jk1430

I wouldn't have brought this up but since jackfish mentioned the Vandersteen 2 & 3's. I can confirm that they are both excellent choices. Looks wise, I don't think you will be able to get them but I have both and think they are quite a bit better than the 1.7. Just to note, I did have a pair of 1.7's myself so I was able to compare them side by side. With Vandersteen though, its easy to get good sound but if you want great sound, you really have to match your electronics properly, as well as good setup. For some other choices, I don't see why a small floorstander would not be OK because they take up about the same space. Some brands I would look at are Spendor, DeVore, Monitor Audio, JM Labs (Focal). I'm sure there are some other brands in your price range that are good as well. If I think of any more, I will post them. Also, if you are looking for the large image size that you are used to with the 1.7's, you can retain most, if not all of it by the type of electronics you use.

Mathem13, At least we can agree on something. Like you, I use DBT's and find them to be very useful. The reason is simple; I don't want to waste any money spent on something that wasn't what I thought it was. DBT's have saved me quite a bit of money over the years, as well as, confirmed several times that I was making a good choice. Overall, I agree; an excellent tool. With regards to timbre, I do feel you are a little off. I took this out of a dictionary: "Acoustics, Phonetics . the characteristic quality of a sound, independent of pitch and loudness, from which its source or manner of production can be inferred. Timbre depends on the relative strengths of the components of different frequencies, which are determined by resonance." That clearly dosen't sound like a Psyco Acoustic factor. To me, at least, not only is timbre something real, but looks like it can be measured, as well. Which is why I asked you about it in the first place.

Mayhem13, From your last reply to me, I do know where you are comming from. You claim to be on the objective side of the issue but reading your own words, you admit to being subjective. "But to your question on Timbre. timbre should NEVER be applied to a reproductive system where exact reproduction of the source is desired....unless your intent is to re'color an artist's masterpiece?............surely that isn't your intention is it?.... And if it was, on what basis would you choose a 'color'.....and how would you apply different colors.....and what colors get applied to what masterpiece?........I believe you understand where I'm coming from with this line of questions:)" If your goal is exact reproduction of the source, the only conceivable way to do this is to experiance the actual event yourself. If you were not there, you don't have a reference to base your objectivity on. From there, the situation can only be treated as subjective and nothing else. Can't have it both ways. If we both didn't attend the actual event. you are every bit as subjective as myself, or any one else, for that matter. Your guess is as good as mine. Who's to say that my system dosent sound as close to the origional as yours? Also, in reference to what you have to say about the importance of timbre, I can only say one thing. Are you on drugs? Do you even know what timbre is?

Mayhem13, Thanks for the above clarification. I thought you were talking about sound quality. It makes much more sense now in context of functionality and convenience. I do, however, have to agree with Jud. There's quite a few things we will not agree on. And thats OK; you're allowed to have your own views. That said, I was hoping you can answer a couple of questions for me. (If anyone else has some input, by all means, comment as well.). I fully admit I am one of those people that forms an opinion based mostly listening. I will look at some measurements and specs, but in the end, I've never put that much trust in them. After reading a lot of comments on websites like this, it seems that a lot of people share your views. I'm starting to now think that I may have to readjust how I evaluate components. One of the main things I listen for when trying new equipment is timbre. For me, I find that is a component is very good at presenting the timbre of various instruments, I will probably be happy with it. The question I have is, how is timbre measured? If you (or anyone), can tell me how to look for this, it will save me a great deal of time. At the very least, it may help me narrow some of my choices down. I do have a couple more questions, but this is my main one so just this for now. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help me out on this.

Mayhem13, Reading your reply, I feel you get the analog part right but I really don't understand why you wouldn't trust your ears. Given the very nature of audio and audio systems, you have no choice not to use your ears. What other alternative do you have? You are listening to music. Am I saying that measurements have no value at all? Of course not, they can be very useful. Also, your ears, under certain curcumstances, can very well "play tricks on you" or be unreliable. But when someone says that you cant trust your ears, I have a hard time believing that person enjoys, or even listens, to music at all. My questions are not at all meant in a negative way; I'm just trying to honestly understand your point of view. Mabye I'm just reading too much into your post.

Given that a good portion of my previous post got cut off right after "One last thing", so mabye I need to clarify. The whole point of my post was to ask the question as to why people enter these conversations and insist on science and measurements claiming that alot, if not all, of the subjective attributes to the listening experiance are placebo, or your mind playing tricks on you because of what others are saying. Most, not even for a second, consider that there is something that they don't know. They read a bunch of specs and form their opinion based on no real experiance of their own. The last part of my post briefly touches on what we don't know. From a medical/science perspective, we are not even remotely close to fully understanding how our bodies work; be it hearing or anything else, for that matter. This brings me to my own question: "Given the fact that we don't know everything yet, is it possible that there may be other factors to this issue? Things that we don't yet know to measure?" Given the OP is a nurse, I can't help but think that if he/she went to work and asked some of the doctors there about this topic, that they may agree with me. My origional post was not an attempt to belittle or discredit, but since some here feel that I have no place making comments here, lets have a look some quotes from the origional post. "Even just a cursory read of the threads will have a newbie encounter those claiming to hear things that in theory should not be heard and which most do not hear." "That way, a newcomer could avoid becoming hopelessly confused over all the subjective stuff in the threads and make a decision based on accepted scientific principles." "The more time I spend here, the more obvious it becomes that many people underestimate the power of the mind to deceive itself." "Expecting ones ear alone to tell the truth just doesn't work." "Quite often even the most rational will see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear." "I work in the medical industry (nurse) and have daily encounters with the placebo effect. It is extremely powerful and many pseudo medical industries are built around it." "I hope this is taken for what it is, i.e, constructive criticism from an outsider looking in." "great forum but I think it would gain a lot of credibility by dealing with these issues upfront and in a very visible way." "Newcomers would feel much more comfortable and less bogged down." The only thing I can take away from the origional post is that you have an admitted newcomer comming into the forum and literally dictating what is, and is not valid about others choices and views with relation to how they listen to music; while directly admitting they are a newcommer and don't know much about CA. They claim they're here to learn. It looks to me like they are here to teach. If you don't believe me, thats OK, just reread the OP. Gregg, You state "The OP throws down a legitimate challenge to the community. It deserves an 'answer' -- even if we have to struggle with it. You could even make the case that the more we struggle with the answer, the better the question." You now have an answer, at least from me, and unlike you, I'm not struggling at all. You also ask me to do you a favor. Read the post again and you will find that I just did.

What I really don't understand here is why certain people will come to a site like this to begin with. Everything hear is centered around the subjective. Even when people on these threads discuss things of an objective nature, in the end, the reason for the discussion is better sound. Better sound is subjective. The origional poster states that he/she works in the medical field and would like to keep things scientific and objective. That goal has already been achieved. From an objective standpoint, as long as you can hear and understand the music, you're done. The cheapest thing sold at Walmart will cover your needs for a system, based on objectivity. So, the OP, without realizing it, is really asking questions and making comments based on his desire to have a better listening experience. No matter how you look at it, going beyond the most basic function of just being able to hear the music is subjective. If you don't believe me, think of it this way: Lets say that you want me to listen to a song that I have never heard before and then comment on it. As long as I could hear and understand the song, what would be the difference between me listening to the song on a clock radio as opposed to a $100,000 audio system? The answer is nothing; I can tell you if I like the song either way. Anything more that that and you are crossing over into the subjective. Even when you are dealing with scientific measurements. You do so in an attempt to gain better sound. One last point regarding objective measurement. We don't even come close to fully understanding how our senses work. That alone implies numbers alone don't tell the whole story. To get a complete picture with measurements is impossible because we don't even know what to measure. One last thing

However you decide to go, I think your idea of creating a partition just for music is a very good one. As far as protecting your music files, you really should have a backup on a seterate drive. If you can't do that, a music partition is the next best thing. You will still be at risk for a mechanical hard drive failure, but a seperate partition will protect against software/user error types of problems. Also, if using Windows, you will be using either ntfs or fat32 for a file system. Neither one is very good and leaves you open to failures that can lead to data loss. If you are going to install Win7, the best thing to do is handle all the partitioning before the install. Whatever you do, I would highly recommend that you back up all important data first. If you need any help on how to do this, post and I can walk you through it. The process is not difficult but you may have a few questions.

The first thing I would do is try some different media players. VLC is very good for video but I don't like it at all for listening to music. Here's some really good players that are free and work on Mac: Clementine, Audacious and Amarok. Try all 3 because they are very different from each other. Any one of those should sound better than what you have now. Also, someone mentioned Decibel. If you like Decibal, you should try Audacious. While they are similiar in a lot of ways, I feel Audacious is a better player.

I also find that a bit confusing with the Yamaha. The only thing that I would like to add is to consider your whole system when you upgrade. Its very easy to focus on one thing and overlook others. When I spend on upgrades, i like to get as much for my money as possible. For example, you need to get a USB DAC. I know that there are some excellent choices at all different prices. Beyond using the DAC for your computer, I see 2 potential low cost, or even free upgrades. Most DAC's have other inputs besides USB. You can also use it on your Oppo (At least for CD's). Also, a lot of DAC's have a volume control. This will allow you to bypass your preamp which can be a huge upgrade in sound quality. Again, these are just a couple of things that you can try if you like. A lot of people have different opinions as to what is better; you will too. All I'm saying is make the best of whatever you end up with and don't be afraid to experiment. Some of the best things I have done were by accident or just playing around using things in different ways.

Kevin, Its a good thing it didn't work. I just tried the link and it was OK for me. If you don't want to risk your music files you must either use another computer for the download or use a drive that you know there is no music on. (If you have a small USB drive for 4 or 8 gigs, that will be fine.) Try the link again and if that does not work for you, I will list some others for you to try. It dosen't matter which one you choose as they will all work for what you are trying to do. Also, you won't have the drive letter issue with Linux. Once Windows is out of the way, it will be much easier for you to see what's really on your drives. 33. Back Track, 37. Knoppix, 55. Clonezilla, 73. Toorox, 83. Systemrescue I would try Knoppix first, but any one of them should be OK. I try to check this thread as often as I can. If you have any problems, post and I will try to help you if I can. **I just thought of a couple of thing as I was typing. If you are using an external drive, try using it on another computer, even if you don't think your music is on it. Also, with Windows, sometimes the C parition is used just for the OS and may have another partition besides C (D, E, F ect.) where your files are really being stored. It can be easy to miss because in Explorer, on the left side of the screen, it just gives you choices (Music, Videos, Documents, Downloads, ect) and don't show a drive letter because you can put things from different partitions in them. One last thing, and I can't believe that I didn't think of this sooner: download another media player and use that one to search for your missing music. I recomment a media player that works with Windows called Clementine because it is really good at finding music on all of your drives. I would try that first before using the Linux option. It will be easier and faster.

I think you are off to a good start. The best part is that you are doing stuff yourself and really learning instead of just asking people what you should buy. The only advice I can give is that your tastes will almost certainly change over time as you listen to more music and equipment. Make your own decisions. (That dosen't mean you can't consider advice. Just remember that you have to listen to your system and not someone else.) Lastly, if you stop listening to music (or just listen to your system to evaluate components), you messed up.

I may be able to help here. In your last post you say: I did not run the linux distro as I am a little nervous running something I'm not familiar with and I'm not sure how to verify that's safe to do so. I get that but here is where you may be going wrong. If you didn't misplace your music, it somehow may have been deleted. In the post where it said to stop using your computer immediately, there was a very good reason for that. If you just can't find your music, thats one thing. If it was deleted, however, it becomes much more serious. Deleted files don't actually get deleted. The OS just flags that portion of the hard drive that had the file on it as empty and is now usable. The file is still there. As you continue to use your computer, the deleted files will be written over. It may happen right away or it may take a while. Think of it like not setting your house on fire and destroying it all at once, but standing on your front lawn and shooting it with a gun. Right now, by continuing to use your PC, you are shoting at all the deleted files on the free space of the HD. I read through the instructions in that earlier post. I'm not a high level computer expert, but I can tell you there is no safer way to handle this that I know of. Read the post again and think it through. You can't do damage. That's why it was recommended.

Try going into audio settings/preferences and see if there are options for digital.You may have to change the settings to to a higher resolution. If that doesn't work, post exactly what you did.

I was reading through some of the recommendations for your problem. Did you try what the second poster recommended about running a live linux distro? If no, was there a reason for not doing it?