News: AudiogoN's RMAF Show Report and Audio Federation's Report

Audio Federation is pleased to announce that AudiogoN’s Rocky Mountain Audio Fest Show Report will be displaying photos from the Audio Federation show report as they move towards being one of the most comprehensive show report destinations on the internet. AudiogoN show reports offer several unique features such as interactive exhibitor information, comments and room-by-room discussion boards.

AudiogoN RMAF 2007 show Report

As always, Audio Federation will continue to focus on the high-end audio show experience from a ultra high-end audiophile point of view, expanding the coverage and depth of the photos, reporting, and presentation to provide visitors ever more realistic up-close-and-personal you-are-there high-end audio show reports.

Stopped by 6moons a few times…

SixMoons.com is usually a safe stop for me – it doesn’t drive me crazy with angst reading their stuff.

I liked the Hong Kong Show Report. Is it just me or do they know how to do high-end like nobody’s business? The new $200K Transroter turntable, the new, what, $140K?, Burmester CD player …

There was also the Jeff Day piece on Musicality at 6moons.

I guess I agree with his general thesis, which we would put as “Don’t overemphasize Realness (transparency, accuracy) and Impressiveness (slam, detail) at the expense of Enjoyability”.

But it was hard to tell if he was going too far, and saying: “Enjoyability versus Realness and Impressiveness are fundamentally incompatible with each other”.

The other point he was implicitly making, and you just know the type of people who will pounce on this, is that not only should products, rather than systems, be chosen on the basis of their Enjoyability (which he calls Musicality) but that cheap products are inherently more musical than expensive ones. For example, car radios, Leben CS600 pre and the Harbeth Super HL5 speakers. [I am not familiar with the Leben, but the $4795 Harbeth ……? How about the Acoustic Zen Adagio, the Quad, the Odyssey Lorali, Sonus Faber Amatuer I, or used Extrema, etc. etc.]

But assuming these do sound good to somebody – they buy them, take them home, plug them in to a system with cables that distort the harmonics and muffle small transients even more, a system with amps that are guaranteed for 20 years exaggerating the attack of every note [not to mention truncating the duration, that most beautiful thing, the ‘sigh’ of each note] so now George and Ringo seem like THEY ARE REALLY ANGRY all the time.

Hey, uneven dynamics and a relaxed attitude to the things like, oh, voices and musical instruments don’t bother everybody.

OK, in my stupid opinion, most equipment over-emphasizes something; it is just plain hard to make something perfectly balanced. But hardly any of it is unusable, if care is paid to system matching.

But is a lot more difficult, it seems to me, to correct for something being too comprised in the attempt for musicality. That if that something has too little of a property of sound, it is worse than too much. If something, in trying to archive “musicality” so badly that dynamics or responsiveness or finesse are removed, there is just no way to get that information back. But if something is too detailed, throw a tube at it [crude but effective]. If something has to much transparency? The soundstage is too realistic? Imaging too spot-on?

Sorry, the article would have been more to the point to talk about components with near perfect balance, and ignore the “audiophiles going down the wrong path” lecture. Audiophiles are all over the place. They don’t need to be steered away from transparency, imaging and the like [we KNOW it is not the end all and be all, that it is not the sole criteria for quality, but it is certainly ONE set of criteria], off into low-fi land.

[I know I exaggerate, but this buyers guide approach bores me. People need to know their options at each price point and the performance trade-offs of these options, using some kind of categorization scheme, [NOT 1 thru 5 stars, A thru D, 1 thru 4 notes, etc.] that can handle the bewilderingly large number of characteristics of each product’s performance as it relates to other product’s performance. We try to do that here, with perhaps some success, though our focus is primarily on the ultra tippity tip of the high-end.]

One of our first posts was about climbing the mountain of fewer and fewer compromises to the ultimate system sitting at the top, which we speculated, most people would agree was the best. And how there is path up the mountain along which systems exist that have compromises but mimic the ultimate system that sits at the top of the mountain . But the compromises are things like frequency extension, macro dynamics, bass. Not details. Not transparency. Not imaging. I would argue that those things are part and parcel of music, and stereo reproduction. They leave the midrange alone. They leave most musical instruments and voices alone. Compromise somewhere else.

As for building a balanced Enjoyable (musical) system.

Just buying cheap gear is not the answer. Just buying old gear is not the answer. Just buying expensive gear is not the answer. Just buying the latest upgrade is not the answer. Just buying things that get great reviews in the magazines or on the forums is not the answer.

The answer? Ugh. W-e-l-l-l-l-l-l-l…

The easiest answer is to listen to lots of things, hear a system you like, and get that system lock, stock and barrel. [I apologize to our non-U.S.readership – I have been overflowing with these old-fashioned ways of putting things lately].

Another method is to grow your system: take your best guess as to what to get next, paying close attention to not only what people say it does well “Great bass on kettle drums, man” but what it is weakest in “I have been noticing a lot of musicians play instruments that need to be tuned”.

Then strive for balance as you add / change components: if you already have something that is very detailed in your system – don’t add something else to your system that is extremely detailed if you want a balance, if you want Enjoyability (Musicality), no matter how ‘cool’ it is or how excited the people are who talk about it.

[But if you do want the Most Detailed System Ever – then… go for it. Have fun. Don’t let anybody tell you that your system has to be enjoyable / musical, it is YOUR system. [Just don’t expect your spouse to hang out with you a whole lot when you are playing it :-)]]

OK. Glad someone is talking a little about music and how humans process it… but this “High-End Audio is All Messed Up Because Of:

[fill in the blank:

1) too much realism, [Jeff Day]
2) too little realism, [J. Gorden Holt]
3) too commercial,
4) too many charlatans,
5) nobody takes it seriously enough
6) missing real dynamics
7) the manufacturers suck, the trade rags sucks, the forums suck
8) the musicians suck
9) the musicians suck after 1750 A.D.
10) kids and their downloads
11) greedy and/ or impressively stupid recording industry
12) things are too expensive
13) China
14) the value of the dollar is dropping like a heavy stone right smack on our little toe [us :-)]
15) the media format (pick one, or pick several: MP3, redbook, SACD, DVD audio, Blu-ray, HDDVD, digital recorders)
16) the media format wars [pick one]
17) home theater
18) too many products
19) shrinking demographics
20) and not the last, but… The Internet

], whiny stuff is for the therapists couch. [Boy, look at how long that extemporaneously written list is… this hobby sure has a lot of whining going on. :-)]

HiFi+ and the Marten Coltrane Supreme loudspeakers


I hope nobody thought we were just going to ignore this… 🙂

Most people tell me this was a pretty positive review. We certainly would like to thank Roy Gregory for taking the time and brain cells to describe what these speakers do, as well as putting it on the cover of the HiFi+ magazine this month.


But me, similar to the reviews of the smaller Marten Coltranes before this by Roy Gregory, Mike Fremer, and HP, I want them to describe what the speakers do that is unique. Not just describe it as yet another speaker that does X, Y and Z with music track A and B.


I can sense that they recognize there is a challenge here, to 1) describe these without damaging their relationships with other manufacturers and 2) not sound like they have gone off the deep end, lost too many marbles, and gone wacko like the guy at Audio Federation.


The problem with these speakers is that they are so competent, especially the Supremes as we call them here [and which is what the rest of this post is about, though everything applies to the Coltranes and little cousins, just there are more compromises and less absolutes], that they are completely shocking… or completely boring.


They are completely shocking because we have spent our lives playing with speakers that are colored. Colored neutral or colored sweet, colored impressive or colored dull. Finally there is the music, which has always been painted in the past with some kind of artist’s brush, the artist being the speaker manufacturer.

To be sure the underlying technology, drivers, crossover, cabinet all limit just what can be done compared to the Real Thing. But, given the technology, this is the way speakers should be built if people just want to hear what is upstream. If they do not, then that is OK, and there are a lot of speakers out there that sound great and we love them and we recommend and or sell a number of them.


They are completely boring because they just play what they are given. They don’t futz with the music and pump it up because they think they know what you should like – and it isn’t the actual music, it is how well the designer can SLAM the bass, or render exceedingly fine detail, or throw a gigantico soundstage or build a great looking cabinet or make tall tall speakers or …

They are boring because after you get them, you are done with speakers. Now, if you want to change the sound, you just change the upstream components.

They are a tabula rasa, which means, if I remember my Spanish [Latin] meaning clean slate. They are like a blank piece of paper: scary, challenging, boring, exciting… because it is now up to YOU to setup the components to make the sound you have always wanted.


And this is where the reviewers are at a disadvantage. They, have limited time and limited componentry to try with the speakers. They may have only one room. It took us one year [so far!], three different rooms, five different positions, dozens of combinations of best in-class amps and cables and sources, … and we are STILL just starting to get a handle on what they can do.

Like any good tool, the designer does their best, but they can barely imagine, if at all, what people will be able to do with it. This is true in software and I believe it to be true in high-end audio as well. We are, many of us, mapping new territory in high fidelity music reproduction using the best equipment available. How much fun is that? [that was a rhetorical question, but, just in case… it is a LOT of fun :-)].

So, I am definitely asking for too much from reviewers, but it would have been so great to have them talk about this in their reviews, how these are so, so, so balanced. Like wives versus girl friends, husband-material versus boy friend-material. Something that will stand by our system for years and years.