PDA

View Full Version : digital auido? Ye or ney?



tommyk90
07-23-2005, 12:29 AM
What do you guys think of digital audio for home stuff? I have an opportunity to pick of some floor standing speakers pretty cheap, and was just wondering what you guys think of them.:)

stones
07-23-2005, 12:34 AM
I had the chance to listen to some DA speakers, I thought they sounded really nice.

JimJ
07-23-2005, 12:34 AM
Got a link?

tommyk90
07-23-2005, 12:37 AM
Got a link?

No link that i can find, but i'll see what i can do.

stones
07-23-2005, 12:40 AM
I looked on their website to find the speakers I listened to and they only seem to list car audio stuff, maybe they dont manufacture the Ht stuff anymore??.

creater
07-23-2005, 01:06 AM
digital is kool...sounds nice and sweet

PV Audio
07-23-2005, 12:43 PM
old school is still better

JimJ
07-23-2005, 12:59 PM
old school is still better

Well, yes...but some newer brands are pretty good if you don't have special requirements or anything :)

Fluance, Streem, Energy, Athena, stuff like that.

I've just never heard of Digital Audio speakers before, hence my curiousity.

PV Audio
07-24-2005, 02:24 AM
Well, yes...but some newer brands are pretty good if you don't have special requirements or anything :)

Fluance, Streem, Energy, Athena, stuff like that.

I've just never heard of Digital Audio speakers before, hence my curiousity.
pretty good for checking out perhaps. i say that because if these new comers with their insane radical techniques are so revolutionary, why are we still learning basic and fundamental loudspeaker technologies from 1983 articles on standing waves and cross-bracing. seriously though (this isn't directed towards anyone on here, but to these bullshit audiophile companies), loudspeaker technology hasn't changed in the past 30+ years. if it had, then people wouldn't be selling speaker repair kits for 1977 advent woofers. if it had, people wouldn't buy klipsch speakers. along the same lines, not many people even understand wtf a horn loaded (i love me my armenians :D), heaven forbid an aperiodic enclosure is. ****in loudspeaker fundamentals were developed in the 30's and the technology cannot change. it amazes me when people come out with "new-wave" piston materials like BILLET CONE WITH MAGNESIUM DUST CAP, while anyone with half an iota of knowledge could argue into the ground (including myself) that a paper cone will produce the most natural sound which is why they are generally used in midranges and very rarely in tweeters because they tend to break up at high frequencies. if your fcking new products are so **** good, gimme a coronal cut of one of your cabinets so i can see just how great it is. what'll I find? probably some roofing felt with pioneer OEM drivers and some plywood bracing. anyone realize why the forerunners in loudspeaker information wrote their books decades ago? LDC by Dickason (which i just finished :D) is not a new book as it is in it's sixth addition. i wish these audiophiles would take a look and see how retarded they look with their fancy new interconnects that need time to be conditioned before using them. people selling ****ing horn enclosures for 75 grand or the best to date, someone selling a 100000 tube amplifier and saying that it is cutting edge technology. cutting edge my ***, the only people who use vacuum tubes are people who enjoy their unique warm sound, people who are hobbyists (thats about 80%) and then the people who think that the technology is so interesting and "brand-new" that they mark up the prices on their SET's to 50000 and actually have unknowing filthy rich "audiophiles" swarm on them. people go out and see "high tech" looking rhomboidal enclosures when the claimed most transparent loudspeaker was a Celestion honey comb aluminum tower built in the late 70s to early 80s. **** i said alot but heres some cliffs

1. **** "audiophiles". nothing is good sound unless they think it is. money does not make good sound which is evident from the entire population of diyaudio.com

2. **** "groundbreaking" technology from the funk era. nothing has changed (except for planar speakers which are technically not electrodynamic loudspeakers"

and finally

3. **** people that buy the above **** thinking that their tube amplifiers are something greater than the original amplifiers ever created that would make your lights dim because they draw so much current


thats all, i just got fed up today after finishing Dickason's book and stupidly picking up an issue of The Atrocious (Absolute) Sound

JimJ
07-24-2005, 02:34 AM
loudspeaker technology hasn't changed in the past 30+ years.

The physical laws governing acoustics haven't changed, but there certainly have been advances in loudspeaker technology...the current trend of ultra-high-excursion subwoofers are testament to that - you didn't have drivers with that much linear throw available back ten or twenty years ago. Whether or not the new technology is better is, of course, entirely subjective.


and then the people who think that the technology is so interesting and "brand-new" that they mark up the prices on their SET's to 50000 and actually have unknowing filthy rich "audiophiles" swarm on them.

The same people that think cryo-treating their power cables will get them a better soundstage, or buy expensive adapters to burn in their RCA interconnects before use.


and stupidly picking up an issue of The Atrocious (Absolute) Sound

Bad Lemans! Bad Lemans! Go read a copy of Stereophool while you're at it...:D

PV Audio
07-24-2005, 02:52 AM
The physical laws governing acoustics haven't changed, but there certainly have been advances in loudspeaker technology...the current trend of ultra-high-excursion subwoofers are testament to that - you didn't have drivers with that much linear throw available back ten or twenty years ago. Whether or not the new technology is better is, of course, entirely subjective.



The same people that think cryo-treating their power cables will get them a better soundstage, or buy expensive adapters to burn in their RCA interconnects before use.



Bad Lemans! Bad Lemans! Go read a copy of Stereophool while you're at it...:D
yes this is what I am referring to. i undersand that the physical nature of constructing a driver may be different, the actual parameters for constructing a normal ED piston, motor and VC driver haven't. but look in today's speakers :( the only people who know wtf they're doing are the people that pioneered it (the likes of wilbur klipsch's company and the geniuses as jbl (wanna make sound? move air :D )). these retarded companies who think they have something new need to look at just where they learned how to build a speaker in the first place. no doubt from a 1980s book on how beveled edges reduce cabinet resonace :D

**** at least someone knows where i'm comin from