Slashdot Mirror

The whole vinyl fad is just another way for the unscrupulous to take money off the stupid.

Agreed, CD audio is enough for most people never to know any better. Some of the more aggressive lossy compression is noticeable of course, but even that is not that easy.

Still assuming 16 bit 44.1k isn't good enough, let's think about this for a minute.

What about 24 bit 96kHz? That is a standard I believe. well 24 bit contains 256 times as many quantification levels as 16 bit. Well that ought to be good enough there. 96k is, however, only about double..

Of course if your an engineer, you might have heard of the Nyquist sampling theorem which says you need to sample at least twice the sampling rate as the highest frequency content you care about. (For the sake of argument we assume that we can analog filter out any frequencies we don't care about.)

Now humans theoretically can hear 20k, but not in practice. I'm guessing it is 16k or less, but you can look it up. Still 20k x 2 = 40kHz, so 44.1k is good.

Of course if your really an engineer, sometimes it is just nice to get some more points, and you might aim to get 10X the frequency content. Sure its technically overkill, but why not. We'll 96k is only about 5x the frequency content so that is impossible with 96kHz.

So, do we need 192kHz sampling? Maybe 192kHz plus 32bit sampling. That will do it for sure...

What is the bottom line? It is a couple things actually. First, speakers don't have a flat frequency response. Some are better than others. Even if you go completely crazy with the input quality, you have to deal with speakers that are made on Earth. Second, even if you buy the best in the universe, well places you put speakers are usually crap acoustically.

Basically if you care about audio, buy decent quality stuff but nothing with "monster" in the title. Energy Encore used to have good speakers. Pair it with a good amplifier. Does Sony still make decent stuff? Most likely it will be heavy, but class D amps are presumably improving all the time, but I doubt you want one for this. Pair that with a well designed room, designed to reduce sound bouncing, as well as to dampen it. If in doubt, it wouldn't hurt to do things like surround the room with heavy drapes to absorb sound. 2 layers 5/8 of drywall before the drapes wouldn't hurt either. Make the room something that is not a rectangle is likely a bonus, though that requires research.

Do those things, and ditch the vinyl, and I bet you will like the result more. FWIW, I once purchased either this reciever or one much like it. sony for like $1k. In hindsight I still can't believe i did that. It has to have been at least 10 years ago.

I stopped caring about audio nearly as much, and saw how much power that thing used when it was just sitting idle. I have this tiny little class D thing now. It is good enough, and uses almost no power idle.... The sony was definitely a good amp though, and still is for that matter.

Digital optical is utterly inferior to HDMI Audio. It only supports 2 channels uncompressed, anything other than that. 2.1, 5.1, 7.1 is compressed.

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Great. Now show me a modern, HDMI-equipped receiver that sounds anywhere as near as good as my circa 1998 NAD T750. As long as I can get a Blu Ray player with 5.1 analog audio output, I'll be set for discs and streaming, but I need that Toslink output (and a decoder box) from my TV for OTA broadcasts.

The PSP even has games still coming out for it?

Wow. I haven't even turned mine in in a whole year. I guess the lineup for it was really that crappy.

This guy actually talked about Sony having "the best mp3 players" and "the best audio shit"... what? Sorry, nobody in their right mind buys a Sony MP3 player, and Sony audio stuff is overpriced and underpowered too - Sony barely ever registers beyond a blip at the usual places...

I think I know what @TheKevinButler's Slashdot name is now though! Come on down and take a bow, Kevin... I mean "perryizgr8."

The Samsung SIR-T165 has a Firewire output that you can use to stream from your TV broadcast to your computer. However, later models have a lot more to offer in terms of stability and menu speed. A lot of these early models are slow and prone to locking up. They also don't receive channels nearly as well as the later models. But, if hacking is what you really want, go for the SIR-T165.

Nearly a decade ago Sony released a receiver (starting with the STR-DA90ESG) which utilized a Wii-like control you used to mouse-around the GUI/menus; here's a pic of the remote http://www.dvdremotecontrols.com/Mfrs/Sony/SonyAudio/RM-VP1.jpg/.

Some people loved it, but most people (especially reviewers) *hated* this "Vision Touch" approach to the user interface. It was so long ago that commercial reviews aren't available online, but there are references to those criticisms in the owner reviews posted at http://www.audioreview.com/mfr/sony/a-v-receivers/PRD_118802_2718crx.aspx/.

After just a few years of that they wised up and switched to the better approach of shipping two remotes -- one with all the buttons that you put away and only dig out when you're doing something complicated and one with only the most-used buttons for daily use. "But my DVD player only came with one super-sized remote" you say? Not exactly -- the one that came in your DVD player's box is supposed to be the uber-remote that you put away for infrequent use and the one that came in your TV's box (the play, pause, rew/ff, menu, power buttons) is the one for your daily use.

If you're using powered speakers, why not just go digital (say, over fibre) to the speakers?

Three things.. 1.. cost. 2.. Rich Audiophiles think the descreet steps of the D/A conversion will degrade the audio. Selling a digital solution to the tube amp CD rejecting purists is not a way to make money. 3.. Compatibility. Analog RCA connectors is universal. Digital standards between manufactures is anything but. In the pro field, extra boxes add complexity and another point of failure which is often hard to troubleshoot. In broadcast, digital is the only way for long haul program distribution and remote broadcasts. It's noise free and either works or it doesn't. (same for cell phones)

And wires aren't the only option: with ECC and some good buffering/caching, you could probably just stream the digital over WiFi. I haven't tried it but don't see any significant obstacles.

Several manufactures are going this route with a package.
http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=318
http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Product_C2&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1137028967848&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper
http://www.laptopmag.com/Review/Linksys-Media-Extender-WMCE54AG.htm

But the physics of speakers is unforgiving. There are plenty of exotic solutions to those problems. If I were an audiophile instead of an engineer, that's the hole I'd probably throw my money into.

Absolutely true. As such this is the part of my system that was the most involved in selecting and is the single most expensive part of my system. I used my speakers to demo why speakers make a big deal in the system. When asked about speakers, I would send them over to my speakers and ask them to knock on the back, sides, and top of them while the system was off, and then have them do the same with any other speakers they find. A speaker box is a wodden drum which the speaker drivers thump. Number 1 rule is find speakers that don't add their own sound. Speakers that sound like knocking on an empty wodden box are to be rejected. Most speakers are made this way because it is cheap, lightweight to reduce shipping costs and easy to sell at lower price points. A good speaker will sound the same as knocking on the cement sidewalk outside.

If you ever run across an old pair of the early standard in quality speakers, the Accoustic Research 3a's, take the time to knock on the back of them.

After the cabinet is properly built, the next item on the list is quality drivers with proper magnets, voice coils, and loose suspension. You don't want the speaker cones themselves to be a cheap drum. Good drivers are rarely put in cheap cabinets and the reverse is true. The quickest way to find good speakers at the local stereo showroom is to shut everything off and start knocking on some cabinets. Quite a few years ago some the passing cabinets was from Yamaha, JBL, Accoustic Research, Polk, and some Kenwood and KLH. Failures included most of the Pioneer (Except the premium line) Optimus, Sony, and most other consumer grade speakers.

Personaly I have a pair of Yamaha NS1000's and a pair of AR 3a.
http://www.arsenal.net/speakers/ar/classic/ar-3a/ar3a.htm
http://www.audioreview.com/cat/speakers/floorstanding-speakers/yamaha/PRD_120821_1594crx.aspx

These are all much dated as I am.. but gook well built equipment doesn't need to be in next years landfill. If I threw these on Ebay, I am sure I could get my entire investmet back unlike the cheap stuff.
If you want to have fun,

To answer the "bits is bits" crowd I have to say that they are right. They are right, that is, until you have to convert back to analog and you factor in real-world power supplies and analog circuitry. I did some experiments with cd's to determine what the heck was happening. Turns out that no magic is involved. What is happening is that the disc takes on a static charge,either through spinning in dry air or just from handling. A spinning, statically charged disc is the definition of an electrostatic generator. This hash-like voltage is impressed on the laser-pickup circuitry. Of course the digital circuit ignores this noise (Well,not entirely. It does effect the jitter rather badly because of power supply noise.), but the noise is now impressed on the power supply and you can see the hash presented to the power-supply rails feeding the analog amplifier, and the cheap chips in most cd-players cannot reject this hash/noise. The better the power-supply and analog cicuitry the less effect this hash/noise and the clarifier has. No power supply built by man can completely eliminate this hash-voltage. It is best to stop it at its source. Hence the Clarifier. This tweak is actually an ANALOG tweak; the clarifier removes the static charge from the disc reducing the noise impressed on the power supply. Most all cd tweaks affect the player in the analog domain. Remember, the CD itself is indeed a digital storage medium, but the player is essentially an analog device right after conversion. (Hell, even before conversion. Its accuracy of conversion is dependent on a clean voltage from the power supply.) For an experiment, take your favorite cd and play it. Notice where in the image the high frequency stuff is (bells etc). Now take your disc and place it against a color tv picture tube when on (about 30,000 volts static charge while running). Now play it again. You will notice an enourmous degradation of sound. Now use the Clarifier (or a bulk tape eraser;start the erasor from about 1 foot,bring close to disc,hold near disc for about 20 secs,then move out to 2 foot before turning off,it works the same just not as convienient as the Clarifier). Now listen again. There should be a readily noticable difference in percieved noise floor and clarity on the highs. Tweaks like vibration damping, green ink, etc all work because the PLAYER is mostly an analog device; it just gets its initial data from a digital source.

Buy the Sony 7506's if you want good headphones.

You might have to go to an audio store to find them, but they are classic industry standards for musicians and other people that have to work with audio.

http://www.audioreview.com/cat/headphones-home-aud io/headphones/sony/PRD_118049_2750crx.aspx

Try searching for a review of a commerical product like a TV by model number. Google will fill the search with places selling the product, not with reviews. If Eopinions or Amazon does not have a review, you're screwed. You'll be buying blind. Okay genius, what keywords do you enter? If I wanted to find reviews on the Sony KDL-V40XBR1, I personally would type in "sony KDL-V40XBR1 reviews".

I tried your search. And I wasn't impressed with the results.

1. http://www.pricerunner.com/sound-and-vision/vision /tv/456966/reviews - No user reviews posted, no editor review posted
2. http://www.bizrate.com/marketplace/product_info/ov erview/index__cat_id--11520000,prod_id--346857528. html - two users reviews posted, no editor review posted
3. http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_Bravia_XBR_KDL_V40XBR 1/4505-6482_7-31470102.html - 24 user reviews, editor posted review
4. http://reviews.designtechnica.com/review3148.html - 2 user reviews, editor posted specs
5. http://www.audioreview.com/PRD_343744_2728crx.aspx - no user reviews, no editor review

This is similar to what I've experienced recently searching for reviews on Google. I can eventually find them, but I usually need to use a much more complex search that removes keywords stores usually use. The next time, I'll try Yahoo and see how it goes.

Or maybe not. The same search at Yahoo turned up shopping.yahoo.com twice in the top 5, and a similar lack of reviews.

Not when it was released.

Just search. There's plenty of places that still list the initial MSRP.

http://www.audioreview.com/cat/portables/mp3-playe rs/rio/PRD_173483_5548crx.aspx

I do understand it dropped later, but so did the price of 20G iPods.

Also, "estimated street price" is used by companies to indicate sell prices below MSRP, because they expect discounting. It isn't used to indicate prices above MSRP.

I bought a Sharp Aquos LCD television last year. It's only a 20" model, not a giant one, and it's only normal TV, not HDTV.

It's way better than the CRT it replaced.

There are no issues with ghosting; it clearly refreshes fast enough for TV, DVDs, or console video gaming.

I am looking forward to the day when I get a much bigger one (the 37" and 42" both look nice). When I get the bigger one, it will be a model with a DVI input, and I'll hook up a computer to that. I want to play first-person games on a giant screen with my living room's surround sound all around me.

steveha

P.S. I figure LCD is pretty much a stable technology at this point. It's basically a large laptop screen, and those have been around for years. Plasma has burnin issues, and OLED may simply fade with time. I look forward to SED displays... but LCD is here now and getting more affordable every year.

Digital, maybe, but you don't want to raise the ire of the analog stereophiles: You'll get everything from Stereo cables make a difference to Debunking the Myth of Speaker Cable Resonance, not to mention forests worth of dead tree sacrifices for Speaker Cable Face Offs.

And please, please, please, please: Don't get them started on Solid State -vs- Vacuum Tube...

MP3pro sucks ass. Plain and simple. How do I know? I tried it. Here's the issue: I can hear MP3 compression artificats clearly to 192kb on most sources, and to 224kb on some of my "favorite" music. Certain Boston sequences are particulary difficult to encode well even at 256kb when played over decent headphones*.

The problem is that even the registered version of an MP3pro converter would max out at 128kB, with 192kB "quality". Nice, but not really "enough". Everyone seems to be racing to the 96-128kb SIZE point, without realizing that it's not really all the great to listen to unless there's a lot of background noise, or the equipment you're playing it on comes in a heat-sealed clamshell. And 64kn in every format I've listened to sounds somewhere between AM and FM radio, with digital artifacting added as a bonus. I'll take 48 or 64 for spoken spoken word, but please don't say you use it for audio unless you are listening to it while mowing the lawn.

I finally gave up on lossy formats and started re-ripping everything in FLAC. Now I can transcode through foobar2000 to whatever the format dujour is, or to a format which will fit in the space I have on my portable player.

* Sony MDR-V6 in my case...quite the bargain IMHO, but get the Beyerdynamic 250/290 replacement pads - they're much more comfortable. See http://www.audioreview.com/PRD_118127_2750crx.aspx

Very true. I completely lost all faith in the audiophile bunch after seeing some of the crap they spout. Especially stuff like this that actually makes the claim that different digital audio fibre optic cables somehow sound different.

>Just try to design 3kW hifi audio amp and see what will be cheaper...

You have a source for tubes than can handle (assuming we are hooking up some magically-able-to-handle-3kw-home-speaker) 20 amps of current? If so, show me the money. Otherwise, you know the old saying, shut up or put up.

I say this because I am certain I can find transistors that can do that.

Now, since I can't find ANYTHING in a tube amp that can handle 3kw (examples, please), I'll post this example, a 200 watt tube amp running at (*GASP*) $6000!

To show I'm not making those numbers up, here's another (now discontinued) tube amplifier, weighing in at a "hefty" 60 watts RMS (my 30 year old H/K 430 solid state amp beats it! LOL!). MSRP: $1,995.

Now, assuming the usual laws of economics apply, I will again, assume, that a 3kw tube amplifier will cost much more.

I can assure you a 3kw RMS solid state amplifier will cost under $6000. In fact, it'll cost you $1,129. If you bitch you don't like the brand name, I can find others in the same price range. And you'll look silly bitching about it, too, because Peavy definately isn't Yorx quality.

But please, please, do tell me where I can get get a 3000 watt tube amp for that price or lower. I'd love to buy, oh, say, 10,000,000 of them. I'd be richer than Bill Gates when I sell them for, oh, about 1000x the price without a hitch.

If you have to have cubes, or even if you don't, buy everyone a set of Beyerdynamic DT 531 headphones. These are not only some of the best headphones you can buy (around $150) but they are completely open so that you can hear what's going on around you while listening to music. As such, you don't have the desire to listen overly loud and you don't get that "in your head" feeling that most headphones give you. For working it's perfect.

Music is a big way to personalize your work environment and I guarantee you that everyone who works for you will be shocked at how great the experience of using these 'phones is. It's at least as good as the first time you work for someone who gives you Aeron chairs.

I have a Sony DVP-NC650V 5-disc DVD/SACD/Video CD player. It cost $199 a year ago. The reason I bought it is because my receiver, an old Harman/Kardon, doesn't have a built-in Dolby Digital or DTS decoder, but does have analog 5.1 channel inputs. This Sony is one of the few players I could find that had 5.1 analog outputs.

I haven't read much about it since, but it is my understanding that SACD players (don't know about DVD-A) do not output multichannel sound via the optical or coaxial connections. You must use three two-channel RCA cables to connect it to the receiver. (Front left, front right, center, surround left, surround right, and subwoofer)

I haven't bought any SACD's yet, but it came with sampler disc--and as the other posters have said, it's awesome. There really is a noticeable difference. The live recordings really sound like you're at a concert.

In short: research the models carefully on the web before buying (some have drawbacks that may bug you)

This reminds me of another thing... People who shell out like 300 bucks for a SPDIF audio cable made out of like gold plated 00 gauge wire that's too fat even to bend into anything smaller than an 8" bend radius.

Again, they can "hear the difference" -- i mean, I can hear the difference too when I use a shitty SPDIF cable. The sound cuts out and the DAC buzzes really badly when 1% of the bits don't get there - because the frames can't be decoded! The fucking format has a fucking checksum to make sure the fucking signal comes through fucking flawlessly! IE if you can hear it through a SPDIF cable and it doesnt pop and cut out, then you are getting 100% of the digital information that there is.

Here's some fucktards ranting on this topic:

http://www.audioreview.com/PRD_124054_1584crx.aspx

One guy gave this particular cable a raving review because it made the sound "more analog" -- whatever the fuck that means -- it's actually impossible for the cable to affect the sound unless it's fucking with the equipment grounding and causing a hum somewhere else in the electronics -- which would actually make it a shitty cable. Fuckers would probably do better with a piece of alarm wire with some RCA connectors soldered on the endss. That's totally retro analog bullshit there!

~GoRK

John Atkinson's measurements (which were done incorrectly) show these speakers to be superior in every measurable way to the others described above and a proper set of measurements would make them look even better. They extend to nearly 20Hz (-10dB) in the bass and are essentially flat to 20kHz. (They are indeed flat within ±1.5dB from 35Hz to 20kHz when measured correctly.) They produce near-perfect impulse response and step response plots.

I've a pair of 6'x4'x2' magnaplanar mg2b's from the mid eighties which sound amazing when powered with good gear... for <1/10th the price of those new B&0s. If you want a good set of speakers within that price range, try something worthy.

I've a pair of 6'x4'x2' magnaplanar mg2b's from the mid eighties which sound amazing when powered with good gear... for <1/10th the price of those new B&0s. If you want a good set of speakers within that price range, try something worthy.

• 2x Athlon MP 2k+ (on Tyan Tiger MB)
• GeForce 2 with tv out (and 2 other vid cards)
• ATI TV Wonder
• ZapWay IR Receiver
• Sony el-cheapo multi function universal remote control
• Herman Miller Aeron
• Datahand chair mounted split keyboard
• SBLive 5.1
• MSB-Tech Link II DAC
• Good home stereo powering a set of Magnepan MGIIa's (quasi-planar speaker)
• and soon: a SXGA LCD Projector (NEC MT1030+)

• gentoo GNU/Linux
• ALSA audio drivers
• lirc
• mplayer
• xmms
• mldonkey, video store, cable for media acquisition

I hope to eventually suspend a THX acoustically transparant screen across the magnaplanars and use a LCD projector for a 6' x 5' HD image.

Overall the experience has been quite good, tho having it all setup on a workstation requires much maintenance to keep all the apps communicating... a dedicated shuttle box to feed the projector/DAC would be a little nicer, tho I'd still want a central media server. Wireless is not needed here, as the few cables (spdif/video/etc) pose only a problem to the vacuum cleaner. Of course, the setup costs as much as a nice used car (which I don't own) and I find myself dreaming of 6'x5' trees rendered in imax style 3d (cow's can fly in caves, but require awkward polarized glass or expensive eye surgery for 3d flight experience).

Andy
http://benow.ca

OK,

Obviously THX has lowered the bar for audio in the PC world. As far as I am concerned, they've just pissed all over their name. Why is it impossible to get THX for home theater for anywhere near this price point ($399 retail w/amp and decoder)? Because Logitech does not use industry standard methods for rating the frequency response of their system, we can only assume that it is crap. I would imagine that if you added the +/-3db standard, their numbers would look a lot appealing.

So anyway... What have others found to be a cheap, high-performance system? Myself - I use Energy's Take 5.2 sub/sat system with a Marantz SR6200. The combo was less than $1k (if you shop around... I don't want to plug any more at this point) and it sounds better than some of the other stuff that I tested - better than the Polk RM7200s but not quite as deep as the RM7600s. However - the speakers sounded only decent until about two months of use. I didn't really believe in "break-in" periods until I experienced this for myself (tip - run them at "full range" and moderate volume for break-in and then cross them up and crank it). Although none of this equipment has THX logos on it, I enjoy it tremendously.

So my question is - what are other good "budget" audio systems out there? The Energy 5.2 system is available on the street for less than $600 and I have yet to see something competitive with that.

Anyone?

OK,

Obviously THX has lowered the bar for audio in the PC world. As far as I am concerned, they've just pissed all over their name. Why is it impossible to get THX for home theater for anywhere near this price point ($399 retail w/amp and decoder)? Because Logitech does not use industry standard methods for rating the frequency response of their system, we can only assume that it is crap. I would imagine that if you added the +/-3db standard, their numbers would look a lot appealing.

So anyway... What have others found to be a cheap, high-performance system? Myself - I use Energy's Take 5.2 sub/sat system with a Marantz SR6200. The combo was less than $1k (if you shop around... I don't want to plug any more at this point) and it sounds better than some of the other stuff that I tested - better than the Polk RM7200s but not quite as deep as the RM7600s. However - the speakers sounded only decent until about two months of use. I didn't really believe in "break-in" periods until I experienced this for myself (tip - run them at "full range" and moderate volume for break-in and then cross them up and crank it). Although none of this equipment has THX logos on it, I enjoy it tremendously.

So my question is - what are other good "budget" audio systems out there? The Energy 5.2 system is available on the street for less than $600 and I have yet to see something competitive with that.

Anyone?

Replying to my own post... I looked around for headphone amplifiers and it seems that be the best amplifier for about $200 range is Musical Fidelity X-can V2 (class A tube headphone amplifier!). Be sure to get V2 because there're some problems with channel separation and noise in the V1. Your husband cannot listen with the amplifier only but at least I would be much happier with a high quality amplifier without headphones than a cheap one with cheap headphones.

With a budget of $200 or less the best choice would be a good pair of headphones. You can get pretty nice sound from some small speakers but with that small amount of money spent to two or more speakers and an amplifier isn't going to result in high quality sound. With any luck, $200 should get you pretty good headphones and an amplifier for those. And be cheap about the headphones and use more money on the amplifier because it'll probably last longer anyway. Read some reviews and remember that if the subject is going to wear glasses some cans are going to cause problems (for example, I cannot use any sennheiser setup but I have Sony MDR-F1 instead. Be warned that MDR-F1 is a bit hard for the amplifier and you can ruin the result with a cheap one.

With a budget of $200 or less the best choice would be a good pair of headphones. You can get pretty nice sound from some small speakers but with that small amount of money spent to two or more speakers and an amplifier isn't going to result in high quality sound. With any luck, $200 should get you pretty good headphones and an amplifier for those. And be cheap about the headphones and use more money on the amplifier because it'll probably last longer anyway. Read some reviews and remember that if the subject is going to wear glasses some cans are going to cause problems (for example, I cannot use any sennheiser setup but I have Sony MDR-F1 instead. Be warned that MDR-F1 is a bit hard for the amplifier and you can ruin the result with a cheap one.

I have two sets of speakers connected, a pair of old 3 way JBL's D315's and a JBL SCS135 surround system. The SCS135 system sounds incredible for DVD playback, but is only okay for music. The D315's are great for music, but need to be driven hard with lot's of power to appreciate them(these speakers were made for heavy metal:). The big 15 inch woofers and lots of power eliminate the need for a subwoofer and turning on the sub creates a rather annoying boom. The reason for both sets is because different mediums require different approaches. Listen to a John Bonham solo through a sat/sub setup and then through a traditional pair of big woofer speakers and you will see exactly what I am talking about.

I have two sets of speakers connected, a pair of old 3 way JBL's D315's and a JBL SCS135 surround system. The SCS135 system sounds incredible for DVD playback, but is only okay for music. The D315's are great for music, but need to be driven hard with lot's of power to appreciate them(these speakers were made for heavy metal:). The big 15 inch woofers and lots of power eliminate the need for a subwoofer and turning on the sub creates a rather annoying boom. The reason for both sets is because different mediums require different approaches. Listen to a John Bonham solo through a sat/sub setup and then through a traditional pair of big woofer speakers and you will see exactly what I am talking about.

They won't care that they can't make a copy of it, because the copy will invariably be of worse quality, and that is exactly what the audiophile doesn't want.

They might not want to copy it, but they want to use their fancy high-priced DACs.. which they won't be able to do without digital outputs.

--sean

I have an rca mm32110 32' SVGA monitro/tv http://www.audioreview.com/TVs,32,inch,and,above/R CA,MM32110/PRD_129174_2725crx.aspx It is not multisynch (multisync is an nec trademark).

When I spend $850 on a monitor, any OS had better not attempt to send it signals it cannot handle.

Windows XP does the same thing to that monitor that Lindows apparantly did to the reviewers fixed frequency monitor. Could you imagine a nebie feaking out because Windows XP almost destroyed a $1000 monitor!!!! Basically Windows XP gets confused on the circa 1999 Rage Fury Pro and thinks that it must send a composite signal to the SVGA input of the TV. And let's not mention that WinXP refused to stay at 640x480 because it wants to tell you what the ideal resolution is. Without the RFP there is not problem.

I have also had similiar problems with win 98 and switching between fixed and multisynch moitors.

The bottom line is that you cannot expect any OS to support every hardware possible as PnP. At least with Linux or Lindows, you can tell the OS how to handle the hardware, you cannot do this windows a great deal of the time.

If you like those, you should see the MCDR-NC10 set. I picked up a pair several months ago, and they've preserved my sanity very well. I fly fairly often, and find them to be invaluable.
There's a review of them here, and it's pretty much right on. I highly recommend them. They're very comfortable over long periods, and when feeding audio, you pretty much lose all external audio inputs.

The single thing about them that bugs me is the connector cable. There's a detachable connector from the battery unit which has the headphone jack connector on one end, and an obviously proprietary connector on the other. Losing this cable would be a big pain in the ass. I would guess they have other connectors for different interface types, but it'd be nice if it was a standard conversion I could hit Radio Shack to replace.

What we have to be worried about now is just Sony learning from its lessons and coming back with an implementation that doesn't totally suck. Then we're all in trouble.

The Magic Gate that SONY has been trying to foist on the public is a gate that locks out MP3s and freedom and which locks you in to their proprietary system. No one is going to buy these devices while gigabyte carrying Ipods and other devices that allow you to do what you want are on the market.

If SONY really learned its lesson, it would DROP ATRAC completely, finance OOG and use it to as the basis of the next gerneration of Mini Disc recorders.

It would release its next generation portable players with the ability to play OOGs and MP3s by default and any other format through third party plugins. It would release an SDK so that this could be done easily, and it would not sue people who hack SONY software as in the ABIO case.

They actually believed that people whould be bewitched by the design, buy the players and then use the software bundled with them to convert thier whole collecions to ATRAC. Only the most stupid of people would buy into having to rip thier music twice just to play it on a pretty piece of metal.

What is also amazing is how SONY tries to appropriate the language of software movements. "OpenMG copyright protection technology" There is nothing "open" about "OpenMG". In any case, they are not fooling anyone: as it says here

The real problem is that the SONY of today is not the SONY of the mid 70's when the original Walkman was released, which is a shame, because they have some fantastic engineers and designers.

I'm in the process of doing a multi-room setup, but I haven't settled on which DACs to use yet.

My idea is to pipe around SPDIF on coax cable, but again, I haven't tried this out yet.

I'm in the process of doing a multi-room setup, but I haven't settled on which DACs to use yet.

My idea is to pipe around SPDIF on coax cable, but again, I haven't tried this out yet.

I'm in the process of doing a multi-room setup, but I haven't settled on which DACs to use yet.

My idea is to pipe around SPDIF on coax cable, but again, I haven't tried this out yet.

You just said "Bose" and "reproduce sounds *very* well" in the same paragraph. Sorry if I'm chortling right now...

Read the Bose Faq, and please be more careful with your future purchases.

>Deep bass tends to get crunchy VERY fast,

Sorry guy, that's your speakers talking. MP3 gets 'watery' when its compressed too much. Your drivers are likely made of plain paper. Read reviews of the product before you moderate. Some high, many, many, many rock-bottom low. And really, plain paper? My clock radio uses the same technology.

Really, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but before you spend mega-$$$ on anything again, look it up on the 'net. You just might be doing yourself a favour.

This Sony remote is pretty good as an inexpensive learning remote.

One of the major problems with most cheap learning remotes is the lack of memory available to learn alot of functions. This one actually has enough keys and enough memory to totally memorize the functions for a Tivo remote with it's mass of buttons (4-way switch, menus, play/pause/slow, etc). It also has macros for those that have all of their TV sound output through their receiver (can turn TV and receiver on simultaneously).

At $40 here, it's pretty decent for the price.

It's not the extreme high end, but it's enough to control my TV, Receiver, VCR, DVD, Laserdisc and have enough memory to copy my Philips Tivo remote.

Reviews are here and here.

Here's a review of my choice. It's not fully programmable in that you can't add or remove buttons, but there are tons of available functions built in. The back-lit LCD is nice. And for $90, I can live with having to use a few mislabelled buttons.

...or check out Audio Review. Just be aware that "real" audiophiles tend to turn their noses up at Bose speakers, citing the same tired lines ("more spent on marketing than on research and design") but I've got a pair of Bose 201s that sound nice enough on my computer.
As nice as the Wharfedales hanging off my Marantz? Not hardly, but still listenable enough.

it's actually one of the cheaper direct view hdtv sets around. my dad got his for $2100 (floor unit), but they retail for around $2500. here's a pretty good online retailer that carries it for cheap.

though you do lose out for paying less, the menus and UI suck my innards and it's RCA quality so I don't expect it to last too long. some other complaints have been its lack of digital video out. here's a bunch of user reviews for the tv.

I'm suprised the audiophile market doesn't have any superconducting products. It seems these people will buy anything as long as it costs enough.

I'm suprised the audiophile market doesn't have any superconducting products. It seems these people will buy anything as long as it costs enough.

Flat speakers (aka electrostatic speakers), though not exactly mainstream, aren't unusual in the audiophile world. If you're really curious, you might check out Magnepan or MartinLogan or Quad. Also try looking for reviews at Stereophile. There used to be a user-review site at www.audioreview.com, but it's not resolving for me so maybe they're offline at the moment.
--

That's not loads to work with for a 5-channel audiophile A/V system. Heck, you won't get much change from 4 PSB Alpha's and a decent sub.

Bottom line for you would be to go to your nearest audio/video mart, see what's in your price range, and give them a listen. If you like one, that's all that matters.

Check the extensive posts on these speakers at AudioReview. The story of nOrh is that it was created by an audiophile living in Thailand. Many Asian economies were tanking a few years ago so he decided to use the craftsman who traditionally made drums to now use these shells for speakers. The end result is a solid wood speaker (compared to the cheesy MDF used by most speaker manufacturers today), that is hand finished is comparable to high end furniture in the quality of finish and build. The speakers I got were a deep reddish color with a high gloss finish.

Most importantly, the speakers sound great. They use very high quality Vifa drivers (and the highest quality Scanspeak drivers on the more expensive models). The sound is very warm, and you can crank them very loud (although they need a fairly well powered amp to drive them).

The best thing about this company is that they are truly using the Internet to create a lot of value for the customer. They don't need to stock expensive showrooms and the labor costs are much lower in Thailand, so you get one of the best speakers for the price. The only bad thing about them is their shipping times, it took about 3 months to ship the speakers. If you have the patience, I highly recommend nOrh. Also, check out their new line of ceramic speakers.

I'd have to agree. I got a DVD player from my parents for Christmas and I decided I needed decent sound to go with the picture. I did some research on the HTB-503 (audioreview.com, hometheatermag.com) and thought this would be the best bang for my buck, considering that I didn't have a lot of bucks to spend. It has Dolby Digital and DTS decoding @ 100 watts per channel. I am pleased with it. I picked it up at Sears for $500, but you can find it cheaper online if you wish.

First and formost, remember that all audio/video enthusiasts have their own likes and dislikes that won't match yours, so take all advice and opinions with a grain of salt. Your ears are the only ones that matter. If you do your homework, you'll end up okay. That being said, here's my $0.02.

I'm a big Marantz fan. In my opinion, Marantz moves towards or equals high end products like Acurus, Adcom, Mark Levinson and others. But they also have a wide range of receivers in your price range. Check out the SR4000, for example.I've got the SR7000 (@$750) and absolutely love it.

I agree with other posters that speakers are the most important. Spend the most you can on speakers. In your price range, I'd check out the smaller Paradigm, Tannoy, or B&W speakers. If you're looking for a sub/sat system on a tight budget, check out Energy Take-5($500 for the set, if I remember correctly). Then get what you can for your receiver.

It's also important to note that speakers and receivers don't necessarily "match", i.e. they might sound crappy together but with different equipment might sound fantastic. So if you buy the receiver and speakers at the same time, make sure to listen to them together and not on the equipment that the dealer has set up. If you buy one before the other, bring it with you when you go to audition.

Last word of advice: audition, audition, audition. A good dealer will give you the remote control and let you test to your heart's content. Bring your favorite CDs. A wide range of material is good. Also bring a couple DVD's to check out the DD/DTS sound as well. Don't let anyone bully you into making a purchase or offer a "one time sale"...if they do, do you really want to buy your equipment from them?

Good luck!

I was in a similar situation a couple of years ago, when I purchased a DVD player (Sony DVP-S550D). The old Dolby Pro Logic receiver wouldn't cut it anymore. After doing some research, I opted to go with the Sony STR-DE 935, and ordered it from a mail order place. Since this model was just comming onto the market, the retailer did not have them in stock and mine was placed on backorder.

About that time I discovered AudioReview.com and found this site to be immensely helpful. I quickly canceled my DE935 order, and ordered the Sony STR-DB930 from another dealer. The receivers were very similar feature-for-feature, yet the DB series is much better than the DE series. It is only sold through Sony ES dealers (so you won't be able to find it at Best Buy or C.C.) and is built from higher quality components, using the frame/beam construction of the ES products. Though the DB935 and DE930 are both rated at 100W / channel, closer examination of the specs (THD) reveals that the DB has really a much more powerful amp. The DB930 has now been replaced by DB935 which appears to be very similar, except for some cosmetic changes. Overall, I'd highly recommend the Sony STR-DB930/935. In the price/performance dept. it can't be beat; it's like getting a Sony ES receiver for nearly the DE level price.

I'd also like to add my voice to those who mentioned not to be conned into buying Bose stuff. It sounds fine in the store, but most people that get it home are usually disappointed with the performance after a few months.