Doesn’t really surprise me. I have always been of the opinion that the impact of having equipment in between speakers is miniscule and am always very surprised when people on forums such as this suggest otherwise.
i would say that there are 2 reasons for that: the cost saved in long speakers wires. The accessibility for components behind the rack: it’s easier to connect cables and swap between components.
For myself, in my room and system, it sounded better with nothing between speakers.
I don’t particularly find journalists’ systems interesting - not least because you don’t know if they are really their choice of system, or what they happen to have at the time. I ignored the previous thread, but I just had a glance here and noted that there is a relatively high proportion of pretty large rooms, otherwise little in common, and interestingly some rooms with acoustic treatment, and others looking as if they must have terrible reflections muddying the sound.
But I am interested to know what those speakers are in pics 8 and 10: Not the ones evidently under review, Wilsons in pic 8 and whatever in 10, but the ones lurking behind, with brown grilles and wood sides maybe the reviewer’s own.
some systems i posted before were showing even more problematic rooms. My last thread was closed and i have only the photos as back up. So difficult for me now to give details.
The picture 10 shows Kharma speakers.
You can like or dislike IB, but it’s the reality of the journalists system, at least a fraction of them.
Exactly.
Thx Rooster,
One audio journalist was mainly running Audio Note, into Harbeths from memory. He has now moved to McIntosh as he finds it a better reviewing tool, not for absolute sound quality.
I think that journalists have the privilege of listening to a wide range of kit, but they also need to keep and run a variety due to the demands of putting together a synergistic system; and they always have the consistent limiting factor of their rooms.
Still always good to have a gander at what kit they are running and using to make their judgements.
M
1 Like
I think the Kharmas may be the speakers in Pic 12. Pics 8 and 10 are the same room as each other - the room with the Statement amps. It’s the speakers in the background in the corners that I was querying.
As for these being the reality of journalists systems, my comment about not myself finding the systems particularly interesting was simply a statement of fact, and certainly not a criticism of you posting. However as I said, I certainly don’t think they are all the journalists personal choice of gear, some very much seeming to me being equipment on test. (Witness the two different main speakers in pics 8 and 10, not to mention the two different sets of amps.)
on the pics with Statement amp and Dcs sources, the first speakers are Wilson and the second are Focal Kanta. Behind are hideous big acoustic panels.
I agree that components are not always the same, as you said and as Mr Underhill pointed.
A lot of staff under review, so components are often changing.
Are those 4ft or so square units in the corners bass absorbers, or speakers? If absorbers, it is odd that they don’t match the absorbers hanging on on the back wall which is why I wondered if they are speakers… but actually the front fabric colour is the same, so maybe you’re right. If so, a well damped room.
perhaps too damped. Lot of acoustic panels in that room.
Audioarts show room/ New York city.
The room is made on special floating floor. Cost no object system with Zellaton Statement speakers, Fm Acoustics electronics, Le Son Ls001 dac, Brinkman Balance turntable.
Le Son Ls001 dac ( 40k)
1 Like
well known audio journalists, with nice gear but somehow problematic rooms:
Michael Fremer
Ken Kessler
Art Dudley
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.