Are you satisfied with your home Audio System?

[CapMan]

Yes, specifically since I realised that spending more and more on gear whilst remaining constrained by my listening room was a futile waste of money.

Downsizing to a perfectly capable AVR and using Dirac with well measuring speakers was all it took.

 

[DSJR]

I said 'No but' and really, the gear is little to do with it. I have a major issue in that I tend to bond with the stuff I have and there's a bit too much of it cluttering up the loft and garage now, none of it anything you lot would care about either!

I need to start flogging stuff and try a pair of wider directivity modern boxes to see how they work in our heavily damped sitting room and with my depleted hearing (my existing speakers sounded swell in my dealer pal's lively dem room). If I can start getting rid of the vintage amps I have piled up in storage, I'd return to built in actives in a heartbeat.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

For the last 4 days, yes. Before that, no. In the future, yes but... at some point.

The past 4 days, after new speakers and dialing them in, I just listened to music with no second thoughts. That's satisfied in my book.

 

[fcracer]

There is a vote in 2016, here https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ou-satisfied-with-your-home-audio-system.561/

I found it is very interesting that only 47% of the person who voted "Yes".

And we know it is the golden age of audio electronics now, because there are so many incredibly high performance, yet inexpensive product are released.

So what is the answer after nearly 8 years?

Purifi and Dirac have pretty much stopped my perpetual upgrade cycle. The combination of low distortion, ample power, and digital room correction have given me everything I ever wanted.

The only thing more I could ask for is better build quality and materials in my NAD M33. If they made a super masters version with metal everything and top tier parts, I’d pay another $2k for it and never upgrade again.

 

[Tell]

Purifi and Dirac have pretty much stopped my perpetual upgrade cycle. The combination of low distortion, ample power, and digital room correction have given me everything I ever wanted.

Same! Since I got my current speakers and my MiniDSP almost ten years ago I've started caring less and less about the rest. A good pair of properly placed speakers, DSP and at least absorptions for the early reflections really goes a LONG way.

 

[StefanSweden]

Yes, but I realize my setup is modest and I have not yet done any meassuremnts using Umik and REW, so I think it can sound better. Eventully I plan to go with actives since I dont like to tinker with different equipments and make it as minimalism as possible. I really love the look of Buchardt speakers. Have not yet listend to them.

 

[SSS]

Although I use very good equipment from the 1980ies the musical sound still very good. Since due to my age the hearing of beyond 12 kHz is dimmed no room EQ necessary. With big d'Appelito loudspeakers the bass is very natural. Power amp Crown with 2x 150 Watt is sufficient. Listen stored wav and flac files with my "music box" aka laptop with Audirvana and external DAC is perfect. Have also lot of LPs and a Thorens TD124 but don't use it anymore.

 

[Basic Channel]

It’s gotta be “yes, but” mainly because you never know until you improve something. So “yes but I don’t know what ceiling treatment would do, or a sub down to 20hz rather than 30hz”

And also “yes but when you get to a certain point (or age) it’s not that exciting a change”

 

[SSS]

Regarding room measurements I have the technical knowledge and equipment but hate the work needed because it will not be clear that I can get real improvement. So I skip this.

 

[Basic Channel]

Could probably do with four 8" loudnesswise yeah, but I want more of them to help with room modes and more even response in just one position in the room. Bigger subs tend to go lower as well which can be nice for movies

I suppose the benefit of having a living room like room 2 at Fabric in London is you don’t charge yourself 10-15 quid for a bottle of beer.

And you get to choose the tunes

 

[Willem]

Since due to my age the hearing of beyond 12 kHz is dimmed no room EQ necessary.

This is a misunderstanding. Room equalization is mostly or even only useful in the lower frequencies, below, say 300 Hz or even lower. And that part of your hearing does not deteriorate with age.

 

[vicenzo_del_paris]

Voted "Yes, but" regarding current room acoustic.
From a device and speaker perspective, it is a big Yes !
Unless something breaks at some point.

My listening room happens to also be our living room and treatment options are limited by room configuration and also by my wife

 

[ajramirez]

Yes, but I am always curious about how other components may sound in my room.

 

[FrantzM]

Not sure I understand the strikethroughs, but I enjoyed reading your story.

Agree 100% with your advice.

I should clarify.. the strikeout were for fun

I’d also like to both modernize and simplify my setup even further.

On my side I don't need to modernize or simplify the system. it is modern (as of 2024 ) and simple: AVR as the center of the system (2-CH and HT) and a DSP to control the subwoofers. Do not see the need and expanse for DLBC when MSO can do it for free (and a lot of research and work ). Is DLBC better than MSO, BTW?

That said, I have now dialed in my setup to such a high satisfaction level, that I wouldn’t mind if it turned out to be my last one.

So have I.Have dialed, painfully and slowly to a very high level of satisfaction but I can hear the limitations of my present transducers: LCR (LSR 308) do distort, audibly to me above 90 dB or SPL at the listening position.
The subwoofers, Dayton Audio SUB-1500 make strange , scary sounds when pushed to reproduce above 105 dB below 30 Hz.. They buzz and rattle and distortion is audible then...
The AVR is also rather old... It is a 2017~18 model, that I bough refurbished. not complaining about its performance and not in the camp of "separate sound bette".. but I wouldn't mind something like the Monoprice HTP-1 or for endgame, never to be replaced unless it fails or a Trinnov, yes... If I were to go in those directions, Class D amplifiers.. just because
For speakers, Revel F208 are strongly in consideration. If some Revel Salon 2 were to pass by, at a salacious price...

I do like active, I believe they can be better than passive. I live where there is no distribution or repair/support outlets for anything audiophile. OTOH, I can solder and diagnose and I do have backup amplifiers (Rotel 5-channel and a JBL Pro with 8 channels) ... So passive it will be.


Peace.

 

[Barrelhouse Solly]

What do you think is better?

I haven't shopped around. I'd like a little more headroom. Since I listen at relatively low volumes, hardly ever > 80 dB, power isn't a major consideration.

 

[coonmanx]

I haven't shopped around. I'd like a little more headroom. Since I listen at relatively low volumes, hardly ever > 80 dB, power isn't a major consideration.

Yeah, headroom isn't much of an issue for me. I remember when I bought into the NAD hype... That the 7140 had 3 dB of headroom. But then I got over that once I realized that I rarely needed that headroom and instead of buying a 40 wpc amp with 3 dB of headroom, I could simply buy a 100 wpc amp and be done with it. Like you, I rarely listen at high levels anymore. In fact 80 dB would be loud for me. These days I usually listen in the range of 60 to 70 dB. So my 100 wpc amp barely breaks a sweat. In the bedroom, where i generally listen at even lower levels so that I don't piss off my son in the next room, the 0.01 watt LEDs are the only ones that light up. One one-hundreth of a watt. LOL. So the 100 wpc amp still has 99.9 watts left in reserve. LOL.

And BTW, that bedroom amp is a recent purchase. It is a Scott SA231, an amp that was part of a rack system in the 80s. Some might even call it BPC. But the build quality is good, it has discrete outputs and a heavy transformer and sounds good. All for less than $100 of of the Bay... I know that people tend to look down on that era of Scott, but I now have a system in the bedroom that has a Scott CD player, a Scott tuner, a Scott integrated amplifier and a Toshiba EQ. Nothing fancy or super high end, but it does what it is supposed to do and that is make music that I can appreciate. I have no issues with that system at all besides a slight drawer issue with the CD player. Nothing that a new belt wouldn't fix however.

 

[SteveC]

I voted yes, but. Not due to any dissatisfaction with my current system, which I love. Picture me putting on a crash helmet now, since I'm about to admit that I mostly listen to vinyl. The thing about turntables is that they are a mechanical system. So, just like different tires or shocks can change how a car handles, changes to parts of the turntable can make a difference to the sound. I don't spend big bucks on cartridges, but I do enjoy playing "with" my stereo, as opposed to just listening. So, if a fun, relatively inexpensive cartridge that I don't already own should present itself, I just may grab it, put it in a headshell, and put it into rotation. Yes, I have an odd idea of what constitutes fun.

 

[MattHooper]

Regarding room measurements I have the technical knowledge and equipment but hate the work needed because it will not be clear that I can get real improvement. So I skip this.

Somewhat the same here.

I'm just not a "pocket protector" type who geeks out about measurements, and so the measurements stuff to me is off-putting drudgery. I'd do the work of measuring and then no doubt find an issue and then have to go about trying to solve it (e.g. in ways I don't care to bother with, room correction etc). My system sounds so good to me as it is, and the last thing I need is to be made explicitly aware of a room/node issue to think about when listening that I know I'm too lazy to address anyway.

Know Thyself is half the battle

*(My AV Receiver does room correction when I want for my surround system, which I set up many years ago, but even then I tend to prefer the uncorrected sound).

 

[Mart68]

Somewhat the same here.

I'm just not a "pocket protector" type who geeks out about measurements, and so the measurements stuff to me is off-putting drudgery. I'd do the work of measuring and then no doubt find an issue and then have to go about trying to solve it (e.g. in ways I don't care to bother with, room correction etc). My system sounds so good to me as it is, and the last thing I need is to be made explicitly aware of a room/node issue to think about when listening that I know I'm too lazy to address anyway.

Know Thyself is half the battle

yes that's pretty much where I am at with it also.

Plus I'm currently using an antique digital pre-amp. I can connect six VCRs to it, but not my laptop.

 

[DMill]

Yes, specifically since I realised that spending more and more on gear whilst remaining constrained by my listening room was a futile waste of money.

This is very good advice IMO. i bought a used home so my options for a proper listening space are very limited. Good news is I have a basement I can do whatever I want, and it is great condition to finish. Bad news is it would probably take about $40k to really make the room comfortable. In order to make the room to code I’d need to add some sort of egress, and that is just the beginning. It lacks anything beyond a concrete slab with a pool table in the middle. So flooring, drywall etc. It is dry and has electric. It can be done. I think I’ll complete the room around the same time Class D amps become yesterdays news and my hearing is shot anyway. LMAO. At least the next owner can play their Class E amps in a beautiful space.