Reviews

1

This is so stupid it makes Tivoli products almost seem resonable. Trying to restore lost analog qualities after 128kbps (nearly universal) compression is like trying to appreciate last Tuesday night's filet mignon by looking a picture of the dirty dishes.

Posted by Elcoholic in So Cal on January 29, 2007 at 5:20 PM (PDT)

2

Previous comment is totally off base. The couple of hundred people who eventually buy this unit will do so because they want a $149 speaker/dock and are willing to spend another $550 because they dig its style (and it does look pretty sweet, one must agree). Not for alleged functional reasons involving the tubes. Same reason people might buy furniture from Baker instead of Room & Board, or from Crate & Barrel instead of from Bob's Discount Furniture. That said, I can't imagine the market for this at $699 can be all that big.

I don't get the previous commenter's flip remark about the 'universal' standard of 128 kpbs. What person, who if they are in the market for a premium speaker/dock must hopefully be at least mildly serious about music, listens to stuff from the iTunes store? Surely they must rip most if not all of their stuff from CD into lossless or at least high bitrate AAC, either of which could be on their ipod if they choose.

Posted by Gitzman in Chicago on January 29, 2007 at 7:32 PM (PDT)

3

I agree that the first comment is out of line. I wouldn't call 128k universal. I'm not sure if I'm a minority, but I still buy cds. And when I do, I rip them at a lossless format.

I'm not sure how "tube amp" this is though. I've heard this is really a solid state with a tube pre-amp. It probably also has PCB circuitry... and if it does, don't play it too long or you'll melt the tube sockets.

Posted by webelo on January 30, 2007 at 7:07 AM (PDT)

4

Perhaps I should clarify my comments. I am very serious about music, including analog music. I bought my 1st serious system (turntable, rcvr, 2 speakers) in '76 for $2300. In '74 I paid $3200 out the door for a new Civic. There is no way to objectively recreate analog sound once digitized. When I want to listen to analog music I have 800 LPs and a turntable w/ a moving coil cartridge for that. If I want to do serious listening then I'll cue up one of my 500 or so CD's or 1 of 5 DTS 5.1 music DVD's. I would trade a testicle for a pair of Carver Silver Seven's or an AR Tube Amp. IMHO an iPod will never be the center of a "serious" home system, no matter what you plug it into. Where the iPod kicks serious a$$ is in the fact that my 60g 5th Gen iPod allows me to carry around 9146 songs w/ 19.5 gb in reserve in something the size of a pack of smokes. If I went with Lossless I'd lose most of my library.

Posted by Elcoholic in So Cal on January 30, 2007 at 5:45 PM (PDT)

5

It's important to note that blind testing is still controversial in the audio world. On the one hand, it certainly appears to follow the tenets of the scientific method.

On the other hand, ultimately, you don't want to know which system is better when you listen to it for a few minutes or hours, you want to know which system is better when you listen to it daily for years. If there are subtle yet important differences that only make themselves known in extended listening, blind testing as it is usually done is not particularly useful.

Also if something about the testing situation changes the listener's response (think white coat effect on blood pressure or the tendency of survey respondents to answer in the way they think is pleasing to the surveryor), the testing is also not useful.

Of course, that's only if those things are true, but just like tubes vs. solid state and analog vs. digital, it's a long-standing argument and both sides should be represented, however silly you may think the opposing side.

Posted by mattwardfh in Texas on February 20, 2007 at 5:34 PM (PDT)

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

New Deals


Shop for Accessories: Cases, speakers, chargers, etc.