|
IMO you can spend a lot on speakers (especially ones that will effortlessly fill a large space) before diminishing returns kick in. You have to be well into thousands before price performance really start to level off.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
http://highend-electronics.com/products/synergistic-research-black-quantum-fuses Graphene! Quantum!!! TBF at least this still beats the maniacs who will run amps unfused and blow them up
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
quote:the BLACK Fuses are treated with 2 Million volts of electricity Sure they are. Even if you could use graphene as a conductor in a fuse (you would never do this), its resistivity is 1×10^−8 Ωm. A fuse might be 1mm˛ and 10mm long. resistance = resistivity x ( length / area ) = 1×10^−8 x ( 0.001 / 0.00001 ) = 0.000001 Ω current = voltage / resistance = 2x10^6 / 0.000001 = 2 TRILLION AMPS
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
I think they just painted a standard fuse with bedliner and called it good 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
Waldo P Barnstormer posted:Sure they are. Your math is as bad as your understanding of graphene
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
1mm˛ is one hell of a fat fuse wire. Try more like 0.1mm˛, or less.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Wouldn't a graphene fuse be a single chain of atoms? That's the benefit, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Your math is as bad as your understanding of graphene It's true I don't know anything about graphene, but what's wrong with the math? KozmoNaut posted:1mm˛ is one hell of a fat fuse wire. Worked it out with that and you still get 20 million amps. Either way they are not treating these fuses with 2 million volts edit: also they'll need a pretty fat fuse wire if they're going to be putting 2 trillion amps through it. A Lone Girl Flier fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
You're missing the point that it's absolutely no problem putting thousands or even millions of volts across a fuse, since your amperage is limited by your supply.
KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Waldo P Barnstormer posted:It's true I don't know anything about graphene, but what's wrong with the math? 10 mm is 0.01 m, not 0.001. 1 mm^2 is 10^-6m^2, not 10^-5. Graphene is usually atomic layers thick, so less than 10^-9m. The cross-sectional area of a graphene wire would probably be less than 10^-15m^2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:You're missing the point that it's absolutely no problem putting thousands or even millions of volts across a fuse, since your amperage is limited by your supply. But then you're not putting a high voltage through it either. Lets say you have a power supply capable of 80A and a 0.1ohm short circuit: V=IR =80x 0.1 =8V Anyway, this is all academic because this company is not putting 2 million volts across any of their fuses. People talk about these fuses being "zapped by a tesla coil". http://www.stereotimes.com/acc082912.shtml quote:I think the quantum tunneling on a Tesla coil is key to the sound of these fuses, and the consumer can only get it from SR with their third generation Tesla Coil. This, of course, leaves little choice. These fuses are at about the same price point as other audiophile fuses. I am a sucker for the thrill of hearing a sound that suggests I am at the recording venue. These fuses allow my equipment to yield such a holographic image. The sound is open, effortless, defined, extended, detailed, and most importantly realistic. I guess what they're doing is leaving the fuses in a room with a running tesla coil, and somehow the fuses are imbued with this magic quantum tunnelling property, kind of like how homeopathy doesn't work. Spazzle posted:10 mm is 0.01 m, not 0.001. 1 mm^2 is 10^-6m^2, not 10^-5. Graphene is usually atomic layers thick, so less than 10^-9m. The cross-sectional area of a graphene wire would probably be less than 10^-15m^2. Cool thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
http://www.head-fi.org/t/397691/audio-gd-discrete-op-amps-reviewed-opa-earth-opa-moon-opa-sun-v-2 How can one person write this much bullshit, and actually believe it himself?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:http://www.head-fi.org/t/397691/audio-gd-discrete-op-amps-reviewed-opa-earth-opa-moon-opa-sun-v-2 The AD797 he's creaming over appears to be a mike preamp chip...I guess two of them could make a headphone amp though? http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Analog-Devices/AD797BRZ/?qs=/tpEQrCGXCwnXZ1Ropaiug==
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
Tell me about Dolby Atmos. Do I deserve to die for even mentioning such gimmicky nonsense in the prescence of goony audiophiles?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
codo27 posted:Tell me about Dolby Atmos. Do I deserve to die for even mentioning such gimmicky nonsense in the prescence of goony audiophiles? You only have two ears, so yes. Hara-kiri is your only option now
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
codo27 posted:Tell me about Dolby Atmos. Do I deserve to die for even mentioning such gimmicky nonsense in the prescence of goony audiophiles? Have generally heard really good things, so my next receiver will probably be one of the Pioneer ones with it and I'll add the extra speakers bit by bit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Have generally heard really good things, so my next receiver will probably be one of the Pioneer ones with it and I'll add the extra speakers bit by bit. Personally I haven't quite been wowed by Atmos or DTS-X yet, not even when I watched The Revenant in a brand new top of the line cinema with a full Atmos setup. The electric recliners were super nice, though. Then again, I've never really been wowed by surround sound in the first place, so take that as you will.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Surround replicates for a group what good stereo already does for one person. What I'm saying is unless your friends chip in for your audio system, gently caress 'em What's the minimum number of speakers for Atmos? It seems neat for a dedicated theater space but utter overkill for an average home theater in a shared space.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
I thought the big deal with Atmos was supposed to be that it could scale surround sound information gracefully to wildly different physical speaker layouts that theaters already have? Not so much that it sounded particularly better on its own, just that it could mean a theater chain sends out one digital movie to all its theaters rather than multiple formats encoded to match up to the speaker layouts in each physical theater better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
If you have enough speakers I guess it's supposed to be able to move sounds around with great precision too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
I've always favoured ceiling mount, downward firing surrounds generally anyway. Atmos is exactly that though, atmospheric effects rather than directional stuff like surrounds that never really works in a theatre anyway due to the large number of seats in there. I imagine a home setup could be really nice though, a full surround setup with a set of 2/4 ceiling mounts adding general ambience. I'm more interested in this kinda thing though for Dolby Atmos: https://ukf.com/words/dolby-atmos-the-revolution-of-the-sound-system/15029 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMR5iWG1UI4 quote:I made a synth lead travel across the ceiling from front to back then go into a circular pattern. I also made accelerating risers that spiral upwards like a helicopter rotor. In other instances, I allowed a sound to just sit in a space doing it’s thing – the novelty of hearing music in this way is almost impressive enough even without the complex motion panning.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
Edit: Thanks for the advice/redirect.
Mozi fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Jul 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Either find one on Craigslist or Ebay or whatever or replace the whole thing. Soundbar sets aren't really intended to allow pieces to be swapped. EDIT: This is not the right thread for this. Go here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Apparently music sounds best in JRiver when the embedded coverart is 800x600 or smaller. This, and many other very interesting findings are covered here: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0716/Why_Do_WAV_And_FLAC_Files_Sound_Different.htm E:  
KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Jul 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Jesus christ. This is the only possible response.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
The audiophoolery, it's coming from INSIDE the thread! Never let your cats make your hifi purchasing decisions: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Unity Gain posted:The audiophoolery, it's coming from INSIDE the thread! your love of EL lighting is doing a number on your wallet
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
I still blame the cats 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Now that it's done, will there be an unboxing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Ooooh sorry. I actually got it a few months ago, so it's already set up: No, I can't hear things in the music I never heard before, but everything certainly sounds good! No it's not "the best sounding" gear anywhere ever, and I am very well aware that I paid a hefty premium for pretty meters and the McIntosh name. But I do very much like the sound, having auditioned tons of stuff before pulling the trigger. I haven't splurged on myself in well over a decade, and I am well aware that the purchase was driven more by psychology than audio engineering. That said, the setup makes me happy and I enjoy both looking at it and listening to it, and it's nice to have some happiness in my life again  I run a few other things into it, and the cables are all bog standard off-the-shelf.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Apparently music sounds best in JRiver when the embedded coverart is 800x600 or smaller. This, and many other very interesting findings are covered here: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0716/Why_Do_WAV_And_FLAC_Files_Sound_Different.htm This is amazing. "The burden [flac conversion, decoding jpegs and reading metadata] presents to the computer “would not even be remotely noticeable” was the usual refrain. On the other hand, many manufacturers of high performance audio servers and audio programmers disagree with this point of view. They remain convinced that it is small variations in computer-generated noise that significantly disrupts replay sound quality." Lol I wonder why audio companies might say things like this. If you ask the J River guys about stuff like this, they will not engage you, and threads like this on their forums often get closed. Unity Gain posted:I am well aware that the purchase was driven more by psychology than audio engineering. That said, the setup makes me happy and I enjoy both looking at it and listening to it, and it's nice to have some happiness in my life again This is the way to do audio in my opinion. Be aware of psychoacoustics, find gear that makes you smile for some reason, and your music will sound better. McIntosh gear always makes me smile for some reason! Edit: 
A Lone Girl Flier fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Jul 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Unity Gain posted:Ooooh sorry. I actually got it a few months ago, so it's already set up: self_aware_audiophile.txt Hey if it sounds good and makes you happy that's what matters. That being said - will it really bump out 50W? e: oh, it's basically an integrated amp even though it just says "headphone amp"? Panty Saluter fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Jul 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
Waldo P Barnstormer posted:
Yeah, it's a good way to approach evaluating luxury goods of any kind. The three pillars: psychological, aesthetic, technical. My daily drivers are $90 Onkyo bass cannon IEMs  I've been wanting a McIntosh "something" for like 35 years now, ever since I saw a big rear end McAmp in the window of Lyric Hi-Fi in NYC when I was in high school.Foot for scale.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
I listened to a friend's Dolby Atmos home theater. It's really only good in the sweet spot and the rainstorm demo sounded okay but didn't blow me away.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:I listened to a friend's Dolby Atmos home theater. It's really only good in the sweet spot and the rainstorm demo sounded okay but didn't blow me away. That is....exactly the opposite of what I would expect. Shouldn't a massive array of speakers like that have a pretty generous sweet spot?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:That is....exactly the opposite of what I would expect. Shouldn't a massive array of speakers like that have a pretty generous sweet spot?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:That is....exactly the opposite of what I would expect. Shouldn't a massive array of speakers like that have a pretty generous sweet spot? Do you need to use the "auto-level" function with a mic to get the best performance? I've got an older Dennon receiver/amp that I set up that way with a 5.1 system and it let me set 3 or four listening spots. Made a massive difference over using the old earballs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Yeah, I wonder if he still needs to calibrate it. I know Denon has had multi-point calibration forever but no idea on other manufacturers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:self_aware_audiophile.txt I won't deny that the cognitive dissonance sometimes causes signal noise  Panty Saluter posted:Hey if it sounds good and makes you happy that's what matters. That being said - will it really bump out 50W? Believe it or not...I'm not using the speaker outs yet! I've got the pre-outs going unbalanced into a tiny Mackie mixer which is then balanced connected to a pair of self-powered Event 20/20 studio monitors from ca. 1996 I actually want speakers, and listened to a bunch from $500-$2,500. Was happiest with B&W 685 S2 (around $700-$800 for the pair) because they had very nice mids and a more subdued treble. The more expensive speakers were more "resolving" and "detailed" but I really am not a fan of sharp treble. So yeah, I'm dying to hear how the amp sounds. I'll probably get the speakers before the summer is out but  .This is also why I asked here about bi-wiring, which the 685s can do. I was interested in the thread's opinion, which was basically to just use plain old 2x2, so that's the way I'm gonna go.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Apparently music sounds best in JRiver when the embedded coverart is 800x600 or smaller. This, and many other very interesting findings are covered here: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0716/Why_Do_WAV_And_FLAC_Files_Sound_Different.htm I thought this was about, like, a glitch in the conversion program that only occurred with cover art. Instead I got .
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 05:07
|
|
