Argo Duck
Formerly known as "AiDee"
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Posts
- 2,245
- Likes
- 430
A note about the Taboo as speaker amp, even when the speakers are mid-quality and being used improperly...
I was telling my (very understanding) wife about Steve's new Taboo, and - should I buy one - what I might do with the old one. In our everyday TV room we have a simple M-Audio 2.1 set-up for sound, which I dropped in after our KEF surround system blew up for the 2nd time. The M-Audio system is meant as a PC-based near-field 'monitor' system, and performs ok for TV purposes.
We decided we'd try the Taboo with the M-Audios. I didn't bother bringing the CSP2 around - so the sub was left out.
Well, we were both amazed how good the little M-Audio satellites sounded! The was such good weight and body the sub wasn't missed at all. There was more presence - voices stood out clearly and were much more distinct. Or, as I'm sure TV is mixed for voice anyway in most cases, its more likely Taboo was simply delivering its usual clarity and transparency. It was striking how clearly vocal details registered e.g. changes in voice from the same actor in different scenes (he appeared to have a mild cold during one part of the shoot, which showed up in two distinct scenes about 30 minutes apart in the finished production), and voice changes as actors moved about wrt microphone and room.
Going back to the M-Audio's amp (built-in to the sub; sub level zeroed for comparison), it's very apparent how muddy and indistinct its sound is, and just how little resolution it has.
I quickly moved the Taboo back to my study, before my wife got too used to the improved sound
In the event, I've decided probably not to buy the new Taboo. On Decware's thread about the new amp Steve clarified that the difference is "the new LUCID mode, giving you an optionally wider soundstage with about 10 times the detail. IF you find yourself drawn to this listening mode, there will be no comparison. IF not, then it will be the same basic amplifier but with more resolution from the Cryo'd Beeswax caps [which outperform VCAPs Steve says in the same thread].".
I was telling my (very understanding) wife about Steve's new Taboo, and - should I buy one - what I might do with the old one. In our everyday TV room we have a simple M-Audio 2.1 set-up for sound, which I dropped in after our KEF surround system blew up for the 2nd time. The M-Audio system is meant as a PC-based near-field 'monitor' system, and performs ok for TV purposes.
We decided we'd try the Taboo with the M-Audios. I didn't bother bringing the CSP2 around - so the sub was left out.
Well, we were both amazed how good the little M-Audio satellites sounded! The was such good weight and body the sub wasn't missed at all. There was more presence - voices stood out clearly and were much more distinct. Or, as I'm sure TV is mixed for voice anyway in most cases, its more likely Taboo was simply delivering its usual clarity and transparency. It was striking how clearly vocal details registered e.g. changes in voice from the same actor in different scenes (he appeared to have a mild cold during one part of the shoot, which showed up in two distinct scenes about 30 minutes apart in the finished production), and voice changes as actors moved about wrt microphone and room.
Going back to the M-Audio's amp (built-in to the sub; sub level zeroed for comparison), it's very apparent how muddy and indistinct its sound is, and just how little resolution it has.
I quickly moved the Taboo back to my study, before my wife got too used to the improved sound
In the event, I've decided probably not to buy the new Taboo. On Decware's thread about the new amp Steve clarified that the difference is "the new LUCID mode, giving you an optionally wider soundstage with about 10 times the detail. IF you find yourself drawn to this listening mode, there will be no comparison. IF not, then it will be the same basic amplifier but with more resolution from the Cryo'd Beeswax caps [which outperform VCAPs Steve says in the same thread].".
