Archive through May 27, 2008
|
Bronze Member Username: SnapcatPost Number: 51 Registered: Oct-07 | Well, I made the decision - Bryston or MF A5. I just got a used Bryston 3B SST sight unheard...decision made for several reasons - size, balanced hookup capability for later, other folks comments. It was manufactured in 2004, so I felt pretty comfortable doing it. It has been an earopening experience to say the least. For me the most noticeable change I experienced going from the NAD C372 (still used as pre-amp) is presence and detail. The NAD has midrange presence and liquidity, but that's about it compared to the Bryston. The 3B has a bit less 'liquidity' (my term) in the midrange. For me the NAD sounds like you're listening to a band in a big room, but you're around the corner of a wall or something. The Bryston puts you on the front row. OH YEAH  |
|
Silver Member Username: WattsssupBarrie, ON Canada Post Number: 254 Registered: Aug-06 | Congrats man, first row seating is best. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10258 Registered: Dec-04 | Attaboy snapcat. Join the ranks of happy Bryston owners. Are you going to consider a Bryston pre at some point? Or is the Nad going to do it for you? |
|
Bronze Member Username: SnapcatPost Number: 52 Registered: Oct-07 | I'll be sticking with the NAD for several months. My later plans are to go the compter/dac route and possible get either a Benchmark or used Bel Cant 3 and use that for a pre. This way, I can completely separate and integrate my 2 channel and HT stuff... 2 Ch Balanced, HT w/ RCA's. However, I might go with a less expensive DAC and a Bryston pre - I could still do the separate wiring approach. I'm still way behind the curve on the pc/dac stuff. I haven't put in enough time lately.... |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1531 Registered: Jun-07 | COngrats SnapCat, great purchase. The Bryston Pre also makes a huge difference. Enjoy the listening experience. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 2935 Registered: Sep-04 | A decent preamp stage would show you what that 3B is really capable of. The weaker part of the equation in the 372 is actually its preamp stage in my view! Regards, Frank. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12653 Registered: May-04 | . Does the Bryston have gain controls? If so, run your CD player directly into the amp for a passive pre amp of sorts. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1533 Registered: Jun-07 | Thats a great idea. The Gentlemen at Just Hi Fi runs his Arcam cd player right into his Bryston power amp. It is a SST Pro. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2726 Registered: May-05 | I don't think the standard Bryston amps have gain control. The Pro series does. If they do have it, its not in a convenient place that'll be easily accessable whenever you want to adjust volume. If you're looking into a computer based/DAC route, Bryston is developing a stand alone DAC. They can retro-fit an internal DAC into just about any Bryston pre-amp, and all their current pre-amps have the option of coming with an internal DAC. The DAC option isn't cheap. I think its about $1K. If you really want to get the most out of your Bryston amp, a Bryston pre-amp is the optimal solution. I've said it a million times - pre-amps are often the most over-looked part of the system. In many cases it's more important than the amp. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12655 Registered: May-04 | . If you have the ability to wire a volume control to a few RCA's, you can build a passive pre amp for a few dollars starting with Radio Shack parts. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10274 Registered: Dec-04 | hehehe |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10275 Registered: Dec-04 | As long a you have the RIAA curve, the choices are easy. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 307 Registered: Apr-08 | Snapcat, keep in mind that the C372 can handle much better speakers than the B&W 683s and so most of your limitations will still come from them. We normally are running nothing less than $2500 speakers on that amp. Doesn't necessarily mean your impressions don't have some validity, but recent B&Ws have had that 'listening from another room' sound because of the kevlar midrange (cone resonance), but have a bright, punchy sound that many like. We just have found that putting better speakers on the amp makes the amp seem like less of a limitation. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6916 Registered: Feb-05 | However if the speakers sound much better with the Bryston it becomes obvious that the primary limitation here was the NAD...which is often the case with NAD. Obviously the Bryston's can handle far better speakers but driven properly those B&W's sing quite nicely. I'm using some old NAD separates in my living room...last week I swapped out the NAD pre for a modded and hot rodded Rotel and the difference was night and day. The same crappy speakers (old Boston Acoustics A120's) sounded like they had a new lease on life. Upgrading the speakers is not always the answer, and in fact can be doggone near fruitles once you reach NAD's (not Masters series) limitations...which aren't hard to reach. That's my opinion and one borne of experience (much experience with NAD).YMMV! |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 308 Registered: Apr-08 | We just haven't had that experience with NAD. If only there were 'night and day' differences between good electronics, but most to all of that disappears when people don't know the identity of the gear. It's amazing how powerful our minds are at influencing what we hear, even when we try to guard against it. I doubt we'd agree on these points until I've had the chance to prove it to you as I have with other people. If you're ever in Albuquerque, we can play 'guess that amp' and you'll understand. I've just accepted it. Decent amps are all too darned good for the 'night and day' thing. It remains true that most things that people blame on amplifiers and sources are actually the fault of the speaker/room interface and are more easily corrected with a speaker change or room tweak. IME, of course. My wife gets a buzz from going to church. It could be God, but on the other hand, it could just be that she was expecting the buzz. Snapcat described one aspect of the B&Ws with the NAD and described a different aspect of the B&Ws with the Bryston. Things that make you go hmmmm..... |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 333 Registered: Jul-07 | "We just haven't had that experience with NAD." Yep, but lots of people have. Please don't argue that your experience is more valid than other peoples. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 310 Registered: Apr-08 | When I say "we", I'm talking about hundreds of customers. So that pretty well cancels that out. What I see here is a "grooming" exercise where people convince other people that their problems are the CD player or cables or amp or whatever, rather than the speakers/room/setup and give them high expectations with switching brands. There are two possible outcomes of 'grooming' - one is hearing what people told them to expect in 'night and day' differences, the second is somewhere between 'I don't get it' and profound disappointment. As some have told me, those that don't hear the night and day difference often don't want to admit they didn't or be looked down upon for not having heard it. If you don't think this is possible, you've never taken any psychology and/or marketing classes. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6920 Registered: Feb-05 | If the Bryston changed the sound of his system to the point that he describes then I'm not sure what you have to argue about John. Some of the folks here that you are speaking with have been big NAD fans in the past and don't dislike it now. However if by changing an amp or pre amp the existing speakers become more than satisfactory or beyond that even enjoyable then there is nothing to debate. Would his system have sounded better with better speakers...probably, but only to the limit allowed by his NAD amp. Now he can upgrade to any speaker he wants and be assured that his amp is up to the task...excellent choice in my opinion. This is snapcats experience surely you must understand that this is not an area that is arguable...remember our perception is each and every one of our reality. If I say I heard a night and day difference...it would behoove you to show me the respect of believing me rather than dismissing my experience based on some pseudoscientific premise that holds no more water than my experiential observation. I'm not a gullible audio nut. I teach my wife to listen for specific differences and she can pick different cables reliably. It's not voodoo it's just another skill that some of us have learned...try it with an open mind you might like it! |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 313 Registered: Apr-08 | Art, I can respect your experience right up until "night and day". That makes the observation meaningless. The people's observations I truly respect are those that can detail very small differences that would largely be unnoticed by or inconsequential to most people, yet wouldn't call them anything like 'night and day'. Our mind is not a static thing and our audio 'memory' is limited to seconds when it comes to the difference between most amps, cables, sources, etc. By the time you've swapped the amp, it's too late to really be sure about anything. So if you're hearing 'night and day' differences, I'd say take the DBT, win some money. 'Night and day' should mean you could tell the two apart 10 out of 10 times. It's interesting for me because I am able to point out flaws in speakers that 'serious audiophiles' can't hear. Yet they all claim to hear differences in amps or cables that I cannot. I think if you take a DBT, you will find yourself more humbled by it than you think and the 'night and day' differences become something a bit more similar to "I'm going to guess that......." "Night and day" should be obvious to *anybody* in any situation. What I *think* you really mean is that you heard a really small difference but feel pretty confident that it exists. "Night and day" is like "defective and not defective". Hell, I wouldn't even describe the difference between a $200 Sony receiver and a $2000 Bryston as "night and day", though it's a bit more significant than between a Bryston and an NAD (hell, many people will prefer the 'more liquid' sound of the NAD). Do you believe that Bjorn Edvardsen is inept that he can't design an amp that is as good as a Bryston? Or that his goal is somehow 'wrong' compared to a Bryston? Or do you just mean they have a slightly different flavor and you prefer one over the other on your speakers? IOW, the NAD (or Rotel or Cambridge or Adcom or Bryston or.....) isn't a limitation in most systems, so I'm not sure why everyone likes scapegoating their gear except to feel as though they have superhuman hearing. Speakers have 500-1000 times the distortion and inaccuracy of an NAD amp (or more). How could that possibly make it the limitation? Especially on $600/pair speakers? So my main point is hyperbole is not a useful thing in audio and is misleading to those who start to believe that there are these gigantic differences that no one will sit down and try to prove even exist. A lot easier to just claim it exists. Can you imagine if I started telling my customers that NAD was better than Rotel or Cambridge and it was 'night and day'? That would make me a charlatan! Instead, i just tell people that I really like the company and the products and they are more than welcome to borrow it and see if they like it. I practice what I preach, which is keep the commentary more in line with the real, demonstrable differences. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 334 Registered: Jul-07 | "When I say "we", I'm talking about hundreds of customers. So that pretty well cancels that out." Cancels what out ? You mean your experience is more valid than others, right ? It isn't. You can't speak for "hundreds" of customers, sorry. They'll have to speak for themselves. Respect others. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 314 Registered: Apr-08 | No, Chris, I'm saying that if you average out all the opinions everywhere, they pretty much cancel out. Some people think Bose is 'the best'. Do i need to 'respect' that? There are reviews of NAD products, especially in Europe that say they're absolutely the best in their class. I don't 'respect' that opinion either. We see reviews of some of our gear that is so over the top that i literally say 'Well, it got a glowing review that says _____, for what THAT is worth". I don't respect 'opinion', i respect actual facts. People have the right to say all kinds of ridiculous, unprovable nonsense. That doesn't mean i have to respect it or sit there and nod. I respect the right to say it while not respecting what got said. I think B&Ws are mass market, overpriced mediocrity compared to NAD. That Ascend Sierra's measure like crap compared to most speakers in their class. That's my experience. So do you 'respect' that? You haven't respected my opinion or experiences in the slightest thus far. If that's my experience, it's essentially identical to 'truth', right? That's your argument for experiences with which you agree, right? But not with those you don't. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6922 Registered: Feb-05 | "That makes the observation meaningless. The people's observations I truly respect are those that can detail very small differences that would largely be unnoticed by or inconsequential to most people, yet wouldn't call them anything like 'night and day'." Because I heard a night and day difference between two pre amps doesn't mean that can't hear and detail subtle differences. It's one or the other with you isn't it. You really do seem incapable of allowing others experiences to have any legitimacy without criticism. That's too bad...I had given you more credit than that. "What I *think* you really mean is that you heard a really small difference but feel pretty confident that it exists." Thanks for telling me what I mean...no I meant exactly what I said. "Do you believe that Bjorn Edvardsen is inept that he can't design an amp that is as good as a Bryston?" Don't know Bjorn. Next time you do dinner with him perhaps you can ask. I'm guessing BEE can design a fine amp and indeed the BEE amps are fine budget amps they just don't hold a candle to any Bryston I've heard. Well I guess I'll let you go back to sparring with folks here. Pretty obvious you don't want to discuss audio with folks who are your equal...because to you they don't exist...again that's too bad. Other opinions exist John and they are every bit as legitimate and important as yours...really. See you over at the music thread. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 315 Registered: Apr-08 | Art, you might as well be saying that you can beat up 10 Army Rangers in hand to hand combat or jump 10 feet straight up. Maybe you think you can. But can you prove it? I mean, really, this forum at times sounds like a bunch of drunk guys bragging at the bar. Night and day difference, 10 for 10, three different DBT level matched trials, three different speakers, same price product. $1000 bet. Since it's 'night and day'. What do you say? I don't mind discussing audio with equals, but I mean equally humble in their actual hearing ability. I find it fascinating that people think they can hear things I can't or hear 'night and day' differences where they are extremely subtle. I've spend hours at times attempting to hear these dramatic differences. *Sometimes* I hear some very subtle ones. Sometimes I hear none. And so far, every scientific experiment undertaken backs me up on how subtle these differences really are. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12682 Registered: May-04 | . heyyyyyy, fishy! How ya doing? Still p!ssing people off for no good reason I see. Still lying out your @ss to make yourself feel important. What a life! Hey, I want to have the last word here too. If you respond to this post you are a worthless sack of sh!t who lies to his own mother about what she should buy. If you respond to this post you prove you have a pathological problem with letting anyone have the last word. You will prove you are mentally ill. If you respond. I'll be waiting to hear from you. . |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6925 Registered: Feb-05 | You'd be the one with the most to drink my friend...I completely misjudged you. You are full of insults and certainly none of your proclaimed humility. I will leave you to hurl insults at others and to receive the many well deserved insults that will be returned to you. You may now have the last word and once I read it I will have the last laugh....have a nice life...or the one you deserve. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 317 Registered: Apr-08 | No, Art, I'm full of healthy skepticism. I will apologize publicly for doubting you if you can take my $1000 in the above bet. You're asking me to simply discard all of my experience on your say so. I'm willing to do so IF you can demonstrate 'night and day' under controlled, scientific conditions. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 318 Registered: Apr-08 | Jan, is that the same way you 'prove' that one good amp 'blows away' another? By saying so? Nice try! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12683 Registered: May-04 | . fishy, you are pathological and you should see how skewed your whole argument is torward proving everyone else is wrong simply because you must be right. But you won't. You cannot let anyone else have the last word. There's no insult I could ask you to agree to just so I could have the last word that you wouldn't accept in order that you have that last word. A $1000 bet wouldn't keep you from having the last word, would it? One sick puppy I'd say. Oh, and you can't hear. "I don't mind discussing audio with equals, but I mean equally humble in their actual hearing ability." Sorry, fishy, just because you can't hear there's no reason the rest of us can't either. There's no one "equal" to you because my dog is better than you as we have proven in another thread. And there's not a "humble" molecule in your rotting little fishy body. When's the head finally fall off? . |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 344 Registered: Mar-04 | Jan you should admit that for all your pleas that John leave ecoustics a part of you wants/needs him to stay. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 335 Registered: Jul-07 | John, people can hear differences. Have you read lately ? You keep ignoring the body of documenation that says significant differences do exist. Thousands, 'professional' and amateur alike. YOU prove they DON'T exist and then come back and tell us how you made out. And your own ears won't do it. We'll need some others to come back with the same comments. Your ears are a little suspect, and your objectivity. Have a nice life with that. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 319 Registered: Apr-08 | Art, i sincerely apologize if you think i meant to insult you, i didn't. I'm saying that 'night and day' differences don't exist with nominally functioning components (10 out of 10 correct picks in a DBT), so you're engaging in a bit of hyperbole when you use that term. I see the problem with this forum as being insufficient perspective, skepticism, balance. It's more like "Rah! Rah! Rah! Make the same leap of faith I did! Rah! Rah! Rah!" Chris, I didn't say that people can't hear differences. I'm saying that people have a natural tendency to exaggerate them, in part to rationalize their purchasing behavior, in part to fit in with the crowd, in part to pat themselves on the back for having such incredible hearing. There are people out there already who do the proofs, but few audiophiles and reviewers will take them up. When they do, there is much complaining that the test couldn't have been valid. Some people man up and realize that maybe they were engaging in a bit of self deception. Like one AVSer who put his pride on the line with his $20K speaker cables that he couldn't tell from generic speaker cable in a DBT. It changed his world a bit. As another example, one of my customers replaced his $12K Krell FPB stereo amp with a $3000 M15 7 channel. He was delighted that he lost nothing in the switch, pocketed a bunch of money and upgraded his speakers and got full surround. BTW, why are *my* ears and objectivity suspect? I work around this all day long. I hear subtle to big differences in speakers, zero to subtle differences in electronics AS IT SHOULD BE. Most SS amps don't vary more than .01-.1dB in FR in the audible range. Did you know that the NAD M3 measures better than the Bryston B100 in virtually ever way EVEN when the Bryston's amp section is driven direct and the NAD is driven through its preamp section? But even then, the differences are somewhat minor, so I wouldn't bet money that I could hear the difference between them in a DBT, but I welcome anyone who thinks they can to put up their money. Jan, be yourself. Be proud. Don't go changing. Every sitcom needs a crazy, annoying neighbor |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12687 Registered: May-04 | . "you wants/needs him to stay." I know I said I was going to ignore you, baitboy, but learn how to speak English. You too, fishy, "I'm saying that 'night and day' differences don't exist with nominally functioning components". Nominally: "1 : of, relating to, or being a noun or a word or expression taking a noun construction 2 a : of, relating to, or constituting a name b : bearing the name of a person 3 a : existing or being something in name or form only *nominal head of his party* b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual : APPROXIMATE c : TRIFLING, INSIGNIFICANT 4 of a rate of interest a : equal to the annual rate of simple interest that would obtain if interest were not compounded when in fact it is compounded and paid for periods of less than a year b : equal to the percentage by which a repaid loan exceeds the principal borrowed with no adjustment made for inflation 5 5 : being according to plan : SATISFACTORY *everything was nominal during the spacecraft launch* --nominally adverb Sheeesh! . |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 336 Registered: Jul-07 | "I'm saying that people have a natural tendency to exaggerate them, in part to rationalize their purchasing behavior, in part to fit in with the crowd, in part to pat themselves on the back for having such incredible hearing." a) you have no idea what peoples motives are. pure speculation. b) exaggeration is YOUR term. If it's big or significant to them, then it is. You are really hung up on this John. Everything is relative, why do you insist on debating descriptors. c) you keep ignoring the body of evidence in contradiction to your claims. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12688 Registered: May-04 | . "Every sitcom needs a crazy, annoying neighbor." And you are this sitcom's stupid guy who everyone laughs at. Congratulations. Now you don't even have Art to carry on your "adult" discussions. Pretty soon you won't have anyone who can tolerate you. fishy, if you answer this your are a dumbphuck. I be waiting for your reply. . |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6927 Registered: Feb-05 | Apology accepted. I understand your premise John I just disagree. It may seem like hyperbole because most folks probably would not explain the difference in those two pre amps as night and day. We swapped 'em out again last (my wife and I) and again to me the differences were profound. I think one of the areas that we get into trouble with is the area around the belief that I or other audio hobbyists are claiming superior hearing or "golden ears". It doesn't help that some of the most respected audio publications tend to reinforce this idea. My hearing is pretty much standard issue. Where I excel is in the area of critical listening. In my 30+ years in this hobby I've trained myself to be good at identifying and labeling sound so that I can refer to it later. We don't have a very good auditory memory so the only legitimate way to compare audio is to use the same terms to describe the same characteristics and even then it's only as good as the individual who is doing it. However if over many years of practice you have found consistency you can then begin to train others as I have my wife. This means explaining to her what I mean when I use terms like "grainy" and "air". The explanation has to be coupled with examples. I beleive most folks catch on pretty well and then you can speak a common language. This is the approach that I prefer. Again I know you prefer a more scientific approach...that works for you and that's fine. I recommend that you read...if you haven't already...some of the discussions relative to the pros and cons of double blind testing in audio. Both sides have very good arguments...and in the end, like this discussion it's a wash. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1554 Registered: Jun-07 | "Do you believe that Bjorn Edvardsen is inept that he can't design an amp that is as good as a Bryston" Yes, but he doesn't. He builds, budget, decent sounding amplifiers for the guy that wants to hear SOME fidelity at a low cost. NAD does not hold a candle against Bryston. I am not talking just measurements here John. I am talking sound, robustness, build quality, warranty, QA quality, in almost every aspect. Why do you think professional music studio's around the world live and die on using Bryston amps. You would think if they could get just as much 'quality' from a NAD amp at such a low cost they would buy that instead. Tell the professionals John, who mix, and record, and listen to music for a living that NAD sounds, and is built better than a Bryston amp.lol I wonder what kind of answer they will give you. Oh, and John, this is coming from me, a NAD fan. "I think B&Ws are mass market, overpriced mediocrity compared to NAD" What!!!??? NAD is probably the largest mass marketed Hi-Fi company out there. The only thing they are missing is having their stuff at Future Shop/Best Buy. NAD is not even a true hi-fi company. They are owned by a Marketing Company, Lenbrook. Lenbrook, buy a company, market them, and find the cheapest bidder in China to build their stuff. Sure they have some audio engineers who claim they fully design the product(marketing), but prove BEE boy does. B&W is still built in UK, by real people, by a real company, and only sold as a true Hi-Fi speaker. I don't understand where that comment came from, perhaps you were just joking around. But come on, as much as I think NAD products sound great for the money you pay for them, they are still the biggest marketing, china made product in Hi-Fi today. Thats just a true fact right there, on paper John, so you should be able to understand it then. The biggest difference you hear going from a C272 to a Bryston Amp is the snap and slam. The bass, and speed of the amp is dead on, and fast. It also hits way harder than the C272. Why? Dampening and the fact that the Bryston amps have the ability to draw easlity 40-50A of current, without breaking a sweat. Because they are built like a tank. If this was done so by a NAD C272, it would set on fire. Either way- Snapcat did the right thing, and could clearly hear a difference. It doesn't matter if it can be proven, his ears, and his brain, can hear a difference. You wife goes to Church..for what? Because she believes in a non-proven, fictional believe, that is the largest mass marketed bull$#it going. But hey, that is her belief and thats OK. I didn't mean that as an insult John, but not everything has to be proven by science or on paper for someone to enjoy something. Thats the good/bad thing about the human brain. I would like it if you stopped telling people what they think is not true. Cheers. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1555 Registered: Jun-07 | "his is the approach that I prefer. Again I know you prefer a more scientific approach...that works for you and that's fine. I recommend that you read...if you haven't already...some of the discussions relative to the pros and cons of double blind testing in audio. Both sides have very good arguments...and in the end, like this discussion it's a wash." Art-Well said. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12690 Registered: May-04 | . Well, I'd disagree he has a "scientific" approach. Demanding blind tests be taken on a bet whenever confronted with an opposing idea does not make anyone "scientific". It borders on the pathological. Nick, you give NAD too much credit. Sony has long been and remains the largest mass marketed audio company in the world and most of their product is made in China. The "Sony" brandname is still one of the most recognized trademarks in the world along with "CocaCola" and "Coke". And B&W has recently opened their own manufacturing facility in China. What sets the B&W plant apart from most other audio manufacturers pursuing Chinese production is the strict oversight by the B&W parent company and its purpose built intent. The plant - at the moment and probably for the foreseeable future - only produces specific B&W products. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12691 Registered: May-04 | . I too would prefer fishy did not diminish everyone whose experience is not similar to his own. I would particularly appreciate this since fishy's experience is not within the mainstream of high end audio and is merely anecdotal to his inablitity to either hear or to logically conclude a problem. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12692 Registered: May-04 | . "I think one of the areas that we get into trouble with is the area around the belief that I or other audio hobbyists are claiming superior hearing or "golden ears". It doesn't help that some of the most respected audio publications tend to reinforce this idea." Art, what magazines are you reading? I don't get this impression from the mainstream subjectivist magazines. IMO you are painting with too broad of a brush. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 345 Registered: Mar-04 | Jan you get too excited. Do you have another hobby besides audio? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6928 Registered: Feb-05 | I probably read the same mags you do Jan. Both of us being human we may interpret what we read differently...and that's ok. BTW, one of those mags has an annual "Golden Ear" awards issue. I think I missed this years unfortunately. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ZorroPost Number: 84 Registered: Jul-05 | Summary: 1) Snapcat made a purchase. 2) Snapcat is very happy with the results 3) John Ashman turns another thread into sh#t! 4) unbridled id is still on John's leash  5) Someday when hell freezes over, Johnny will understand how stupid his comments are. So, after all this dance the question is: where is Snapcat? He left the thread long time ago and he is having a great time listening music. (Yes, through the Bryston.) "All we are saying, is give peace a chance" |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1302 Registered: May-06 | JA - "Snapcat, keep in mind that the C372 can handle much better speakers than the B&W 683s and so most of your limitations will still come from them" Let's for argument's sake take this as a truth. What does that have to do with snapcat's original post of the differences he experienced between the NAC C372 and the Bryston 3B SST? I did not read "night and day" in his original post? Somehow that still drew your criticism. Art posted "night and day", yet you take issue with that? Why, because he had a lower level of speaker than snapcat and still heard a significant difference. Don't you think if you gave snapcat or Art the best speakers you sell that they would still pretty much post the same description of what they heard when thy switched out an amp? How can you judge Art's "night and day"? Does it carry a certain weight or scoring that according to your "book" is outside a standard deviation of, let's try 3? I will try this a different way. JA - "I'm saying that people have a natural tendency to exaggerate them, in part to rationalize their purchasing behavior, in part to fit in with the crowd, in part to pat themselves on the back for having such incredible hearing." For argument's sake (just like above), let's say I have my kit at about 98.8% of perfect using my lifetime of listening experience and familiarity with music and different equipment. So that 98.8% is a valid figure for me to throw out since it is based on....ME! Now I go and change out my ICs, from some expensive Dared's to a set I made myself for about $3 each. What do I find? More openness, darker quiet passages, more detail, faster pace. Suddenly my system is at 99.4% of perfect. That is a 50% improvement for me. Just so there is on confusion here; 100% - 98.8% is 1.2% 100% - 99.4% is 0.6% 0.6% is 50% of 1.2% That is how I get to a 50% improvement, sort of like "night and day", and it cost me next to nothing so I had no vested interest in proving I did not need more expensive cables. The Dared's were a real nice improvement for me when I swapped into them, I just found a better solution. I made other changes to isolation and dampening, some work in a positive manner, some do not. The one's that do not I back out. I do not need a DBT to figure out what works or does not work. I just need to have zero expectations going into a change and then accept the results as I hear them, not what anyone tells me I should expect, certainly not measurements, and not reviews. That's why every change I make to my kit is an experiment. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1556 Registered: Jun-07 | "Nick, you give NAD too much credit. Sony has long been and remains the largest mass marketed audio company in the world and most of their product is made in China. The "Sony" brandname is still one of the most recognized trademarks in the world along with "CocaCola" and "Coke"." Jan- I meant that as an Insult to NAD. Just like JA did to B&W. NAD is not Sony, I totally agree. But to say that B&W is more mass marketed(in the audio world, means corners are cut, cheaper parts are used to meet large market demands) than NAD is absolutely crazy IMO. Either way, I didn't mean that statement as in giving NAD credit. I was actually knocking them down a notch. Cheers. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 322 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris - a) you have no idea what peoples motives are. pure speculation. I did extremely well in my psychology and marketing courses. b) exaggeration is YOUR term. If it's big or significant to them, then it is. You are really hung up on this John. Everything is relative, why do you insist on debating descriptors. Because you're right, it is relative. Speakers are hundreds of times worse than electronics. The best speakers aren't even close to the 'purity' of a Sherwood receiver. Trying to act as though the difference in electronics is even *close* to the differences in speakers is misleading to the new folk here. c) you keep ignoring the body of evidence in contradiction to your claims. What evidence? Subjective observation that doesn't take into effect how our brain works? That's not evidence! That's like saying that because the sun appears to rise and fall, that it circles the earth. Science, I suppose, robbed people of that kind of anecdotal 'evidence'. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 323 Registered: Apr-08 | Thanks Art. You sound like one of my customers. Very astute hearing, very capable of hearing small details. He's just a bit more reserved in his commentary. I send everything I can home with him I can to get his observations. I don't take them as gospel, but I do give them credence. And most of the time, it's helpful because he makes me feel more secure in my own subjective opinions as they usually match up pretty well. My main issue here is that the difference between a $500/pr speaker and a $600/pr speaker is greater than the difference between a $300 amplifier and a $30,000 amplifier (except maybe SPL). In fact, the difference between your left and right speakers is objectively, provably bigger than the difference between most any two amplifiers. That's not to say there are no audible differences, but I've seen far too much of the 'electronics first' way of thinking here, which is provably incorrect. I've demonstrated this time and again. Not from you so much, but others here. As I showed once, $20K worth of high-end can't make a $5500 speaker better than a better pair of speakers running on near total mediocrity. And I don't mind if you disagree  |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 324 Registered: Apr-08 | Nick, How do you explain the fact that the lowly NAD M3 outpoints the B100 in virtually every measurable way? Lower noise, lower distortion, higher output, flatter response, etc, etc, etc. Pretty good for a 'marketing company'! Seems to me it's like Bryston that needs to go back to the drawing board and I actually have a LOT of respect for Bryston I just completely disagree that it's demonstrably better, if it were, I'd sell it. In fact, I've flirted with it time and again, but just didn't think it added anything I needed. I'm absolutely happy with what NAD is doing and how they're doing it. Do you seriously think even *some* recording studios 'live or die' on Bryston amps? That's ridiculous. They'd switch amps without thought if they liked something else or if Bryston went belly up. The big thing about Bryston I respect is the warranty and the fact they don't wet their finger and hold it up in the air. There's little to nothing new in amplifier design. Bryston makes solid amps at a reasonable price. As do many other companies. FWIW, aside from measuring better, the M3 outweighs the more expensive B100 by close to double and likewise, puts out nearly double the power, so the 'better built' argument falls a bit flat. The Bryston doesn't measure as well, isn't built as well. Apples to apples. If you don't understand that B&W is mass market, you don't understand the difference between high-end and mass market. PSB is also mass market, but is priced like it and is a far better value. Mass market it when you compromise quality for salability and do lots of price point engineering. Entry level to mid-level high-end such as NAD is when you sacrifice features for sound and, rather than cutting quality, you cut features or power. That doesn't means B&W can't build a decent product, some of it doesn't entirely suck. But it's not 'high-end'. Do you understand what 'speed' is? It's called slew rate. Frequency response. If an amp is capable of doing 100kHz, it is BLAZINGLY fast. Your subjective assertions don't apply very well to reality. Bass is extremely slow to an amp. I'll give you that Bryston is willing to build more expensive, more powerful amps at the top end of the spectrum. Where's the Bryston amp that is $700? Maybe Bryston doesn't know how to build a good amp inexpensively? Anyone can build a good expensive amp! Let's talk apples to apples here. B100 vs M3. M3 is a better amp. As far as Snapcat, maybe he is happier, but still, I wouldn't have bothered messing with the C372 short of having a WHOLE lot better pair of speakers that actually give the amp a bit of a challenge. Then you don't need to scapegoat the NAD based on compromised speakers. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 12693 Registered: May-04 | . "My main issue here is that the difference between a $500/pr speaker and a $600/pr speaker is greater than the difference between a $300 amplifier and a $30,000 amplifier (except maybe SPL)." That is, of course, total BS. And, no, I do not want to particiapte in a blind test. No one, not even the people who believe if it measures the same it sounds the same, would accept that statement, fishy. And the idea that your speakers are not an identical match is irrelevant to the discussion - as are most of you "proofs". The channels in an amplifier are unlikely to be identical either. Please, stop this tortured method of argument, you are hurting my head with your stupidity. Show me the two pairs of speakers you are referring to here and explain how they are vastly different. . |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 325 Registered: Apr-08 | Zorro, I made some very sensible comments. Jan and Chris turned it into shite. But I'm glad he's happy. I just think should have bought better speakers before worrying about his amp. THAT would have been a big difference. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 326 Registered: Apr-08 | Michael, your math kinda sucks! And let's start with the better assumption that your system is more like 80% perfect because of your speakers and there's little to nothing more expensive electronics can do to change that, except maybe adding DEQX to the system. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2729 Registered: May-05 | Why do you guys continue to argue with this POS? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 328 Registered: Apr-08 | FWIW, my speaker taste lies towards extremely accurate speakers, but not bright, so I tend to prefer an amp that is very refined to one that is marginally aggressive or grainy or 'punchy'. What some people hear as being soft or lacking in dynamics is what I find to be refined, smooth, transparent. I don't want to hear my amp AT ALL. I don't hear the NAD M3 AT ALL. I don't need or want an amp that I can hear as "fast" or "dynamic". So that's where *I* and coming from. I've always loved Conrad-Johnson and YBA amps for that, now the NAD gives me that and a whole lotta whupass and valuable features. That's my personal POV. And even then, none of all that with nearly any speaker matches my digital active speakers. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 329 Registered: Apr-08 | Stu, be nice to Jan. He's just a bit old, he's not a POS. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1557 Registered: Jun-07 | "How do you explain the fact that the lowly NAD M3 outpoints the B100 in virtually every measurable way." But the Bryston B100 sounds better. "FWIW, aside from measuring better, the M3 outweighs the more expensive B100 by close to double and likewise, puts out nearly double the power, so the 'better built' argument falls a bit flat. The Bryston doesn't measure as well, isn't built as well. Apples to apples." But....the Bryston B100 SOUNDS BETTER!! "Let's talk apples to apples here. B100 vs M3. M3 is a better amp." But JA.....the Bryston B100 SOUNDS BETTER!!! ""Pretty good for a 'marketing company." Yeah it is, I wonder who is building the Masters series. Their last series(Silver) was great stuff. Built by Gryphon.... Bryston is known mainly for their power amps. Do you still feel that NAD Masters series Power Amp measures up to that of the Bryston Power amps? lol * Here we go with more measurements * "Do you understand what 'speed' is? It's called slew rate. Frequency response. If an amp is capable of doing 100kHz, it is BLAZINGLY fast. Your subjective assertions don't apply very well to reality. Bass is extremely slow to an amp." JA- I copied that 'subjective assertions' from Stereophile Magazine on a 4B review. I don't care about measurements, I use my ears. Heres a fancy write up on NAD's buy out by Lenbrook. Lot's of Marketing talk. http://www.stereophile.com/news/10431/index.html |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10281 Registered: Dec-04 | It is like slipping a slurpy to the seal at the zoo, Stuie. So he continues to perform. |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1303 Registered: May-06 | "Michael, your math kinda sucks!" I suppose that is the best you can oome up with when you keep re-running the figures and come up with the same results. And let's start with the better assumption that your system is more like 50% perfect because of your NAD - M3 and there's little to nothing more expensive speakers can do to change that. I have heard your NAD M3 and it fell completely flat for me. It is was not musical in its presentation when I heard it. Boat anchor would be a good 2nd career for it perhaps. So John, does that sound enough like you to not debate my feedback to you? Reread what you wrote and try to explain why you think your judgment is the only thing that matters. I am not spending $50K for a system. My kit already outperforms any $50K system I heard. I understand my limitations with my kit and it is near there now. What do you understand John, other than you are the only one with an opinion and we should all fall in line and remove ourselves from the evil JV spell? You are not unintelligent yet you are incapable to use your experience to be of any assistance to anyone. That's sad. Like others have suggested, if your only objective is to be disruptive or waste our time kindly move on. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 346 Registered: Mar-04 | How does an audio company survive without a marketing strategy and plan? |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 337 Registered: Jul-07 | "c) you keep ignoring the body of evidence in contradiction to your claims. What evidence? Subjective observation that doesn't take into effect how our brain works? That's not evidence! That's like saying that because the sun appears to rise and fall, that it circles the earth. Science, I suppose, robbed people of that kind of anecdotal 'evidence'." Amazing. You just dismissed decades of literature and documentation in one paragraph. It's all apparently a big misunderstanding ? People have been kidding themselves all these years and continue to do so en mass ? Who would truly value their opinion so strongly as to presume that everyone else is wrong, and they are right. Who ? Who would assume that their experiences and assumptions, although in complete contrast to commonly held views, are correct, and not subject them to critical review ? I think I know who. Mindspeak. Say it, and it must be so. Sorry John. You can't wave your magic wand and change history, peoples hearing, or the differences in components. They are what they are. Apparently you are the only person who is able to discern true differences ? Because you know how the human brain works ? You're quite something. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 330 Registered: Apr-08 | Michael, i'm not the one that needs to move on. Disregard my opinion if you like, but you can't get me to change it. Unless you feel like doing a professional DBT maybe  If a product is actually better, it will measure better. If one person things it's subjectively better, it doesn't really matter because, unless it actually measures worse, someone else will not like it as much and cancel out the opinion. Maybe you just like unrefined amplifiers that don't measure as well as others. Chris, you're the one disregarding a WHOLE bunch of science. |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1304 Registered: May-06 | I have no idea why you do not think you should move on. How can anyone know what your opinion is? "If a product is actually better, it will measure better." BS and you know it so why keep it going? If one person subjectively thinks it is better they will buy it, end game. It doesn't matter what anybody else subjectively thinks. The person who thinks it is better is the person who buys that product. Folks buy what sounds good to them, don't you get it? Somebody who knows next to nothing about music buys audio by measurements. From what you describe, that would be most of your customer base. Draw your own conclusions. Jan, Chris, Nuck, Art, Gavin, and others have tried to help you be part of this. You just cannot see that. Go or stay, it matters not to me. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 331 Registered: Apr-08 | Michael, if it matters not, there's no need for you to respond to any of my posts. I help my customers get results, not placebos. They don't care about the measurements, nor even how I get the results, as long as I do. |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1306 Registered: May-06 | It matters not to me whether you go or stay not whether I want to sit by and let your one sided view of the world mislead someone asking for real help. What you don't understand is that we are about working WITH folks, encouraging them, providing what we believe to be helpful information. I will perhaps post something that contradicts others opinions or is erroneous. If someone takes the time to point out my error and what I should have posted I am most appreciative as I am not perfect. This is my hobby, something I find enjoyment in, as do the regulars here. What enjoyment do you get out of this John? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 332 Registered: Apr-08 | i would say the same thing. I give people the very best advice i can based on considerable experience. More than just anecdotal or unscientific perceptions. I enjoy that. I don't enjoy being personally attacked for having given different advice than others. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 338 Registered: Jul-07 | "I don't enjoy being personally attacked for having given different advice than others." Then stop rediculing the opinions of others just because YOU don't believe they are true. "Chris, you're the one disregarding a WHOLE bunch of science." Please point me to it, I must have missed it. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SnapcatPost Number: 53 Registered: Oct-07 | Wow, I leave town for a few days with no email.... |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2731 Registered: May-05 | snapcat, Keep a copule of things in mind here... John Ashman thinks his opinion is absolute and can't comprehend why everyone else doesn't take his word as gospel. John Ashman states matter of factly that the NAD M3 measures better than the Bryston B100. He has yet to explain which measurements are better (other than watts per channel and number of inputs). He did the same when comparing the Bryston B60 and M3. John Ashman stated he never heard the B60. I'm very willing to bet he hasn't heard the B100 either. Yet he matter of factly states the M3 sounds better. Anyone who has an OPINION different than his is completely wrong, because his OPINION is FACT. Just like a number of people here including myself, you've heard both products side by side and strongly preferred the Bryston over the NAD. John Ashman hasn't heard the Bryston products he strongly discredits. Yet he keeps insisting that they sound better, based soley on the M3 "measuring better," which again he has yet to state how it measures better. The M3 is all the intergated amp John Ashman will ever need. I'm genuinely happy for him that he's found his holy grail. Unfortunately, he seems to think it's all the integrated amp EVERYONE will ever need. His posts should be printed on toilet paper. At least then they'd be useful for something. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SnapcatPost Number: 54 Registered: Oct-07 | From the top: Jan, no gains, this is not the pro version. I'd be interested in a link to learn more about a straight wire preamp. John Ashman, yep I understand the 683 has limitations - also my checkbook has limitations. One leap at a time. I don't disagree with your assertion that people can't hear the difference in some electronics. However, I think that many people can tell the difference in THEIR room in their home. The room factor is huge - size, shape, contents (fabric, hard surfaces, etc...). The room factor alone can create audio store perception changes. I still like NAD. I like the Bryston more with most music. For me and my room, the NAD is less controlled in the bass region and has much less 'air' or treble imaging or whatever it's called. The NAD has solid midrange imaging. I also like salsa. I hate salsa with raw onions. I love salsa with cilantro. Lots of people would disagree. It's all a matter of taste and opinion. Zorro, I'm still around - just on travel last week... didn't think this post would generate this much enthusiasm , so I didn't seek out internet access (other than work). Although, I should know better after that old vs. new NAD thread. Actually, I was listening to music. Some live music in bars; I heard some PS Audio amp/pre with a Saturn and a pair of B&W 804S. Very nice. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 333 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, learn to use google. Take some psychology courses, take some marketing courses. Stu, you're just wrong. What you're saying is that some of you are saying the equivalent of 'aspirin cures cancer' and I'm the unfortunate soul who has to say 'no, we did extensive clinical trials and while it doesn't hurt, it certainly isn't a cure'. Again, once you've been to the 'other side of the fence' and lived with digital speakers, you realize how futile upgrading your electronics is. Most people hear have pretty mediocre speakers with very good electronics. They'd be better off with much better speakers and, yes, 'mediocre' stuff like NAD or Rotel or whatever $1000ish stuff. That I can prove easily and do regularly. There's no such thing as two CD players or two SS amps or 2 SS preamps that are as different from each other as your left speaker is different from your right, let alone the difference between $500 speakers and $600 speakers. That's the reality. Trying working with in that for just a couple of posts some time. As an aside, the B60 and B100 are very recommendable products. But most people here clearly have bigger issues in their systems because all everyone wants to talk about ancillary gear and how one brand is 'better' than another 'just because i say so'. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 334 Registered: Apr-08 | Snapcat, I wish everyone here were as lucid, self-confident and, well, normal as you are. I only offer up my suggestions as a balance to others', not as a repudiation of them, something to consider, nothing more. I'm not sure why that makes people so angry but i guess i'll just have to get used to it. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 335 Registered: Apr-08 | BTW, Stu, I have heard the B60, now that I think of it. It's been awhile. I traded it in towards a theater system. It was fine. It didn't make me want to ditch NAD for Bryston, but it seemed like a nice product. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 339 Registered: Jul-07 | "Chris, learn to use google. Take some psychology courses, take some marketing courses." Oh I've googled. Other than your posts (and similar arguments to this on every other board you post on) I've read nothing that comes close to your claims of a wordwide audio conspiracy, where everyone writes about differences they hear, when there are none. But that didn't suprise me, since they are YOUR theories and opinions. I've found a ton of information to the contrary though. And I've taken psychology courses and marketing courses. They didn't help me hear differently. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 336 Registered: Apr-08 | Snapcat, one quick question - does it seem like you need to turn the volume up less with the Bryston amp attached? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 337 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, maybe you should try paying attention in class then. The 'worldwide conspiracy' is simple. Sell more gear and more expensive gear. Make money. Marketing by itself is a conspiracy - manipulating the customer into thinking he "needs" your product. Whether or not he does is immaterial. Create demand where little or none exists. Create unhappiness instead of contentment. Most every commercial points out how lacking your life is without the product they're selling. My goal in sales is to create contented, happy customers that send their friends, not try to bleed people dry. Two of my customers wanted to take the money they were saving as a down payment on his home and spend it on NHT 3.3s when they came out. I talked them out of it and put together a nice little system for the on the cheap. They've been great customers and 'referrers' ever since. As I see it, there are 1000 times as many people with truly awful systems than there are audiophiles with a need to upgrade. Rather than creating more 'audiophilia nervosa' (there's plenty of that already), we go after the 'masses' and try to get them into entry level highend and get them enjoying music and being really HAPPY with their system. Not worrying about what it doesn't do, but enjoying what it does do. Not obsessing about cables or their CD player. Goodness, people come in all the time, tell me their system and they have a somewhat older Rotel or Bryston or NAD or Adcom and wonder if they need to upgrade their electronics and I say 'well, i won't stop you if you want, but I wouldn't, let's work on the other stuff that's more important". I look at the big picture - the total system performance, the end result, not individual parts. Let me ask you Chris - do you think that the difference between a Bryston amp and an NAD amp is greater than the difference between your left speaker and your right speaker? The difference between $500/pr speakers and $600/pr speakers from the same company? Just curious how well you grasp reality. Simple yes or no answer will suffice. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 340 Registered: Jul-07 | "Chris, maybe you should try paying attention in class then." Ouch. You need to stop complaining about being insulted. "The 'worldwide conspiracy' is simple. Sell more gear and more expensive gear. Make money. Marketing by itself is a conspiracy - manipulating the customer into thinking he "needs" your product. Whether or not he does is immaterial. Create demand where little or none exists. Create unhappiness instead of contentment. Most every commercial points out how lacking your life is without the product they're selling." I think it's a bit of a stretch to take that and generalize that noboby knows what they need, and there are no significant differences in electronics. Don't you ? "Let me ask you Chris - do you think that the difference between a Bryston amp and an NAD amp is greater than the difference between your left speaker and your right speaker? The difference between $500/pr speakers and $600/pr speakers from the same company? Just curious how well you grasp reality. Simple yes or no answer will suffice." Another insult...and I've been trying John. The answer to this question has no bearing on my grasp on reality. Life is far more then audio John. I think you've lost some perspective. I'm not sure I'm the one that needs the reality check, given your conspiracy theories. And your question is too general. What NAD amp ? What Bryston amp ? Which speakers ? The cheapest NAD amp would sound quite different from the best Bryston I'd say. And the signature of two speakers within the same brand could be quite similar. Perhaps you could be more precise with your question. Of course, I'd need to hear the components in question before I'd judge. It's only theory until you actually hear it for yourself. I don't buy audio equipment based on spec sheets. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SnapcatPost Number: 55 Registered: Oct-07 | "Snapcat, one quick question - does it seem like you need to turn the volume up less with the Bryston amp attached?" It's about the same. The NAD gives the 'bigger' bass and low midrange sound to me, while the Bryston has more detailed presence (music sounds closer) with more bass detail. The Bryston bass sound has more detail to me, I can hear more individual bass notes. On some discs, such as Van Morrison's Moondance, the Bryston seems a tad lean'; on other's such as BB King's Dueces Wild, the NAD has overwhelming and boomy bass - in my room with my stuff. The NAD can't hang on to Rachmaninoff's Piano Conceto No. 2 - details are smeared, but the Bryston brings out the details. One particular timing thing I noticed is on Charles Mingus Ah Um track 6. On the NAD it sounds like the horn guys are out of synch and a bit non-melodic. On the Bryston, they play really fast but they are together as a group. It's noticeable. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 341 Registered: Jul-07 | Hmmmm, sounds like distinct differences to me. Glad you're enjoying the Bryston snapcat. I've never had the pleasure of Bryston ownership myself, but they make great equipment that can be enjoyed for decades. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 339 Registered: Apr-08 | Chris, you just failed any reason to talk to you, Without one foot in reality, there can be no reasonable discussion. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 340 Registered: Apr-08 | Snapcat, that seems reasonable to me. I'd only like you to consider that the results might be different and in the NAD's favor on different speakers or in a different room or with any number of variables. I was looking at the C372's and 3x priced B100 measurements this morning and they're practically identical. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2732 Registered: May-05 | Once again John, I'm glad you found your Holy Grail. Just because its the last integrated you'll ever need, doesn't mean its the last integrated everyone will ever need. The B60 is the only integrated I'll ever need. Based on actually listening to everything in the price range, and not just spec sheets and marketing, I've come to the informed and educated opinion that to better the B60, I'll need to spend more than twice as much as it costs. If you really think you're the victim here, let me ask you this - why is that you can't admit that people actually prefer other integrated amps over the M3? Even after they've heard it side by side against other gear? Furthermore, oh enlightened one who knows all - what the hell is a "digital speaker?" Do speakers now decode 1s and 0s? If you were referring to active speakers, I've heard several. They're very good. But, the best ones cost far more money than I have. Active ATCs and PMCs come to mind here. Guess who makes the amps for upper end active PMCs? You guessed it - Bryston. The only affordable active speaker I've heard is Quad. Excellent speakers, but not my taste. I prefer more forwardness and presence. As I said earlier - Your posts should be printed on toilet paper. At least then they'd have some use. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 341 Registered: Apr-08 | Stu, a few points - I am certainly aware that people will prefer one thing over another. It's when they claim that something is 'better' (as in universally, obviously, you should agree with me, better). Some people like straight coffee, other sissies like me have to have cream and sugar. Which is better? Neither. Isn't a B60 twice the price of a C272? Certainly close to twice the price of a C372? In which case, the NAD kicks butt and spending the money on a B60 is kinda stupid, according to your own flawed theory. What is a digital speaker? It's one that substitutes lossy capacitors, resistors and inductors with a DSP crossover and multi-amplification. You clearly have a lot to learn, so maybe you should read and learn before wiping your butt with my posts. It's amazing to me that you don't understand basic concepts, but think you are knowledgeable enough to be on my playing field. There's a difference between buying something and understanding what you bought. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1948 Registered: Nov-05 | but think you are knowledgeable enough to be on my playing field. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Oh stop it JA, We're laughing so hard it's reducing us to tears. Stu - if you really want to play in JA's playing field, don't forget your sand-bucket and Tonka toys. Sorry, I said I'd stay out of JA's bullcrap, but that one was a ripper! |
|
Bronze Member Username: ZorroPost Number: 85 Registered: Jul-05 | Snapcat, I did not mention it earlier but congrats on the Bryston Mate, seems to me you are another happy owner. Enjoy! |
|
Bronze Member Username: ZorroPost Number: 86 Registered: Jul-05 | Rantz, Good one mate, can not stop laughing! Johnny: Mate, stop this insanity! Really, what does it say to you that pretty much no one takes you seriously? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but with good reasoning and respect for others. Go home, learn how to be a good boy then come back and try again! Bad Johnny, bad Johnny  |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 10283 Registered: Dec-04 | I really don't recall when price came into this little slice of heaven, but digital XO's and multiple amplification seem a bit pricey as well, as compared to a B100 and nice speakers. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 344 Registered: Jul-07 | "Chris, you just failed any reason to talk to you, Without one foot in reality, there can be no reasonable discussion" Finally ! Since you don't have any evidence of your theories John, please in future state them clearly as your own. YOU think there are no significant differences in electronics. YOU think most if not all people don't know what they need. YOU think you can look at a piece of paper and tell how a component sounds (and all the while biasing your listening experience). And your arrogance is out there in the open again John. I mean WAY out there. Your "league" ? What an a$$hole. And remember, you promised, I'm not worthy of a reply. Don't come down from on high to mingle with the commoners John. Hope you don't get a nosebleed up there....no wait....I do. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 345 Registered: Jul-07 | "I really don't recall when price came into this little slice of heaven, but digital XO's and multiple amplification seem a bit pricey as well, as compared to a B100 and nice speakers." Just one of Johnny's many irony's Nuck. "Why does anyone need more then NAD on the cheap" out of one side of his mouth, "go buy a $6000 digital speaker to get the REAL answer" out of the other. He's a little unpredictable that way, and a little aggitated lately for some reason. He'll be back later, right now he's out playing on his mood swings. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 346 Registered: Jul-07 | "What is a digital speaker?" A marketing term. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 6938 Registered: Feb-05 | Digital Signal Processing...applied most successfully with speakers by Meridian. I hate the way they sound...YMMV. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1560 Registered: Jun-07 | "I was looking at the C372's and 3x priced B100 measurements this morning and they're practically identical." I think this is the best proof yet that measurements of an amp does not represent how a human hears it. I have heard the C372 over 20 times I bet. What is right beside the C372 at my dealers location? The Bryston B60. I have A/B'd those two amps at least two or three times and the C372 is in nowhere near the league of the B60 IMO. Going from the C372 to the B60 is like taking your hands off your ears. Big big big big difference in sound quality between those two amps, to my ears. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 347 Registered: Mar-04 | If someone prefers bryston why do they have to justify it? |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 348 Registered: Mar-04 | Just one of Johnny's many irony's Nuck. "Why does anyone need more then NAD on the cheap" out of one side of his mouth. The M3 retails for $2799, cheap for some not all. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1561 Registered: Jun-07 | "If someone prefers bryston why do they have to justify it?" Exactly. Snapcat preferred his new Bryston, and only congratulations is in order. No more. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 347 Registered: Jul-07 | "If someone prefers bryston why do they have to justify it?" Great question. Apparently because they like it better than NAD. John needs to enforce his "you can't hear significant differences in electronics" mantra, in particular when NAD is involved (he sells it you know). |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 342 Registered: Apr-08 | It's kinda funny how i can make one post and keep you guys all busy for hours. If you say 'I prefer', that is indisputable. If you say 'X is better than Y' and ALL you have is a completely scientific listening impression, that is highly disputable. And it mucks up the place with useless opinion. And this place is already full of useless, even harmful opinion since way before I arrived. All of you guys need to participate in a DBT so you can put your inflated opinion of your hearing capability into perspective. It's easy to believe in all kinds of things, like you can fly or are invincible or in Santa Claus until you actually verify it. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 348 Registered: Jul-07 | "If you say 'I prefer', that is indisputable." Great, then you'll have nothing to talk about because that's all people are telling you. Their impressions, their opinion. The only one talking in absolutes here is you. "All of you guys need to participate in a DBT so you can put your inflated opinion of your hearing capability into perspective. It's easy to believe in all kinds of things, like you can fly or are invincible or in Santa Claus until you actually verify it." The burden of proof lies with you John. And you have none, so give it a rest. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_ashmanAlbuquerque, NM United States Post Number: 345 Registered: Apr-08 | Really? It seems to me that there are a lot of people on the "NAD can't compete in any way with Bryston, no way, no how, it isn't even close" bandwagon and that is provably untrue, objectively and in DBTs. Of course, I'm not the one saying the Earth is flat. Snapcat is about the only one I've seen lately trying to put it in personal terms rather than global terms. I don't see too many people saying 'sounds better TO ME', let alone adding "in my completely unscientific and biased listening". As I said, if you can pre-condition people that amp A is better than amp B, they will hear it whether it true or not. Only a small fraction will have the objectivity to say "they sound the same to me" or "But I like amp B!" That's how viral marketing works, same thing Bose does so successfully. Everyone is out to convince people that their choice is the choice others should make, rather than simply listening to lots of things and buying what they like. From the outside looking in, if I were a Bryston or Rega or Naim marketing guy, I'd be laughing my butt off and celebrating watching you guys jump through your hoops to bring other people on board. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2734 Registered: May-05 | "If someone prefers bryston why do they have to justify it?" For the same reason why your hero needs to justify why he prefers NAD. Then again, he didn't say he prefers the M3, he said it is better. No preference stated on his part. "Isn't a B60 twice the price of a C272? Certainly close to twice the price of a C372? In which case, the NAD kicks butt and spending the money on a B60 is kinda stupid, according to your own flawed theory." There's an obvious flaw in your post, so I'll go ahead and point it out for you. If the 372 was as far as my budget could stretch, I'd be very happy with it. Here's another one for you... I bought my B60 second hand. I literally paid $100 more than the MSRP of a 372. Not to mention that I have 12 years of warantee left on it (compared to 3 for a brand new 372), and none of the capacitor problems that the 372s had (or did you not get that memo?). According to your flawed logic, I should have saved $100 and bought something that is a several steps below what I bought. The biggest flaw to your whole arguement - When have YOU DBT'ed the M3 vs a B60 or B100? When have you even heard them side by side? When have you even heard them at all? You keep challenging everyone here to a DBT. Take your own superior advice - DBT an M3 against ANY Bryston. Without hearing a B60 or B100 (let alone along side an M3), you have no leg to stand on - scientific nor unscientific. According to your own assinine logic, without a DBT all of your assumptions about the M3 can't be anything more than imaginary. Your eyes are playing tricks on you. You're allured by the idea of getting a great integrated amp at a cheap price. All those musical qualities you're hearing aren't real. They're all imagined by your inferior non-scientific mind. Put up or shut up. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 1563 Registered: Jun-07 | Well said Stu. JA- why didn't you just buy a C372? Why spend so much more for the M3? Did you do a DBT test to see if the M3 sounded better. You know...there is probably a bigger difference between my Left and Right speaker, than the C372 and the M3. Or so you say. So why spend the money? What is the warranty on that 2700 dollar M3? 3 years? Wowsers, you really should have done a DBT test on the M3. Because until you do, you have no proof that it sounds better than the C372. I would gladly put a DBT together for you JA on the C372 vs the M3 vs the Bryston B100. You could win some big bucks JA. |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 349 Registered: Mar-04 | "For the same reason why your hero needs to justify why he prefers NAD" Hey stu take it easy. You like your b-60, so just listen to the thing instead of going on about it. You would think with the way you defend it you would not have the time to visit here. It is conceivable that many would prefer the M3 over a bryston integrated. I don't see that as being out of the realm of possibility. What is apparent is that because some have purchased a brand they feel imbued with a false sense of superiority on some level. What do you care what opinion John has? You act as if you don't but obviously you do as about seven of you cannot stop yourselves from posting after every post he makes. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics