New Jecklin Float QA !!!

[Glitterbug]

Hello everybody, and thank you all for the insights and thoughtful posts that helped me immensely to make up my mind about getting a Float vs. not getting a Float. I have a Float now. But let's start at the beginning:
 
I am a composer and producer (of more experimental electronic and contemporary music), and upon changing cities, and having to currently work in an intermediate kind of setup that is not sound proof nor properly acoustically treated (while we are building a new studio), I was starting to grow more and more frustrated with the headphones I used to work with, that were ok for HAVING to work with them SOMETIMES, but certainly not for prolonged sessions, nor for final judgement, let alone for having them on for 8-12 hours at a time. The headphones I have are Beyerdynamic DT 250, DT 770, and Sennheiser HD25II for live monitoring, all of them ok dynamic cans and studio standards, but nothing fancy.
 
So I started looking into getting new headphones- I admire the sound of my precious Rogers LS3/5a's (with AB1s), IMF, and my Klein&Hummel O96 mid field monitors, I wanted to find something that somewhat resembles the sound signatures of the monitors I am used to and that I enjoy working with, or, in the case of the LS3/5a's, even grew to love.
 
Quad Musikwiedergabe used to help me here and there with the repair of voice coils of blown speakers (happened once, to the B110s of the LS3/5a's), and I was aware of the existence of the Float, but never actually heard them. Mr. Stein once said to me that he loves the LS3/5a's because they are the closest to the ESL57 as far as dynamic speakers are concerned, and considering that the Floats are supposedly the closest to ESL's when it comes to headphones, I thought the Floats might be just down my alley.
 
Luckily, I found a pair of Float IIs with the last revision of the PS2 for a fair price on Ebay, and there started the journey. Upon arrival, they were with no doubt MUCH better than any dynamic headphone I had listened to so far, but had a few very aparent downsides. Bass reproduction had a steep rolloff at approx. 70-80hz, and the high frequencies seemed to be somewhat distorted, also effecting the imaging. Very little so, but it was noticeable that there were problems in the extreme frequency spectrum.
 
Reading more and more articles and forums, It became clear that the transformer box was to blame for a lot of the downfalls of the system. I was considering various options, from building a new dedicated amplifier, to getting better, custom made transformers from Sowter in the UK, but since I needed a reliable solution quick and have too much work to do to fiddle around with my soldering iron, I ended up buying the new Jecklin QA tranformer box from Quad Musikwiedergabe.
 
I have to say that it solved ALL issues I had before. The reproduction is stellar now, in both extreme frequency ends. Hiss is gone. And I find myself working with the Floats more and more, even in situations in which I could also use my monitors. Imaging is amazing, and they play with a sense of ease and resolution that I would have not considered possible for head phones, or ear speakers if you want.
 
I run them in a rather humble, "no-nonesense" kind of setup (without getting into details of the rest of my studio setup)- the chain is a Motu 828 MKII with Black Lion Audio modifications, Black Lion Audio Micro Clock MkII, Mackie Big Knob Monitor Controller, Quad 520 power amp (highly modified), and cables are Sommer Albedo and Mogami.
 
The greater frequency range they are able to deliver now, especially in the lower range, forced me to put some work into the frame, as now all of a sudden I had rattling and all kind of vibration related issues that weren't there before (the Floats just didn't vibrate so much before...). I solved that with fixing the drivers in place (with some very thin 5mm x 1mm self adhesive rubber tape that I would usually use for air tightening of speakers) on the sides where they touch the chassis of the frame.
 
Also the metal grilles behind the foam of the ear pads (both inside and outside) needed some anti rattling re-sealing on the sides.
 
I am quite sure that these are the last headphones I will ever need, and well, if they die one day, I will get myself a pair of QAs. But I see no reason to do so as long as these last. The pair I have had a Quad Musikwiedergabe driver service before I bought them (and only very few hours of usage since), and I am quite positive that there won't be that big of an audible difference between the QA and my Float IIs (despite the fact that I haven't heard the QA headset yet). The biggest problem was the transformer box, and with the new QA Power Supply, these are the most neutral, non fatiguing, yet stellar headphones, I have ever had the pleasure to work and listen to music with. I tried various Stax models before, but none ever were to my liking. And some days I work with these for up to 12 hours a day.
 
Music reproduction has many objective and subjective parameters, and I am sure that there are a lot of great systems out there. But to my ears and liking, the Float IIs with the QA transformer box are among the best monitoring systems, be they speaker or head phone based, I have ever heard. My quest to find the perfect headphones ended right here.
 
Amp matching seems important, I had them driven with a (also highly modified) Quad 405 before, but I was missing the last bit of resolution that my Quad 520 is able to deliver. As everybody knows, they are certainly not efficient, but I was even able to drive them to ok levels with a small Indeed 2x25 watt T-Amp. So my travel setup now consists of the small T-Amp, the old PS2 and my amazing Floats. 
 
I read somewhere: Life without a Float is possible, but pointless. I second that.

 

[wink]

Quote:

I read somewhere: Life without a STAX is possible, but pointless. I second that.

Fixed...

 

[Glitterbug]

 
Isn't it great that we have options to pick from...? Hearing is a bit like tasting- my favorite dish might be your most hated, and vice versa. 
 
I would still suggest to listen to the new Float QA if there is a chance to do so somewhere near by. And I will happily go and listen to the latest Stax offerings once I find the time... I only know a few of the Pro models, and they all didn't really speak to me. Maybe it's a bit like comparing Quad and Accuphase amps- I sold an Accuphase pro amp a few years ago because I couldn't stand it, and only use Quad 's, mostly from the pro lines. Both are great amps, but different beasts catering to very different followers.
 
And I'd happily invite you to come to Berlin and give my setup a try if you'd like!

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Hello everybody, and thank you all for the insights and thoughtful posts that helped me immensely to make up my mind about getting a Float vs. not getting a Float. I have a Float now. But let's start at the beginning:
 
I am a composer and producer (of more experimental electronic and contemporary music), and upon changing cities, and having to currently work in an intermediate kind of setup that is not sound proof nor properly acoustically treated (while we are building a new studio), I was starting to grow more and more frustrated with the headphones I used to work with, that were ok for HAVING to work with them SOMETIMES, but certainly not for prolonged sessions, nor for final judgement, let alone for having them on for 8-12 hours at a time. The headphones I have are Beyerdynamic DT 250, DT 770, and Sennheiser HD25II for live monitoring, all of them ok dynamic cans and studio standards, but nothing fancy.
 
So I started looking into getting new headphones- I admire the sound of my precious Rogers LS3/5a's (with AB1s), IMF, and my Klein&Hummel O96 mid field monitors, I wanted to find something that somewhat resembles the sound signatures of the monitors I am used to and that I enjoy working with, or, in the case of the LS3/5a's, even grew to love.
 
Quad Musikwiedergabe used to help me here and there with the repair of voice coils of blown speakers (happened once, to the B110s of the LS3/5a's), and I was aware of the existence of the Float, but never actually heard them. Mr. Stein once said to me that he loves the LS3/5a's because they are the closest to the ESL57 as far as dynamic speakers are concerned, and considering that the Floats are supposedly the closest to ESL's when it comes to headphones, I thought the Floats might be just down my alley.
 
Luckily, I found a pair of Float IIs with the last revision of the PS2 for a fair price on Ebay, and there started the journey. Upon arrival, they were with no doubt MUCH better than any dynamic headphone I had listened to so far, but had a few very aparent downsides. Bass reproduction had a steep rolloff at approx. 70-80hz, and the high frequencies seemed to be somewhat distorted, also effecting the imaging. Very little so, but it was noticeable that there were problems in the extreme frequency spectrum.
 
Reading more and more articles and forums, It became clear that the transformer box was to blame for a lot of the downfalls of the system. I was considering various options, from building a new dedicated amplifier, to getting better, custom made transformers from Sowter in the UK, but since I needed a reliable solution quick and have too much work to do to fiddle around with my soldering iron, I ended up buying the new Jecklin QA tranformer box from Quad Musikwiedergabe.
 
I have to say that it solved ALL issues I had before. The reproduction is stellar now, in both extreme frequency ends. Hiss is gone. And I find myself working with the Floats more and more, even in situations in which I could also use my monitors. Imaging is amazing, and they play with a sense of ease and resolution that I would have not considered possible for head phones, or ear speakers if you want.
 
I run them in a rather humble, "no-nonesense" kind of setup (without getting into details of the rest of my studio setup)- the chain is a Motu 828 MKII with Black Lion Audio modifications, Black Lion Audio Micro Clock MkII, Mackie Big Knob Monitor Controller, Quad 520 power amp (highly modified), and cables are Sommer Albedo and Mogami.
 
The greater frequency range they are able to deliver now, especially in the lower range, forced me to put some work into the frame, as now all of a sudden I had rattling and all kind of vibration related issues that weren't there before (the Floats just didn't vibrate so much before...). I solved that with fixing the drivers in place (with some very thin 5mm x 1mm self adhesive rubber tape that I would usually use for air tightening of speakers) on the sides where they touch the chassis of the frame.
 
Also the metal grilles behind the foam of the ear pads (both inside and outside) needed some anti rattling re-sealing on the sides.
 
I am quite sure that these are the last headphones I will ever need, and well, if they die one day, I will get myself a pair of QAs. But I see no reason to do so as long as these last. The pair I have had a Quad Musikwiedergabe driver service before I bought them (and only very few hours of usage since), and I am quite positive that there won't be that big of an audible difference between the QA and my Float IIs (despite the fact that I haven't heard the QA headset yet). The biggest problem was the transformer box, and with the new QA Power Supply, these are the most neutral, non fatiguing, yet stellar headphones, I have ever had the pleasure to work and listen to music with. I tried various Stax models before, but none ever were to my liking. And some days I work with these for up to 12 hours a day.
 
Music reproduction has many objective and subjective parameters, and I am sure that there are a lot of great systems out there. But to my ears and liking, the Float IIs with the QA transformer box are among the best monitoring systems, be they speaker or head phone based, I have ever heard. My quest to find the perfect headphones ended right here.
 
Amp matching seems important, I had them driven with a (also highly modified) Quad 405 before, but I was missing the last bit of resolution that my Quad 520 is able to deliver. As everybody knows, they are certainly not efficient, but I was even able to drive them to ok levels with a small Indeed 2x25 watt T-Amp. So my travel setup now consists of the small T-Amp, the old PS2 and my amazing Floats. 
 
I read somewhere: Life without a Float is possible, but pointless. I second that.

GREAT post! Late 70s/early80 I had a pair of LS3/5As and in more weys than one, it remained in my memory as something very special indeed. It is a monitor, in this case literally.
 
And Floats, like any electrostat, sing better with better "electrics", be it transformer or amp. Wish you nice work and some more creative insight that is not possible to achieve to such degree and with so little effort with lesser transducers !

 

[Glitterbug]

Thank you! And great to meet somebody from the professional recording side of things, so I saw in your profile!
I am an audio enthusiast (with reason, and as an artist, with limited budgets) both in the studio and at home, and looking at all the offerings out there, I think it's mostly about finding something you enjoy to work with and that one also enjoys in a non-work environment.
 
With the exception of my active mid field monitors, by now also "vintage" Klein & Hummel O96, I really enjoy the sonic qualities of older British equipment, especially of the BBC range of monitors. In the studio I use the K&H's, LS3/5a's and recently an IMF Super Compact II (also Quad amplified, with a reworked crossover, internal cables and new mids) joined the choir. At home, it's LS3/5a's + AB1s (driven by a Camtech C101 pre and Quad 510 mono amps, all of them heavily modified), and in our secondary home, it's a pair of Celestion 15XRs that also got a new crossover, a second bass woofer instead of the ABRs, and Morel tweeters, and some wood work and dampening of the cabinets (I found those, and couldn't leave them in the ditch...).
 
Having found the Floats was really a streak of luck for me. I never particularly enjoyed working with headphones, but now that I am kinda forced to do so for another 1,5 years until our new building is done, these are the best solution I could have hoped for. For example, I was never able to judge reverb to this precision with headphones before- before, there either was room information or not, but it was kinda impossible to tell the size, shape, height... the Floats can deliver this kind of "sub text" of a recording. And this is just one example.
 
As with all pro monitoring equipment (and a lot of high end audio too), the big trick is always to walk the thin line between precision and non-fatiguing monitoring. A lot of the BBC designs can deliver just that. Many of them might not be the very last word in resolution, but the fact that one can work with these for long long hours at a time, without having ringing ears in the end (and I am not speaking about ringing ears because of high volume), and still craving to listen to music at home, is one of the major qualities these designs have.
 
I recently was interviewed by the WDR (German public radio), and had a little chat with the engineer that recorded the interview afterwards- he had brand new Adam monitors sitting in front of his console, and his old Spendors were sitting disconnected on the floor. He was raving about how much he hates the Adams, and that his ears hurt after a few hours of having to work with them. That never happened to him in the 20+ years he had the Spendors. And that is exactly the problem with a lot of the modern monitors- they are gimmicky, and if you listen to them at first, they might be impressive. But you don't want to be impressed by your equipment, at least not by your monitors.  Because impressive in this context means fatiguing, and fatigued is exactly what you don't want your recording engineer to be!
 
The Floats, as my other monitoring gear, are certainly not modern, and they don't have any of the razzle-dazzle of contemporary equipment that screams "louder! louder!" all the time. They were not made for highly compressed, brick wall limited, screaming loud material, and they sound like **** with material like that. Why? Because music was meant to be dynamic, and not to scream at you through little laptop speakers. And I like that they don't make ****ty recordings sound nice. Who ever likes that kind of sound may be happy with their Audeze cans or Adam monitors, but it's not what I like or stand for. So, Floats for me, thank you!!

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Thank you! And great to meet somebody from the professional recording side of things, so I saw in your profile!
I am an audio enthusiast (with reason, and as an artist, with limited budgets) both in the studio and at home, and looking at all the offerings out there, I think it's mostly about finding something you enjoy to work with and that one also enjoys in a non-work environment.
 
With the exception of my active mid field monitors, by now also "vintage" Klein & Hummel O96, I really enjoy the sonic qualities of older British equipment, especially of the BBC range of monitors. In the studio I use the K&H's, LS3/5a's and recently an IMF Super Compact II (also Quad amplified, with a reworked crossover, internal cables and new mids) joined the choir. At home, it's LS3/5a's + AB1s (driven by a Camtech C101 pre and Quad 510 mono amps, all of them heavily modified), and in our secondary home, it's a pair of Celestion 15XRs that also got a new crossover, a second bass woofer instead of the ABRs, and Morel tweeters, and some wood work and dampening of the cabinets (I found those, and couldn't leave them in the ditch...).
 
Having found the Floats was really a streak of luck for me. I never particularly enjoyed working with headphones, but now that I am kinda forced to do so for another 1,5 years until our new building is done, these are the best solution I could have hoped for. For example, I was never able to judge reverb to this precision with headphones before- before, there either was room information or not, but it was kinda impossible to tell the size, shape, height... the Floats can deliver this kind of "sub text" of a recording. And this is just one example.
 
As with all pro monitoring equipment (and a lot of high end audio too), the big trick is always to walk the thin line between precision and non-fatiguing monitoring. A lot of the BBC designs can deliver just that. Many of them might not be the very last word in resolution, but the fact that one can work with these for long long hours at a time, without having ringing ears in the end (and I am not speaking about ringing ears because of high volume), and still craving to listen to music at home, is one of the major qualities these designs have.
 
I recently was interviewed by the WDR (German public radio), and had a little chat with the engineer that recorded the interview afterwards- he had brand new Adam monitors sitting in front of his console, and his old Spendors were sitting disconnected on the floor. He was raving about how much he hates the Adams, and that his ears hurt after a few hours of having to work with them. That never happened to him in the 20+ years he had the Spendors. And that is exactly the problem with a lot of the modern monitors- they are gimmicky, and if you listen to them at first, they might be impressive. But you don't want to be impressed by your equipment, at least not by your monitors.  Because impressive in this context means fatiguing, and fatigued is exactly what you don't want your recording engineer to be!
 
The Floats, as my other monitoring gear, are certainly not modern, and they don't have any of the razzle-dazzle of contemporary equipment that screams "louder! louder!" all the time. They were not made for highly compressed, brick wall limited, screaming loud material, and they sound like **** with material like that. Why? Because music was meant to be dynamic, and not to scream at you through little laptop speakers. And I like that they don't make ****ty recordings sound nice. Who ever likes that kind of sound may be happy with their Audeze cans or Adam monitors, but it's not what I like or stand for. So, Floats for me, thank you!!

Another great post. I just returned from a full day demo of "my" ( highly modified Technics vintage gear ) turntable, preamp and power amp - on friend's SAFE ( Symetrical Air Friction Enclosure, Google for patent ) speakers. This system can play really loud and low, < 25 Hz - yet listening for in excess of 10 hours at concert levels, be it string quartet or Van Halen in full cry, did not produce even a hint of anything approching fatigue. 
 
I like BBC monitors for the precise reason you stated. Floats, properly driven, are quite a few notches better still. Spendors are one hell of a good speaker even today - and prices on the used market reflect that.
 
And looking on vast majority of recent compresed over compressed over ..... compressed recordings - it really hurts my ears. People simply do not realize how important dynamic range is and how vulnerable it is during recording, let alone any manipulation during mastering. Trouble is, equipment with wide dynamic range is expensive and scarce - and wide dynamics just do not work with usual computer speaker setups. Even musicians often demand LOUD = compressed recordings - sad but unfortunately true.
 
Limited budget is the best motivation to utilize whatever means at disposition to the fullest - and in quality recording, using the least ( but quality ) gear usually provides best results. An amateur with burning desire to do something really well will usually outperform pro norm in the same category - because of desire to do it best he/she can, regardless of efforts needed to do it and not weighing whether work will be adequately paid or not. But that can be done on ocassional basis only - no one can afford it in the long regular run.

 

[complin]

Seems like a variation on a folded horn design so not sure what would be patentable about this.  However US patent law seems a bit daft to me 

 
For a speaker with staggering bass down to at least 20hz the the Danish Jamo Oriel's are some or the best i've ever heard.  Weigh 75kg each and stand 180cm high! The chambers above and below each contain a bass bandpass enclosure and driver.  They were made over 20 years ago as a money no cost project and cost £6000!
 

Quote:

Another great post. I just returned from a full day demo of "my" ( highly modified Technics vintage gear ) turntable, preamp and power amp - on friend's SAFE ( Symetrical Air Friction Enclosure, Google for patent ) speakers. This system can play really loud and low, < 25 Hz - yet listening for in excess of 10 hours at concert levels, be it string quartet or Van Halen in full cry, did not produce even a hint of anything approching fatigue. 
 

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Seems like a variation on a folded horn design so not sure what would be patentable about this.  However US patent law seems a bit daft to me 

 
For a speaker with staggering bass down to at least 20hz the the Danish Jamo Oriel's are some or the best i've ever heard.  Weigh 75kg each and stand 180cm high! The chambers above and below each contain a bass bandpass enclosure and driver.  They were made over 20 years ago as a money no cost project and cost £6000!
 

SAFE is not variation on the horn, but transmission line. Advantage is higher efficiency, as there is no damping/stuffing material ( usually wool ) as in transmission lines. Never saw Oriel in flesh, but it is dwarfed by SAFE - 90 kg plus. To date I am aware of no commercially available SAFE speaker - even baby version will weigh approx 50 kg per speaker if done right. To give you a clue regarding performance in bass; if you are familiar with TDL biggest enclosure - imagine same extension, but greater refinement, no softening in the bass, greater dynamic range - with menageable power, say 150 W /ch. TDL requires approx double the power, yet does not sound so alive. This is not criticism of TDL per se, as I consider it one of the best transmission lines - it is just the fact that SAFE sounds better. Heard four various DIY designs so far and no closed compression or vented bass speaker comes even close. Maybe a well implemented passive radiator design (  like great Polk speakers of the past ) - unfortunately never heard them. Wrong side of the pond for this...
 
It is the most complex box enlosure to build - only horns are understandably harder to build. Just count those partititions in SAFE - there is at least as much wood in there you can never see once the enclosure is assembled as it is on "display". It is a high heeled enhusiast DIY project - the design I listened to yesterday stems from Dynaudio ( and naturally uses Dynaudio (vintage) drivers ) - it is quite remarkable speaker for the whole range, not bass only. Check the number of speaker systems commercially available that weigh approx 100 kg per speaker - couple it with the fact even those are very simple constructions compared to SAFE - and it should be clear why it is not attractive to manufacturers.
 
Play a good recording of say plucked upright bass on SAFE - and all the tedious repetitive building of partitition after partritition will be forgotten. Playing http://www.discogs.com/Billy-Cobhams-Glassmenagerie-Stratus/release/1023921 on good turntable and SAFE is not for the faint at heart.

 

[complin]

Quote:

 
Play a good recording of say plucked upright bass on SAFE - and all the tedious repetitive building of partitition after partritition will be forgotten. Playing http://www.discogs.com/Billy-Cobhams-Glassmenagerie-Stratus/release/1023921 on good turntable and SAFE is not for the faint at heart.

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Thanks a lot for sharing this ! I thought this to be tried on SAFE ASAP - but topping my "fly aerodrome" with Stax Lambda Pro says SQ is just not worthy enough. Frequency and, in particular, dynamic range is very poor. But being able to see and hear these musicians live for the whole concerts from 32 years ago is simply fantastic. Somewhere in the middle or towards the end of this 1981 tour they recorded the mentined direct to disc LP in London. If you like BC, this is perhaps the best sounding recording of his drums.

 

[complin]

How about these for a pair of bass speakers - Horns
These are in system of French designer Vincent Brien who has designed the TOTAL DAC 
 
[size=medium]Computer source (USB), Totaldac REFERENCE-D2 dual DAC crossover, triode amps for the ribbon speakers and the bass horns ,transistor amp for low bass, 97dB DIY ribbon speaker, 107dB bass horn using 38cm Cyrille Audio driver, total eleven 15inch woofers:[/size]
 

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

How about these for a pair of bass speakers - Horns
These are in system of French designer Vincent Brien who has designed the TOTAL DAC 
 
[size=medium]Computer source (USB), Totaldac REFERENCE-D2 dual DAC crossover, triode amps for the ribbon speakers and the bass horns ,transistor amp for low bass, 97dB DIY ribbon speaker, 107dB bass horn using 38cm Cyrille Audio driver, total eleven 15inch woofers:[/size]
 

Nice system. Would be nice to hear it.
 
I stumbled upon this while browsing the net for God only knows what audio related at the time : http://www.royaldevice.com/custom31.htm

 

[Glitterbug]

While I do appreciate the incredible efforts people make for having good, true hifi at home, I find both examples a tad bit over the tops... my suggestion: use a fraction of the budget spent on the systems mentioned above, buy a really nice stereo, and use the rest for another 15.000 or so vinyls... and start listening to music, and not to obscenely huge sub woofers...   

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

While I do appreciate the incredible efforts people make for having good, true hifi at home, I find both examples a tad bit over the tops... my suggestion: use a fraction of the budget spent on the systems mentioned above, buy a really nice stereo, and use the rest for another 15.000 or so vinyls... and start listening to music, and not to obscenely huge sub woofers...   

Like with everything in life, a common sense compromise is in order. I am stll approx 12000 LPs short of your proposed goal, and although I do posess and appreciate better headphones, can not honestly say I can not listen to majority of music with JVC HA-S500 cans, that cost approx $ 70. They are actually quite fun and get unproportionally large share of listening time, compared to its modest cost.
 
TBH - can anyone actually listen to 5000 + LPs/CDs/WHATEVERs ? I mean at least kind of regularly, each one coming at least twice a year for proper listen, not just background while doing chores. I know collectors that have FAR in excess of mentioned number - but it is more about collecting than actually listening to music. I do not say I will not be adding more LPs to my collection, yet I do not see it likely the number of candidates for new arrival to exceed say 500. If I do not have a certain composer/band/singer/etc in my collection, it is for a reason - and it seems pointless for me to have "must haves" that do not appeal to me at all - because they will get one play only, and even that might well not be complete. On the other hand, I do have ( and listen to regularly ) approx 10 versions of Mahler's second ( depends if you count CDs or not ) - which is pretty pedestrian compared to friend's 38 versions of Massenet's Werther - the last one sung in Russian ! 
 
I have a friend, to whom I helped unloading a couple of truckloads of bricks for his house. Since proper bass horns are LARGE, before any work on actual building was done, he made plans how to incorporate those lenghty bass horns into house foundations - running in effect twice the lenght of the house, with mouths of horns masqueraded as fireplaces...
 
Returning back to Earth, there is a minimum quality that will be satisfactory, it is not little money, it depends on each individual sensibilities/expectations, but it is nowhere near the extreme examples mentioned. I am nut for phono cartridges - but honestly, the difference in that last n-th degree of improvement an outrageosly expensive cart ultimately gives is less thrill than discovery of a new artist on a single LP - count how many musical thrills you have to sacrifice to be able to hear that last n-th improvement  - and decide for yourself. 
 
Whatever your decision, always enjoy your music !

 

[Glitterbug]

I agree with everything you said. I myself am still in the 4 digit zone with my vinyls, and the suggested 15.000 mark was just a little joke. But I hope to be able to buy records for another few decades... not as a collector, but as a music nerd. We don't even own a TV at home, and spending long evenings with my partner (she is as much of an audio and music nut as myself) and / or friends in front of the stereo, or meeting around certain musical topics with everybody bringing records, files or CDs, is at least as wonderful as watching a great movie with friends. Having a pleasant, pristine system certainly helps to have us all spell bound and glued to the music. 
 
Speaking of expensive carts, I recently put a (pretty vintage) Audio Technica AT-OC30 MC that was retiped by Mr. van den Hul (the rest of my turntable consists of a highly modified Technics 1210 MkII with a Linn Akito arm, and Herbies's Way Excelent II Mat). I was always very sceptical of those carts in the 1000€+x area, but this one blows me away every time I put a record on... I am already dreading the moment when it's time has come, it's one of those items that made such a huge improvement that I would miss it so much.
 
But still, I can only second your last sentence- it's the music that moves us, and all technology should be forgotten about when listening to a truely unique recording or amazing work. I really like my system because it vanishes behind the music. LS3/5a magic... and I might have mentioned that before, the Floats give me exactly that sensation. I can listen to the music in such a precise way and still forget that I wear head phones. I just moved to another (also temporary) studio and the acoustics of the room are still awful and need a lot of tweaking and dampening, and having the Floats gives me instant means to continue working. Such a simple device, but such musicality.