 |
| Letters -- December 2005 Room correction? December 26, 2005 To Jeff Fritz, Your newest "The World's Best Audio System" is quite interesting. I applaud you for showing the measurements of your room. This is something all reviewers should be required to do. A coloration introduced by your room will invariably affect all of the equipment placed in your room unless that equipment actually corrects for nonlinearities. And that brings me to my question: Will you be trying any actual room-correction components once you have your final acoustic measurements? Roland Fairclothe A very good question. I think the answer is, "It depends." It really does wholly depend on the final room measurements, not to mention the final sound. Preferably, I'd rather not introduce any signal-altering components in the signal path. Keeping the chain of components as uncorrupted as possible usually produces the best sound. However, if there are nonlinearities that simply can't be corrected for any other way, and if audibly they are so intrusive as to escape my mind's internal correction, perhaps the lesser of two evils would be some form of in-line active correction. Although most audiophiles reject such methods -- and I have counted myself in that camp for most of my life -- I do realize the acoustic reality that often is unavoidable. I honestly believe that most audiophiles live with a greatly colored room, whether they know it or not. Measurements, and some corrective action, would yield results far more dramatic than any component change; this makes far greater sense than trying to flavor the sound with power-cord swaps, and the like....Jeff Fritz Digital speakers? December 6, 2005 To Ross Mantle, As a budding audio enthusiast, I really enjoy reading your Opinion Archives. I did find the article about compressed vs. uncompressed audio very interesting. Anyway, I was hoping for some help and advice. Are there any active loudspeakers that support digital inputs? Young and broke, I cannot afford the BeoLab 5 or the Meridian 8000s, so I was hoping for an under-$5000 solution. Being a fan of conserving space and technology integration, I intend to run the speakers using a high-end sound card from my HP z555, because all my content is digital anyway (256kbps Mp3s mostly). As a telecommunications engineer, to me the digital format is inherently superior (if done right) and I really want a speaker that supports optical communication between source and itself to get rid of line attenuation. Hopefully all this is not sounding utterly blasphemous. On another note, with computing power extremely cheap, why aren’t we seeing more high-end speakers use the digital approach? Do an FFT on the input signal, chop it up at the right places, do the D/A conversion, and send the appropriate chunks of signal information to the right speaker. Of course, my 65-year-old audiophile father will be shocked by such thoughts. S.A. I'm no high priest, but I don't think anything you're saying would offend the audio gods. Mother Nature herself seems to share your opinion on the inherent superiority of digital for transmitting information (see "Is the Brain Analog or Digital?"). So-called digital speakers -- that is, speakers with built-in digital-to-analog converters (DACs) and amplifiers -- have two major theoretical advantages. The analog signal path is as short as it can get, and both the DAC and the amplifier(s) can be optimized precisely to the properties of the speaker. There are also some disadvantages. The DAC and amplifier(s) are subject to vibrations within the cabinet, which tends to cause nasty electromechanical feedback distortion. This also applies to crossovers, which is why some manufacturers place them outside the speaker. Heat dispersion is another problem, as is the space occupied within the speaker by the various power supplies and electronics. The other thing that is not widely appreciated is that digital signals are not free from transmission artifacts. Different digital cables on my DAC, for example, sound markedly different from one another even though the information is purely digital. The real reason why digital speakers are so rare, however, is marketing psychology. Speaking from experience, the purchase of expensive gear is rationalized as a long-term investment. Audiophiles simply will not buy a component that does not enhance their previous "investments." An audiophile who has an amplifier, for example, wouldn't consider purchasing active speakers because then his amplifier is no longer an investment. There is also The Quest For The Perfect Match, a form of satyriasis that has audiophiles constantly searching for the magic component that will make their system sing. If you don't suffer from these behaviors now, you sound like you will soon. For these reasons, the very best (and most expensive) gear is usually found in the form of separate components. With regard to your question, the only products that come to mind are the ones you mention. I have heard that there are a number of low-cost digital speaker systems designed for computers that use digital active speakers which could fit your bill. I think a computer can be a top-notch digital source, but I suspect you won't find digital speakers for less than $5000 that are very good. My advice is to take your $5000, get on Audiogon, and find yourself an audiophile-grade DAC, an inexpensive triode tube amp, and some sensitive speakers, then feed these from your computer. For a start, I could recommend a California Audio Labs tube DAC, a Connoisseur triode amp, and some used JMlab Electra floorstanders or Cobalt monitors with Cardas cables. With a little bit of care, you'll get great sound....Ross Mantle
Ultra Audio is part of the SoundStage! Network. |
