KLIAV Show 2009 Reports

For total performance they won the crown but for performance with price ratio...hmm, I think the mid setup has won over them..IMHO

Photo is available at the web below:
http://cforum6.cari.com.my/viewthread.php?tid=1683996&extra=page%3D1

chk posts on the kl international av show at www.hi-fi-avenue.blogspot.com
tx

And most people don't visit with an open mind...they have formed opinions based on reading reviews and blogs...and hype

123_rocketman wrote:Hi,

Has anybody attended the presentation by Franck Tchang on his resonators in CMY room at level 4?

The resonators are made of different metals starting with copper, silver, gold and platinum. They are of semi-hemispheric shape of 17mm diameter with 4 external "wings".

Wish to know your feed back on the resonators.

I hear no difference...maybe i am not pro...how about others?cAn?

aawcy wrote:
I hear no difference...maybe i am not pro...how about others?cAn?

Trust your ears. That is what all that matters.

I am with ryder and lavender.

sivaguru wrote:I am with ryder and lavender.

Hey guys! Where are you?

Trust your ears and if you need any assistance in this area of resonance responses in your listening room, ryder is welll read and have extensive experiences in this area.

Siva: Glad that someone had responded to your query on the performance of the pairing of Harbeth speakers with Exposure amp. Considering getting a pair of Harbeth?

Regards

Thanks tycham.Perhaps when I recover from the economic slump.Will read the thread though.

My take on the best room or set up? Take a normal pop/rock cd and ask the dealer to play. Crank the volume out loud and if the system can handle the music nicely, then that's one set up you take note of. No point using audiophile cds to evaluate a system as most playback would definitely be above average.

You may be right mister but I have to disagree with you 100%.

You are infact not testing the system but the flaws on the CD/Recording itself.

A good system will bring out the flaws in a CD or recording. You are not milking the potential of the system at all.

Maybe good for testing a minicompo.

Just like putting a Ron 92 petrol into Mugenfoo's MugenTuned Honda to test it's capability.

BTW, you can have desert island system for rock music using a minicompo after a few beers.

Cheers.

Just my 2 cents. YMMV.

It's a can of worms we are going to open here. Some people actually says the ultimate factor of a system is the music source. I.e. our LP or CD and how good the recording is. This is the reason why so many exhibitors plays the bing-bang-booms. Because they can't use a normal commercial CD as their recording tends to leave a lot to be desired. Those 'audiophile' LP/CD tends to have very close miking, using top of the range mikes and recording equipment. Their recording are exemplary eventhough we can't say the same about their music. But when we want to demonstrate how accurate the system is, the bing-bang-boom is the safest bet.

On the other hand, the more pertinent arguement is that what -we- really want to hear is -our- music. So isn't it more important that the system plsys -our- music well and not some audiophile bing-bang-booms ? But what happens if our favourite CD is recorded too bright and with rolled-off bass ?.....

An F1 car cannot use Ron 92 petrol and shows it's capability.

forgive me for getting philosophical, but nobody really knows the quality of a cd 'pressing' or wav file etc, not even the recording engineer who mastered it, until it is played back over some kind of a sound reproduction system. My point is that we can only know the quality of a recording (on a certain medium) upon hearing it being reproduced. We do not know whether it is Ron 92 or F1 fuel until we put it into the machine and start it up. I think this is one reason why the 16-bit resolution/44.1khz sampling rate of the Red Book format is still with us; what we previously thought of as the limitations of the format ('digital sound') has turned out to limitations of the reproduction machinery. As the understanding of the digital music reproduction has improved (eg jitter, brick wall filters), we've begun to realise that what we thought of as the 'inherent' sound of CD is not. Perhaps misterslumber has a point; i've heard albums on CD I'd given up on as damaging to the ears sound tonally refined and with much better dynamic contrast and expression on a well-sorted system. But maybe that's just me...

Yes, JTan, that's the whole point. Once we were trying out a powercord and we used a cd of an old recording (in the seventies) to play in the system. That sounded terrible but when we changed the powercord into the CD player, aha, it didn't sound so bad after all! In fact, it became listenable. Of course if we were to test using an audiophile cd instead, the sound difference will still be there, but only minimal as the recordings are already quite maximised. Sorry VS126, but I think you have got your perception very wrong by equating rock music to mini compos. You haven't heard rock music yet in a great set up, and I mean great set up, not those system that can only handle vocals and minimalistic instrumentations at soft volume level. And yes, Wong said it right, you want to listen to the music that you like, not have to listen to the music that your system like - in other words, be a slave to your music, not to your system.