Los Angeles meet impressions
Jan 19, 2004 at 8:50 PM Post #16 of 62
Quote:

Originally posted by stuartr


The 170 dollar SACD player sounded heavenly...absolutely heavenly, unfortunatley there are only 3 or 4 SACD's that I would buy, so it is not worth it for me. DVD-Audio too sounded very good, but in my brief listening time, it seemed to me that the SACD player sounded better than the DVD-A...I don't know whether this is format or player.
I should get a roll developed by tomorrow, then I just need to scan in some shots. Give me some time, I have a lot of work to do. Anyway, thanks guys for a great time. It was really fun.


thanks for the reports guys....Stuart...was this the Pioneer 563A?
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 8:53 PM Post #17 of 62
Unless you are shooting in medium or large format film, a $1000 Digital SLR will easily kick 35mm's ass in the resolution department. I don't care what scanner you use, 35mm is still pretty grainy when scanned at high resolution. You just get more detail of the lower resolution grain.

BUT. I have yet to see a digicam surpass the color quality of film. For those that are interested check out Foveon tech's CMOS sensor. It comes the closest to approaching the color of film. The Sigma SD10 uses the Foveon sensor is a very intersting camera. For more info google it or goto www.dpreview.com

I retouch alot of photos for a livin. Ugh... Too many.......

A fancy high priced camera still doesn't help someone that doesn't know what they're doing. LOL, Stuart, you'd be surprised how many photographers who bought a speed light and not know the flash head angles up.

I guess it comes down to convenience vs. quality too. (the same could be said about head-fi gear.) I will eventually get a nice digital SLR, but not yet.

Anywho, can't wait to see your pics, Stuart. Will look a helluva lot better than my POS digicam's shots.

-Ed
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:11 PM Post #18 of 62
That's what I get for not going to the site for a few weeks. I didn't even realize there was a meet till today, a day or 2 after it
frown.gif
..Oh well. Looks like it was fun. I hope to make it to the next one........
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:22 PM Post #20 of 62
Some more impressions.

I wish I could've spent more time with the "CoJo".

It really did get a lot "fuller" in sound after it warmed up. (Man , it really does put out alot of heat.) The K1000's were very smooth on them. I didn't get huge viseral bass that a lot of people talk about with tubes + K1000. I guess it's because I initially thought the Grace was going to be thin in the bass dept with the K1000's (I was wrong). I really should've of done a better side by side comparo with the CoJo. The Cary was getting alot of play time. Man, that's a nice CDP. One helluva remote. Even though Stuart says it sux, it's solid metal and weighs nearly 1 pound.

I really really liked the Cardas Neutral Refs. I did not find them harsh at all. Definitely more revealing, though. They do look to be pretty fragile compared to other IC's. But that makes me more excited to find an abused bargain pair in the future.

The Headroom Max. Man, that is one overkill beefy amp. (OK, the Sudgen is even bigger) I don't like it's ridiculously stiff stepped attenuator. Plus, I could hear pops between the steps. Much louder than the DACT's steps. The Max wasn't really a good match for my tastes with my Zu HD600's. Too muddy for me. But, the HP2's on the Max. Mmmm. Much better.

The HP2's were very nice, but they were a real pain to position on my head correctly and get the drivers lined up just right over my ear canals. The HP2's have a really narrow focus to the drivers. Highs were clear and mids were balanced. I like neutral sounding phones. But the bass was very thin. (I guess I didn't really have a good fit, I didn't want to bend the headband) But, I really like the industrial looks.

The Stax Lambda (the creaky one). I just couldn't get past the cheapness of it's construction. Could they have made it out of noisier plastic? One of the worst materials and finish in any headphone I've ever seen. But if you kept your head really still, it sounded quite nice.

The HE60/HEV70. Nice and flat sound, but I had a real problem with extreme RT and LT channel separation. It desperately needed a cross feed. I just sounded way off, IMO. Bass was quite thin.

The Stax Omega II. These were my favorite electrostats there. Very comfy, great materials and finish (although, I'm not a big fan of the $#!T brown color, although a black one is coming out apparently). They really felt like a big comfy leather couch. The kind you just sink into. The bass was amazing compared to the others. They have a really sweet faux carbon fiber box.

SACD and DVD-A. They really excite me. The cheaper "low" end players there sounded great. It raises the bar and gets better sound out of cheaper source. I really want to hear what higher end HiRes is like. I really wish that the RIAA will get it's head out of it's ass and put out more albums. Til then, I'm going to stick with Redbook. Plus, I really cannot deny the sheer convenience of a computer. Well, except for Iron_Dreamer's setup. Mr.IMemorizedAlltheKeyStrokes.
biggrin.gif


Did I mention how much fun this meet was?
-Ed
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:32 PM Post #22 of 62
Quote:

Originally posted by JMedeiros
thanks for the reports guys....Stuart...was this the Pioneer 563A?


Actually, it was some sort of Sony...it was not ES, and it was a 5CD changer, but I guess it has the same SACD dac as the 222ES...(so sayeth carlo). I am not sure whose it was, but it was great.

As for the whole film digital thing, I just get pissed off when people act like film is out of date or archaic. It is still very much alive, and still better than digital in many ways. Don't get me wrong, digital is awesome, but not for everything. Color balance, as Ed said, is one of these things. As for grain, I would suspect Fuji Velvia 50, Kodachrome 25 and 64, and Ektachrome 100G would be favorably compared in the grain department to 1000 dollar dSLR, but that's another story. Sometimes grain is nice...especially in Black and White, which is something that digital REALLY can't do, especially for printing. Anyway, it is like asking if vinyl is archaic...you will get the same backlash and the same digital supporters...I am in the middle in both camps, I recognize the advantages of both, but I prefer the analog format.
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:39 PM Post #23 of 62
Quote:

Originally posted by stuartr
Actually, it was some sort of Sony...it was not ES, and it was a 5CD changer, but I guess it has the same SACD dac as the 222ES...(so sayeth carlo). I am not sure whose it was, but it was great.


Sony SCD-CE775 perhaps?
smily_headphones1.gif
Was it modded?
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:45 PM Post #24 of 62
Riz,

Yup, at the power supply and it drives three 2 channel outputs (and multi-channel defeated), though it didn't drive three for the meet.

--

I meant the Stuart tackling Ed for the digital camera tidbit jokingly. Maybe it was remote control anger.
wink.gif
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:53 PM Post #26 of 62
Quote:

Originally posted by carlo
Riz,

Yup, at the power supply and it drives three 2 channel outputs (and multi-channel defeated), though it didn't drive three for the meet.

--

I meant the Stuart tackling Ed for the digital camera tidbit jokingly. He probably did it out of remote control anger.
wink.gif


Yes, I was fondling his remote too much, wasn't I?
eek.gif


-Ed
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 9:53 PM Post #27 of 62
Quote:

Originally posted by Edwood
the HP2's on the Max. Mmmm....But the bass was very thin (I guess I didn't really have a good fit)


No, it was probably the amp. Plug the Grado's into the Maestrobator, and you will hear more bass (extended and tight) than HD600's. Trust me.
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 10:00 PM Post #29 of 62
Bah. It was nice talking with you, Ed.
 
Jan 19, 2004 at 10:08 PM Post #30 of 62
Quote:

Originally posted by stuartr
As for the whole film digital thing, I just get pissed off when people act like film is out of date or archaic. It is still very much alive, and still better than digital in many ways.


Sorry to piss you off -- my comment was meant in good humor only.

Maybe film is better. But "very much alive"? I don't know. You saw this news item right?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top