The Art of quality recordings

[Big Dog RJ]

G'day maties, greetings from down unda- unda isolation...
Well not too shabby really, restrictions are slowly easing off but we can never be too relaxed, Covid is still on the loose!

Was just listening to some old jazz fusion by Bob James and his crew Fourplay. I've heard them live in Chicago many years ago in a galaxy far away... or shall I say at a Jazz club in Naperville. Anyway, that type of sound always remained as one of my reference points, of which I built many great systems from over a few decades.

So I pulled out a few CDs, one was the Journey Album and the other called Heartfelt. Although the sound was a blast! The music was not that great I must say. I ended up with a headache within the first few mins and after nearly 2hrs of listening I had a thumping headache. I realised that both these CDs are heavily compressed. To such an affect that loudness is way over the top, everything is loud, normal passages, regardless of soft/loud, transients and the whole presentation is just loud! Also the level controls set on the preamp were only around 30 but it was still loud, that's about it!

Took out an older Fourplay CD, Between the Sheets, probably one of their best albums overall. Now, this was much nicer, smoother and had the subtle variances that one would expect from good recordings. So ended up listening to that for the next hour.

Then I selected a Ray Brown album series called My best friends are... piano players, on Telarc. Hit play and oh! Now that's what I call music! Every note, every detail rendered in its most natural form, with superb layering and tonal pitch, plus the musicality was marvelous! And another marvelous thing, my headache went off!

Basically, I realised what a drastic difference in recordings, and one that I was so used to in the past, I just simply don't enjoy any more. The Telarc labels are great, and then I have a few ECM and many Verve labels, all of which are outstanding on digital playback. Those subtle differences on Telarc, ECM and say Blue Note are only subtle variances that still make the music most enjoyable and rewarding.

However, the compressed stuff is really bad and I don't see myself ever heading in that direction again, unless there was nothing else to listen to. Ah! But then there's always vinyl and quality reference recordings are mighty fine!

I was just wondering if anyone else has come across this loudness, compressed material I'm referring to? And if so, how do you address it and do you just ignore it and focus on the music..., which I find bit difficult to do.

Listening habits is certainly an important criteria in audio playback, at the same time I firmly believe that re-creating quality recordings is definitely an art form!
Once that quality of re-creation has been established, the listener is rewarded with fine music!

Interesting to hear your thoughts...
Cheers, RJ

[admin]

Can't agree more, RJ. The quality of recordings is such an integral part of our hobby. I mostly listen to CD's and the quality is highly variable. The dynamic range compression on some albums is just horrendous. Everything is loud,... no dynamics whatsoever.

I have had some very big negative surprises when buying some albums that I was really looking forward to and then upon playing them in my system and hearing how awful they sound. It sometimes can be very sad, especially when you built up high expectations. Much of the music I "discover" is done while I am at work listening to music streaming on inexpensive headphones and DAC. I will often find music that I really like and then purchase the CD or LP for home listening on "proper gear". It's hit or miss.

I've been "burned a few times" with bad purchases. If possible I try to check the dynamic range compression database of albums to see if I can predict whether it should be an album that I purchase.

http://dr.loudness-war.info/

If it gets bad marks, I really have to consider whether this is something I want to add to my collection or not.

Certainly, there can be a big difference between "a good song" and a "good recording." With vinyl it's even harder as you now only have to see how it was recorded, but also the condition of the record. And of course, each time that record gets played, you lose a little fidelity.

Oh well, such are the hardships of our hobby. But for all the disappointments there are those times when you spin a record and it's like magic and you close your eyes and the band is in front of you. No regrets.

[AnotherJohnson]

The compressed stuff is nearly always pop or rock, and generally it was mixed for playback on car systems where road noise kills the chance for subtlety.

[roberto]

RJ and dear friends,

That's exactly the why I am now on computer music. I can play uncompressed files, (DSD) up to 11.289MHz sampling frequency vs 44,1KHz. Also, I use the Signalyst HQPlayer (signalyst.com) to reproduce high resolution files with excellent results. the dynamics, the feeling of the musician(s), the quality of the recording is granted. (This sampling frequency is what comes out from the recording console without any compression).

On today's days, most all recording studios are using digital consoles and the recording is digital made, not analogue. And this is a fact.

The ASIO software that I use for dedicated audio files, is fantastic. I can upsampling the 44.1KHz of the cd up to this frequency.

Is up sampling a good thing? Paul McGowan from PS Audio answer this question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdPU2TZylSs

Happy listening!

[Big Dog RJ]

Wall Flower DK

20200721_014104.jpg (2.9 MiB) Viewed 1449 times

I was just listening to these few LP's and having an awe-inspiring experience, the level of detail on DK's Wall Flower album and Cassandra Wilson's New Moon Daughter is superb!


Then I started spinning a few discs and was disappointed at the mediocre quality recordings... until I came across a gem! Hadn't listened to this one for a while... what a outstanding presentation I must say! Talk about the art of quality recordings, no doubt!

This experience on CD, and LP and the variations in the quality of recordings is such a significant experience for me, that now I'm going to very very carefully select what I buy. It's going to take a while of proper searching but I think it's worth the effort, afterall I really don't want mediocre stuff.

20200721_013653.jpg (4.16 MiB) Viewed 1449 times

20200721_013704.jpg (4.27 MiB) Viewed 1449 times

Cheers to those fine recordings!
Nothing else compares, RJ

[AnotherJohnson]

On today's days, most all recording studios are using digital consoles and the recording is digital made, not analogue. And this is a fact.

This has certainly been true for 30 years now. If there are people arguing that it’s not, they haven’t been paying attention.

Even so ... the airborne signal that is captured has ALWAYS been and CONTINUES TO BE analog.

Is up sampling a good thing? Paul McGowan from PS Audio answer this question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdPU2TZylSs

PS Audio has had some winners, and Paul McGowan often makes good points.

Obviously streaming is the way most will listen to music as we move forward. It is also obvious that audiophiles constitute a minuscule fraction of the streaming community. So ... I have no faith in any form of streaming as a lasting source for the highest quality.

Regarding digital in general, it eventually has to be turned back into an analog airborne signal so that you can hear it.

Regarding this conversion process, by the time it gets to any currently produced CJ product, this DA conversion has already taken place.

I don’t know about most of you, but for me digital domain amps never sound right. I think this was in play for me with much of the ML Masterpiece line. For whatever reason, the class D amp in the BF210 doesn’t bother me, but it’s supplementary below 150 Hz rather than primary below 400 Hz. Edit: interestingly, the Marantz PM-KI class D integrated amp doesn’t bother me either. Maybe there are some implementations that sound better than others. https://www.hifiplus.com/articles/maran ... amplifier/.

So ... streaming is here to stay. And sampling rates are important, although the Nyquist sampling theorem suggest that we are often in overkill mode when rates are compared to human ears. There must be more going on in human sound processing than can be captured and presented in an FFT.

Ken Ishiwata is reportedly the first to use the term streaming, 10 years before the industry began using it as a staple. Ken’s first love was tape, which is true for all audiophiles of his (and my) era. The PM-KI Ruby integrated amp has two tape loops. People don’t seem to realize that the two tape in jacks are really just extra line level inputs. The two tape out jacks are simply a pair of unprocessed signal outputs. Tape loops and theater loops or processor loops are equivalent. It was probably an error to label them as tape.

Tape is the way we came up watching our elder audiophiles. Look at Roberto’s Dad ... he had several tape machines. It was the norm, not outside the norm, for audiophile of his day.

We saw tape go away as the stereo era came in. We saw cassettes replace reel to reel. We saw CDs replace both. We saw SACD come as a super format and then die because the market for exceptional programs was so small.

We now live in an era where Alexa regurgitates mediocre digital everywhere. And people are thrilled. Advertisers blurt out “Listen to us on whatever system you use to stream at home!”

Sigh ...

Well, I may add streaming through the SA-KI Ruby’s DAC. But my preliminary efforts are not giving me a warm feeling. It’s fuzzy, but not warm.

The only advantage I can hear so far is that program storage issues are virtually eliminated. In the smaller living spaces of so many urban dwellers these days, this is a HUGE plus.

YMMV. Mine certainly does.

[roberto]

Hola Chicos,

My points of view might not be yours. And this is ok. Regarding my LPs, (4K and something) I just became bored with the cleaning, I can only played one LP daily, cleaning the needle, having the VPI16.5 cleaning machine, etc, my TT sounds good. Still, there is wow and flutter, and also, there are resonances that belongs to the tonearm with the tip and the vinyl and do not belong to the naturalness of the musical instrument. The signal to noise ratio, the best that I can get with the new type of material, circa -75dB and the channel separation at 1KHz circa the 35dB between left and right. And the distortion. O boy, really? This is the eternal debate. To me, and my ears are now more into the digital world. And I am going to tell a recent history that I have:

Mr Pignani, is a dear friend with Conrad Johnson gear and he owns Avantgarde big horn speakers. When he listened for only 30 minutes or so my system, the said: your digital sounds fine, but never will match the quality and the sweetness that I have with my TT. He owns a very fancy TT with a $4K cartridge. He said: is it too difficult to bring your digital gear to my place and there I can show you how wrong you are. I said, It is OK, I am going to disconnect the external hard discs and I am going to take only two, where I have very nice music. I too my Mac Pro, with the USB Lush^V2 cable, my Nordost Blue Heaven IC, my Exasaound E-32 DAC with the Up Tone Audio LS-2 linear power supply. At his place, he had a table where I could install all my digital gear, next to his system. He also has a screen HDMI TV where I could use too. I took me less than 15 minutes to be ready. Then he said. I want to have the same level, and to start the song immediately so, I can switch back and forth for the test. I do know that this is not right, but I agree with him, that it was his way to do the test. Honestly speaking, I had my tale sticked into my legs at this point. I said, this is going to be a difficult test. He did just the levels and started to have a listen. I use the HQPlayer software by Signalyst and the ASIO software for DSD native files.

I do not want to bored more to you. The overall sound that came from my DAC did match all my expectativas. He was shocked. He could not believe how good the digital signal was vs his TT. He did check all what will check. Sax, piano, guitar, drums, cymbals, bass, electronic music, classical music, cellos, violin, strings, brass, percussion...you name it. And I can say that both media sound very nice! My tale stared to wave, and when I came home, I was very satisfied with this test.

What I am saying is that on these days, there is a very good digital gear that it is having that sweetness, that thing that the analogue has. The timbre and the harmonic texture was alike, and some times, the digital was clean, no surface noise and rumble that it is present in the TT, no matter how expensive the TT is.

If you scroll down you will find the specifications and measurements. Read the measurements and see how the new digital rig is doing. Look for distortion, intermodulation, signal to noise ratio, channel separation, crosstalk, frequency response...etc.

https://www.exasound.com/Products/e32MarkIIDAC.aspx

Both medias, the TT or any good analogue audio reproducer and todays digital gear are good. I am not saying that digital must be your liking. What I am saying is just give it a try. It is not a 16bit/44.1 KHz. This dac can play DSD native with a sampling rate of !1.289MHz and 32 bits. It is a totally different digital beast and it is compatible with all digital formats.

Happy listening!

[AnotherJohnson]

Your turntable description and experience is why it was so easy to displace turntables from their central prominence.

Yet mine is quite different.

I clean a record once at the time it is first played. Rarely does it get or need a second cleaning.

I brush the stylus once every few hours ( maybe 6 to 8 sides). It does not need more.

I have excellent pitch and timber that beats the very best streaming demos I have ever been pitched.

I go side after side without ticks or pops.

It could be that I am just exceptionally careful of my records ... I treat them well, and vise versa.

There are three areas where streaming beats vinyl for me.

1. Space required for storage.

2. Vinyl’s incessant interruption of the music necessitated by the short length of one side.

3. Vinyl’s very high cost of playback gear (my deck, cartridge and preamp retail for nearly $50k, although I’ve got substantially less in them). Edit: actually more than $50k. Yikes!!! How did this happen? It just snuck up on me.

There is no doubt that the best streaming can be excellent. I think we’ve discussed that before.

But ... the best streaming is fickle. Here today, maybe not tomorrow. Copyright protected ok today, not playable tomorrow. The headaches of dealing with content providers is far more aggravating to me than grabbing a record or cd off the shelf.

And we always come back to the ADC/DAC that has to be involved. Some are really well done. Many are not.

When records and CDs are gone, which one could argue is already the situation, the majority of streaming services will be happy to serve up McMP3 burgers as the majority would prefer.

Meanwhile, there are so many examples of incompetent turntable installations with very happy owners listening intently, that we’re back again to psycho-acoustics and why people choose what they choose.

[roberto]

RJ and Chicos,
Understood. I am not a 200 LPs user. I still have three great TT, the Goldmund Studio, The Oracle Delphi VII and the Linn LP12. A lot of TT had passed through my ears too. I have all the tools for the alignment of the 15° for the VTA, all the overhang tools. And more of 4000 LPs of my collection.
I spent hours with analogue gear, and believe, I love the analogue sound. Sound is analogue. To play the LPs, you must have a RIAA phono preamp, with a special equ. curve. And you do know all the fuzz regarding how a LP with a needle vibration, generates the analogue signal to be amplified to get to our speakers.

There is a lot of compression with the signal too. I have some test records where you can see how a non safe weight jumps off the track. Also, what about miss tracking? The LP centre hole for the TT"s pin is always off centre. Many records are like this. Nevertheless, our ears have a very good capacity. We learn to how avoid the problems that are inherent with the technology and we concentrate in what we should, the music. And not only the music, the musician(s) playing for us. I am only mentioning the most common problems. And beside of all these, the Analogue is OK!

I have this analogy: what happens if you take a nice beef steak and you throw it into a blender. This is not a problem. You have chopped meat. Now, make the beef steak back again. The main problem is to go back from digital to analogue. It is not a simple thing. But with the powerful computers available on these days, and the softwares availables too, this is what it is happening on digital. I can play with my DAC a native DSD file coming out from the recording console with not compression and the same exact file. The old 16 bits/44.2KHz is not enough. There is a lot of signal compression with mp3 and mp4 files too.

And this is what most melomaniacs are hearing. He or she do not care about the quality...they can not distinguish the huge difference. On the other side, we can. I can. And four or five years ago, digital sound did sucks! I could hear all the harsh and jitter. On today's good DACs, this problem have been solved. My DAC plays crystal clear sound. It does not resonate, and do not miss track. Also it reproduces what is at the file. If the file is a bad recording, same thing to analogue, the sound is bad. If the signal is great, that's what you get, great sound.

The friendly use for digital, and how easy is to move from A to Z and choose any song and make a playlist of your own liking. Because I am getting old, my time is very value for me. I lose a lot of time with LPs from one to the other. If I can have the same quality, why should I stick with the old tech? Right now, I have over 16TB with DSD files and good recordings. It is twice bigger that my LP collection...and I am really enjoying the quality...it is that nice too.

Happy listening!

[AnotherJohnson]

I am not trying to talk you into vinyl. That ship has sailed for you.

Please do not assume that your vinyl experience is universal, although it is obviously the majority experience.

I am not dismissing digital for you.

I am dismissing it, at least in the form of streaming, for me.

And it is not a naive or poorly considered dismissal.

[Big Dog RJ]

G'day maties,

Some very valid points on both sides of the spectrum, no doubt! It is always a learning curve and I believe on both formats there's always room for improvement.

Going back well over two decades, I could never get the TT analog quite right. There was always something I had missed only to discover when I took the TT to get checked did I realise what areas of setup were missing. So I basically ditched it! Around 90/91 it was digital playback all the way. Starting with a Telefunken CD player, Kenwood, Technics, Yamaha, and only then into the mid-fi gear; NAD, Arcam, Musical Fidelity and Marantz. Then few more years after, it was Wadia, Meridian and Meitner DACs.

Finally settled for a superb CJ DV2B vacuum tube CD player and that was it! For a while... until I ventured into Cayin, Cary Audio, Playback Designs, ARC Ref series then was on the lookout again... and now settled with a Mac! Although I am still totally focused on the T+A, with all those digital playback systems it definitely got better with every type and model I chose. However, that CJ DV2B I do truly miss, it was a legendary sound and sincerely enough, the T+A gear sounds quite similar.

During my time with the ACT2, whenever I went down to the Basement Discs store in Melb city CBD, the owner of that store would always ask me if I ever thought of getting back into vinyl. I told him that the thought and urge had always been there but the dedication and commitment in maintaining high quality vinyl was making me think twice, plus the associated cost. Where would I start? Having the ACT2 and various CJ amplifiers, I would have to start at a fairly high level otherwise it's pointless. Might as well just stick with CDs.

Only way after around 2013, I took the plunge and got the Rega RP3. However, it didn't stop there, had to add the cost of a phonostage, cartridge and power supply, plus interconnects. All up, over 3 grand having bought the Ortofon 2MBlack, after having the 2MBlue. Anyway, on the CJ gear through the Quads, it was marvellous! And so the upgrade cycle begins! Now, that cost has gone over five times that initial amount, which I would be more than adequate but to learn it certainly gets better as you go up in all aspects of TT & analog gear. So my quest continues...

As for the digital front, as I mentioned in my previous post, I was a bit flat when I played some awful recordings on CD. Then I came across some quality material, like that 20bit mastering CD of Patricia Barber- Modern Cool, and a few other well recorded stuff on ECM and Telarc, the quality playback through the McIntosh SACD player was fantastic! I was seriously thinking at one point whether I should just ditch the Mac and start venturing on the upgrade path again...but this time round I don't think so.

I don't see it any worthwhile point in just spending large amounts just to attain only about 15% in upgrade sonics. I'm looking for that 40% and above performance benchmark, that's my standard and it's quite high. So far, it's only the T+A digital playback systems that meet that benchmark or possibly exceed it. However, the damn thing costs over 30grand! Especially now, if I were to divulge in that type of spend, the good wife will definitely throw me in the dog house!

So, for now I'm enjoying both formats on both sources, vinyl and CDs, and the quality recordings are indeed mighty fine!

Cheers to all, and enjoy those fine tunes.
Bigity woofetey! Woof!
RJ

[roberto]

Hola Chichos,

Two friends came today this afternoon that I have not seen for long time. They are truly audiophiles too. They love the music and one is a keyboard player. Of course, I opened a good wine, and had some cheese, while listening to the music. One of them was so impressed, that he barely talked. I asked if he was not OK, or did not like what we were listening, and he said: this is the most revealing sound and the most less ear fatigue that I ever heard. I'm into their space. I can feel their breathing. The air through the trumpet and through the sax is impressive.

What a compliment!. I was shocked by his comments. Then I said, there are many little things here that makes this quality sound to happen. So, what it is the most important thing, is the way that we can enjoy all these wonderful musicians playing for us. What an afternoon!. They really liked my place and my room. I have made a lot of little changes, and it looks that they could hear them too.

The last change, I made a little stands for my CLXs. These stands make to have the same floor to panel height and the same ceiling height to panel. The stat panels are almost at the centre of the room. I like it...and they look bigger...I am a show off perhaps. The good thing is that I do like my new improved sound. I have better stage, wider and better sense of 3 D. The rest remained about the same. It is clear, transparent, incredible midrange, with deep low frequency due to my BF-210 and I do not know this reason, but I have to decrease the volume. Something was cancelling the volume, the SPL. But it remains the same. I do not feel any change in the bass energy or in other frequencies, just level...strange but good!

Happy listening!

[Big Dog RJ]

Hey Robbo mate,

That something from the bass that's cancelling and seems strange is basically the CLX's coughing up the sub! Throw out the sub mate, the CLX's don't need it. What CLX's need is very high quality recordings, that's about it!

If the recording is great, it will reproduce great. Then again if the recording is superb, it will reproduce superb! I still cannot think why you require a sub, unless your room was huge... even then I don't see why.

The other night when I was listening to that Patricia Barber CD recording done on 20bit masters, the quality of the bass was so fantastic that no sub can match the overall speed and agility of the full range stat. That triple stator and dual Mylar technology is way ahead of its time. To get that thing to move and to be able to control and fully grip it, that's the tricky part...until then I can see why a sub would be required. However, if your amplifier is well capable of doing exactly that, with superb control and grip on the triple stators, the bass energy reproduced on the CLX's is actually one of it's greatest strengths!

Only a handful have experienced what these full range stats are capable of.

Cheers mate, very glad to hear that your friends enjoyed their listening session. Also a small tip, generally after a few glasses of red and some fine cheese, things tend to sound a whole lot better, ha!

Have a good one matey!
RJ

[AnotherJohnson]

Also a small tip, generally after a few glasses of red and some fine cheese, things tend to sound a whole lot better, ha!

When I was young, and listening to C22 and MC240s, it took more than reds.

Martinis and Manhattans were required.

[roberto]

RJ, mate, sorry,

I disagreed with you on the very super low sub-harmonic content. The bass drum, the tuba, the harp, even the piano, the baritone clarinet, the double bass, the church organ, you do need a sub.
On the other hand, the CLXs are designed thinking that you will use a sub with them on each channel. These are words from Mr. Peter Soderberg, who encourage me to do my best and get a pair of CLXs.

I am not cranking the sub, the volume is very low, but it is needed to have that sense of deepness on the bass notes. You don't know what you are missing. Play any organ church music, like Saint Saenz, Concerto No 3 for organ and orchestra. Or play Cantate Domino, Propius, song no. 11 is a very nice recording with a girl singing then a choir with an organ. The bass notes without the sub are inexistent. So, all depends of the type of music that you listen. If you don't listen musical instruments with very low frequency, then I am with you, there is not need for a sub. Doble bass, just sometimes, the bass player uses the very low notes as an effect. Ron Carter and Ray Brown are an example for this. Also John Clayton and Bryan Bromberg. On electric bass, Abby Laboriel is a good example of this too.

Happy listening my dear friend. Stay safe, stay home!

[AnotherJohnson]

https://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649 ... pole-subs/

I had shared this link before. It was removed for a few days, but the deal must have fallen through.

Note the pair of dipole subs.

FWIW, I agree with Roberto that a pair of subs were probably the original plan for the CLX.

When I read his comment on the bass, my first thoughts were about the phase setting, the relative location (node, anti-node, other) and then 25Hz setting. Since he likes the new configuration better, perhaps he is closer to a local optima for placement and/or settings.

I really like BF210 with the F228Bes. But I don’t think I would like it with the F208s.

I wonder how it would pair with the M126Bes. That might be its best pairing for my three rooms. I do not want to lug the 96 pound BF210 up the stairs. So if I get motivated, I’ll bring the M126Bes to the system at ground level for an audition with the BF210. If it’s worth adding one to the M126Bes, I may start scouting for another one and hire a mover to lug it upstairs.

But not today.

[Big Dog RJ]

Yes Robbo, agreed on that mate.

If and only when reproducing very low notes, organ music and perhaps full orchestral works that require a sense of added weight and heft to the overall presence then a sub or pair of subs is the answer, and if it's a very large room.

But that's the thing:
1. I don't listen to that type of music at all.
2. Panels with subs, might as well go with Ren15a's or Neoliths. The CLX's aren't required in this type of setup, it would be a waste of space & money.
3. The CLX's were designed for purity in recordings. Subs can be added if the user wishes to do so but it is not required because it captures everything on the recording.

What we have been hearing in the past are resonances developed within the box or enclosure. Once this box is free or becomes a boxless design, those distortions and resonances are gone- zero! So when it's not there we want it back, and so augmented bass is preferred not the naturalness of bass low frequency.

It takes a while to get used to. Every panel type speaker is a boxless design. There's simply no enclosure that reinforces low frequency or traps it inside a cabinet. Stats, ribbons, hybrids and well designed full range panels have absolutely no distortion. You already know this and that is why you set your subs on very low levels... in which case again, why use them at all?

The double bass played by Ray Brown, Charlie Hayden and the new generation like Christian McBride, and the others, sounds very natural through the CLX's. Subs are not required whatsoever.

Nearly every person who has experienced the CLX's at my place in my particular setup actually thought I was hiding subs in a corner somewhere. They couldn't believe how low these stats could go when required, and I said it all depends on the recording.

I'm not bothered if this is in agreement or not, and if you prefer to listen to your favourite tracks with subs on right throughout, that's fine. As long as you're enjoying it and getting the most out of your recordings.

It's a marvellous thing when you get it right with careful placement and these large stats do require the extra room to be able to deliver that bullet speed bass. No sub can compete with this triple stator speed. It's in the physics, completely different technology as you are well aware of.

Cheers mate and enjoy.
RJ

[AnotherJohnson]

RJ - you’ve probably told us, but could you refresh my memory please? Did you start out with CLX + subs in your room? Or did you start out with CLX alone, and decide that subs were unnecessary?

There would be no purpose in adding subs to the 13A or 15A. Their woofers are large and their bass extension is well into the lowest octave. I note that asking prices for used 15As are typically more than used prices for CLX Arts, although they’re close. Neither seem to sell though.

I’ve been watching 13As, 15As, and CLXs on several sites. The only pair that I’ve seen actually sell in the past 2 months were 13As, and the auction closed at about $7700. Asking BIN prices are typically $3500 higher, with no sales.

Speakers look like a bad investment. They go out of favor. They go out of style. They take up space. They perform as an augmentation of their installation. Yet we’ve got to have them to hear the music.

FWIW, The way ML has set up the BF 21X, I don’t think we’re adding box sound. It is hard to pick up any box resonant modes with a probe.

[Big Dog RJ]

G'day AJ,

Just came across your post, I'll reply briefly as possible since I just finished my late night/early morning session. Now it's 4:33am need to hit the sack...

The CLX's come in two versions, one is the standard version referred to as the CLX, which was introduced around 2008/09. Then shortly after ML introduced the CLX Art, and further refined it subsequently around 2014/2016. Both are very similar from a glance but internally and structurally quite different.
1. The ART series added the extra piece of hardwood on the opposite side of the curved panels. This solid wood is curved and has a beautiful grain, plus adds extra rigidness to the frame of the stat panel. This adds more weight and has a solid thump to low frequency response.

2. They also included solid stainless steel locking collars on the speaker terminals. When you hold them in your hand you'll realise the top quality in these items.

3. The crossover box has been bolted, not glued like the standard version. This also adds greater strength to the overall structure of the entire system.

Both versions also have internal bass switches to adjust for mid-bass and lower bass. The owners manual doesn't mention this, simply because the default settings are well balanced measurements and ML really doesn't want the owner to muck around with it. It's not easy to get the top cover off, you have to jiggle around with it, although if you do this it will not void warranty but it's a pain in the butt! Plus you have to be very sober... I prefer changing the ribbon tweeter elements on maggies rather than messing with these bass switches.

I'm not sure which versions are advertised in your area of the US but if those sides are not curved and rather straight then these are not CLX Art's.

Re. To using subs: yes I did try them with and without on two separate occasions and in two different locations. Initially it was my first demo in Spore, driven with Momentum amplifiers using BF series subs. It was fantastic! There's no doubt about that, and that's where I fully agree with Robby.

However, there were two superb recordings on LP which I've attached pics of, and with the subs it was bass all the way. Then we shut off the subs and went monoblocks direct, the sound was so much more purer and engaging, and the recordings were totally different!

Later in 2018 I bought the CLX Art's and tried three different subs. REL (very nice & powerful), Vandersteen (very smooth, effortlessly done) and ML's BF subs (overall best balance & seamless integration). As I mentioned earlier, the music I listen to doesn't require it, and later earlier that year 2018 & 2019 I visited again to listen to the mighty CJ ART300's driving the CLX's, holy shmackaroons! What an outstanding presentation!

That's when I decided to go Class A on my monoblocks because the ART300's have a much higher Class A bias that can fully grip the bass panels on the CLX's. You're looking at "triple stators with dual Mylars" no easy task for any amplifier to control and grip whatsoever!

Also, whenever I visit my other good mate who drives his CLX Art's with Pass Labs amplifiers, that Class A grip is superb! Which is why I enjoy the MF2550SE driving the CLX's as well. I might probably just keep it afterall.

In regards to my small collection of high quality reference recordings, two of which I've listed here.

One: the Anne Bison Trio, Four Seasons live at Bernie's is a direct to disc mastering on 45rpm 180gm limited edition. With the talent of Michael C Ross engineering and mastering done by the master himself, Bernie Grundman, this recording in its purest form is superb! Some people say without a sub I don't know what I'm missing... no I don't because I'm not missing anything!

The bass lines on this recording are outstanding, there's nothing more required, honestly!

Two: the other one by Eric Bibb, Just like love, recording done on Opus3, again reference quality. On the back of the LP cover, it clearly states how they conducted this particular recording. How they created the space and environment of the musicians, the vacuum tube console used specially designed for such applications, and the purest highest quality signal they could reproduce as directly as possible, which they want the listener to experience in its purest form.

That my fellow audiophile CJ maties is exactly what I'm referring to, and subs are not required within a carefully selected category of fine musical gear, such as CJ and CLX's or your fine selection of speakers that you are currently using.

However, if you do like that added oomph or Humpty so be it! It's not on the recording to begin with, it's artificial.

Cheers to all, and enjoy those tunes!
RJ

[AnotherJohnson]

Both CLX and CLX Arts are advertised used for less than 15As. The Arts are stalled at $12999. The earlier version at $10998. And the prior model Zs, CLS flavors are advertised used for as little as $5000 without moving. Monolith 3s at $3k to $4k.

There is a distinction between unnecessary and unnoticeable. I think this subwoofer business is a place where this is in play.

A good sub pairing is one that you don’t notice until you remove it. And then you like it less, not more.

In any event, personal preferences are what make capitalism work, and they constitute the spice of life.

So, while I can’t virtually experience other people’s systems, I can celebrate their joy.

Most of what we puff and posture about is true for our own audio reality. The frustration comes when we can’t convince others of our personal truth.

Then again, why should home audio be different from the other facets of our realities?

Man it is hotter than Hades here in Tennessee these days. And we can’t even all describe that without discussion. Thermometer reading, heat index, dew points, muggy meter ... I used to teach a chapter on psychrometrics (not a misspelling) in the second course on thermodynamics. You can tell from TV weather girls that they must take this subject too.