whitedragem
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2010
- Posts
- 619
- Likes
- 631
Interesting take, but somewhat questionable if the M11+ Ltd (with AKMs) has worse spec numbers (as it does)...
Sabre chips are GREAT for benchmarking and 'spec sheets'.
Other companies that focused on 'audio first' often put out kit that doesn't benchmark so well, yet sounds vastly more musical. (To those who 'listen')..
I have ALWAYS downgraded my kit, when buying 'better equipment' when specs are to be believed.
Specs are a guide to whether it is built right.
Companies that tune for sound quality usually detune the 'perfect specs' until it sounds good.
I know many people like reading 'the best numbers' on their spec sheets; any spec sheet warring (at all) suggests this SHOULD be the pursuit.. but the reality is, specs that are 'good enough' and a sound profile that is musical should be the pursuit.
I am one of the few who seek out the 'version one' Panasonic UB9000 uhd/4k player: it uses AKMs, where as the replacement has jumped to sabre chips.
In this instance I actually feel that the sabre chips are actually 'better' parts, due to their lineup positioning (the AKMs in the version one model are typical mid tier stuff that finds its way into mass market surround receivers/soundbars etc), but it simply comes down to design philosophies; some companies put 'music first', some KNOW THAT the best best spec sheet numbers alone will win them market position.
I know MOST will disagree with what I am saying here, and it took me over a decade to find myself questioning some of these 'truths'.
The scientist in me was happy trusting specs alone, and I am no muso, so didn't trust my gut feeling on too many occaisions.
The amount of times I have bought vastly better kit, that has 'worse' spec sheet numbers, is insane...
That being said, some measurements I seek as 'minimums' for any class of kit, and as long as those minimums are met, then I have faith that it is 'built right'.
Valve components do force me to concede a few specs sheet lines, and I do so happily.. (my valve mono blocks are preferable to most of my kit that 'flogs them' (by the spec sheet), it doesn't take an audiophile to figure this out either... just watch the people in the room.. good kit gets toes tapping, well 'measuring kit' can often be so lifeless it is simply fatiguing, and most say' yes, "lovely" and are keen to get out of the room and enjoy a hot beverage, turning their visit to other pursuits 'more social'.
Vs 'good kit' that simply has people interrupting conversation moments to 'listen', even if the music is rooms away.
Anyhow, on post [topic] , the M11+ ltd doesn't have the 'spec sheet' advantage of the ESS M11+, nor the M17, so, not sure how they would come to 'that conclusion' (preferring the M11+ ltd) unless it was a personal opinion based on actually listening to them.
I have no horse in this race; I feel the M11+ ESS version has enough improvements to justify it as a purchase if 'both were in front of me at equal price'.
(for example the improved carbon fibre volume panel would have me actually trust using the volume panels' 'buttons'. /I've owned enough consumer kit to know that those buttons will 'break through' the Ltds' material when used enough...)
and, regarding the UB9000 panasonic UHD disc spinner, the ESS variant would no doubt be the better part. (not that most users will be using the multichannel out, but 'to blow the minds of those who think digital is always perfect; the digital out via HDMI (into receivers) is so 'low class' on the pansonic players less than the flagship, that my family vastly prefers listing to blurays via our older oppo unit due to the much clearer dialogue and better layered soundtracks it lifts. (both units passing 'digitally via HDMI, both set correctly, for best 'sound').
There is so much to passing digital well, and so much noise on the internet sharing science 'facts' as if they are 'real world' practicalities.
They simply are not.
Whether you have discovered these facts or not, please don't be so blind as to parrot them (not written to @Ichos, whom I absolutely value their opinion; a GREAT reviewer who understands MUCH DEPTH regarding the consumer market and our precious 'toys'),.. digital quality is not the same. it is why 10k$ transports exist. If you want to believe that a budget box (digital 'compatible') passes anywhere NEAR the same quality sound(/picture) as a 'better unit', trust me, IT DOES NOT!
So all the muppets who reckon they are saving a tonne and getting equal performance- it isn't true. Nothing wrong with saving money, nothing wrong with being happy with YOUR purchase; but it isn't fact.
Once a user has trained themselves to see 'consumer class reds' (video sources and TVs/cameras) or better digital transport helping sound quality (generally requiring a well matched reference system) then most of the 'entry level consumer stuff can be seen for what it mostly is: "format compatible".
The M11+, as a transport, is the cheapest gateway I have found to 'decent' digital transport.
That being said; it has massive issues in the present incarnation regarding becoming a jitter box after a small amount of time. Wasn't that way out of the box; something 'bad' happened with Google updating the OS (without telling me) when I connected to the play store. If I could do it over, I would buy a fresh M11+ and never let it update once... but this extra paragraph is tacked on, cause if it were a 'fresh post' it still wouldn't garner the attention it deserves, so I will keep my typical rants 'all together' to save thread readers having to figure out which other posts to 'skip over'. (I know I can be blocked, I hope @FiiO have not done this, as 'communication is key'!)
Sabre chips are GREAT for benchmarking and 'spec sheets'.
Other companies that focused on 'audio first' often put out kit that doesn't benchmark so well, yet sounds vastly more musical. (To those who 'listen')..
I have ALWAYS downgraded my kit, when buying 'better equipment' when specs are to be believed.
Specs are a guide to whether it is built right.
Companies that tune for sound quality usually detune the 'perfect specs' until it sounds good.
I know many people like reading 'the best numbers' on their spec sheets; any spec sheet warring (at all) suggests this SHOULD be the pursuit.. but the reality is, specs that are 'good enough' and a sound profile that is musical should be the pursuit.
I am one of the few who seek out the 'version one' Panasonic UB9000 uhd/4k player: it uses AKMs, where as the replacement has jumped to sabre chips.
In this instance I actually feel that the sabre chips are actually 'better' parts, due to their lineup positioning (the AKMs in the version one model are typical mid tier stuff that finds its way into mass market surround receivers/soundbars etc), but it simply comes down to design philosophies; some companies put 'music first', some KNOW THAT the best best spec sheet numbers alone will win them market position.
I know MOST will disagree with what I am saying here, and it took me over a decade to find myself questioning some of these 'truths'.
The scientist in me was happy trusting specs alone, and I am no muso, so didn't trust my gut feeling on too many occaisions.
The amount of times I have bought vastly better kit, that has 'worse' spec sheet numbers, is insane...
That being said, some measurements I seek as 'minimums' for any class of kit, and as long as those minimums are met, then I have faith that it is 'built right'.
Valve components do force me to concede a few specs sheet lines, and I do so happily.. (my valve mono blocks are preferable to most of my kit that 'flogs them' (by the spec sheet), it doesn't take an audiophile to figure this out either... just watch the people in the room.. good kit gets toes tapping, well 'measuring kit' can often be so lifeless it is simply fatiguing, and most say' yes, "lovely" and are keen to get out of the room and enjoy a hot beverage, turning their visit to other pursuits 'more social'.
Vs 'good kit' that simply has people interrupting conversation moments to 'listen', even if the music is rooms away.
Anyhow, on post [topic] , the M11+ ltd doesn't have the 'spec sheet' advantage of the ESS M11+, nor the M17, so, not sure how they would come to 'that conclusion' (preferring the M11+ ltd) unless it was a personal opinion based on actually listening to them.
I have no horse in this race; I feel the M11+ ESS version has enough improvements to justify it as a purchase if 'both were in front of me at equal price'.
(for example the improved carbon fibre volume panel would have me actually trust using the volume panels' 'buttons'. /I've owned enough consumer kit to know that those buttons will 'break through' the Ltds' material when used enough...)
and, regarding the UB9000 panasonic UHD disc spinner, the ESS variant would no doubt be the better part. (not that most users will be using the multichannel out, but 'to blow the minds of those who think digital is always perfect; the digital out via HDMI (into receivers) is so 'low class' on the pansonic players less than the flagship, that my family vastly prefers listing to blurays via our older oppo unit due to the much clearer dialogue and better layered soundtracks it lifts. (both units passing 'digitally via HDMI, both set correctly, for best 'sound').
There is so much to passing digital well, and so much noise on the internet sharing science 'facts' as if they are 'real world' practicalities.
They simply are not.
Whether you have discovered these facts or not, please don't be so blind as to parrot them (not written to @Ichos, whom I absolutely value their opinion; a GREAT reviewer who understands MUCH DEPTH regarding the consumer market and our precious 'toys'),.. digital quality is not the same. it is why 10k$ transports exist. If you want to believe that a budget box (digital 'compatible') passes anywhere NEAR the same quality sound(/picture) as a 'better unit', trust me, IT DOES NOT!
So all the muppets who reckon they are saving a tonne and getting equal performance- it isn't true. Nothing wrong with saving money, nothing wrong with being happy with YOUR purchase; but it isn't fact.
Once a user has trained themselves to see 'consumer class reds' (video sources and TVs/cameras) or better digital transport helping sound quality (generally requiring a well matched reference system) then most of the 'entry level consumer stuff can be seen for what it mostly is: "format compatible".
The M11+, as a transport, is the cheapest gateway I have found to 'decent' digital transport.
That being said; it has massive issues in the present incarnation regarding becoming a jitter box after a small amount of time. Wasn't that way out of the box; something 'bad' happened with Google updating the OS (without telling me) when I connected to the play store. If I could do it over, I would buy a fresh M11+ and never let it update once... but this extra paragraph is tacked on, cause if it were a 'fresh post' it still wouldn't garner the attention it deserves, so I will keep my typical rants 'all together' to save thread readers having to figure out which other posts to 'skip over'. (I know I can be blocked, I hope @FiiO have not done this, as 'communication is key'!)
