A few revelations from the March 2018 Montreal HiFi show I attended.

 

Spoiler alert: this document veers towards the negative side.

​

​

I must admit that I’ve been an avid HiFi show visitor throughout the years. My first visit was over 20 years ago at the Montreal venue.

 

Now that I’m a “regular” attendee, it became clear that some brand representatives gave up on me, as they realized that I wasn’t a potential customer, and redirected their energies towards potential buyers. Fair enough. They have sales targets to meet, and I fully understand that putting bread on the table takes priority over my curiosity and concise questions.

 

I also learned plenty of things attending these shows, and used them as idea generators. Shows provided direction in my DIY quest. It was more apparent in my earlier days when budgets were more limited. DIY forums also took up way too much of my time.

 

A big shift from these shows eventually caused me to switch from using vacuum tubes to using only solid state. The shows slowly convinced me of the overall superiority of SS over tubes, and I never looked back. Whilst it’s been gradual, it’s been a 180 degree shift none the less, and all in part due to these shows and relatively slow learning on my part.

 

I started attending as a “brainwashed purist”, and would only consider single ended triode amplifiers, with no negative feedback, and then thinking that direct heated triodes (like the 300B) were the Holy Grail. Add a Lowther style crossover-less speaker system and I had everything I could ever dream of.  As a result, my system was just that. A cheap copycat of expensive systems I saw at Hifi shows. All I needed was a NOS cartridge to improve my Systemdek turntable. Adding to this was that  “vinyl+full-range+SET” was fashionable at the time.

 

HiFi shows also drew me to the magnificent qualities and frustrating limitations of electrostatic loudspeakers*. In fact, I owned ESL’s three different times. I still think about them every now and again, as they do offer some aspects better than any other electro-mechanical device.

*However, they can't meet "step one" described below.

 

I purchased various cables after quite convincing vendor demonstrations. I was part of the snake oil theory and bought suspicious products. I also bought quite a bit of “tweaker” apparatus from various vendors, after hearing the differences these vendors did swapping demos. Some products did make significant changes on a given system. I was ignorant and loving it, and salesman loved me too.

 

I still remember, returning from a show, and then playing my own system, only to be disappointed at the system’s lack of relative performance, versus what the expensive gear was capable of. I needed to throw more and more money at it, or get a better job, as my DIY efforts (very true in the vacuum tube phases) weren’t good enough.

A wealthy person, with no skill or understanding, could simply buy an expensive system and they’d  get significantly better sound, than my years of dedicated efforts and handpicked capacitors would ever do. And just to add insult to injury, the expensive products looked better as well, with their chrome and piano finishes etc.

 

I knew I needed a better system, but didn’t really know what to do. I decided I needed a  quick fix.

Better coupling capacitors, NOS tubes and expensive parts would surely make my system play better, as my transformers weren’t “new old stock” Western Electric, but affordable Hammond products. That, I thought, must have been the root cause of my problems. Those damn Hammond transformers and their mechanical buzz.

I had bought expensive “C37” (similar to violin varnish but priced as an audiophile product) and treated my then Lowther EX3 paper cones, in an attempt to improve on them. Subjective results of the C37 coating were more of difference than just improvement. Not too sure if it was worth doing.

 

While it may be easy building DIY loudspeakers, it’s not easy building great sounding ones.

 

 

***

 

 

Fast forward 20 years, and I’m still as active into the hobby as ever. Now, I see HiFi shows as simply a leisure time event.

I keep hoping a ground-breaking product will emerge, but it’s just not happening.

The best advancement in 20+ years has probably been the development of the Beryllium tweeter, and that’s not perfect either.

 

Some marketing departments often try to draw attention with big advertisements but usually, the rule is: “the bigger the claim, the bigger the disappointment”. Read some literature on PS Audio or DeVialet for some examples of bold claims. If you want a hard laugh, read the Shakti Innovation website.

 

I find that the same old products continue to be showcased in nicer boxes. With prices inching higher and higher, most products have serious basic flaws, which I couldn’t imagine living with. Flaws such as basic inter-driver time alignment not being factored in for 95% of loudspeakers sold. What the hell’s up with that? How about perfecting the square wheel next?

Under-damped tuning for a bass reflex system is still being manufactured today. What a shame, and mediocre sounding at best. (under-damping means that the woofer in a loudspeaker is in an enclosure smaller than the optimal size. This trick allows manufacturers to reduce the size of a box and cut costs, while deteriorating loudspeaker performance)

 

I don’t compare my system to showcased products anymore, regardless of their MSRP.

I use a better yardstick for reference. I judge my system against live music, I’m a regular classical music goer, and I attend most live music whenever I can, and I love the social aspect as well. The dynamics of live music are hard to reproduce and fooling the brain is tricky. Most expensive systems can’t come close to doing this. Ultimately, the function of HiFi is to trick the brain into believing there’s a live band in front of you.

 

My biggest general complaint of HiFi systems is insufficient playback capacity.

The fact is, that amplified or not, live music is loud.

A symphonic orchestra is capable of ~137 dB @ 3 meters!!!

Have you ever wondered why Beethoven was deaf?

Orchestras rarely play at their maximum level, and you rarely sit closer than 10 meters anyway. I still think reaching 115 dB for a fortissimo is the minimum capacity any HiFi system should do, 115 dB at the listening position.

 

I simply lose interest if a system isn’t capable of doing this most basic “imitation”.

Step one is that you should imitate the intensity of the sound you’re trying to reproduce, if you want it be credible.

However, 95% of speaker systems at a typical HiFi show aren’t capable of reproducing 115 dB at all, let alone at less than 5% distortion.

If step one of high-fidelity reproduction is already broken, then why bother to continue? Who cares if the soundstage is great, when everything collapses as you crank up the volume to just over 95 dB. Yawn…

 

The requirements for designing a loudspeaker with 115+ dB capacity is based on The Laws of Physics. You can’t cheat physics, unless of course you capitulate and choose to use headphones.

 

Don’t think that this single pair of “high tech” 10-inch woofers in this very expensive floor stander will break Physics Laws and cleanly reproduce 115 dB @ 32 Hz. They just won’t. No matter how beautiful they are, how much technology is claimed to be used and what badge they wear.

​

I still appreciate HiFi shows, but I feel as though the student has surpassed the master.

Thanks to the internet, doing a proper system isn’t very hard. The information is easily available.

​

The bullet points described below I couldn’t do 20 years ago… despite trying hard.

I learned, understood physics and used proper technology to achieve good results.

​

I’m glad I did because:

• I can now easily reproduce dynamics of 120+ dB at the listening position.

• I can distort less than 5% when I play realistically loud through the full frequency bandwidth. (in fact, < 5% @ 20 Hz)

• I achieve a time coherent frontal wave front for good speaker integration and proper waveform launch, thanks to digital delays and DSP.

• I didn’t spend millions of dollars to achieve realistic, better sound than I ever thought possible. (Though not exactly cheap either)

• I can correct for major room mode through use of clever digital sound processing. (DSP isn’t a magic cure, but a tool)

• I have a fairly constant reverberation time through the audio frequency, thanks to fairly effective acoustic treatments. (But they are ugly and visually dominate the room)

• I have a listening position giving me 7 Hz to ~22 kHz @ +-6 dB. (Very flat system response for ~7’ listening distance in a fairly small room, and using horn speakers)

• Use of room acoustic treatments gives me a natural, flatter response resulting in minimized  DSP use.

• Active speakers are used with independent, ample amplifier power reserve per driver, ensuring good dynamics can be reproduced, otherwise called “headroom”

• Power compression is very limited by means of very high efficiency and over capable system in a home listening environment (vs stadium requirement requiring 140+ dB)

 

The last bullet point explains why the Japanese use big over-sized vintage high efficiency loudspeakers in smaller rooms. They understand something most westerners don’t. Dynamic range, effortless sound and SPL capacity are something that requires specific requirements (i.e.: big size does matter).

 

How on earth could I, without any engineering training or research department, progress faster than the industry? All of those points above are usually used in studios and by professionals, nothing is a secret here, I've learned it from somewhere. Yet, most audiophiles remain 35+ years behind the progress curve, and still try to improve archaic technology such as vinyl playback, instead of embracing newer technological improvements.

 

I still believe that basic common tweaks often help. (Isolation cones for example)

They represent tiny, little baby steps on the progress scale.

Baby steps get you moving forward yes. However, I’d rather embark on a plane and get there fast, instead of hoping to get there.

This means active crossovers, digital playback, DSP, multi-way and such.

 

The HiFi of today is just barely better than 20 years ago.

• Vinyl is still being manufactured.

• Turntables still often rely on belts instead of servo-controlled loops.

• Cartridges. Are we still playing vinyl? Why?

• Amplifiers are still very noisy as SNR specifications haven't improved much in 20 years.

• Loudspeakers are still designed with passive crossovers, and often have several major flaws in their time coherency.

• Beautiful real wood veneers are replaced by shiny multiple coats of “piano finish” black. (This one is personal preference, but it doesn’t make the speaker better.)

• Emphasis is on products when room acoustics dominate results below the Schroeder frequency. (~160 Hz – 200 Hz)

​

To my earlier point, a "wealthy person" could just show up at a HiFi show, write a fat cheque and obtain superior, realistic sound reproduction as a "turnkey” product. That simply isn’t true any longer.

​

Realistic sound reproduction exists and is possible, but you need to do it yourself, as the industry is clearly not doing it for you.

Big money gets you a nicer box, and that’s about it…IMHO.​

​

 

Remember, I have a French mother tongue, doing my best to express myself in the Shakespeare language.

Thanks to a friend, Bevis, most of my website has been corrected for proper English grammar, much easier read now :)