Absolutely. Positively. I concur. I had a set of Harbeth Monitor 40s. They are, by any measure, reference level speakers if there have ever been reference level speakers. The difference between a set of McIntosh MC-501s ($5k used) and a late '90s Carver A-500x ($400 used) were minor and fall into the categories you described. Moving the speakers a bit or making a wee change in listening position made for a greater difference. Playing with sources -- ditto.
tomjtx;144163 Wrote: > . I'm also an (amateur) musician, have played an inssomewhere around > 16kHz). > > In the end, I could tell the difference, but only on some tracks I knew > very well, and even then just barely. I found it easiest to discern on > a recording of the Bach cello suites - there was a difference in > timbre, and possibly in detail. But it was very subtle - and this in a > comparison between an extremely highly rated and reviewed amp custumized > and upgraded by the manufacturer, and a 15 year old medium to low grade > mass-market surround sound receiver. > > My (personal) conclusion from this experience? Spend money on music, > speakers, and room correction. Amplification has been solved. that's interesting. The timbre differences you heard would probably be enough for me to want to buy the amp. Do you think most people in both camps would agree that amplification has improved to the point that the least differences exist in this part of the audo chain? Seems reasonable to me. -- highdudgeon ------------------------------------------------------------------------ highdudgeon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2195 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28368 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
