Maximizing one’s assets

November 12, 2021
 by Paul McGowan

Separate loudspeaker drivers like separate electronics maximize the attributes of each: amplifiers focus on amplifying, sources are specific to their task.

And so it is with speakers too. No woofer can reproduce that which a proper tweeter can. Take for example the planar tweeter in the upcoming FR30 loudspeaker. Its moving diaphragm has lower mass than the air it is driving. Try that using a heavy-high mass woofer. Or the opposite. The thin planar driver is no match for the long-throw woofers used to pump long wavelengths of bass frequencies into the room.

In my opinion, there’s simply no substitute for separates whether in the multiple drivers that make up a loudspeaker or the multiple boxes that together produce music that brings us pleasure.

If high-performance and precision are the desired outcome, then it makes perfect sense to maximize one’s assets.

Subscribe to Paul's Posts

74 comments on “Maximizing one’s assets”

  1. Hey Paul, before you also tell us how important the crossover is to filter & phase without distorting the signal…too much, is there any chance that we could see a picture of the crossover that is used in the FR-30?? 😀

    1. Paul often highlights the importance of synergy when combining components for an audio system. Synergy and synchronization that’s the challenge for every multiple-driver loudspeaker. What is the use of the best plasma tweeter when there is no driver for the frequency region below showing identical “speed” (behavior) in the crossover region? Not to mention the inherent phase issues of a passive crossover. A decent pair of single driver headphones is able to produce audible bass. No loudspeaker will come even close to its sound quality. And designing a multiple driver loudspeaker for far-field listening requires additional tools for best integration into individual room acoustics. A tough job.

      1. Getting my audio loudspeaker system to sound close to headphones has always been my goal. I used to think my multi-driver loudspeakers could never come close to the quality of my headphone system, but I have changed my mind as the quality of my system components has improved along with greater care in the positioning of the loudspeakers to maximize their focus and soundstaging. In addition to optimal speaker placement and room treatments, only the most transparent and resolving amps, speakers and cabling can approach “headphone quality.” If any one component, even a cable, is not up to the task, headphone quality will be eluded. Properly positioned speakers with well-designed driver arrays with seamless and time-aligned crossover networks can come very close to headphone coherence, stereo imaging and transparency, with the added benefit that sound may be more natural and less fatiguing. Yes, it is indeed a tough job and very expensive in terms of investment and effort to approach headphone quality with loudspeaker systems. Some of us, right or wrong, believe we are almost there.

      2. There’s an excellent article in Copper 149 by Russ Welton explaining in simple technical terms the merits of near field listening. Basically, he argues that is how most speakers are designed to be listened to.

        My system now resides in a smaller, better designed space and I sit significantly closer. It is a much better musical experience. I did a little experiment last night by sliding away the rear wall creating a listening space 60 feet long. It lost something, as well as quite a lot of heat.

        1. My Quasi Near-Field 990cf listening room does have it’s advantages, notably Dynamic Capability…no problem reaching 110 db peaks! Additionally, soundstage presentation has great depth, width and height that easily exceeds all room boundaries, thus sonic reproduction is often mind blowing!!!

          Here’s the Copper 149 article by Russ Welton (thanks SNTBCWS):
          https://www.psaudio.com/copper/article/choosing-new-speakers-sensitivity-and-room-size/

          Here’s a 2D graphic displaying what I hear in my music room:
          https://i.postimg.cc/ncMzPHQx/Ted-s-Music-Room.png

          Ted

        1. Thanks FR. I would put these gems on a stand lifting them to ear level. 🙂 I think every audiophile should have made an extensive listening to a single driver crossoverless speaker before discussing criteria of high fidelity. I have a pair single-driver crossoverless floorstander (30 to 20 kHz) with an internal Helmholtz-resonator which was a fun-exercise of a loudspeaker designer whose daily creations are in the mega-buck range (80 k$ to 500 k$). These little speakers provoke the question why are there needs for bigger and far more expensive multi-driver speakers. The only answer I could give: if you prefer body shaking SPLs or if you have to fill concert hall like listening rooms with music or if your ears are impaired by misuse of ear-buds, indeed you have to search elsewhere.

          1. There is indeed something magical about a single driver, crossover-less speaker system, and I think it’s because of phase and timing distortions inherent in most complex systems. Creating a time and phase coherent speaker system requires superb drivers, extraordinary attention to detail, and therefore high costs. For example, my Vandersteen Kento speakers. However, if one is willing to sacrifice some bass extension and some volume capability, as you suggest, there is the marvelous single driver Sibelius speaker offered by Pearl Acoustics.

        2. Ah, open backs….
          3.7i. The love – that lifelike stage. The hate – the inability to listen 75% of your favorite albums because you now hear how badly they were recorded. But that imaging? Still worth it.
          Box speakers are that the great relationship partner. Reliable, comfortable, dependable and great. They are life-long keepers. Open backs are that one you had for awhile who was unreliable, finicky, hard to deal with and ultra- high maintenance but you stuck it out because they were absolutely hot… oh, and every night – the life altering, earth shattering SE………se…..separation was out of this world.
          And if you gave up on your open backs and went with the boxes… you STILL think about those open backs. Reflectively. Fondly. With a heavy sigh. You wonder where they are and who is enjoying them right now. And sometimes you still long for them, RIGHT in front of your boxes.
          Don’t you.

      3. Thanks pssquirrel .. A new benefit of listening through headphones that I recognized a year ago when I started to listen through quality headphones and headphone amp after a 20 year hiatus. Now headphones have several purposes for me now… late night listening without disturbing the neighbors and inside my head listening.

      4. The problem with separates is often the cabling.
        When I was comparing CD players to separate DAC and transports, I found I needed to spend $1,500 on a digital cable to equal the CD player.
        I use a very special wire in three different gauges throughout my system made by
        Dueland.
        It is a four nines pure silver ribbon wire with a natural silk dielectric embedded with oil at high pressure. In it’s two larger gauges it gets a second natural silk dielectric, this time embedded with a chemical designed to repel moisture.
        Parts Connexion stocks all three gauges, no affiliation.
        They also stock the KLEI line of RCA plugs, which I found to be best in a large shoot-out, they are the latest from Eichmann, whose “silver bullets” were the best!
        You would be amazed about the differences RCA plugs make.
        I took a DH Labs interconnect and cut off it’s RCA plugs and soldered on a set of KLEI’s, the difference was immediately noticeable.
        The wire costs a king’s ransom, but it’s worth it to my ears.

  2. I can’t say I agree with any of this, but it is a matter of opinion.

    Paul referred to a guy called John Hunter the other day, who owns REL. Stimpy2 posted a great interview of him. Mr Hunter explained that he was inspired to be an audio engineer by the Quad ESL, a single driver speaker, which for over 60 years has for many been the benchmark for transparency and cohesiveness. Even Paul referred to it when benchmarking the transparency and cohesiveness of the FR30, and beating ESL – I’ll believe it when I hear it.

    So far as separates are concerned, let’s hypothesise that PSA could design a world class digital power supply. Then imagine they could design an amplifier as good as the BHK300, if not better, but it was the size of a small paperback book and 95% efficient. Then let’s imagine they could design a DAC as good, if not better, than the DSD DAC, except it was the size of a cigarette packet. Repeat the DAC argument for a streamer and a phono stage. PSA’s engineers might then realise that by connecting their circuits and PCBs they could eradicate the signal loss and noise issues of connecting the sections with long cables. PSA’s engineers might find that the components, being directly connected, could be better controlled and work together better thanks to software, allowing features like DSP.

    All of a sudden you have an integrated system you can pick up with one hand rather than a collection of boxes that weigh more than a car.

    My view of Paul’s (and others) preference for separates is driven entirely by the type of technology and engineering PSA adopt, not because it is necessarily better than alternative technologies that are used in some integrated units.

    Whether component systems are better than integrated systems is a pointless argument. What really matters is what people want to buy and use in their homes, and there are plenty of integrated systems (often two boxes: amplifier + everything else) that offer high performance and precision.

    1. “…a collection of boxes that weigh more than a car.”
      Now really; Steven.
      That’s as amusing as England winning back ‘The Ashes’.

      “often two boxes”…yep; that’s me 🙂

      1. My car weighs 935kg. The ISRV weigh 680kg, the P20 regenerator weighs 43kg and I think there are 3 or 4 of them in Music Room 2. Add amplifiers etc, the Music Room 2 system weighs rather more than my car.

        But I do agree with you on the Ashes this winter (summer).

      2. stoke the fire, the stoker is raging, burn the fire, the pope will ignite, leach those flames, use the wood, ; ashes to ashes dust to dust that little urn is crawling its way back…broadly speaking and do the bess, ….on-root back to England’s green and pleasant land.

        now Paul Mc those “fat rat” 30’s landed cost in Blighty?

        rock and bloody roll and God save the Queen!

    2. I’m not sure you can say that the electrostatic esl speaker is a “driver” speaker, at least in the context of comparison to a typical box speaker. Even your Maggie speakers use multiple panels.
      As good as the quad esl’s were for certain kinds of music at low volumes, they became distorted/clipped when getting pushed either by the music or at higher volumes.

  3. With those broad shots, Paul, as I assume unintentionally, often triggers various core topics of individuals which he didn’t aim to address.

    This time I think the post is neither aimed to transfer the topic “loudspeaker driver separation” to “separation of electronic component designs”, nor towards multi driver speakers vs. one way or two way drivers of any kind (planars, or conventional single driver, coaxial etc.). Each would be a topic per se.

    My understanding was, the topic is aimed towards the fact that PSA decided to use the best possible driver for each application and achieved to integrate them coherently. Which is not easy in general and especially when using a fast ribbon even at the direct crossover to the bass (we know this from incoherent sounding electrostatic speakers with conventional bass units).

    Although I think coherence was not in Paul’s upmost focus so far due to using a speaker like the IRS V, I believe it was in the focus of Chris. And the use of multiple small, fast and strong bass drivers should suggest, that this integration will work. The used drivers are a dream combination in my eyes. Remains the task to very well integrate them, then bingo.

    1. He makes a good point about separating speaker tasks that is well illustrated by the last two speakers I’ve used. The Harbeth SHL5plus (and several other models) rely on an 8″ mid/bass driver to go from the crossover at around 3khz to 40hz ±3db. It requires a fairly rigid polycarbonate cone. The Wilson Sabrina has a 5″ mid and an 8″ bass (stiffened paper, I think) and go to 31hz ±3db. Same size driver, less work to do, better sound, especially below around 100hz, if not a bit higher.

      Paul’s analogy doesn’t work for me because, whereas there are clearly good and bad reasons to combine functions in speakers and well as electronics, they have nothing to do with each other. The main reason is, of course, because speakers are a mechanical system and most components are electronic systems.

      1. Got it. I agree that the reasons for combining drivers in speakers have nothing in common with the reasons for combining source and amplifier in electronics. The first is for sound philosophy, the latter for convenience reasons.

        But Paul is coming from the opposite side. The reasons for separating speaker drivers are similar to those for separating electronics.

      2. Got it. I agree that the reasons for combining drivers in speakers have nothing in common with the reasons for combining source and amplifier in electronics. The first is for sound philosophy, the latter for convenience reasons.

        But Paul comes from the opposite direction. The reasons for separating speaker drivers are similar to those for separating electronics.

        1. You must be from the other side of the pond. You’re making these incredible observations while I am shaking the cobwebs out of my head on the east coast of the United States. That was an intense interpretation of today’s post jazznut.

          A quick aside: Speaker frames are called spiders, I’m shaking cobwebs out of my head and I just wondered if we could the militarize these webs to design the ultimate driver?

          1. Well, the whole crowd here is busy, first to understand what was meant and then to decide to follow abroad interpretations or to get to the core. But who knows if what I think is the core, is it or not.

            Paul‘s posts mostly are so wide and clear only in a limited way, that they tend to open a pandora‘s box frequently. But that’s certainly not Paul’s topic alone, as many of us seem to have some constant trigger points waiting to be engaged 😉

            I’d prefer less frequent, but deeper and more explicitly focused topics, but it runs well just as it is, too 😉

            1. I’ve noticed that over the past several months that the morning topics have have been crafted in a different way than before. I like your idea of deeper more focused topics even if they are spread out over several days.

              I also have difficulty believing that Paul doesn’t insert trigger words or phrases that could heat the fire under the cauldron :-). But you are correct, things run fine the way they are.

        2. Half the fun of Paul’s posts is sometimes trying to work out what he’s saying, and he’s the first to admit things sometimes don’t come out quite as intended!

          Paul has mentioned PSA was one of the first manufacturers to separate CD transports from the DAC to isolate the mechanical vibration from the electronics. No one questions the merits of that. I was speaking to Innuos the other day about upgrading from a SATA Zen to a SSD Zenith and they explained that you lose the vibration of the SATA and gain the electronic noise of the SSD, so the Zenith has an additional linear power supply purely to power the SSD and reduce that additional electronic noise. So compromises everywhere.

          1. If it weren’t for the compromises, the unit cost would be higher. That’s another compromise.

            In the 22 years that I own my Wadia CD player I have never bypassed It’s internal DAC and run it into my PSA DSD/DAC Streamer to listen to the possible (probable) improvements. I love the sound of the Wadia and since what I hear by comparing the sonics of my CD player to the DAC/Streamer scares me a little. In reality I know that the DSD/DAC may most likely improve the musicality of the transport without the use their internal DAC. The more I write the more I get the feeling that I’m going to try this out. It’s there for the trying.

            1. Your comment today is probably what keeps getting me in trouble 😉
              If I have the capability to try something without incurring an sizable expense then I always head down that road. Nothing ventured nothing gained so to speak. What’s the worse that could happen… I like it and then have to implement it? Or ah! No real improvement and back to where I was?

              1. Mike, I think you are a wiser man than I.

                I swore off making any audio equipment purchases six months ago. You have to run away from any media to keep that promise. With all of the talk about XLR versus RCA cables and my ability to make the changes that I have fought over the past four years, I finally took the leap and I am so glad that I did. What the hell if I have no money, there’s always PayPal credit. The change I talked about would cost me very little, just a cable to connect from my CD Player to my DAC. It’s the only way I will ever find out how much better (or not) the sound of CDs will come across to my ear brain connection. These are individual judgments that we all have to make in life and it’s getting to the point where I can no longer afford new equipment especially when I have a very reasonable sounding system. The XLR’s made all the difference and I could have returned them Within 30 days if I wasn’t happy.

                1. Stimpy2,

                  I just took the cable plunge also. I’ve been with the Xlr connections for years, Finally tried some other type of cables, Silver, like you, the differences were great enough to justify the expense. So they’re being built now and should be here in a few days or so. I was specifically talking about utilizing a different ‘feature’ of any given component. Especially output wise. It was the very same thing you mentioned… Transport/ internal Dac… to transport external Dac … then to computer (audio purposed) driving the Dac. It was a fun journey, didn’t break the bank and opened up a whole new world for learning and listening.

          2. Innuos has several convincing measures in their stuff and prove they go deep into the matter. If they had a pure streamer and would support I2S I might have had one already. But they argument that the most anti noise measures apply to the server side generally and so far only offer servers. They even see their integrated streaming option just as a convenience addition. So their output stage might be a bit more limited than the rest.

            What I would hope is that the PSA streamer is not spec’ed down towards the later server in terms of measures and sophistication around the streaming side of it, but I’m not sure. Otherwise it would rather be a Stellar series unit.

            1. Few people offer I2S because it is a non-standard format. Hardly anyone uses it and of those that do, they are often incompatible.

              Actually the Innuos 2.0 streamer is not a convenience matter, it’s taken 4 years to develop and does seem to sound noticeably cleaner than Roon. It’s a streamer optimised to their hardware.

              Their other two products are a usb reclocker and an ethernet reclocker. They are independent of their streamers and plenty of people who don’t use Innuos servers use them. A lot of the value in those products derives from their investment in well-designed power supplies.

              Octave Server will be a direct competitor to Innuos Zenith Mk3 running Innuos 2.0. The difference is Z Mk3 is a 4th generation product and can run Roon Player and serve as a Roon Core if required.

              1. Steven, The I2S ( or more properly IIS ) serial bus protocol was developed by Phillips in 1986 for PCM digital data transfer between IC’s in a CD player. It is one of the most standard protocols in the industry. One has to be careful about cable lengths and impedance when adapting it to transfer digital data between two pieces of digital audio gear, however, it is clear that PS Audio’s adaptation of the protocol using HDMI connectors and cables has been very beneficial to the performance of their digital audio gear.

                1. I think the main reason why was because Sony require a proprietary data transfer from a SACD transport to a DAC, and they chose I2S. I understand I2S may wired differently by different companies, but few use it anyway. I recall Marantz used to make a SACD transport and had their own connection called MMM, but now sensibly make SACD players only. Esoteric use an HDMI variant called ES-Link and dual AES/EBU, like dCS.

                  Using an internal bus connection as an external cable with separate signal and power is not new. Quad did it with their QuadLink bus cable from around 1990 until fairly recently.

                  If the benefit is galvanic isolation of the signal, Innuos have that covered by providing a CAT45 data output, which really is a universal protocol.

  4. I’m a fan of “single driver” and “nearly single driver” speakers.

    My second system uses a 3.5W tube integrated driving a pair of Madisound BK-16 kit speakers with a fancy Fostex driver. They sound like music to me. For smaller spaces this kind of setup would be hard to beat.

    For the main system in a much larger space I have Sanders Sound Systems Model 10e hybrid ‘stats. These are no ordinary ‘stats (M-L, Soundlab for example) because they use a TL (transmission line) woofer enclosure and DSP LMS (loudspeaker management system) for crossover, EQ, room correction, etc. And, these things play plenty loud with great dynamics.

    Not sure why Paul tends to dismiss all stats as having poor dynamics. The nearly massless panel membranes are extremely fast with transients and the octaves from 170Hz to 20kHz+ are covered by a single driver. This is ideal for coherence in my experience. I’m convinced not enough folks have heard a properly designed modern hybrid ‘stat speaker system.

  5. Paul,

    Please don’t take this as a critique on the FR30, it is just my perspective.

    The FR30 in my eyes is analogous too a fine set of ceramic chief knives. From a small paring knife, to a large meat cleaver, and with multiple lengths of French and serrated knives in between. Each knife perfectly suited for its job.

    However in my kitchen, I enjoy preparing my meals using one very sharp, 10 inch, carbon steel, French blade knife. This one knife is perfectly balanced, and was handmade by a craftsman in small town in Ohio (who I met). The knife needs special attention to keep it sharp, and will never see the inside of a dishwasher. It is not good at every job, but for 90% of the meals I prepare, it is a perfect fit for me.

    I know I would really enjoy having the FR30s, but similar to 99.9% of Ferrari owners, they would be much more than I need.

    1. Thanks for the advice on knives, as our half-built kitchen is awaiting a box full of blunt knives. I shall have to investigate the one-knife option.

      1. Try an 8” Victrionix wood handle chef knife. I have over 15 chef’s knives in my collection and this is the one I use is 90% of the time. The Swiss Steel is amazing and it is incredibly well balanced. You shouldn’t need to sharpen the blade instead hone the edge with an Accusharp honing device. I promise you, you’ll never regret it. I even compared it to my $2,000 Bob Kramer knife and I like the Victrionix much better.

          1. I said it before and I’ll say it again. You will never be disappointed with the 8 inch wood handled model chefs knife from Victrionix. If Amazon is still carrying it you actually open it to check it out you can return it. I’ve got Hankel, Wüsthof, Mercer and possibly another brand or two of knives and I have been cooking for 58 years now. Until I was diagnosed with diabetes I was as addicted to cooking as I am to audio. Before I moved from New York I had over 400 cookbooks. I know my craft even though I could never do it for a living. I’m trying to figure out how I can meet Massimo Bottura before I crossover. Cooking was my life and to some extent it still is. I stand behind my statement. Sometimes the price of an item can be deceiving. My Victrionix knife is over 12 years old and still is almost as sharp as the day I took it out of its packaging because I know how to take care of it. I have also given two of these identical knives as presents, one to my son who is a master at cooking and the other to a friend of mine who owns a restaurant and is a terrific Chef. They both love it. So much for my sales pitch.

            1. I like a nice meal (possibly an understatement), my wife looks after that department, but we’re not foodies. For me, the most critical use is to cut a slice of lemon or lime. You can’t do that with a blunt knife.

                1. The difference is we turn up at hotels and find they have a 2-star restaurant, my brother-in-law spends 6 months planning foodie trips and ends up visiting the same place. Plus we’re not that fussed about Michelin, a good meal is a good meal, it can be in a mud hut as far as we’re concerned.

                  Honestly, if you can’t cut citrus fruit, how can you make a decent drink?

                  The bigger issue is this new kitchen has a massive tray for knives and things and the Swiss Job is going to be lonely. Maybe we should get some hand-carved spoons?

        1. Crikey, $2000 for a knife? Is that a misprint? And there I was thinking hi-fi is expensive. If I’d paid $2000 for a knife I’d want it to buy the ingredients and cook the meal as well. Couldn’t that have been better ‘invested’ in audio 😉

          1. Bob Kramer is not selling his handmade one-of-a-kind knives now which go for as much as $10,000. This was a gift from my best childhood friend who is worth an unbelievable amount of money. They are more for show then for use But mine is a plain ordinary Kramer knife with no fancy Damascus finish and all the other doodads that he puts in most of his handmade knives.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Kramer

            Read the entire Wikipedia info especially were talks about his career and you will see that two of his knives have sold for $30,000 and 200k+at auction

    2. A man that enjoys a great Chef’s knife. A man after my own heart.

      I hope that you aren’t sharpening any high quality blade, instead of honing the edge otherwise the blade angle changes, the height gets more shallow and the edge loses its razor like sharpness overtime. Keeping a blade well honed will give you years and years and years of outstanding cutting, slicing and dicing.

      “What the hell was I talking about?” Professor Irwin Corey…aka
      ‘The World’s Foremost Authority”.

      1. Stimpy2,

        I use a Work Sharp M3 ceramic hone to sharpen my Warther knife. When I’m done sharpening, I have to warn my wife, she is not used to working with a truly sharp knife and will cut herself.

        If anyone is interested, below is a link to Warther and Sons Cutlery.

        https://warthercutlery.com/?matchtype=&network=g&device=m&keyword=&campaign=11087631534&adgroup=107617590366&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIzs_wj5mT9AIVCWpvBB2kzQzWEAAYASAAEgJbv_D_BwE

        1. Thanks I’ll check it out.

          It’s a fact that more people cut themselves badly with a dull knife than a sharp knife. It’s all in being in the moment and focused while you slice or cut. I always curl my left fingers so that my knuckles are resting on the side of the blade and keep the blade slightly slanted away from that hand while I’m working

  6. To separate or not to separate …that’s the question for a lot of couples these days.
    There are a lot of things to consider before you decide to …erm wait,.. I think I’m on the wrong site.
    Sorry.

      1. A lawyer ? You mean a real pro…?
        Actually I was talking about couples in audio.
        A pre and power amp, a transport and dac, a TT and cartridge, a sub and woofer.
        What is one without the other ?

  7. Today’s post is one that makes the most sense to me in quite a while. Maximizing the usefulness of what you have to work with or designed. The trick comes in melding the best qualities of each with the fewest compromises. Isn’t that what all of us are basically doing, or has 2 channel audio perfection been found somewhere?

    1. You just hit it right on the head Mike, congratulations! I’m going to start looking into Running my CD transport part of my player into the DSD DAC/Streamer And start investigating this afternoon. Time to pull out my manuals

  8. What??!!! No one mentions Bose here? One driver no crossovers. They had excellent marketing technics and sold millions. I heard them in clubs mounted from the ceilings in clubs when I was stationed in Korea many moons ago. Was never impressed with sound especially lack of bass but never heard them properly set up either. I will always wonder why Dr. Bose didn’t come out with a few more options such as the Bose 1001 or Bose 1201 (perhaps 10 or 12 inch drivers) instead of the tiny 5 or 6″ drivers ? Kef makes excellent drivers where the tweeters are built into the woofer. This design (I think it was called uni-Q) has many benefits and is heard as “one” speaker absent of phase distortion ect. But I am sure it is still a compromise. One thing that baffles me is why speaker designers/engineers don’t use Active crossovers instead of passive. Every time I changed my vehicle’s audio systems from passive to active I was never disappointed. Using active is beneficial also because you don’t lose amplifier power to a network of resistors coils and capacitors plus you get a lot more tuning ability. Able to adjust crossover frequencies and slopes ect. I am with Paul here since it is difficult to have one driver perform all frequencies but perhaps the gap will get closer someday much like tube and transistors. Paul Please don’t ban me for mentioning that “B” word here on your forum. Thanks.

    1. Think about a past post where we talked about all that matters is our perception of what music sounds like to each of us when you are listening. That’s all that counts.

    2. A friend built a 20×20 man cave ,pool table bar etc. two Bose 301s up in the corners of the room and just a ‘stereo’. It was great fun,very loud,perfect party setup. Crap that was 20 years ago.

  9. IMO, Paul’s Post today is easily understood. Well engineered, well designed and well implemented “separates” (being it electronics or mechanical transducers) can bring to the audio performance a synergistic blend of the combined strengths of each, without potential weaknesses of some fully integrated systems!

    There are advantages/disadvantages of both separates and integrated components, just have to pick your intended space, sonic goals and of course, budget!

    1. For Me, they are definitely Not Antonyms, but very capable Synonyms!

      It certainly is more challenging for an “Audiophile” (like you or me… see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audiophile ) to put together a highly resolving, very detailed and very accurate music reproduction home audio system that is very capable of live, realistic holographic soundstage presentation on a shoestring budget! Of course, that really depends on what one designates as a “shoe string budget” (Very different for each individual)!

      BUT, it Can Be Done!!! If you could hear what I hear (audio investment of around $6K), I’ve No Doubt it would blow your mind!!! 🙂

      As far as drugs…wouldn’t know as I have no experience with any of that!?!

      Ted

      1. Oh I think I can do that for 6K Ted. A lot of research and in-home testing to find the synergy in the system components one by one. Sounds like fun. I need something to build or put together.

        As far as recreational drugs are concerned (not heroin) medical marijuana sales are booming in Florida. I can’t drink anymore (medical issue) and that’s why I smoke just to relax at night and to put me to sleep I used to have a very nice wine collection and I put together a group of investors to purchase wine futures for the 1982 Bordeaux and 1977 Ports. If inflation goes down I’m talking to some of my friends about the top quality Burgundies to purchase as futures but at my age I’ll probably be dead and buried before they’ll be ready to sell.That was a big passion of mine as well.

        1. Yep, it’s been a journey of only…46 years (on and off)?! Much testing, synergy and blood-sweat-tears have gone into this wonderful and passionate hobby but to date, it has paid off!!

          The current WWW and social media being what it is, the tools, educational info, testimonials and personal kindred support would make my “audio goals/budget” much easier and faster to obtain!! No doubt you (or any audiophile) could achieve similar/same Audio Nirvana!!! 😉

          Futures/Investments in sought after fine wines…Very Interesting!

          Ted

          1. It’s been 63 years for me. I should try to remember every piece of equipment I ever purchased or upgraded or traded or was gifted. It will be a long list but short in comparison to many other Audio Maniacs

Leave a Reply

Stop by for a tour:
Mon-Fri, 8:30am-5pm MST

4865 Sterling Dr.
Boulder, CO 80301
1-800-PSAUDIO

Join the hi-fi family

Stop by for a tour:
4865 Sterling Dr.
Boulder, CO 80301

Join the hi-fi family

linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram