Your home Audio/A/V Hi-Fi System

[Shaorin]

is there anyone else here on MW that likes to listen to music/play VGs/watch Video programmes

the old fashioned way, through a component Hi-Fi/A/V system? that's the way i like to do things,

PC-based entertainment media system be damned...

PIONEER VSX-D1S TOTL 130w/ch. A/V Stereo Receiver (1990/1993)

PIONEER PD-91 Reference Compact Disc Player (1988/1990) (upgraded with parts from a PD-3000, the JPN market version)

PIONEER PD-M90X Reference Multi-Play CD Player (1987/1989) (the very first REFERENCE/ELITE multi-play CDP)

PIONEER CT-S800 (1988/1990) full-featured TOTL Single-Well LaserAmorphous-Head cassette deck, with casted-iron transformer

PIONEER DV-09 Reference DVD Player (1998/2000)

PIONEER CLD-3030 TOTL Compatible Laser Disc Player (1988/1989)

PIONEER GR-777 Ten Band Stereo Graphic Equalizer (1988/199?) (TOTL remote controllable EQ with dual spectrum display)

PIONEER CS-G503 Four-Way Stereo Loudspeaker System (199?)

PIONEER SE-305 Stereo Headphones (1974)

PIONEER MR-100 Multi-Room IR Receiver (1989/199?)

PIONEER CU-MR100 Remote Control Unit (1989/199?)

PIONEER CU-AV100 Programmable Remote Control Unit (1988/1989)

PIONEER CU-AV200 Programmable Remote Control Unit (1989/1993)

ELAC MIRACORD 46 Idler Drive 33/45/78 speed Stereo Turntable (197?)

JVC HR-S8000U TOTL S-VHS VCR with Digital FX (1988/1990)

VSX-D1S TOTL 130w/ch. A/V Stereo Receiver (1990/1993)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/PIONEER/VSX-D1SMACGYVER9-9-20092.jpg

PIONEER PD-91 Reference Compact Disc Player (1988/1990)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/PIONEER%20PD-91/PD-91MacG11-26-101.jpg

PIONEER PD-M90X Reference Multi-Play CD Player (1987/1989)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/PIONEER%20PD-M90X%20MACGYVER/PIONEERPD-M90XMacGyver.jpg

CT-S800 (1988/1990)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/CT-S800%2004-09-2009/CT-S800MACGYVER11-28-09.jpg

DV-09 Reference DVD Player (1998/2000)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/DV-09/DV-09MacGyver06-16-09.jpg

PIONEER CLD-3030 TOTL Compatible Laser Disc Player (1988/1989)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/MacGyver%20System%202010/CLD-30301.jpg

GR-777 Ten Band Stereo Graphic Equalizer (1988/199?)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/MacGyver%20System%202010/GR-7771.png

CS-G503 Four-Way Stereo Loudspeaker System (199?)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/MacGyver%20System%2012-7-2008/MacGyverSystem12-7-20082.jpg

SE-305 Stereo Headphones (1974)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/MacGyver%20System/DSCF0970.jpg

CU-MR100 Remote Control Unit (1989/199?)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/PIONEER/CU-MR100.jpg

PIONEER CU-MR100 Remote Control Unit (1989/199?)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/PIONEER/CU-AV100.jpg

PIONEER CU-AV200 Programmable Remote Control Unit (1989/1993)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/PIONEER/CU-AV2001-1.jpg

ELAC MIRACORD 46 Idler Drive 33/45/78 speed Stereo Turntable (197?)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/ELAC%20MIRACORD%2046/DSCF1926.jpg

JVC HR-S8000U TOTL S-VHS VCR with Digital FX (1988/1990)

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/JVC%20HR-S8000U/HR-S8000UMacG1.jpg

Edited December 9, 2010 by Shaorin

[StealthLurker]

lol, mmsadda

[myk]

I'm curious, what's the deal with using older component based pieces than newer 'tech such as HDMI, optic, etc?

[atomicscissors]

I'm curious, what's the deal with using older component based pieces than newer 'tech such as HDMI, optic, etc?

I'm not an audiophile myself, but I've heard some describe analog audio to be "warmer" than digital.

Plus, there's always the nostalgia factor.

[eugimon]

I'm not an audiophile myself, but I've heard some describe analog audio to be "warmer" than digital.

Plus, there's always the nostalgia factor.

usually those guys are talking about things like vacuum tubes and LPs though... not just old stuff.

[atomicscissors]

Heh, yeah, I should have added that. High-end audio is nuts. $15,000 for a phono cartridge? That's some serious dough.

[JB0]

usually those guys are talking about things like vacuum tubes and LPs though... not just old stuff.

To be fair, records DO have more range than CDs, from a purely technical standpoint.

Extracting that extra range without the physical issues of reading the record causing artifacts is another story.

And at the end of the day, most of the difference boils down to the different masters used. Lot of CDs are mastered horribly incompetently.

Tubes, though... that's indefensible.

As far as old hardware VS new hardware...

Audio doesn't really change a lot. A good piece of gear from 1987 is still a good piece of gear, as long as it's in good shape.

If your CD/DVD/WTF player has good DACs and you aren't using shitty cables, there's not really an advantage to using a digital run instead of an analog one.

And to the consternation of many and defiance of logic... analog video works BETTER over long runs than HDMI(because it's not a particularly GOOD digital video standard).

[myk]

Lol, for a second I was trying to remember what a "WTF" player was, lol. You can always count on 'JB for good 'info...

[JB0]

What, you mean you didn't collect Wire Transport Flywheel media too?

Yeah, I collect a little bit of info about everything, it seems. Nice to find a use for it sometimes.

[Gaijin]

Yamaha RX V765 Receiver to a Sony 52" XBR9, along with a Sony BDP S370, a PS3, and a Scientific Atlanta 8300HD all going to an Energy Take 5.2 speaker system. The subwoofer is an older Energy 100w Take 5 Sub. All though HDMI.

Love Energy's speakers and Yamaha's receivers. Clean power to speakers that sound better than many costing many times more. Perfect combo for movies, music, and games.

[Peabody]

Amazing setup Shaorin! Pioneer stuff is beautiful. I have a similar obsession with old and new Sony gear. I recently picked up a DA50ES Amp for almost nothing. Basically if it doesnt have HDMI ppl dont want it. I run optic from my PS3 to the amp and its very nice sound, I am looking for a reference grade CD player next though, I will post pics of my setup in the near future.

[Shaorin]

I'm curious, what's the deal with using older component based pieces than newer 'tech such as HDMI, optic, etc?

because i prefer to.

this is the era of Audio/A/V gear i grew up with, and it is also some of the last (and IMO, greatest)products

of the legendary Japanese bubble economy of the 1970's/1980's.

further, they are all SUPERB two-channel stereo components.

while i feel i am doing quite fine without it at present, there is nothing stopping me from eventually

getting a good BD player

(PIONEER brand of course, BDP-05FD or the TOTL 09FD, whichever i can afford by the time i'm ready for one)

and running the HDMI to a good HDTV monitor

(TOSHIBA brand if i can help it, PIONEER is no longer in the video monitor market)

and the BDP's analog stereo RCA outpus to my Hi-Fi system.

i've had surround sound before, and found that i prefer full-range stereo for video programmes as well as music...

[taksraven]

shitty cables,

Define please, and what is not "shitty"?

I find this to be an interesting area of discussion.

Taksraven

[Shaorin]

Define please, and what is not "shitty"?

I find this to be an interesting area of discussion.

Taksraven

SHITTY CABLES:

NOT SO SHITTY CABLES:

quality Audio/A/V cables generally have exotic, multi strand, specially braided

oxygen-free copper wire throughout, surrounded by layers of electrical shielding

to resist RF and EM airwave interference. terminated with high-quality gold-plated connectors

and a metal/aluminum/brass/etc. barrel.

average low-grade patch cords, however, are just multi-strand copper

or metal wire coated with plastic insulation and the lowest possible grade terminations...

[myk]

"oxygen free, multi-braided, multi-stranded?" Wow..Low end cable user here...

[Shaorin]

"oxygen free, multi-braided, multi-stranded?" Wow..Low end cable user here...

well, oxy-free copper is the best on earth. being oxy-free means,

zero possibility of oxidization of the copper, which can effect ultimate sound quality.

PC-OCC copper made by the japanese company "OHNO CONTINUOUS CASTING" is a continuously-casted, single-crystal copper

of the highest purity available. many companies throughout the years have used PC-OCC in tight tolerance electrical connections

in various Hi-Fi products. for instance, PIONEER once used PC-OCC wiring for connection of the REC/PLAYBACK heads

on their best cassette decks of the late 1980's, and SIGNET corporation once produced stereo RCA interconnects of total PC-OCC wire.

for my case, i use MONSTER CABLE throughout my system, with critical connections, such as my two CD players,

handled by MONSTER's TOTL "THX REFERENCE" series stereo RCAs, which ran around $60.00+ (depending on length)

at WORST BUY and CIRCUIT CITY (R.I.P.) about five+ years back...

Edited December 13, 2010 by Shaorin

[VT 1010]

In terms of old A/V stuff, I have a Pioneer CLD-97 LaserDisc player hooked up to my Sony 34XBR970 (via composite, of course). I got it in mint condition, in the box a few years ago. Sadly, the previous owner left the original pack-in batteries in the remote; needless to say, I'm looking for a replacement remote. I also still have my parents' old BetaMax VCR...somewhere around here.

On the less impressive audio front, I have an admittedly low-end turntable hooked up to my dad's old Kenwood KR-A5050 receiver that I got from him. There's a strange appeal in having to operate a turntable. Plus the analog "effects" on the sound are pleasing--pops and clicks aside. Nonetheless, I much prefer digital when done right.

Define please, and what is not "shitty"?

I find this to be an interesting area of discussion.

Taksraven

Same here. I'm curious what separates the good cables from the bad.

quality Audio/A/V cables generally have exotic, multi strand, specially braided

oxygen-free copper wire throughout, surrounded by layers of electrical shielding

to resist RF and EM airwave interference. terminated with high-quality gold-plated connectors

and a metal/aluminum/brass/etc. barrel.

average low-grade patch cords, however, are just multi-strand copper

or metal wire coated with plastic insulation and the lowest possible grade terminations...

What makes them better? They certainly seem to be more resistant to corrosion, but--barring survival over a long period of time, a harsh environment, or heavy EMI--how does this specifically translate to audio quality? I have a love and fascination with high-end audio equipment and I'd genuinely like to know.

[Shaorin]

In terms of old A/V stuff, I have a Pioneer CLD-97 LaserDisc player hooked up to my Sony 34XBR970 (via composite, of course). I got it in mint condition, in the box a few years ago. Sadly, the previous owner left the original pack-in batteries in the remote; needless to say, I'm looking for a replacement remote. I also still have my parents' old BetaMax VCR...somewhere around here.

On the less impressive audio front, I have an admittedly low-end turntable hooked up to my dad's old Kenwood KR-A5050 receiver that I got from him. There's a strange appeal in having to operate a turntable. Plus the analog "effects" on the sound are pleasing--pops and clicks aside. Nonetheless, I much prefer digital when done right.

Same here. I'm curious what separates the good cables from the bad.

What makes them better? They certainly seem to be more resistant to corrosion, but--barring survival over a long period of time, a harsh environment, or heavy EMI--how does this specifically translate to audio quality? I have a love and fascination with high-end audio equipment and I'd genuinely like to know.

try these on for size:

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/298103/whats-the-deal-with-pcocc

http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/furutech/furutech-PCOCC.htm

also, try scraping the battery contacts clean on your remote,

using an X-ACTO. also use a Q-TIP soaked in ISOPROPYL ALCOHOL

to rub them clean. combining these methods should yield you

a functional remote unit...

Edited December 13, 2010 by Shaorin

[taksraven]

SHITTY CABLES:

NOT SO SHITTY CABLES:

quality Audio/A/V cables generally have exotic, multi strand, specially braided

oxygen-free copper wire throughout, surrounded by layers of electrical shielding

to resist RF and EM airwave interference. terminated with high-quality gold-plated connectors

and a metal/aluminum/brass/etc. barrel.

average low-grade patch cords, however, are just multi-strand copper

or metal wire coated with plastic insulation and the lowest possible grade terminations...

How much of a difference can it make. Is there any real scientific way of measuring the difference or is it all just down to the ears of the listener? I'm not trying to hassle, I'm just interested in pinning down a person who claims to know the difference so I can be educated. Is sound quality really just an "eye of the beholder" sort of thing? If I am happy with my current setup that does use "shitty" cables, how much of a difference can it make?

[eugimon]

How much of a difference can it make. Is there any real scientific way of measuring the difference or is it all just down to the ears of the listener? I'm not trying to hassle, I'm just interested in pinning down a person who claims to know the difference so I can be educated. Is sound quality really just an "eye of the beholder" sort of thing? If I am happy with my current setup that does use "shitty" cables, how much of a difference can it make?

Shitty cables can and do lose certain frequencies or have greater than average signal attenuation.

But see, here's where it's interesting. If your equipment can't generate those frequencies anyways what does it matter? I mean, if you have a boxed home theater system from sony or whatever, rushing out and buying expensive cables and wiring isn't going to accomplish much. Similarly, fancy cables with the "correct" gauge wire, with blah, blah, blah might be awesome if you're doing a 100m run from your AV room to the theater run but if you're doing a 3ft drop from the TV to receiver, signal attenuation isn't much of an issue for you.

For me, this debate is similar to the one where audiophiles complain about "lossy" MP3 players. Yes, a 128kbps mp3 file does not sound as good as a properly mastered CD. No question. BUT, I used my MP3 player on the train, on the bike, when I'm walking around and I don't have 800$ reference quality headphones so that distinction is really a moot point.

In conclusion... yes, cables are important but the components they're plugged into are important as well and having awesome cables on mid range gear is kind of like getting the gold package on a civic.

[jenius]

My stuff is so 2005 but this is my living room rig:

Sharp Aquos 46" LCD HDTV

JVC Receiver (one of the first with relatively glitch free HDMI switching)

KEF surround sound 5.1

Oppo DVD player (which doubles as my CD player)

a 2005 HP Media Center where I stream Pandora from and watch Netflix, Hulu, and use the media card to watch the local channels (I only pay for cable Internet these days).

[taksraven]

Shitty cables can and do lose certain frequencies or have greater than average signal attenuation.

But see, here's where it's interesting. If your equipment can't generate those frequencies anyways what does it matter? I mean, if you have a boxed home theater system from sony or whatever, rushing out and buying expensive cables and wiring isn't going to accomplish much. Similarly, fancy cables with the "correct" gauge wire, with blah, blah, blah might be awesome if you're doing a 100m run from your AV room to the theater run but if you're doing a 3ft drop from the TV to receiver, signal attenuation isn't much of an issue for you.

For me, this debate is similar to the one where audiophiles complain about "lossy" MP3 players. Yes, a 128kbps mp3 file does not sound as good as a properly mastered CD. No question. BUT, I used my MP3 player on the train, on the bike, when I'm walking around and I don't have 800$ reference quality headphones so that distinction is really a moot point.

In conclusion... yes, cables are important but the components they're plugged into are important as well and having awesome cables on mid range gear is kind of like getting the gold package on a civic.

Thanks for that, it was exactly the sort of answer that I was after and confirmed a few things that I had heard over the years.

Similar sort of thing, and this is more video than audio so sorry to the audiophiles out there. Does anybody know if there is stuff out there on Blu-Ray that is simply not worth getting due to the original source material not having high enough resolution? In other words a DVD would be just as effective (and maybe cheaper). I am mainly thinking of TV programs, especially older ones.

Taksraven

[Mechinyun]

I had a pioneer component system I got mid 86 that lasted me until the late 90's. I moved so much it was a pain lugging it all around so ened up selling it. Your setup brings back memories and many components look to be maybe a year or so newer than mine. I did have that same smaller remote that controlled it all, wish I still had the system. Very cool

[shiroikaze]

Similar sort of thing, and this is more video than audio so sorry to the audiophiles out there. Does anybody know if there is stuff out there on Blu-Ray that is simply not worth getting due to the original source material not having high enough resolution? In other words a DVD would be just as effective (and maybe cheaper). I am mainly thinking of TV programs, especially older ones.

Predator first comes to mind, and Ghostbusters I & II. Can't think of any TV shows at the moment, sorry.

Just look up the AVS forums for a tier list of Blu-Rays and check out other Blu-Ray review sites to get a general idea of the quality.

I'm still kinda bummed that they added noise reduction to the extended version of Terminator 2 (and everything else).

Edited December 14, 2010 by shiroikaze

[myk]

Just look up the AVS forums for a tier list of Blu-Rays and check out other Blu-Ray review sites to get a general idea of the quality.

I also check on Amazon, although I'm sure that crowd isn't as picky as a dedicated A/V techie forum...

[shiroikaze]

I also check on Amazon, although I'm sure that crowd isn't as picky as a dedicated A/V techie forum...

You know Amazon mix their DVD and Blu-Ray reviews together, right?

[JB0]

Shitty cables can and do lose certain frequencies or have greater than average signal attenuation.

But see, here's where it's interesting. If your equipment can't generate those frequencies anyways what does it matter? I mean, if you have a boxed home theater system from sony or whatever, rushing out and buying expensive cables and wiring isn't going to accomplish much. Similarly, fancy cables with the "correct" gauge wire, with blah, blah, blah might be awesome if you're doing a 100m run from your AV room to the theater run but if you're doing a 3ft drop from the TV to receiver, signal attenuation isn't much of an issue for you.

Yeah. Depending on gear and situation, cable quality can be more or less of an issue.

It's not just down to noise reduction, though. Lower-quality cables have less overall bandwidth, so... if you try to send too complex a signal through, it gets garbled.

Amusingly, it's actually more obvious in the digital realm, because rather than "smearing", you get clipping and dropouts. And HDMI was never intended for long runs, so it's very vulnerable to degradation.

Analog is pretty durable in that respect. It degrades gracefully.

And Monster generally makes overpriced products with greatly exaggerated benefits, even ignoring their incredibly unethical business practices and ridiculous hair-trigger lawsuits.

My personal favorite example was a PS2 controller extension cable they used to make that they claimed would actually get signals from your controller to the PS2 faster so your game would be more responsive... which is completely and utterly impossible on so many levels that I'm not really sure where to start.

They're one of those companies that spends a lot more on advertising (and lawyers) than they do any actual product development, and have a reputation that's bought, not earned.

For me, this debate is similar to the one where audiophiles complain about "lossy" MP3 players. Yes, a 128kbps mp3 file does not sound as good as a properly mastered CD. No question. BUT, I used my MP3 player on the train, on the bike, when I'm walking around and I don't have 800$ reference quality headphones so that distinction is really a moot point.

And this is a hot-button for me, so let me drag out my soapbox and climb up for a minute or three.

I find the difference between 128kbit/sec MP3s and even just 192 kb/s MP3s is audible with almost everything. Maybe not through pack-in earbuds(I don't use them for comfort reasons as much as audio quality), but... even a pair of junk PC speakers will fail to mask how awful 128 kb/s is(I DO use junk PC speakers for my computer).

128 kb/s needs to just die. It was chosen as a tradeoff between size and quality when dialup was the only game in town, and the concerns that prompted the tradeoff to land where it did are long gone. There's simply no good reason for it to still exist.

I'm not saying everyone needs to start using FLAC exclusively or, god forbid, raw wave, but...

Variable bitrate, average 192 kb/s should be the new minimum standard. It sounds MUCH nicer, you aren't wasting bits by encoding dead silence at 192 kb/sec, and it's not like VBR is rare and unsupported at this point. VBR actually makes a LOT of sense, since the low-complexity parts of the track use a lower bitrate than the more complex parts. So a burst of dead silence can be near-0 kb/s, a full-orchestra crash can surge up to 320, and the file is about the size of a 192 kb/s continuous bitrate file.

Now, I DO have some tracks where 128 doesn't really hurt them that much. The complexity of the audio WILL affect how badly it gets mangled.

But most of the stuff... it shows(or sounds, I should say). And the more complex the music, the worse it will show.

If it's a piano solo, that lone piano gets the full 128 kb/s, but if it's part of a full orchestra, it's sort of like it's divided among all the instruments, and the quality plummets.

In the interests of full disclosure, I go for lossless files on my PC, and convert to high-quality VBR for use on my MP3 player(average bitrates landing between 192 and 256 kb/s).

I'd recommend getting some nice cheap headphones.

Used to use a set of Koss KSC-75s. They're pretty well-known for hitting a cheap-but-good window.

Of course, my current headphones are pretty much junk, and while they don't sound particularly GOOD, I can still tell the difference between a low-bitrate and high-bitrate file through them.

In conclusion... yes, cables are important but the components they're plugged into are important as well and having awesome cables on mid range gear is kind of like getting the gold package on a civic.

Definitely.

But mid-range gear will benefit if you replace those flimsy cables that came with your DVD player with something a little better.

I'm not saying go all-out and get some MONSTER Electroblaster Cables with Superconductive Toroidal Insulation and Patented Turbine-Cut Connectors for Maximal Look-Cool Factor and Optimum Wallet Drainage, in fact I am very much NOT saying that, but... something thicker than a sheet of paper is nice.

[eugimon]

Yeah. I don't use 128 kbs on anything and haven't since my Diamond Rio over 10 years ago. I was just making a general point that not everyone listens to music the same way or has the same priorities.

But I agree with your point, JBO. Decent components all around (and the right type of wiring for the job) are important and will help AV quality in a lot of cases.

Just don't let people do the hard sell on you thinking that rushing out and getting 50 dollar cables will dramatically outperform the cheaper "nicer" cables.

ESPECIALLY speaker wires. Do your homework, see if your speakers can even generate the frequencies that cheaper wires drop. Unless you're dropping the better half of a grand (at least) on each speaker, you're probably not going to notice the difference between "good" speaker wire and MONSTER ™ Electroblaster™ Cables with Superconductive Toroidal Insulation™ and Patented Turbine-Cut™ Connectors for Maximal Look-Cool Factor™ and Optimum Wallet Drainage™

[atomicscissors]

128 kb/s needs to just die....Variable bitrate, average 192 kb/s should be the new minimum standard.

Agreed. When I want to load music on a portable player (either my T-Mobile G2 or Sansa Clip+) I convert my lossless tracks to mp3 using LAME v2. Best compromise between fidelity and file size, IMHO.

[anime52k8]

I really don't get why people wast their time and money on stuff like this.

We payed $75 for a blu-ray player and another 5 dollars for an HDMI cable and guess what, IT PLAYS F*CKING MOVIES AND THEY LOOK JUST FINE!!!!!!!

Same goes for music. My ipod with $10 ear buds plays music just as well as CD's or LP's or whatever else you guys use through $800 headphones.

Edited December 15, 2010 by anime52k8

[Peabody]

Sony `Z series` (hi-end in Australia, mid-range in Japan) 42 inch LCD. Really wanted to go plasma but also wanted to keep everything Sony...and the only plasma I wanted was a used Pioneer Kuro, but out of my price range..

Japanese MGS4 edition PS3 (use this for CDs, US and Japanese blu rays, I have a few although most stuff these days is uncoded its seems) I had a 1st edition with all the bells and whistles but it stopped working...now the used market is too rich for me..have a cheap 1TB installed and a 1TB USBed in, tons of downloads I have yet to replace with DVD or is not available on DVD, tons of porn from the days of javtalk, some music that is too rare, just mixes that went to a few people or out of print - thats the only thing downloads are good for people.

Cheap Sony BD player I got for free with my TV, plays any local BDs I have, plays DVDs with 4:3 aspect ratio in their original form which I can`t always get the PS3 to do..

DA50ES DTS amp, when it came out in the late `90s it went for a couple of grand in Australia, picked it up for $200 on ebay, love it so much, does stereo very well, has that ES circuitry which is very clean and reference like. my crappy SSB-1000 speakers will go next to be replaced with...something good..quite pleased with the sound right now but can do better! Did not come with the programmable remote it was sold with but will pick one up eventually, they run a lot of money though.

I have a Sony optical cable going from my PS3 to the amp, plugs in securely unlike some of the cheaper brands I`ve seen. Shaorin, what is your opinion of optical cable to link your source and your amp? I find it works fine.

I have about 500 CDs, 100 DVDs and blu rays and growing, I love having something on my shelf, rather than a file on my computer.

For portable I have an MZ-RH1 Hi-MD walkman and a pair of MDR-EX700 flagship earphones. I make considered mixes on Hi-MD 1GB discs in PCM only and love it, like the old days of tape but perfect definition. I really get the most out of my music this way. Love having a backlit remote in easy reach at all times as well, something ipods just dont have. The EX700s are in-ear models with 5 different sizes of ear plug so you get a lot of noise cancelling and reference grade sound even in noisy environments you can really hear the difference.

I also break out my old Sony D-E01 anniversary CD walkman a lot, pack 3 good albums around a theme and I`m good for the day, in audio bliss. Although the D-E01 isn`t the best sounding that Sony ever did (have a D-777 for that) the battery life and convenience is the best and it still craps all over any non Sony discman or any ipod in SQ.

Shaorin you are my idol, one day I will own a working S-VHS deck, an LD player and more of the good old stuff. although some new stuff is good I really think stuff was better made when I was growing up in the `90s and dreaming of this stuff.

Same goes for music. My ipod with $10 ear buds plays music just as well as CD's or LP's or whatever else you guys use through $800 headphones.

Agreed. When I want to load music on a portable player (either my T-Mobile G2 or Sansa Clip+) I convert my lossless tracks to mp3 using LAME v2. Best compromise between fidelity and file size, IMHO.

why compromise at all? how much music can you listen to in one outing and why do you need instant access to so much music at all times? Step back, take a big breath and think about what music do you really love and buy it on Amazon for $10. imports or rare discs might be too expensive, download them for now and save up for the real mccoy. unless you can find .wav downloads of them, but then it gets messy because .wav cannot have meta data and you will have to get track info from wikipedia or whatever and store it somewhere else, ..it goes on and on, or you could have a perfect tomb of your favorite artist sitting there on your shelf ready to be manipulated any way you like. Remember there is no DRM on a CD.

[treatment]

/me double-facepalm

you guys oughta buy a pair of these:

http://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-K2-terminated-speaker-cable/dp/B000J36XR2/

and these, too:

http://www.amazon.com/Denon-AKDL1-Dedicated-Link-Cable/dp/B000I1X6PM/

Edited December 15, 2010 by treatment

[atomicscissors]

why compromise at all? how much music can you listen to in one outing and why do you need instant access to so much music at all times? Step back, take a big breath and think about what music do you really love and buy it on Amazon for $10. imports or rare discs might be too expensive, download them for now and save up for the real mccoy. unless you can find .wav downloads of them, but then it gets messy because .wav cannot have meta data and you will have to get track info from wikipedia or whatever and store it somewhere else, ..it goes on and on, or you could have a perfect tomb of your favorite artist sitting there on your shelf ready to be manipulated any way you like. Remember there is no DRM on a CD.

A compromise must be made when your collection is pushing upwards of 1.5 terabytes and your portable player can only hold 8 gigs.

How much music can I listen to in one sitting? I can listen anywhere from one hour to almost the entire day. As a matter of fact, I've been listening to music for about 7.5 hours straight as of this moment.

Why do I need instant access to so much music at all times? That's easy: my taste in music changes when my mood changes. And sometimes, I decide, on a whim, that I'm tired of listening to N.W.A. and want to listen to some Linda Ronstadt.

I've gone completely away from physical media; keep the clutter down, is what I say. In life, I'm somewhat of a minimalist. It's all just a matter of personal preference. After all, we all "travel to the beat of a different drum."

[Peabody]

I've gone completely away from physical media; keep the clutter down, is what I say. In life, I'm somewhat of a minimalist. I

Well unfortunately for you you your philosophy is also minimising the audio quality you hear and therefore the enjoyment you can get out of music .

[atomicscissors]

Well unfortunately for you you your philosophy is also minimising the audio quality you hear and therefore the enjoyment you can get out of music .

Thanks for the concern, but I enjoy music just fine, whether it be encoded in FLAC or VBR mp3.

If I want to really "experience" music, I'll go the Hollywood Bowl.