individually to the speaker treble and bass or not - the speaker will behave in exactly the same way.
Rolfe.
-
Regarding bi-wiring, it is all down to personal preference, it may be making a difference, but you cant hear it, it may be that in your system you wont get any benefit from it. Like fine wine drinkers, they have particular ways of tasting, smelling etc to get the best from their experience. Me ? A bottle of wine at a fiver is good enough. Like sound, if you dont know what your listening for the bi-wire experience may be getting lost on you, where-as like the wine connoseur, you know what to listen for and will appreciate it more.
As Rolfe says, Bi-wiring as utter rubbish. It's a useless tweak promoted by audiophools that have no idea about audio/electric science. This has been shown so many times in objective double blind tests that it's incredible that there are any gullible people left to believe in it. :rolleyes:
Even Bi-amping, which uses seperate amplifiers, is only really effective in certain specific applications, like those that use an external crossover.
Could you post up some results of those tests, I'd be interested to see them.
Here's a few to get you started;
http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm
http://www.axiomaudio.com/tips_biwiring_and_biamping.html
http://www.avforums.com/forums/interconnects-speaker-cables-switches/46335-bi-wiring-cables-what-load-long.html
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/bi-wiring-from-amplifier-to-loudspeaker
-
Never mind tests, it's axiomatic that if the two sets of outputs from the amp are delivering an identical signal, then it doesn't matter whether they're connected individually to the speaker treble and bass or not - the speaker will behave in exactly the same way.
Rolfe.
more power = more sound no?? :huh:
-
Regarding bi-wiring, it is all down to personal preference, it may be making a difference, but you cant hear it, it may be that in your system you wont get any benefit from it. Like fine wine drinkers, they have particular ways of tasting, smelling etc to get the best from their experience. Me ? A bottle of wine at a fiver is good enough. Like sound, if you dont know what your listening for the bi-wire experience may be getting lost on you, where-as like the wine connoseur, you know what to listen for and will appreciate it more.
As Rolfe says, Bi-wiring as utter rubbish. It's a useless tweak promoted by audiophools that have no idea about audio/electric science. This has been shown so many times in objective double blind tests that it's incredible that there are any gullible people left to believe in it. :rolleyes:
Even Bi-amping, which uses seperate amplifiers, is only really effective in certain specific applications, like those that use an external crossover.
Could you post up some results of those tests, I'd be interested to see them.
Here's a few to get you started;
http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm
http://www.axiomaudio.com/tips_biwiring_and_biamping.html
http://www.avforums.com/forums/interconnects-speaker-cables-switches/46335-bi-wiring-cables-what-load-long.html
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/bi-wiring-from-amplifier-to-loudspeaker
Cool thanks, will have a read through them a little later.
-
All my links are on AOL favourates on my other comp thats crashed this one does not allow me to install or run AOL (a good thing :angry:) so i cannot get them i will have to get them someday when i get the chance to infect another computer with AOL, anyway you may also find this link interesting.(hope it works give it time its a large PDF)
http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf
Theres also a great link/site if i can get it or find it again by one of the top engineer that worked at macintosh speaker labs years ago thats very good for speaker cable discussions and he talks about the history behind all the speakerwire marketing and biwiring and why it happened and how to actually choose your cable.
If you google you may also find the well known 'Richard Clarks amp challenge' as well as his less known about 'source unit challenge' or 'wire challenge' all giving you a chance to win $10K if you can beat the ABX testing for soundquality on home or pro or incar audio equipment, no one in 15 years has managed to take his money including many top experts with goldenears at trade expos.
-
All my links are on AOL favourates on my other comp thats crashed this one does not allow me to install or run AOL (a good thing :angry:) so i cannot get them i will have to get them someday when i get the chance to infect another computer with AOL, anyway you may also find this link interesting.(hope it works give it time its a large PDF)
http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf
Theres also a great link/site if i can get it or find it again by one of the top engineer that worked at macintosh speaker labs years ago thats very good for speaker cable discussions and he talks about the history behind all the speakerwire marketing and biwiring and why it happened and how to actually choose your cable.
If you google you may also find the well known 'Richard Clarks amp challenge' as well as his less known about 'source unit challenge' or 'wire challenge' all giving you a chance to win $10K if you can beat the ABX testing for soundquality on home or pro or incar audio equipment, no one in 15 years has managed to take his money including many top experts with goldenears at trade expos.
Yes, I have a bunch of links too. One of the most amusing reads, particularly so in this thread, seems to have disappeared off the net and even a google of its contents turned up nothing. As luck would have it I found the dudes new site and figured out that the document is still accessible even if it's not hyper linked in any way.
You can read it here; http://home.comcast.net/~wirebenderaudio/articles/article_14.htm
It's an interesting read on an industry insiders take of abx testing among other things. An amusing quote which I guess one person in this thread would disagree with to start with, "It reminded me of the year an audiologist set up shop at the LA AES convention, tested a wad of us, discovered the majority of audio professional were functionally deaf, and changed the AES forever. Yeah, from that day to the foreseeable future, no audiologist will ever be allowed to administer hearing tests at the AES convention." :D
-
^^ I think when it gets to this kind of level its all very subjective. Does everyone have the same hands?? does everyone have the same tongue?? So why would everyone assume we all have the same ears?? :undecided:
Its not about what other say sounds better... its about what you think sounds better!!
-
^^ I think when it gets to this kind of level its all very subjective. Does everyone have the same hands?? does everyone have the same tongue?? So why would everyone assume we all have the same ears?? :undecided:
Its not about what other say sounds better... its about what you think sounds better!!
Actually, yes, we do have pretty much the same mechanisms in our head related to hearing with generally the same sensitivities; 20Hz to 20kHz, plus or minus. The last time I measured mine I could hear down to about 16Hz and up to around 17kHz. The younger you are and the more careful you've been the more likely you are to hear down to and up to these limits.
But, the major problem with people's hearing is that it's crap. Generally speaking.
For instance, our memory for how something sounds is just several seconds so comparing whether one sound is "better" than another is problematic in the extreme. You may think that this is not the case but it's a fact. So, for example, people comparing one set of speakers to another by switching cables (which may take a few minutes or so) are wasting their time. Of course, if they sound vastly different that remains fairly obvious but comparing subtle differences this way is very difficult indeed. It's why a/b and abx switch boxes tend to be used so you can switch instantly from one to another.
There are also problems with our mind interfering with what we hear; put in a impressive looking thick cable that you think will improve the sound and you will hear an improvement, sometimes dramatically so. Put on a blind fold, change the cable for a piece of lamp cord of adequate gauge without the person knowing and they will still hear the improvement. Remove the blind fold and suddenly the sound will be awful, "constricted", "lacking air", or whatever silly euphemisms audiophiles use these days.
Our hearing is so prone to influence by other factors unrelated to actually what we hear that the only real way of objectively making judgements with regard to sound is to perform a blind test, preferably double blind. These psychoacoustic principles are well known and documented.
-
Should`nt this now be in the car audio section ?,its drifted abit :undecided:
-
I certainly wasnt arguing that the mechanisms are not the same. After all we all have 5 fingers on our hands but it doesnt make them the same. It how we interpret the sound thats important.
I once popped into a well known audio shop in Brighton to test some new speakers I was looking at, so took down some of my own music.
After the test I told the gent I didnt think they were upto the job and struggled a little. He obviously took offence to this and hooked up some £11k speaker to prove it wasnt the equipment at fault but me!!
tbh althought they sounded a little better I just couldnt see the £10k difference in the speakers, and my current set up sounded alot better. He then decided to blame the the type of music i brought it. wtf??? I proptly left! just because i didnt want to listen to country and western on a med volume my opinion was totally discounted.
I for one dont believe much of this crap audiophiles splurt out. I trust only one persons judgement when it comes to music.... and that is mine, because quite simply thats what counts. :wink:
-
http://www.aip.org/pt/nov99/locsound.html
-
a well known audio shop in Brighton
Pretty sure that's the same place as persuaded me to do that stupid biwiring trick in the first place, and sold me the inflexible sugarally. There's one born every minute.
Rolfe.
-
a well known audio shop in Brighton
Pretty sure that's the same place as persuaded me to do that stupid biwiring trick in the first place, and sold me the inflexible sugarally. There's one born every minute.
Rolfe.
London road?? :huh:
-
a well known audio shop in Brighton
Pretty sure that's the same place as persuaded me to do that stupid biwiring trick in the first place, and sold me the inflexible sugarally. There's one born every minute.
Rolfe.
London road?? :huh:
The very place.
Same place as didn't seem to make much difference to the indifferent sound from my LP12, even though they charged me money for allegedly putting it right.
Rolfe.
-
That dude looks like hes from the 1920's anyway!! Got better advice from richer sounds dare I say* :lipsrsealed:
thats not actually true :grin:
-
I certainly wasnt arguing that the mechanisms are not the same. After all we all have 5 fingers on our hands but it doesnt make them the same. It how we interpret the sound thats important.
I once popped into a well known audio shop in Brighton to test some new speakers I was looking at, so took down some of my own music.
After the test I told the gent I didnt think they were upto the job and struggled a little. He obviously took offence to this and hooked up some £11k speaker to prove it wasnt the equipment at fault but me!!
tbh althought they sounded a little better I just couldnt see the £10k difference in the speakers, and my current set up sounded alot better. He then decided to blame the the type of music i brought it. wtf??? I proptly left! just because i didnt want to listen to country and western on a med volume my opinion was totally discounted.
I for one dont believe much of this crap audiophiles splurt out. I trust only one persons judgement when it comes to music.... and that is mine, because quite simply thats what counts. :wink:
Yes, some of the stuff they believe in is just bizarre. I very much enjoy walking around HiFi shows and having a laugh at some of the stuff that is being peddled to the gullible.
FWIW, very much of what you hear is the room acoustics so, to be fair, that shop is Brighton may just have crappy acoustics (not really a good excuse for an audio shop though) and that's why those speakers didn't sound too good. I've had similar demos; one of the most disappointing were a pair B&W 802D. My B&W 804S at home sounded much better. But having said that, there are a lot of over priced esoteric speakers out there that sound worse than speakers that can be had for a few quid in Argos.
-
I agree.. I was only at uni at the time so my DM602 S2 were more than enough for a room the size of a shoe box :smiley:
think the 15" 400W sub i borrowed on trial was a bit of an overkill though :grin: :grin:
-
What a good read I must say... but for me, having the Dynaudio speakers was not an option because as Adrian had said in his earlier post that the ambient sound in any car will affect the experience of the sounds coming out of any system in a car i.e. road noise, engine noise, rattles and etc. If it is a toss between upgrading the sound components or updrading to xenons, leather chairs in a car, IMO will ultimately depend on the type of car as well as the sound proofing it has... For the GTI, I feel the point is to hear the engine growl as well as to experience the feel of whizzing down the road with road noises etc. Plus to have a drivers' engagement in shifting gears when one hears revs reaching the peak... ahhhhhh so in conclusion, I feel the standard system is more than adequate...
HM
-
^^ I think when it gets to this kind of level its all very subjective. Does everyone have the same hands?? does everyone have the same tongue?? So why would everyone assume we all have the same ears?? :undecided:
Its not about what other say sounds better... its about what you think sounds better!!
Actually, yes, we do have pretty much the same mechanisms in our head related to hearing with generally the same sensitivities; 20Hz to 20kHz, plus or minus. The last time I measured mine I could hear down to about 16Hz and up to around 17kHz. The younger you are and the more careful you've been the more likely you are to hear down to and up to these limits.
But, the major problem with people's hearing is that it's crap. Generally speaking.
For instance, our memory for how something sounds is just several seconds so comparing whether one sound is "better" than another is problematic in the extreme. You may think that this is not the case but it's a fact. So, for example, people comparing one set of speakers to another by switching cables (which may take a few minutes or so) are wasting their time. Of course, if they sound vastly different that remains fairly obvious but comparing subtle differences this way is very difficult indeed. It's why a/b and abx switch boxes tend to be used so you can switch instantly from one to another.
There are also problems with our mind interfering with what we hear; put in a impressive looking thick cable that you think will improve the sound and you will hear an improvement, sometimes dramatically so. Put on a blind fold, change the cable for a piece of lamp cord of adequate gauge without the person knowing and they will still hear the improvement. Remove the blind fold and suddenly the sound will be awful, "constricted", "lacking air", or whatever silly euphemisms audiophiles use these days.
Our hearing is so prone to influence by other factors unrelated to actually what we hear that the only real way of objectively making judgements with regard to sound is to perform a blind test, preferably double blind. These psychoacoustic principles are well known and documented.
There was tests done a while ago, please don't ask me to dig them out as It was a few years..........What they were doing was doing a blind taste test. The test was done with a bowl of custard and in the center of the bowl was some strawberry jam. Unblindfolded, the tasted the jam perfectly fine. They got blindfolded and their bowls swapped with custard and a tasteless red syrup instead of the jam. The blindfolds taken off, tasted again and they all still tasted strawberry jam.
Going by what you have just said, and we take the same analogy into account, not only are audiophiles stupid, but they cant taste properly either ?
There's a lot going on in the mind/brain when you take one of the senses away.
-
Very interesting thread. I used to be interested in hi-fi 20 years ago and always challenged such things as bi-wiring with an 'audiophile' colleague.
Anyway, I like a good sound in the car and have never been happy with stock VW offerings so I'm leaning towards Dynaudio. However, getting a dealer to do a back-to-back comparison of the Dynaudio and standard systems has so far proved impossible. If I'm going to pay £700 for something, I want to know I'm going to be happy with it first.
There's a lot going on in the mind/brain when you take one of the senses away.
I've stopped listening to anything my brain tells me. :laugh:
-
Very interesting thread. I used to be interested in hi-fi 20 years ago and always challenged such things as bi-wiring with an 'audiophile' colleague.
Anyway, I like a good sound in the car and have never been happy with stock VW offerings so I'm leaning towards Dynaudio. However, getting a dealer to do a back-to-back comparison of the Dynaudio and standard systems has so far proved impossible. If I'm going to pay £700 for something, I want to know I'm going to be happy with it first.
There's a lot going on in the mind/brain when you take one of the senses away.
I've stopped listening to anything my brain tells me. :laugh:
At least yours still talks to you, mine fell out with me a long time ago. :grin:
-
Hi
I am still still in doubt if I should order the Dynaudio...
Obviously it is great to read that the sound (standard speakers) has improved (maybe due to the quality of the RCD510 compared to say the RCD300)..
Being an extreme audiophile (you can google my name ...and feel sorry :rolleyes:) I listen only at home seriously to Jazz and Classical..besides that I might be to busy listening to the car's revs....but on the other hand Dynaudio is a serious audio designer....
Anyway after absorbing this thread I have two further remarks...the first is that Rolfe should not blame Ivor Tievenbrunn for the bi-wiring bit...believe me he knows what he is on about ....and secondly VWKev..all kudo's to him, he is also very accurate in this topic advising about audio....... :cool:
My point to revive this after a couple of months, are there now anymore guys/girls with real-life experience on this matter at this stage....
-
Hi
I am still still in doubt if I should order the Dynaudio...
Obviously it is great to read that the sound (standard speakers) has improved (maybe due to the quality of the RCD510 compared to say the RCD300)..
Being an extreme audiophile (you can google my name ...and feel sorry :rolleyes:) I listen only at home seriously to Jazz and Classical..besides that I might be to busy listening to the car's revs....but on the other hand Dynaudio is a serious audio designer....
Anyway after absorbing this thread I have two further remarks...the first is that Rolfe should not blame Ivor Tievenbrunn for the bi-wiring bit...believe me he knows what he is on about ....and secondly VWKev..all kudo's to him, he is also very accurate in this topic advising about audio....... :cool:
My point to revive this after a couple of months, are there now anymore guys/girls with real-life experience on this matter at this stage....
Get it :laugh: