Your Stereo's

I have some slightly upscale stuff, but not the $10,000 mono tube amp kind of gear.

NHT bi-amp speakers, 4 Marantz mono amps (total 325w/side), Arcam stereo preamp, my beloved Technics SL1200mk2 truntable (from 1985) with a fairly ordinary Stanton cartridge, and this year's CD player, a $99 Sony.

It's the first system (of many in my life) where the sound was uncolored, and probably the first time I cleary understood what that meant. I run it flat, and rarely have a desire to add any low or high end, where that was always necessary on previous equipment.

The goal when I assembled this in 2000 was to be the last system I'd ever need. So far, so good.

Bermuda
 
...I still have the Luxman R-1050 reciever that I bought in 1980.

I have gone through a few different components and speakers over the years, but my reciever has not changed.

At work I have my I-pod hooked up to a pair of Bose computer speakers, and I am surprised at how BIG this simple set up sounds.

Barry
 
I have some slightly upscale stuff, but not the $10,000 mono tube amp kind of gear.

NHT bi-amp speakers, 4 Marantz mono amps (total 325w/side), Arcam stereo preamp, my beloved Technics SL1200mk2 truntable (from 1985) with a fairly ordinary Stanton cartridge, and this year's CD player, a $99 Sony.

It's the first system (of many in my life) where the sound was uncolored, and probably the first time I cleary understood what that meant. I run it flat, and rarely have a desire to add any low or high end, where that was always necessary on previous equipment.

The goal when I assembled this in 2000 was to be the last system I'd ever need. So far, so good.

Bermuda

I have a great affinity for NHT 1259 sub drivers and the 3.3 towers:

33lg.jpg
 
Lets see.....

home theater setup:
onkyo tx-sr800 processor
integra dps 5.5 dvd player
monster power center
paradigm monitor 11 front speakers
paradigm cc290 front
paradigm adp 390 surrounds
velodyne 15" sub 800 watts.

speakers i have but dont use:
mirage (dont remember the model) fronts
mirage center
acoustic research sub (blown amp)
some old pioneers
some cerwin vega bookshelf speakers

drum/p.a. system:
yamaha emx-5000 20 channel mixer
QSC 2400 amp
2 soundtech pa cabs
2 alto elvis 15" subs

when i play/practice, i run my ipod through the mixer with my kick miked and one condenser overhead mixed into my headphones.
 
I have a great affinity for NHT 1259 sub drivers and the 3.3 towers

Mine are the 2.9 in Rosewood. Just wonderful.

Bermuda
 
Mine are the 2.9 in Rosewood. Just wonderful.

Bermuda

Yep, they rock! They were a reasonable alternative to the $4k a pair 3.3. NHT is suppoedly closing it's doors for a couple months for either *ahem* restructuring or a sad economy.

Here is the stereophile opinion of the 2.9's: http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/320/
N29.jpg


"Conclusions:
Great loudspeakers are not easy to improve on, and in many respects the NHT 3.3 is a great loudspeaker. Too moderate in price compared with its clear sonic competition to generate a lot of high-end buzz, it nevertheless has remained a strong presence in the High End since its introduction, in 1993. The NHT 2.9 is not as much of a groundbreaker, but for a lot less money—and in a considerably smaller cabinet—you can get 80% of the performance of NHT's flagship. I call that a very good deal."

(This is what I mean by unwarranted audio snobbery... pathetic statements compared to the real-world. )
 
Yep, they rock! They were a reasonable alternative to the $4k a pair 3.3.

I sorta recall that the big ones went down to 23hz and mine only went to 26hz, and that there was a serious enough difference in price to make me 'settle' (which I don't normally do.) But I did audition everything at control room volume (with our most recent CD, so I was fairly fresh on what it sounded like when we recorded and mixed) and would have liked to go all the way. I think it was an extra $2000 to do so, and I still hadn't assembled a whole system yet.

Bermuda
 
Here's my father's old stereo system that I recently resurrected. McIntosh receiver and amplifier, Bang & Olufsen turntable, and KEF speakers. The Denon CD player was a later addition as the system predates CDs. It sounds really nice and warm, especially when playing records. However, most of the time, I just connect my iPod to it (with the cord at the lower left). I love the look of it all too, with the wooden cabinets and the dials. The CD player doesn't quite fit in though. Oh, and the amplifier is unbelievably heavy.
 

Attachments

  • stereosystem.jpg
    stereosystem.jpg
    119 KB · Views: 1,835
Here's my father's old stereo system that I recently resurrected. McIntosh receiver and amplifier, Bang & Olufsen turntable, and KEF speakers. The Denon CD player was a later addition as the system predates CDs. It sounds really nice and warm, especially when playing records. However, most of the time, I just connect my iPod to it (with the cord at the lower left). I love the look of it all too, with the wooden cabinets and the dials. The CD player doesn't quite fit in though. Oh, and the amplifier is unbelievably heavy.

I love mac and kef. I used to have an SS mac preamp about 10 year ago. Very warm and sweet. "Luxman" was considered the Mac of Canada for a while.

My favorite KEF's are all 70's/80's models like the 103/2, 104/2, 105 and 107.
 
These are the 103.2 model. Yeah, they do sound great.

Way back when KEF engineered a bunch of speakers that were to recreate the polar response of a microphone, in reverse. Also, they were dynamic, measured very flat and had tight, low bass response. I liked the uncolored and transparent sound.

High end speakers used to use KEF drivers all the time. Even though Dynaudio brags that the brutally expensive esotar tweeters are matched within .5db, Kef were that accurate back in the 70's.
 
Ok, I couldn't take it. I wanted a bedroom system that was transparent, revealing and most of all musical.

KG4 klipsch do a lot of things that sound great with the right gear. But they are not transparent, time coherent or "musical". They appeal for different and more simplistic reasons.

I found a set of lightly used Vandersteen 2ce signatures for under a grand shipped. I am also adding a Vandersteen 2wq sub.

Argument can and has been made for/against these speakers. They were stunning for the price back when they were just the 2c. The 2ce were a nice step up and now the 2ce signatures take components from the 3a signatures.

Of all the speakers I have listened to over the decades, Vandersteens are always at the top for musicality. Compared to most speakers, they are open, boxless and transparent with a very liquid quality, layering and depth.

I have been to many hi-fi shows, and regardless of cost, I found myself enjoying the 2ce sigs more than many of the other companies flagship speakers. For me, they have that capability of allowing you to get lost in the music and ignore the "gear."
 
Back
Top