What was your best (and worst) audio purchase for the dollar?

[Angsty]

I worked for a defense communication company that was relocating down to Dallas area. Our Metrology department decided some of the old test equipment was not worth moving down south, so we had an employees only bulk sale and all items were being sold for $1.00 per pound.
...I owned that - original issue - McIntosh MC275 for over 20 happy years... until it was pried off of my hands by a Japanese fellow for $6000.


ADD: MC275 weighed 75 pounds.

This deserves more than a "thumb up" - absolutely, freakin' amazing!!

 

[Hear Here]

Actually I just want to hear what is on the recording reproduced as accurately as possible, so the Benchmark and ATCs for me.
Keith

What, even if it sounds mediocre and you are inclined to turn down the volume?

 

[antcollinet]

What, even if it sounds mediocre and you are inclined to turn down the volume?

How can it sound mediocre if it is an accurate reproduction of the recording. Unless that particular recording is mediocre. In which case the solution is not to use an amp that makes the reproduction less accurate, but to either;

not listen to that recording (why would you want to listen to mediocre recordings?)
or
Use tone controls or EQ to adjust the response just for that recording - rather than bugger up the reproduction for everything.

Of course - it could be that your speaker/room interaction makes everything sound mediocre with a neutral amp (but now you have a non-accurate reproduction created by the room).

In this case, (again) the solution is not to try to find an amp that randomly happens to compensate for the qualities of that poor interaction, but to actively use room treatment and/or EQ to fix it. That way if the room or speakers ever change, you can just update the EQ, rather than needing to change your electronics to again find a random combination that happens to suit your room.

 

[Sal1950]

How can it sound mediocre if it is an accurate reproduction of the recording. Unless that particular recording is mediocre. In which case the solution is not to use an amp that makes the reproduction less accurate, but to either;

Agreed !

Use tone controls or EQ to adjust the response just for that recording - rather than bugger up the reproduction for everything.

Funny how we've gone full circle in Hi Fi.
From the earliest days forward we were always working to improve the accuracy of our gear which "back in the day" had
it's problems at every stop in the road. We went so far as to eliminate anything in the path that could potentially cause distortions etc such as tone controls, loudness buttons, balance controls, etc; anything besides a volume control, with passive preamps being all the rage. Today we've reached a point with the electronic path where complete transparency is easily accomplished at a very low cost, and many extremely neutral speakers are available.
So now we're at a point where the source is many times a weak link and once again we look for ways to modify the source in search of improvement. Tone controls to DRC, room treatments and all the rest are popular again to make minor tweaks in search of a final result a bit better.
But IMHO, the use of colored components or speakers that cast the same veil of distortion or coloration over everything played is the exact opposite of what this passion was and is all about. "Sounds good to me" and "personal preference" is not a full time addition you want to cripple your music reproduction system with. A large majority of modern digital recordings and many old analog ones offer the opportunity to listen in extremely closely to the sound the artist and production crew heard in the studio. That to me is the ultimate goal of High Fidelity.
YMMV

 

[WillBrink]

I have had generally good experiences overall over the decades. I didn't have a hard regret for any purchases, only things that didn't always live up to expectations/needs and were sold/traded in. I did buy B&W some 803D v2 at one point as I'd added a large addition to my house and the set up I had didn't fill it. The dealer gave me a great deal on them and they worked out fine at the time. They sounded decent, but I knew I could do better for less $. Once I moved from NE -> FL and a smaller house, I sold them for decent $. Ended up with ATC SCM 19s and subs, and that's a far better set up to my ears/brain.

 

[Hear Here]

How can it sound mediocre if it is an accurate reproduction of the recording. Unless that particular recording is mediocre. In which case the solution is not to use an amp that makes the reproduction less accurate, but to either;

not listen to that recording (why would you want to listen to mediocre recordings?)
or
Use tone controls or EQ to adjust the response just for that recording - rather than bugger up the reproduction for everything.

Of course - it could be that your speaker/room interaction makes everything sound mediocre with a neutral amp (but now you have a non-accurate reproduction created by the room).

In this case, (again) the solution is not to try to find an amp that randomly happens to compensate for the qualities of that poor interaction, but to actively use room treatment and/or EQ to fix it. That way if the room or speakers ever change, you can just update the EQ, rather than needing to change your electronics to again find a random combination that happens to suit your room.

I wasn't talking about mediocre recordings but the fact that some equipment may measure well but make even the.most wonderful recordings sound less than exciting. I gave a couple of examples.

The best sounding equipment is likely to have some "character" that makes its sound spectacular. For example SETs don't measure well but often sound wonderful, particular when feeding horns that also often fare poorly in the lab.

I tend to ignore the last page of a Stereophile review (measurements) and carefully read the text before arranging an audition. If the reviewer is a true expert (not YouTube pundits of course) their description and authorstive comparisons with other equipment are more useful than a waterfall chart.

Music has to satisfy the ears, not the oscilloscope! The Benchmark has great features and measures superbly but it delivers a dull and uninvolved rendition compared with many of the other amps I bought or home demo'd 3 years ago when I compared 12 amps to select the one I most enjoyed.

 

[Purité Audio]

Fine measuring equipment will simply be transparent, so if you choose blameless electronics and a pair of transparent ( or at least as close as possible) loudspeakers and pay attention to the loudspeaker/room interaction you will hear a faithful or high-fidelity reproduction of the file.
I have never found adding distortion makes the sound more exciting just coloured.
Keith

 

[JeremyFife]

Best, and worst is the Topping PA5 amplifier

My first foray into a measurement-based purchase, this change in thinking stopped my "hi-fi" upgrade plans dead and saved me a ton of money.
But ... I was an early adopter, buying soon after Amirm's review and before the problems were reported. Mine promptly failed and I spent frustrating weeks trying to get it repaired (I'd missed the return window).
That was a learning experience!

It's repaired now, and honestly it's just a brilliant wee amp. A constant reminder to do due diligence before buying, and also that great electronics don't have to be expensive. I live with occasional fear that it will fail again - but I've had it long enough now to be happy and I know I can replace it with something better for not very much money at all.
More importantly, I spend more time enjoying music and less time thinking it would sound better if I just bought better cables.

Everything I've bought since has been brilliant (WiiM mini, Genelec 8030C, Matrix Audio i2s, Topping L50, Sennheiser 560)

 

[Sal1950]

The best sounding equipment is likely to have some "character" that makes its sound spectacular. For example SETs don't measure well but often sound wonderful, particular when feeding horns that also often fare poorly in the lab.

That's your opinion and one in which you are fully entitled to. But it is very sadly mis-guided.
But you really do need to think about your claims here. What your hearing from the sound of this poorly measuring gear is distortion and other various inaccuracies applied to the reproduction of the source. That is not High Fidelity, it's Poor Fidelity.

 

[antcollinet]

I wasn't talking about mediocre recordings but the fact that some equipment may measure well but make even the.most wonderful recordings sound less than exciting. I gave a couple of examples.

The best sounding equipment is likely to have some "character" that makes its sound spectacular. For example SETs don't measure well but often sound wonderful, particular when feeding horns that also often fare poorly in the lab.

I tend to ignore the last page of a Stereophile review (measurements) and carefully read the text before arranging an audition. If the reviewer is a true expert (not YouTube pundits of course) their description and authorstive comparisons with other equipment are more useful than a waterfall chart.

Music has to satisfy the ears, not the oscilloscope! The Benchmark has great features and measures superbly but it delivers a dull and uninvolved rendition compared with many of the other amps I bought or home demo'd 3 years ago when I compared 12 amps to select the one I most enjoyed.

Again - you are simply talking about your preference. Don't make the mistake of thinking that because you like "character" (whatever you think that actually is) that anyone else will like the same thing.

And by far the best way of adding character is to take neutral equipment and then adjust the frequency response (or even add distortion) as desired. Then you can take it away again when your tastes change.

 

[antcollinet]

More importantly, I spend more time enjoying music and less time thinking it would sound better if I just bought better cables.

Yes - or whatever else you want to put in place of cables in that sentence.

This is the joy of having your eyes opened by the knowledge available here.

 

[Sal1950]

And by far the best way of adding character is to take neutral equipment and then adjust the frequency response (or even add distortion) as desired. Then you can take it away again when your tastes change.

AMEN

 

[Hear Here]

That's your opinion and one in which you are fully entitled to. But it is very sadly mis-guided.
But you really do need to think about your claims here. What your hearing from the sound of this poorly measuring gear is distortion and other various inaccuracies applied to the reproduction of the source. That is not High Fidelity, it's Poor Fidelity.

The problem there is that if the 2.9k (?) BM amp is as perfect as its measurements suggest, why should anyone consider a 10-20K amp, particularly if it didn't measure quite so well?

Certainly there are better sounding amps than the BM as otherwise everyone would just buy a BM.

Explain please where my logic is flawed.

 

[MattHooper]

The problem there is that if the 2.9k (?) BM amp is as perfect as its measurements suggest, why should anyone consider a 10-20K amp, particularly if it didn't measure quite so well?

Certainly there are better sounding amps than the BM as otherwise everyone would just buy a BM.

Explain please where my logic is flawed.

1. Because people can imagine differences between amps, and “prefer“ what they imagine to be better.

2. In the case an amp does happen to sound different, it’s still might be bias effects that leads someone to prefer the amp with more distortion. So it could be the looks or reputation of the amp driving the preference, or just the bias of that listener.

3. If it happens an amplifier does have audible distortion, a listener may prefer that distortion. “Better” in that respect becomes a preference.

 

[WillBrink]

The problem there is that if the 2.9k (?) BM amp is as perfect as its measurements suggest, why should anyone consider a 10-20K amp, particularly if it didn't measure quite so well?

Certainly there are better sounding amps than the BM as otherwise everyone would just buy a BM.

Explain please where my logic is flawed.

Does that not describe Pass Labs?

 

[Timcognito]

BEST: Coming to ASR for free and learning every way to analyze and improve my sound systems

WORST: Coming to ASR and obsessing over every way to analyze and improve my sound systems then buying new stuff, obsessing over it

Oh well it is a hobby after all

 

[Oddball]

WORST: List too long to be interesting, or to even remember. But at one point, long, long time ago, I bought some tubes directly from Russia, as they were supposedly (potentially) existing only there. It was around $1k when that was real money. The guy did ship the stuff, but it was worth $20. And getting it customs cleared in the US was such a pain that I will remember that for life. Ended up with the customs, as the invoice and the shipment did not match.

BEST: Gallo Reference 3.5 speakers, Bryston 4B SST and Rotel RB 1070 - even after 15-ish years, these things are amazing and make me happy. It was 7.1 system that grew into a bigger one over time. Also M&K 12" sub, sadly forgot the model. My first sub, bought in 1998, was almost as good as the first date

 

[Sal1950]

Does that not describe Pass Labs?

Pass Labs amps really can't be narrowed down like that as Nelson does make a VERY wide variety
of amps. Some designed to be fairly accurate, cost a fortune and look it. Others have been definitely voiced to sound
a certain way and don't cost a fortune, others aimed to the DIY guys and their own little niche..

Why a 10-20k amp, when you see a Pass, D'Agustino, etc, you know the owner spent big money.
They are fricken beautiful works of art.
The BM will supply SOTA sound quality but won't impress anyone visually.

 

[Hear Here]

1. Because people can imagine differences between amps, and “prefer“ what they imagine to be better.

2. In the case an amp does happen to sound different, it’s still might be bias effects that leads someone to prefer the amp with more distortion. So it could be the looks or reputation of the amp driving the preference, or just the bias of that listener.

3. If it happens an amplifier does have audible distortion, a listener may prefer that distortion. “Better” in that respect becomes a preference.

That's about as logical as "Either the Moon is made of cheese or it isn't made of cheese. We know that it isn't made of cheese, therefore it is made if cheese" QED.

 

[Golftee99]

Best: Sansui AU-717 integrated amp bought new in 1978, gave to daughter and it’s still working!!!
Worst: Sony DVP S9000ES, beautifully built and expensive, can barely play SACD discs from beginning to end without skipping or not playing at all with “errors” flashing, then the freaking disc drawer would be stuck, you have to keep pressing the eject button or pry it out, what a POS!!! I felt cheated!
Best: I’m happy to discover ASR, Amir reviews and tests that ended up saving me money for recent upgrades (Hypex Nilai DIY500 stereo x 2 winks winks!)