Studio 590's

[LowPhreak]

Hey Oz, in case you're still here...

Speaking of digital testing as it were, I was going to say (before I got interrupted earlier) that I've noticed the channel I listen to regularly online, www.radioparadise.com, has been sounding increasingly better. The guy and his wife do a lot to get the best sound they can and they have a great format IMO.

We've e-mailed before about this, so I e-mailed him again yesterday and he wrote back:

Hi Art,


I've made a few tweaks to our signal processing, though it's still the same gear. About a year ago, I introduced the ability for me to tag songs with a playback level value, boosting the level of some older recordings by as much as 4db, and reducing the level of some heavily-compressed newer recordings by as much as -6db. This allowed me to greatly reduce the amount of overall gain control on our stream. That's a pretty significant change. I have also made a number of improvements to our source files over the past 2 years or so, often replacing older versions with remastered versions.


If you're listening via one of our apps on iOS or Android, I'm in the middle of a really major overhaul of the audio quality. Rather than applying global audio processing, each sound file is processed individually for uniformity in level & spectral density -- meaning virtually no processing at all other than overall level control in the case of modern masters, and a tailored bit of de-facto remastering of my own on older recordings. It sounds quite nice, I think. Currently about 50% of teh song files are hand-tweaked in the way they all will be by the end of this year or so -- the others are adjusted according to a less-accurate bit of automated guesswork.

...

...and so on.

Anyway, the 590's bring out everything they've been doing to improve their feed, and I've heard it every step of the way. It sounds pretty damned good now, but he'd like me to A/B and critique his newer 320k AAC stream against the 192k stream I've been using, but I don't use Android or iOS. If you do, maybe you should check it out: http://stream-tx3.radioparadise.com/aac-320 and see if you can run it through the speakers. Bill says it makes quite an audible difference.

Hope to see you back soon!

[4313B]

I'm hoping Mr. Widget or another administrator/moderator can lock this thread. In my opinion, it has gotten way off topic and way out of hand. I appreciate the insight and constructive comments by informed and mature members. Thanks to the comments and opinion of Dave 72, I'm off to buy an ancient pair of La Scala's for my music system and anchor chains for the 590's! As 4315B said, it's business as usual which is very disappointing. Suffice it to say, I'm back on hiatus.

Aww, that's too bad. Do svidaniya!

the top end, which was rolled off and diffuse as well as a lack of dynamics. The sound was just boomy, bloated, with muted highs

the 590s didn't give out much of anything except mush. Again, everyone was unanimous regarding the sound. And Big T ended up selling them as a result.

This is not to say they're bad speakers.

Maybe if you can block out all the other duplicitous bullshit and concentrate on the last sentence you can keep the 590's?
I'd really hate to see you flagellate yourself with an old pair of La Scala's.
They were fine back when we were teenagers and didn't know any better but they're not really meant for mature adults unshackled from nostalgia.

I went the other way. As soon as I saw a gaggle of colleagues bashing the 590's I suggested to my brother in law that he purchase a pair.
I also suggested that he post his purchase on this board so he can laugh at any potential backlash.

[Dave_72]

OK Dave, I'll say it once more:

You or your group's bashing of the 590's (and your own jabs at JBL and Greg) was at best premature and amateurish - to what's considered by many to be a very good sounding model.

Most "dedicated and experienced audiophiles" as you put it would probably have thought better of just plugging in apparently raw, unbroken speakers to whatever was there, plopping them anywhere on the floor, and then proclaiming they sounded terrible - with no further attempts to find out why. Really? That's dedication and experience?



My old audio "colleagues" would have laughed you right the hell outta here. For christsakes get a grip and stop digging.

Your defense is like a house of cards. And you keep insulting myself and my colleagues. Again, we were giving our opinion, which we have the right to do. The former owner himself was not enamored, and actually had lived with the speakers for months, and still decided to sell them.

I don't recall making any personal jabs at JBL or Greg. If I did, then I apologize.

What I see here in this forum is a massive double standard. In other words it's OK to "bash" my S4700s and tell me there's no such thing as long break in periods. And as far as I know, it's considered to be a really good sounding model too. However, if I "bash" the 590s and don't give them a chance because of lack of break in, then "I'm" wrong? Come on, you think you're talking to some kid here. I may not be as old as you, but I'm 43, not 16. Also, there's this notion that only your opinion counts here and mine doesn't. That's pretty funny actually.

You say you guys are laughing? Well, I'm laughing right along with you. Because your actions are ludicrous at best.

I could make this real easy and leave this place, but I have every right to be here as you do. So I'm staying whether you like it or not.

You know, I thought audio was supposed to be fun and educational hobby. Some of you try to make it a nightmare for others, and then you wonder why this hobby doesn't get enough traction. Look in the mirror, whydon'tcha?

[Dave_72]

There was a time when I would drill down through a thread like this where someone or a group of folks started shoveling sh!t and I would try to salvage the useful... I just don't have the time or energy these days.

It is too bad that some people insist on behaving the way they do.


Widget

Well, I hope you see that I'm getting ganged up in this thread. It's not a fair fight in other words.

[1audiohack]

Dave this is crazy.

Imagine being with a group of people, like at a party. A guy comes in and introduces his wife, with whom he is pleased and loves. While well within earshot, someone in the group says something like: What does he see in her? Her topend is laid back and she has a soggy bloated bottom. Just a bucket of mush really.

Those are fighting words in my world. The guy never asked for an opinion. Oz showed up to share his delight with his new speakers. What good could stating that not everyone likes them do? Like the party scenario, this has provoked a like negative response that now has you on both the offensive and defensive. Quite frankly, your choice mode of entry into this thread has placed you in an indefensible position.

You are right that your opinions are yours and you have the right to share them, even unsolicited.

OK, Miss Manners has spoken her piece.

Barry.

[Mr. Widget]

Well, I hope you see that I'm getting ganged up in this thread. It's not a fair fight in other words.

Actually, no I do not see it that way.

But rather than trying to assign blame, let's just drop the subject!


Widget

[Dave_72]

Dave this is crazy.

Imagine being with a group of people, like at a party. A guy comes in and introduces his wife, with whom he is pleased and loves. While well within earshot, someone in the group says something like: What does he see in her? Her topend is laid back and she has a soggy bloated bottom. Just a bucket of mush really.

Those are fighting words in my world. The guy never asked for an opinion. Oz showed up to share his delight with his new speakers. What good could stating that not everyone likes them do? Like the party scenario, this has provoked a like negative response that now has you on both the offensive and defensive. Quite frankly, your choice mode of entry into this thread has placed you in an indefensible position.

You are right that your opinions are yours and you have the right to share them, even unsolicited.

OK, Miss Manners has spoken her piece.

Barry.

Ok man, I see what you mean. I apologize to oznob if I insulted him. No one's perfect, and I'm far from it. And that's about it. Thanks again.

Anyway, I'm more than willing to give the Studio 590s another chance. Just because I found them to be lackluster, I might think they're fantastic in another audition.

The end.

[BMWCCA]

Remember, it's only the Internet. Hard to convey emotions yet easy to infer nuances that were never intended.

I'm thinking we've ended this on a note of civility and now we can all go back to being, if not friends, a community with shared interests and goals. But I could be dreaming!

"Fake but Fun" was could have been just a euphemism for "boomy, bloated, with muted highs [and not] much of anything except mush".
A well-turned phrase that apparently offended no one.

[oznob]

1audiohack, thank you for eloquently expressing some of feelings about this thread. One issue is someone giving, in essence, a review on an item that they do not own or have a lot of experience with. When I review something, it has been in my room, with my equipment and extensive listening has been done. That way I can base my review more accurately and intelligently. If I do an A/B of speakers, I am always mindful to compensate for different efficiency and sensitivity. One great way to experience this is to go car speaker shopping. A whole wall of various speakers to choose from and, inevitably, the best sound will be the loudest/more efficient. That is until they turn the volume up.

Mr. Widget, I do believe this a dead horse so I will not be posting again.

Dave 72, I was not wanting or expecting an apology from you but I appreciate it in the context it was given.

Thank you to everyone else who made positive and useful comments.

In the words of Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that."

[4313B]

[DavidF]

"...
Anyway, the 590's bring out everything they've been doing to improve their feed, and I've heard it every step of the way. It sounds pretty damned good now, but he'd like me to A/B and critique his newer 320k AAC stream against the 192k stream I've been using, but I don't use Android or iOS. If you do, maybe you should check it out: http://stream-tx3.radioparadise.com/aac-320 and see if you can run it through the speakers. Bill says it makes quite an audible difference..."

Off topic but perhaps a good thing, in context. How do you access the channel? I am inexperienced in streaming but want to see if I can work something up via internet-network-player. This may be a place to start.

[LowPhreak]

Hi DavidF,


Go to www.radioparadise.com. At the top of the page, choose your stream rate (32k, 96k, 192k, etc.). There's a gain slider next to it as well. Then hit the "Play" button, or if you don't like the current track hit "PSD" (Play Something Different). If you don't get one you like, hit "Stop" then PSD again, etc.

Scroll down the main page for more info, such as for Android or iOS through which you can stream 320k.

The track listing at upper right continuously renews as new tracks come up. You can click on them anytime and rate them if you'd like from 1 to 10. After you have a "ratings base" so to speak, then when you use PSD it'll tend to play the type of tracks you like more, and not give the ones you don't like as much. Example: I can't stand hearing Leonard Cohen's nose, so I rate his stuff 1 or 2 and he never comes up on PSD. Yay for technology! After your PSD track has played, it'll go back to whatever is playing live in-progress.

This of course assumes that you have a streaming device or PC sound card connected and ready to go.


Naturally, you'll also need at least 100 wpc and a decent set of JBLs - crank to '11' and never mind the bollocks!

[audiomagnate]

That sounds pretty compressed to me. I prefer 24 bit myself, especially the way our old friend Professor Kieth Johnson records them. You can download his 2011 HRx sampler at HDTracks, or I might be convinced to share a small sample of one if PMed. Fair warning, these recordings will make the rest of your collection sound pretty anemic by comparison, especially if you have a system with low dynamic compression (i.e. compression drivers/horns and plenty of woof power).

[LowPhreak]

I've discussed that with him and he's in the process of being less compressed from what our e-mails have said, updating older versions with remasters, and so on. On the other hand, there isn't hella much that can be done with many 'non-audiophile' recordings that were originally pushed up and recorded to sound loud anyway.

He's said their 320k stream is better, if I could only use it at the mo'.

[audiomagnate]

Google Play Music is 320 mbps and Chromcast compatible, and Tidal is uncompressed CD Quality. If you want 24 bit cloud streaming, I have my own solution. www.kromecaster.com