Moderator: kabubi
pigdog wrote:ok boys lets be fair! specs are important and so does listening, it works both ways. what was being said in the last posts is to be more objective. specs serves as a guide it is not the end all be all, listening has its flaws specially to the uninitiated, but if you are one of those who can and has the ability to pass judgment based on listening, then that is very good. thats why i tend to take the middle road, also knowing what to look for is important, when i audition any new equipments, i have a certain set parameters that is seen in numbers along with the sonic quality. hope this clears the air and open the forums to real discussions of the merits and weaknesses of each audio items that were discussed here.
Squirrelnutzipper wrote:Advocates of listening only without knowing specs and advocates of comparing specs only are equally right and wrong. Consider the following anecdote about the bumblebee that should not fly.
Not too long ago, aerodynamics appled to a bumblebee determined that the bumblebee should not fly, but it does! Over time, the insect was studied further and formulae refined. What was ultimately determined was that the nature of the bumblebee's wing motion was not fully understood and that when analyzed fully, revealed that theoretically, and in reality, the bumblebee could fly. What has this to do with the issue at hand?
There is a lot that can and is measured in audio that relates to sound quality. Yet, there is much that is not understood. Specifications alone do not solely measure SQ for this reason. Rather, certain aspects of audio components are well understood, as is the impact on sound quality. Among these important considerations are impedance matching between components and gain, for example. Specs are important. Simplistically, would you blindly buy an amp not checking whether it needs 120 or 230 volts? Of course not. On the other hand, it is not a great idea to buy an amp without listening to it in your system and listening environment.
So, a middle ground is merited, where specs are compared AND listening against a well known reference is experienced. Anything less is likely to result in a less than optimal purchase.
audiostar wrote:Hi guys, let's keep the discussion sane, informative and friendly - mods
With due respect, Mang Rod is a nice guy who probably needs a lot of support. He makes excellent audio products by harnessing his long years of experience. He listens to advice, this I can personally attest. He made me audition his compactron for weeks in exchange for giving him my honest impressions. I found his phonoamp lacking in punch and thru brader Buboy, I frankly said so. I was surprised to hear a better-sounding compactron during a session at lovejbl's place. In fact so impressed was Paul (Mamimili) that he immediately ordered one. I also did.
The point I want to put across is that Mang Rod cannot rely on buyers like me and Paul forever. There are those who would want to know what stuff those parts inside the hood are made of and rightly so. We wouldn't buy a medicine to cure certain illness if we do not know its chemical composition, side effects, among others. Specs are and should be a beacon for a thoughtful purchase of an audio product. They tell us in a nutshell what a certain equipment is capable of doing. Intelligent buyers rely on them big time. High-end hi-fi equipment must meet a certain level of sophistication even before they are subjected to critical, albeit subjective assessments.
These are some of the things I look for: freq. response, damping factor, sensitivity. If Filipino audio equipment builders want to be at par with the world’s best, they have to claim in quantifiable terms what their products can offer; otherwise they’ll just be among hundreds of copycats.
I have so much respect for Mang Rod and other Filipino DIYers and I hope they take this gobbledygook, coming from a non-expert, as an encouragement to do better. I'm sure Mang Rod will be more than happy to take his creations to higher levels and I'm willing, in my limited capacity, to help him to do just that.
Peace to all
asoka wrote:audiostar wrote:Hi guys, let's keep the discussion sane, informative and friendly - modsquote]
Yes Sir! Actually pinapasaya lang yung friendly discussion. No cause for alam. Gusto ko ring ipaabot kay ka-myembrong si Squirrelnutzipper na yung go away comment ko ay expression lang yun oppossite sa kanyang parallelism on the bumble bee/potato salad/110/220volts etc. for the topic at hand. I, myself (not to include the sentiment of the whole WS members) don't like to hear it thus i said go away...And bring it somewhere else - advice ko naman para dalhin niya yung argument sa mga uninitiated ni mr. pigdog (joke).
Sir, maganda yung advice mo kay Mang Rod. It is very well said and commendable. It is true that every purchase should be accompanied by a literature bearing the basic specifications the user needed. But this is a prerequisite only in a full marketing management effort over a product of the same category or the likes. We all knew this. But let us face it, that at this stage all outputs coming out of MR's hand are yet in their prototypical stage, or in a more advance thought, - owing to Patrick's frenzy over MR's creations, market testing stage. It is therefore imperative to MR to give out specifications, and a choice for the pre-selling customer to make, at this stage. Can't they not be at peace with that?
Why are some sectors egg him for these specificatons at this point when all these specifications are already embodied in every MR creation's performance?
Peace!
TonyC wrote:Comparing the innards to the promitheus it seems, from a newbie's point of view, that the MRTVC is similar to the promitheus. Kindly see Promitheus photo:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/e ... tvc_se.htm
Hope we see results soon...congrats to Mang Rod.
asoka wrote:...
But it's a different ball game if it's ArnoldC who's asking. We all knew him, right? Of course MR group won't give the specs to him on a siver platter. Kailangan dumugo siya para magkaroon siya ng specs ni MR. Paano?
He'll do a Pharisee act by going to Conchu undetected by his circle of friends and patrons(that includes you, I suppose) and offer to buy from MR a unit. There you go. Dumugo ang pride...atleast may specs na siya at unit mismo.
PS. Maawa naman kayo ni ArnoldC, wag niyo nang isali ang mga uninitiated dito sa usapan natin. Nasa WS tayong lahat. Example na lang sino ang makaka-argue ninyo dito kundi mga dumadaming believers at satisfied customers ni MR, gaya nina skee, dimfer, kabubi, mandym, carlos miguel, novblue, esaudio(tatalikuran na yata ang lawyering to patronize MR), balita ko pati yung kahangahangang cogressman JackD, audiostar, et al. Sino ngayon ang naiwan on your side, e di yung tinatawag niyong uninitiated (logic lang bro, wag magalit kung kala nyo tinamaan kayo). Sabi ni Skarlet...Skavavavoom!
kabubi wrote:I guess that you can categorize the debate on whether specs are important or not in th same league as the contentious and very passionate arguments such as SS v/s Tubes, CD v/s Vinyl, Belt drive v/s Idler Drive, Active v/s Passive…
As far as amps, pre-amps, speakers, TVCs etc are concerned, I really do not give a hoot about them “specs” simply because I do not have the intellectual capacity to grasp their significance and implications. Although much of the data will forever remain greek to me, at least I realize that there are 2 things that are virtually impossible to refute:
1. The best way to evaluate a product is to audition, audition, audition and
2. It is the music that really matters
So, no matter what the numbers and the symbols that accompany the gadget are, they really don’t mean squat when you actually test the item. Actual experience has taught many of us that after a listening session, there have been many promising thigamajigs with great specs that have fallen short of their promise and there are those that may not have seemed promising at first which have exceeded our wildest expectations.
For me, amps prep-amps, speakers TVCs are like people. Some have impressive credentials and all those letters, symbols and titles that they adjunct to their names --- “specs” if you will --- but sadly fall short of our expectations because of what we hear out of them. But then again, there are those fellows who are obscure, ordinary and self-effacing but proved more of a pleasure to deal with and definitely more respectable while we are associated with them.
And in the end, the WS gurus and many of the plebeians say, it is the music that really matters above everything else, and I believe that includes “specs”.
Having said that, may I address the issues raised by Atty Dana, Squirrelnutzipper to you non-believers in specs:
It is not true that the question of specs of Rod’s TVC was not answered. If you had taken the time to search the related threads/posts and read the various forums, you would have come across this satisfactory reply of Tony (which had loooooooong been given) to questions re the specs akin to Mang Rod’s TVC:TonyC wrote:Comparing the innards to the promitheus it seems, from a newbie's point of view, that the MRTVC is similar to the promitheus. Kindly see Promitheus photo:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/e ... tvc_se.htm
Hope we see results soon...congrats to Mang Rod.
If there is anyone who can make an expert assessment in this regard, it would be good old Tony.
Reluctant as I would like to say it, but the reason why Mang Rod is unable to share the specs some clamor for is that he could not afford to purchase the expensive instruments to measure the specs that some of you cannot live without. All that he has is a Sanwa meter, an analog device, for crying out loud. It is not the easiest thing to admit, specially for folks with very modest means mind you, considering that Filipinos have the value of “hiya” (“sense of shame”). For anyone to insist that he should have long purchased these instruments would be downright condescending.
I confess that I am the schmoe that christened Mang Rod’s compactron phono pre amp the “tomato”. I called it so because the compactron tube resembles a small tomato. I beg your indulgence if I cannot satisfy the whims of others for the specs or to give a more scientific evaluation of the phono-pre’s attributes because, as I have said earlier, I am technically challenged for such a task. Honestly, I do not know what “topology” is. Is it the study of the earth’s surface? I also wonder at what “attenuation” means. Is it the ability of a soldier to stand rigid? I do not even know what a “squirrelnutzipper” is, either, if you will ask me. Is it a clothing device to cover the testicles of a rodent? If one will accuse me of being ignorant or apathetic about all this, all I can say is that I don’t know and I don’t care. In the end, it is how the “Tomato” will sound which matters most.
And so I describe my experiences with this wondrous MR creation more along metaphoric lines such as vitamins, minerals, healthy, good-for-you. ESaudio and i have a good chuckle when we refer to the 6c33c-b amp of Mang Rod as a "vampire". Is this such a bad idea considering my limited knowledge in things technical? More importantly, I do so because I want to have fun at it. Undeniably, I believe that this is what this hobby is all about: having fun and that to take it too seriously will only make me miserable.
kabubi wrote:I guess that you can categorize the debate on whether specs are important or not in th same league as the contentious and very passionate arguments such as SS v/s Tubes, CD v/s Vinyl, Belt drive v/s Idler Drive, Active v/s Passive…
As far as amps, pre-amps, speakers, TVCs etc are concerned, I really do not give a hoot about them “specs” simply because I do not have the intellectual capacity to grasp their significance and implications. Although much of the data will forever remain greek to me, at least I realize that there are 2 things that are virtually impossible to refute:
1. The best way to evaluate a product is to audition, audition, audition and
2. It is the music that really matters
So, no matter what the numbers and the symbols that accompany the gadget are, they really don’t mean squat when you actually test the item. Actual experience has taught many of us that after a listening session, there have been many promising thigamajigs with great specs that have fallen short of their promise and there are those that may not have seemed promising at first which have exceeded our wildest expectations.
For me, amps prep-amps, speakers TVCs are like people. Some have impressive credentials and all those letters, symbols and titles that they adjunct to their names --- “specs” if you will --- but sadly fall short of our expectations because of what we hear out of them. But then again, there are those fellows who are obscure, ordinary and self-effacing but proved more of a pleasure to deal with and definitely more respectable while we are associated with them.
And in the end, the WS gurus and many of the plebeians say, it is the music that really matters above everything else, and I believe that includes “specs”.
Having said that, may I address the issues raised by Atty Dana, Squirrelnutzipper to you non-believers in specs:
It is not true that the question of specs of Rod’s TVC was not answered. If you had taken the time to search the related threads/posts and read the various forums, you would have come across this satisfactory reply of Tony (which had loooooooong been given) to questions re the specs akin to Mang Rod’s TVC:TonyC wrote:Comparing the innards to the promitheus it seems, from a newbie's point of view, that the MRTVC is similar to the promitheus. Kindly see Promitheus photo:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/e ... tvc_se.htm
Hope we see results soon...congrats to Mang Rod.
If there is anyone who can make an expert assessment in this regard, it would be good old Tony.
Reluctant as I would like to say it, but the reason why Mang Rod is unable to share the specs some clamor for is that he could not afford to purchase the expensive instruments to measure the specs that some of you cannot live without. All that he has is a Sanwa meter, an analog device, for crying out loud. It is not the easiest thing to admit, specially for folks with very modest means mind you, considering that Filipinos have the value of “hiya” (“sense of shame”). For anyone to insist that he should have long purchased these instruments would be downright condescending.
I confess that I am the schmoe that christened Mang Rod’s compactron phono pre amp the “tomato”. I called it so because the compactron tube resembles a small tomato. I beg your indulgence if I cannot satisfy the whims of others for the specs or to give a more scientific evaluation of the phono-pre’s attributes because, as I have said earlier, I am technically challenged for such a task. Honestly, I do not know what “topology” is. Is it the study of the earth’s surface? I also wonder at what “attenuation” means. Is it the ability of a soldier to stand rigid? I do not even know what a “squirrelnutzipper” is, either, if you will ask me. Is it a clothing device to cover the testicles of a rodent? If one will accuse me of being ignorant or apathetic about all this, all I can say is that I don’t know and I don’t care. In the end, it is how the “Tomato” will sound which matters most.
And so I describe my experiences with this wondrous MR creation more along metaphoric lines such as vitamins, minerals, healthy, good-for-you. ESaudio and i have a good chuckle when we refer to the 6c33c-b amp of Mang Rod as a "vampire". Is this such a bad idea considering my limited knowledge in things technical? More importantly, I do so because I want to have fun at it. Undeniably, I believe that this is what this hobby is all about: having fun and that to take it too seriously will only make me miserable.
vintage_dog wrote:asoka, can you please send me a PM explaining what is the point you are making and what this is all about.
Return to >> TRODT/AVA Audio <<
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest