Steve Hoffman forums full of CRAZY stereo obsessed people!

[himey]

??????????????????????????

I should have said I lifted this quote from the other forum. What I did not need to say was that tongue was firmly planted in cheek...that was obvious.

 

[himey]

And there is a 4.0 Quad mix of the Monkees' biggest hits on the Internet! It's called "Quarters". Not the highest resolution/quality sound, but very interesting.

Pretty sure it's an upmix...but it still sounds nice.

 

[proufo]

Pretty sure it's an upmix...but it still sounds nice.

And fun!

One Monkee per speaker doing Zilch may be un-natural, but it's a riot.

 

[key_wiz]

Hi Key- welcome to this awesome forum.

I agree w/ much you say and it would be logical except for one fact: very few people take the time to sit down and listen to music exclusively.

You are exactly right. Which is why I've said the phrase "THERE'S A CHANCE" so many times. Dedicated music listening is a lost endeavor. At least for the time being. Maybe for ever. But it seems to me that surround audio is the last, best hope for reviving dedicated listening. You have to give people a reason to sit down and listen.

But there's some hope here if marketed correctly, I think. Add some video content to the audio. What Queen did on the latest "The Night At The Opera" MC release is a good idea. Even what Flaming Lips did with "Yoshimi Vs. The Pink Robots" is better than nothing.

People don't seem to have a problem buying a physical copy of a movie they know they probably aren't going to sit and watch more than a few times. This same mindset needs to be applied to MC audio. No, most people aren't going to sit and listen to an album over and over in their living room. But will they spend $10 to do it once in awhile? Sitting and listening to an MC version of "Hotel California" can't be at least as appealing as sitting and watching "Hell Freezes Over"?

I think there's a CHANCE it can be. And the hardware already exists for many, many people. The trick now is just getting the software easily and cheaply into their hands and into their players.

 

[himey]

Then I guess I better throw all my quad gear in the dumpster, it will never "sound proper". I guess I should start saving up for a $50,000 mono setup to try a bit of happiness.

Which dumpster?

 

[quattroatl]

No, this is the problem "...Truth be told, 5.1 in a proper room with equipment that could get the job done might cost $250K or even more."

This quote is plain redonkulous! With all due respect, a modest mid-fi system can handle 5.1 hidef music very well.

On a side note, please PM me about some cables for sale and beachfront property I can sell you in Nebraska...cheers!

 

[Quad Linda]

Although Palladia is a great channel, you should check out the 5-disc or 4-disc Live at Gdansk box, which includes an audio-only DVD-V 5.1 mix of the On An Island album. Depending on the country/release, some other versions include the 5.1 OAI. For all you space cadets, I'm not sure IF it has been released on this format yet on the International Space Station...

I think a lot of us love the physical media because we are collectors at heart....
...As I'm typing this post I'm watching David Gilmour Live at Gdansk that I recorded on the HD channel Palladia; good times indeed!

 

[Circular Vibes]

Which dumpster?

Actually, I am relatively happy with my "low end" system. I haven't given up yet. When I do, I would offer it here first, like a few others have. I am still happy to bring home a new LP or digital disc and hear it for the first time. I am doing so now with Blondie's new album. I do get to blame a few QQ members who have enticed me to shop online for new stuff not available in my local music shops. Now, to be able to sneak my new purchases in without my partner finding out how much I spent. Maybe I can hook up the QSD-1 and SH-3434 without his knowledge??? We have a bit of an agreement, I don't explain my tastes in music and equipment, and I don't say anything about the weekly comic book shopping. My heart is still in being able to drop a needle, sit down and enjoy the music without having to critique the equipment.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

Although Palladia is a great channel, you should check out the 5-disc or 4-disc Live at Gdansk box, which includes an audio-only DVD-V 5.1 mix of the On An Island album. Depending on the country/release, some other versions include the 5.1 OAI. For all you space cadets, I'm not sure IF it has been released on this format yet on the International Space Station...
View attachment 14878

Yes I ordered the 4 disc set to get the surround. Some purchasers should be aware of the difference in 4 disc sets. Some are PAL(UK) and others are NTSC(United States)..you would be amazed at how good the signal for Palladia is out here in space:sun

 

[Quad Linda]

You must have the HDTV capable version of the IBM (HAL) 9000:

..you would be amazed at how good the signal for Palladia is out here in space:sun

 

[bmoura]

No, this is the problem "...Truth be told, 5.1 in a proper room with equipment that could get the job done might cost $250K or even more."

Or a 5.2 system with an Oppo 103 player could cost $5,000.....
http://www.audioholics.com/recommended-systems/5000-5.2-channel-recommended-system

 

[himey]

This quote is plain redonkulous! With all due respect, a modest mid-fi system can handle 5.1 hidef music very well.

On a side note, please PM me about some cables for sale and beachfront property I can sell you in Nebraska...cheers!

When I quoted someone from the other forum I should have spelled that out. Some things in the proper context seem obvious but I still should have used a smiley face to note where I was coming from. It was not my quote, it was a completely ridiculous quote from someone else. It was in response to another post that was an attempt at sarcasm.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

You must have the HDTV capable version of the IBM (HAL) 9000:
View attachment 14879

SOMETHING WONDERFUL IS GOING TO HAPPEN

 

[Quad Linda]

I've been a Quaddie since 1971. Once you get used to listening to music on a high-quality system, you can't help but critique the gear and/or fidelity of the recording/mastering. Back in '73, I was satisfied listening to Q8's through my four Marantz Imperial 5's (8" woofers & phenolic ring tweeters.) After owning and selling progressively more high-end systems for the last 40 years, I've become more snobby about the sound quality. My current main systems has 36 pieces whose "original selling price" exceeds $40k. It's heart is a B&K preamp, 2 B&K power amps, 5 Mission 775 towers and a REL sub. The Sony "home theater in a box" that I inherited when my Dad passed just doesn't cut it. All that being said, there are people whose systems make even my main system sound like crap.

Linda the hi-fi snob

...My heart is still in being able to drop a needle, sit down and enjoy the music without having to critique the equipment.

 

[himey]

You are exactly right. Which is why I've said the phrase "THERE'S A CHANCE" so many times. Dedicated music listening is a lost endeavor. At least for the time being. Maybe for ever. But it seems to me that surround audio is the last, best hope for reviving dedicated listening. You have to give people a reason to sit down and listen.

But there's some hope here if marketed correctly, I think. Add some video content to the audio. What Queen did on the latest "The Night At The Opera" MC release is a good idea. Even what Flaming Lips did with "Yoshimi Vs. The Pink Robots" is better than nothing.

People don't seem to have a problem buying a physical copy of a movie they know they probably aren't going to sit and watch more than a few times. This same mindset needs to be applied to MC audio. No, most people aren't going to sit and listen to an album over and over in their living room. But will they spend $10 to do it once in awhile? Sitting and listening to an MC version of "Hotel California" can't be at least as appealing as sitting and watching "Hell Freezes Over"?

I think there's a CHANCE it can be. And the hardware already exists for many, many people. The trick now is just getting the software easily and cheaply into their hands and into their players.

I like where you are going with this discussion. Where in the past there was basically no chance of multichannel music successfully reaching mass market appeal, it does seem like the stars are aligning to at least give it another chance. The one negative thing that can't be overlooked are the stupid "sound bars". Another half assed gimmick sold to satisfy the masses. People are dumping their cheap surround system for something even cheaper. Sold to them as surround and nearly plug and play.

You have to actually use your brain to setup and enjoy multichannel and it's sad to say most people aren't willing/able for what ever reason to do that.

 

[himey]

I've been a Quaddie since 1971. Once you get used to listening to music on a high-quality system, you can't help but critique the gear and/or fidelity of the recording/mastering. Back in '73, I was satisfied listening to Q8's through my four Marantz Imperial 5's (8" woofers & phenolic ring tweeters.) After owning and selling progressively more high-end systems for the last 40 years, I've become more snobby about the sound quality. My current main systems has 36 pieces whose "original selling price" exceeds $40k. It's heart is a B&K preamp, 2 B&K power amps, 5 Mission 775 towers and a REL sub. The Sony "home theater in a box" that I inherited when my Dad passed just doesn't cut it. All that being said, there are people whose systems make even my main system sound like crap.

Linda the hi-fi snob

Can't argue with that. I was lucky enough to have two uncles that were "snobs". One that was a touring musician and another who sold/repaired hi end audio equipment. By the age of 12 I knew what sounded good and I knew crap. Once you get a taste of a quality system there is no going back.

 

[himey]

I think I have had a brainstorm on how to deal with the SH group. It seems to me that multichannel music not only gives a greater perspective on the sound, but also makes the speakers work more efficiently as they aren't having to deal with all the frequencies at once. Don't get me wrong, I like music in mono, stereo and multichannel. I just feel that four or more speakers can more easily do what is more intricate for one or two speakers. If my theory isn't right, we would all still be listening to one way speaker designs and tweeters/woofers/mid-ranges/etc. would have never been invented. Bi-amping would become a heresy!

http://www.commonsenseaudio.com/nirvana.html

A nice 4.0/5.1 system built around these drivers and a couple/three tube amps could be fun...

 

[key_wiz]

I like where you are going with this discussion. Where in the past there was basically no chance of multichannel music successfully reaching mass market appeal, it does seem like the stars are aligning to at least give it another chance. The one negative thing that can't be overlooked are the stupid "sound bars". Another half assed gimmick sold to satisfy the masses. People are dumping their cheap surround system for something even cheaper. Sold to them as surround and nearly plug and play.

You have to actually use your brain to setup and enjoy multichannel and it's sad to say most people aren't willing/able for what ever reason to do that.

I fear that the "stars are aligned" moment may have passed us by a couple of years ago, and certainly things like soundbars don't help. Unless they can somehow serve to be an entry-level for people to desire better sound..... but I hope it's not COMPLETELY too late.

But instead it seems like we're consigned to 5.1 audio being a niche/audiophile product while 5.1 audio-for-video is industry-standard. It doesn't need to be that way.

I'm excited by what seems to be more product coming out this year than in the last couple of years, but consigning it to niche markets isn't going to help much I'm afraid. We get companies like AF releasing two limited-quantity titles at premium prices and nobody but those "in the know" will even have any idea they exist or where to find them. And they'll either sell out quickly, and then soon only be available on the used market at unaffordable prices, or not sell out and be used as confirmation that "there's no market for this".

I get that limited runs and limited availability and high pricing helps the audiophiles feel special about themselves and this is part of the marketing strategy of these niche labels, but doing it this way will never get the format out the niche.

I think that approach is fine for Hi-Rez. There's no real sense in trying to market Hi-Rez to low-end consumers, so exploit the niche you do have to whatever degree possible. But I think it's the wrong approach for 5.1. It doesn't need to exist only for the elite. And it will be better off for the elite if it doesn't, in the long run.

 

[cupboy]

AF charges premium prices? Compared to what?

 

[key_wiz]

AF charges premium prices? Compared to what?

Standard CDs. Or even movies for that matter.

Pick up a new release of the latest blockbuster film on BluRay in a 2-disc format that has both BluRay and DVD copies, in multiple sound formats, for $20 at the checkout counter at any supermarket in the country.

But a Hi-Rez remaster of a 40 year old album by AF is going to cost $30 and I'll have to special order that.

Why can I get "The Godfather" remastered in HiDef on BluRay for $13 but a remastered in Hi-Rez on BluRay "Exile On Main Street" costs me $30?