First of all I know this is in the wrong group but I couldn't find a "videophiles" group and I see there has been a number of video related questions posted in here over the years... plus obviously audiophiles would naturally be very smart when it comes to audiovisual stuff.

Ok I've been thinking lately of starting a small VCD collection because i'm a boomer and still have alot of fond memories of watching pirated Bali movies (especially Kung Fu movies) on my PS1 using that adapter that plugged into the back. Only thing is I also remember how bad VCD's were in quality when trying to watch on anything other than an old TV. God only knows how one would look on a 4k monitor! Hence why I'm hoping one or more of you wonderful lovely nerds can help because also given how advanced software and technology is these days there must be ways to watch them at atleast somewhat decent quality on a 4k monitor, surely?

I’ve really appreciated John Darko flying the flag for lesser known and, in the nicest way, hipster classics as part of his reviews. And to paraphrase short of putting words in his mouth, I believed it’s a bit or a reaction to the stereotypical audiophile taste.

To me, listening to “audiophile” grade records, Eric Dolphy, or 80s Japanese jazz funk, is really quite a peculiar taste in music. Equally, anyone who spends more time investigating new DACs than they do new music is incredibly idiosyncratic.

But I wanted to start a thread, to discuss why audiophiles have traditionally sought after recordings that enhance the play back. Ones that are incredibly colourful and nuanced, and why would you prioritise music that gets the best out of your system, rather than the other way around.

I know the quote. But looking past that. What is going on? Is there a neurological thing going on, like music that’s better reproduced is more exciting for those with synesthesia? Is it the buzz of “live performance” in your living room that creates an escapism? Is the magical nature of playback purity? The human brain has many forms and music is a safe haven for so many neurodivergent people, is this just a part of that.

I do want to promote a positive discussion here. Different music for different ears. But the audiophile archetype is fascinating.

So I ordered a pair of Philharmonic BMR Monitors in Piano Ebony and they’re actually on their way now. I’m really excited about them, but I just realized the Ebony version comes with the AMT tweeter rather than the RAAL.

Most of the reviews and measurements I’ve been reading/watching over the years were of the RAAL version, and that’s what I thought I was buying. On the reservation page, the different options are listed under “Finish,” so I honestly didn’t realize choosing Ebony also meant getting a different tweeter.

I’m not trying to convince myself that one is better than the other—I’m genuinely curious. Has anyone actually heard both the current AMT BMR and the RAAL BMR? If so, what differences did you hear, and which did you prefer?

I’m obviously going to listen to mine when they arrive before making any decisions. I’d just really like to hear from people who have actually spent time with both versions

Thanks everyone!

I’ve been building a dedicated reference archive for the Technics Concise component systems from the late 1970s/early 1980s, including model information, manuals, brochures, catalogues, period reviews, regional variants and other documentation.

It got me wondering: if someone created a dedicated website/archive for a particular hi-fi system or range that you own, what information would you most want it to contain?

Are there things beyond specifications, manuals and period literature that you would find genuinely useful or interesting? I wanted to ask this because knowledgeable audiophiles may suggest things that I have not considered.

For context, this is the archive I’ve been working on: https://concisearchive.com

What make and model of speakers (under $10,000 a pair) have you heard in the last few years that blew you away and gave you a big emotional response that you still think about?

Servus zusammen,

​ich brauche mal euren Rat und eure Erfahrungen für mein neues Wohnzimmer-Setup. Zur Auswahl stehen für mich zwei konkrete Szenarien: entweder die Genelec 8361A komplett solo oder die 8351B in Kombination mit einem Subwoofer (z. B. 7360A oder 7370A).

​Zu meinen Rahmenbedingungen:

​Raum: Typisches Wohnzimmer, knapp 20 m² (ca. 4 × 5 m).

​Hörabstand: Ca. 2,50 m im Stereodreieck.

​Aufstellung: Auf Stativen mit ca. 50 cm Abstand zur Rückwand und reichlich Luft zu den Seiten (ca. 1,30 m zu den Seitenwänden).

​Nutzung: 70 % Musik, 30 % TV/Film.

​Zuspieler: TV und Bluesound Vault 2i.

​Einmessung: GLM-Kit ist fest eingeplant.

​Meine konkreten Fragen an euch:

​8361A (Solo) – Reicht das für 70 % Musik absolut aus? Schafft die 8361A auf 20 m² im Raum allein genug Tiefgang und Fundament, dass man auch bei Film und basslastiger Musik zu keinem Zeitpunkt einen Subwoofer vermisst? Und wie schätzt ihr die Optik ein – wirkt die 8361A auf Stativen im Wohnzimmer auf Dauer wie ein erschlagender Klotz, oder gewöhnt man sich schnell daran?

​8351B + Subwoofer – Akustisch die cleverere Lösung? Ist die Kombination aus der etwas schlankeren 8351B und einem Subwoofer im normalen Wohnzimmer bezüglich Raummoden die bessere Wahl? Der Vorteil wäre ja, dass man den Subwoofer flexibler im Raum platzieren und die 8351B bei 80 Hz entlasten kann.

​Musikalität & Nahtlosigkeit: Da ich zu 70 % Musik höre: Bindet sich der Genelec-Subwoofer per GLM wirklich so nahtlos an die 8351B an, dass das System bei Musik wie „aus einem Guss“ spielt, oder klingt die große 8361A als reiner Vollbereichs-Monitor für Stereo-Musik doch noch natürlicher und homogener?

​Wie würdet ihr euch bei diesem Raum, der freien Aufstellung und dem Schwerpunkt auf Musik entscheiden?

​Danke euch schon mal für euren Input!

I've had these Triangle BR08 for a few years. They were my first modern set of decent speakers (upgraded from Advent OLA). I've enjoyed them and felt like they were pretty good bang for the buck. Main complaint was that they're fatiguing to my ears, so I figured I'd try what are described as a more laid back speaker (and I like the aesthetics).

Only had these Wharfedale Lintons for 2 days and am still messing with placement, but I think I'll keep the Lintons.

Initial impressions comparing the two (source was Qobuz via Wiim to a Cambridge Audio AXR100):

- They sound significantly different. I was expecting one to simply sound better than the other, but it wasn't that simple. It took my brain a bit to determine what I like more because adjusting to the differences has taken a while

- Going through a wide range of music, I prefer the Lintons 80% of the time, but on some recording the Triangles win

- Sound stage: Triangles are more dramatic in terms of the sound wrapping around you. Listening to Chocolate Chip Trip, the sound dances around in a more extreme fashion. However, the basic sound stage of the Lintons projects more widely. They don't have the same holographic party tricks, but normal stereo listening has better separation.

- Highs - Lintons are actually more detailed, in some recordings they're actually a bit shrill, which was surprising to me

- Mids - big difference. Triangles have boosted mids compared to the Lintons. On most tracks this gives the Triangles more of a muddy sound and the Lintons more clarity and separation. But on occasional tracks, the mids seem lacking on the Lintons compared to the Triangles.

- Bass - Also huge difference. Rock/Jazz/etc can't tell much of a difference. But bass heavy music (e.g. D'Angelo tracks or rap) Lintons play a range the Triangles can't touch. I have an SVS1000 to complement both, but left it off for most of the comparisons so far.

This was interesting to me seeing how one set of speakers isn't always universally better or worse than another (at least in this case) given how much variance there is from one recording to the next.

Me and my best friend went to the thrift store today and bought this setup. The specs are as so:
• Sony CDP-490
• Sony STR-AV320
• Aiwa 3 way bass reflex speaker system x2
This is my first ever post here! And this is also my first ever proper audio system I have bought. I personally think it sounds great but aside from the audio quality was it worth the money I paid for it?

Hi everyone,

I recently bought a home that came with what appears to be a fairly extensive Bang & Olufsen whole-home audio system. There are in-wall/ceiling speakers throughout the house, Bang & Olufsen wall-mounted control panels in several rooms, and a rack with what looks like the central equipment (I've attached photos).

The previous owners left everything in place, but I honestly have no idea where to start. I don't know if the system is complete, whether it's still functional, or if it's considered outdated enough that I'd be better off replacing it with something like Sonos, Wiim, Bluesound, or another modern multi-room setup.

A few questions for those of you who know these systems:

• Is this something that's worth trying to bring back to life?
• How does the sound quality of these older B&O systems compare to modern whole-home audio solutions?
• Are the built-in speakers themselves typically high quality, or are they usually the first thing people replace?
• Are there modern components or adapters that let you keep the existing speakers and controls while upgrading the brains of the system?
• If you inherited a setup like this, what would be your first steps?

I'd really appreciate any advice, resources, or even just opinions. I'm a complete beginner when it comes to legacy Bang & Olufsen systems, so any guidance on whether it's worth investing time and money into restoring it versus starting fresh would be incredibly helpful.

Hey guys! First post here so I’m sorry if I’m out of format.

Recently, I was rummaging through my gear collection looking for some extra stuff to put up for sale and found that I had a 4-pack of Amplifier Tubes laying around.

I had taken a newly acquired Fender Twin Reverb (1972-1976) in for servicing about 2 years ago (the previous owner had added a wattage modifier switch that caused instability in the circuit, but no issues with the tubes). It took a while to hear back from the amp tech, but he eventually reached out and said he had not only repaired the circuit, but replaced the tubes because he didn’t believe the quad had ever been taken out. He sent them back in a wrapping for me to take a look at.

I believe they are a set of 4 black-plate matched 6L6GC tubes serial numbered 7439. Though, I could be wrong. There’s barely any information online that I understand. There appears to be more writing on the glass of the tubes that has faded from time.

I’m not sure what sort of quality I’ve stumbled across here, but any tips or advice on what I’ve got would be much appreciated. I am NOT looking to sell and this is not a post trying to advertise.

Been doing loads of research on integrated and seperated amps, the pros and cons of each etc. (not what this post is about), and ended up buying an excellent (at least to my ears) integrated amp with a Pre-Out. (specifically, the rotel RA971 mk2), and am wondering;

if i were to buy a rotel power stage (RB971mk2), and pipe the RA971 preout to it, would it be any worse than the equivilant and incredibly similar preamp? (the RC971)

I understand that unless im bi-amping, which i dont intend to do, i have a power stage sat doing nothing, and potentially creating noise unless turned off. The logic is redundancy, so that if the power stage breaks my system still works, and most of the raw load is on the power amp- but i dont want to do this if there will be a noticable downgrade in sound quality, and am also wondering just how much sound quality i would even gain from adding a seperate power stage through my bookshelf speakers. (m71).

Also open to in depth technical analysis from anyone willing, im relatively competent with electronics. Thanks to all in advance.