Jump to content

Tassie Devil

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

172 Good

1 Follower

About Tassie Devil

  • Rank
  • Birthday 15/09/1935

Profile Fields

  • Location
  • Country
  • First Name

Recent Profile Visitors

3,228 profile views
  1. Item: MIT Zero 50ex Headphone Amplifier Location: Dilston, Northern Tasmania Price: $1990 Item Condition: As new Reason for selling: Not being used Payment Method: Bank Transfer Extra Info: This dead quiet head amp is an impressive hi-end product, selling new in the US for the equivalent of $AUD4500. It was purchased on impulse, trialled against the Violectric V821 using Sennheiser 800S headphones, but the two amps sounded so similar to these tired old ears, there was no point in putting the MIT in the system. So at under $2000 this rarely used and as new amp it is being offered at less than new price and is a bargain for anyone with associated hi-end gear. A summary of the specs: The Vero HCA50ex Headphone Amplifier is the world’s first high current, battery powered Class A/B headphone amp housed with MIT’s Multipole Technology. It features fifty poles of articulation. Until now, MIT’s Multipole Technology has only been housed within the little “boxes” found on all of MIT Cables’ award-winning products. For the first time ever, MIT is integrating this technology inside an amplifier. 3 Watts of class AB power. Silent Power–Battery powered supply circuit for super low noise floor. 10k input impedance for high current applications. 47 ohm output for enhanced stability. Frequency response: +/- 1/2 dbu from 3Hz to 60kHz for any type of critical listening. Gain = 13dB or a ratio of 20X for extra headroom. X talk -80 @ 1kHz keeps images crisp and clear. 10.25” X 6.75” X 2.25” size makes use and storage easy and transporting easier. 2.5lbs– can sit on any surface. Signal to noise: >88dBu for best low level resolution. 1/8th inch and RCA inputs for ease of use on most equipment. 1/4 inch outputs are robust and extremely easy to use. Here is the sales blurb from MIT: MIT Cables founder Bruce Brisson began purposefully designing audio cables in the 1970’s after encountering the sonic problems inherent in cables typical of the day. He later founded Music Interface Technologies in 1984 after patenting and licensing his early designs to other manufacturers, producing some of the audio industry’s most ground-breaking and seminal products. MIT Cables’ core audio cable technology is our exclusive Poles of Articulation (Multipole), named after the fact that every audio cable has a single point where it is most efficient at storing and transporting energy. At this point in the audio frequency spectrum, the cable will articulate best, and represents the cables’ particular Articulation Pole. My Comment: At 84 in a few weeks, my hearing is showing wear and tear so the high frequencies are elusive. I've always been a skeptic re cable clasims but have been surprised at the difference the MIT headphone cabling made in my current set up so the above may not be total bullXXXX,. However my hearing is not good enough to judge but maybe yours is!. Feel free to make contact fort more information. Photos: Advertisements without photos of the actual item will not be approved.
  2. Maybe he woul;d prefer to not have his name here. Email me - jcoulsonATiprimin.com.au and I'll put you in touch - he is very clever at fixing amps no one else can. BTW he is in Launmcveston
  3. Item: Luxman L-430 amplifier Location: Dilston, Tasmania Price: $600 Item Condition: Mint Reason for selling: Not being used Payment Method: Bank Transfer Extra Info: I purchased the unit here some time ago but it was faulty. Fortunately I have a very clever contact, familiar with and liking Luxman amps, who went through it, replaced all caps and traced down a couple of intermittent faults. I purchased a couple of hi-end main capacitors which he fitted. The initial appeal to me was that the link between amp and pre-amp could be broken to insert a graphic equaliser. It will also handle phono but that was of no interest to me. It is heavy (13.5kg + packing), but the buyer and I can work out the best way & cost of transport. Here are the specs: Form Integrated amplifier Effective output 105W+105W (8 ohms, 1kHz, both channel) THD 0.009% or less (8 ohms-3dB, 20Hz - 20kHz) Cross modulation distortion 0.009% or less (8 ohms, 60Hz:7kHz=4:1) Input sensitivity/impedance Phono man month: 2.5mV/50kohm Phono MC: 100 microvolt/High-Low switching Tuner, AUX/DAD, Monitor:200mV/40kohm Main In: 200mV/50kohm SN ratio (IHF-A) Phono man month: 90dB (input short-circuit, 5mV conversion) Phono MC: 67dB (input short-circuit, 250-microvolt conversion) Tuner, AUX/DAD, Monitor, Main In: 110dB Frequency characteristic Phono: 20Hz-20000Hz�}0.3dB Tuner, AUX/DAD, Monitor, Main In: 10Hz - -100kHz one dB Tone control �}8dB, a turnover shift type Puri part output 200mV(Pre Out) Light filter Subsonic Filter: 30Hz A high cut-off filter: 7kHz A low boost + 8dB, 70Hz Tapes monitor Two lines (Tape-1, Tape-2) Tapes dubbing 1->2, 2->1 Speaker switchpoint Two lines Power consumption 220W Dimensions Width 453x height 135x depth of 425mm Weight 13.5kg The manual is still available on line. Here is one review: Luxman's top-of-the-line integrated amplifier, the L-430, is rated to deliver 100 watts per channel into 8-ohm loads with no more than 0.018 percent total harmonic distortion from 20 to 20,000 Hz. In addition to the usual amenities provided with top-line integrated amplifiers (moving-coil and moving-magnet cartridge inputs, etc.), the L-430 has some common controls that work in an unusual way. For example, the tone controls are eleven-position detented knobs. That doesn't seem too unusual until you notice that those detents are calibrated in terms of nominal "turnover frequency" (1,000 to 10,000 Hz for the treble control, 20 to 400 Hz for the bass). Turning the treble contol to a lower Hz setting increases the boost or cut effect as does turning the bass control to a higher Hz setting. As Luxman's informative instruction manual points out, these controls simultaneously shift the frequency at which the control takes effect and the amount of boost or cut. In addition to a tone-control-defeat switch, there is a phono straight control which, when pressed, bypasses the balance control, tape monitor and selector switches, and the stereo/mono switch. The phono-preamp output thus feeds directly into the volume control, minimizing the number of circuits and switch contacts that the signal must pass through. The L-430's rear panel contains, together with the standard input and output jacks (gold-plated for the phono input), large heavy-duty insulated binding posts for speaker connections and separate preamp-out main-amp-in jacks. These are normally connected via a slide switch but can be separated by that switch for connection of a signal-processing accessory (such as a speaker equalizer) between the preamp and power amp. There are also two switched a.c. outlets and one unswitched one on the rear. The Luxman L-430 is supplied in a black metal cabinet, and its front panel is attractively finished in pale satin gold with matching knobs and buttons. The control layout is well thought-out, with the many pushbuttons grouped according to function. The unit is about 7-3/4 inches wide, 16-3/4 inches deep, and 5-1/4 inches high. It weighs about 30 pounds. Lab Tests Preconditioning the amplifier for one hour at one-third rated power resulted in a rather warm exterior, and some parts of the top plate were too hot to touch comfortably. However, it did not become significantly warmer during our testing, and in use it became only moderately warm. The L-430 is specifically rated for driving 8-ohm loads, and markings near its speaker terminals make it plain that the total load impedance should not be less than 4 ohms. Our clipping-power tests confirmed that the amplifier has the limited current-output capability that these restrictions imply. The maximum continuous power output into 8-ohm loads was 112.5 watts per channel, for a clipping headroom of 0.5 dB. Although we were able to develop about 120 watts into 4-ohm loads, the output waveform was rounded (rather than sharply clipped). When driving 2 ohms, this effect was even more pronounced, a slight rounding appearing at power outputs as low as 25 watts and gradually becoming more obvious as the power was increased. Eventually the amplifier's current-limiting protection circuits created a large notch in the waveform (this also happened when we drove 4-ohm loads). We decided that 50 watts was the maximum reasonably undistorted output that the L-430 could deliver into 2 ohms. The amplifier's protection system shuts it off with a relay in the event of a major overload or output short circuit and resets automatically a couple of seconds after the overload is removed. Dynamic-power output (tone-burst) measurements indicated that the L-430 has an excellent reserve power capability, developing 156 watts into 8-ohm loads (for a dynamic headroom of 1.93 dB). With 4- and 2-ohm loads, the dynamic power appeared to be slightly less than the continuous clipping-power output (this could be due to differences in the measurement criteria during tone-burst testing). Although the bass tone control had a fairly conventional characteristic, with a moderate range and a sliding turnover frequency, the treble control seemed to do little more than vary the gain slightly over a frequency range of several octaves; only near its maximum boost or cut settings was there a significant effect on the frequency response. The loudness compensation (which Luxman calls "low boost") boosts only the lower frequencies. The RIAA phono equalization was extremely accurate. However, the phono-input termination for moving-magnet cartridges had a relatively high capacitance. Even when using the L-430 with low-capacitance turntable cables, it would be advisable to use a cartridge designed to operate into a load of 400 pF or so. The amplifier was stable with reactive simulated speaker loads, and its slew factor exceeded our measurement limit of 25. Comments Comparing the measured performance of the Luxman L-430 to its printed specifications, it is clear that the amplifier is honestly rated and easily meets or surpasses all significant specifications. Furthermore, those specifications define a very good amplifier, with ample power for most needs, extremely low distortion and noise levels, and considerable operating flexibility. Indeed, in most respects it would be hard to criticize the electrical performance or features of the L-430. Also, as might be expected, the amplifier sounded fine with either MM or MC phono cartridges or a tuner input. We should point out however, that the speakers available to us at the time had what might be called "easy" impedance characteristics, with a minimum impedance of at least 5 ohms, and thus did not activate the amplifier's current-limiting circuits. We would not recommend using the L-430 with speakers whose impedance drops to 3 ohms or less at some frequencies. The L-430's virtues are undeniable, but we were puzzled by a few of its features. We could find little value in the tone controls, for example, but quite possibly someone else would react differently to their performance. The filters, both low- and high-cut, were more gradual in their effects than we would like (although this amplifier is by no means unique in that respect). We would have expected the moving-coil cartridge-impedance button to be on the rear apron rather than the front panel, since it is not exactly an everyday operating control. We would have preferred to have the more useful signal processor switch on the front instead. We hasten to add, however, that the location of a button or two does not alter an amplifier's electrical performance. And the performance of the L-430 was first-rate. Photos: Advertisements without photos of the actual item will not be approved.
  4. Thank you for the nice comments. Apologies for being slack at acknowleging but I failed to tick the "Notify" box and have been sidetracked. It is now ticked!! To reply to the two queries. The two black switches are power ones. The top switch powers on the audio components, the lower one for the video items. Yes. I have all music files backed up on a second 8TB Barracuda enterprise HDD. And I do regular Roon backups to retain all the massive editing which has been done on the music files. The latest effort has been to attach PDF files to albums - something very nice for opera librettos but nice for other albums, particularly when ROON gives no info on them. One can read them on the iPad while the music is playing. Editing is a hobby in itself and has taken over from audiophilia now I hope I'm hopefully at the end of that very long (and expensive) road.
  5. Maybe not all wasted as the expensive lessons learned have resulted in a genuinely good hi-end headphone system. For years I passionately hated CDs and digital generally. LPs, with their cartridge set up problems and clicks and pops in the music were the music source for some time.. The change came when I was seduced by laserdiscs so was confronted with the better DACs as produced by Theta. Ultimately, as DACs improved, I abandoned LPs and wasted dollars on a lot of digital gear. The lesson learned from all, this was that the DAC is the most crucial link in the audio chain. It was the crude DACs in the early CD players that generated the loathed digital harshness. The latest acquisition has been the Aurilac G1, a very nice unit, and the end headphone system in the accompanying diagram is yielding very seductive and beautiful music. An explanation about the Yamaha YDP2006 is in order. The DSP in ROON gives a basic change that works for ROON music sent elsewhere in the house (not shown in the diagram below but achieved with a Canare 3 way balanced splitter). However I find I need further tweaking for the headfphone system. The beauty of the YDP2006 is that one of 40 different settings is eacily selected with the push of a button so I can choose a setting to downplay the over emphasised bass that is common in non classical recordings. Particular settings could be devised for particular recordings but I’ve avoided that level of insanity so far. Bottom line is these old ears are hearing the best music reproduction ever experienced. The two most important items in the chain are the L.K.S. DAC and Focal Utopia headphones but they require top quality input so the Canare cabling (much more important than previously realised) and the Auriliac G1 are just as essential. The chain is only as strong as its weakest link. And my predudice is pro AES and anti USB for digital inputs with USB impractical for my headphone system in another room anyway. So I can now sit back in the armchair and use ROON to select beautiful music. And I should comment the the current system plays albums rather nicely that were previously considered “poor” recordings. The “poor” was a result of the playback quality, not the recording! I do have a BD player in the system so can look at opera etc with video on a Dell monitor but rarely bother as the audio only reproduction is so satisfying.
  6. I'm in the process of doing more experimentation on this and am interested to hear of the experiences of others. My comments here refer to a good headphone setup using a used Yamaha YDP 2 006 digital paramrtric equaliser, purchased recently from the USA. [There is a review of this item at the "What's Best" Forum]. It has 40 possible different DSP settings which, until now I've not bothered to explore and have been using only the one setting. I modified this a little using the DSP options available in Roon and the AQ on classical music is generally very pleasing. It was not expensive, although I had to buy a 120v/240v transformer, but is proving to be one of the more significant units in the music path. But I find jazz and popular fare has overpowering bass with this set up so this morning investigated putting in another setting. But I got a big shock because when the Yamaha was set to no DSP the music was flat and dull and the soundstage collapsed. That makes no sense to me but hearing is believing, or is it? This opens up a whole can of worms and I'm wondering if the Yamaha does something else besides merely altering the frequencies. I would not have expected a flat setting to have an effect on the soundstage and anyway, the Yamaha is still in circuit even if theoretically doing nothing to the signal. POSTSCRIPT: It is obvious & I should have woken up to it earlier - the signal was MONO and specifically needs to be set up for stereo.
  7. "However, well-done masterings in 16/44 can sound wonderful." And I must agree. Today I was drooling over how nice the cello sounded in Bach Cello Suites, expecting it to be another of the hi-rez downloads but no, it was the old 16/44. One wonders sometimes just how much those multi slider control panels on mixers mess up the sound. As you say, it sheets back to the skill of the engineers in control. Bottom line I'm VERY happy not to have to listen to music via LP with its inevitable "Snap Crackle & Pop" + the PIA ordeal of turntables, arms, cartridges with their geometric compromises, ....... Good luck to those who enjoy the challenges of hearing great music from that medium but I've been there, done that, moved on and am not looking back. And I respectfully suggest to the analog diehards that digital is not as bad as you (and I once did) think. If it sounds harsh, then that is the fault of jitter and is not being controlled by the DAC (and bridge?).
  8. My first experience with CDs left me horrified and a digital luddite. The sound was harsh and irritating so I stuck to analog LP via Koetsu & other cartridges (cartridges are a PIA to set up optimally), sophisticated tone arms, Linn Sondek turntables etc etc for over a decade. The change to digital was gradual and started surprisingly, via laserdisc. Theta came out with some nice gear that made CDs as well as LDs sound listenable. Of course that started the digital journey with various players, DACs etc until I became seduced by Meridian Sooloos and the 861 processor. Digital was sounding pretty good and the LP collection was sold. The last progression has been away from music reproduction via powerful amps -> electrostatic speakers to head amps and headphones. This has eliminated room distortions and highlighted the AQ which has inspired more adventures into DACs and Sennheiser HD800 headphones. Things were looking up! But along came Roon a couple of years ago so the Sooloos system was sold (without the Meridian 861 – that had blown up after a power supply solder joint failed) and the FLAC files moved onto an internal HDD in this PC. A nice Auralic Aries bridge was used to feed the fully balanced headphone system which ended up with an LKS DA004 DAC and Violectric 861 head amp feeding Focal Utopia headphones. The music (generally classical) was sounding rather good!! Well the final stage of this audiophile lunacy has just been reached with the Auralic Aries sold to a fellow audiophile here on StereoNET and replaced with a Auralic G1. So why bother with the G1 at all? The answer lies in my current journey into hi-rez files where, theoretically, the G1 would handle the digital journey even better. So has it really improved the AQ? I cannot honestly swear to that as I regard auditory memory as highly unreliable. Now it is time to come to the point of this post. How does the hi-rez reproduction compare to CD standards with albums where I have both formats in the Roon system? Many years ago I could not detect any significant difference between SACD compared to 16/44 via a hi-end amp/speaker system so expectations were not high for the newer FLAC files. Add in that my 83 years brain no longer registers as much in the higher frequency spectrum, it was a complete surprise to hear a much cleaner and more open AQ from the newer files. So, it appears to me, that the better digital sampling in hi-rez does far more than improve the higher frequencies which I can no longer hear. There is much better articulation of the midrange with a more open sound to these tired old ears. It seems corny but it does seem as if yet another of Salome’s veils had been lifted to reveal something very attractive. And I’m sure some of your minds are working overtime on that image!!! Up to now I have preaching the importance of the DAC in converting that digital input to listenable analog and I’ll still hold to that but there is obviously a limit so what processing to analog is possible from 16/44. Feed that hi-end DAC with a clean 24/96 signal and the analog results are clearly better. But to hear that does require a well sorted chain of components. Any weak link in that chain can destroy any advantages offered by hi-rez. And I’ll still hold the view that the DAC is one of the weakest links in many systems with speakers and room distortions (or lesser quality headphones) adding to the mix so my findings above will be shouted down as nonsense when no differences in AQ are observed by others. And maybe that G1 was worth buying after all? Sigh, it has been a long (and expensive) road from the Edison cylinders listened to in the attic in the 1940s, graduating to wind up gramophone with fragile 78 rpm noisy shellac records, to mono LP, to stereo LP to the current headphone system fed from digital sources. And there is irony in that my hearing misses quite a lot of what the current system can reproduce. But that does not stop me enjoying the music and that ladies and gentlemen, is the whole point of this ridiculous audio obsession!
  9. And there are heaps of other toys one can "invest" in and ultimately never be sure the AQ is really better!!
  10. Item: Auralic Aries Location: Dilston, Tasmania Price: $1499 Item Condition: Perfect working order, a minor scratch on top Reason for selling: Replaced it with an Auralic G1 Payment Method: Bank transfer Extra Info: Is the Auralic G1 a major improvement on this Aries? No. Is it better? - maybe, but I honestly cannot tell. How do you A/B such units? But of course being a confirmed nutter I had to "upgrade" so the Aries is now up FS. The power supply is $649 new and the original Aries price was $2299. You can read full details about the unit here at Stereonet at https://www.stereo.net.au/reviews/auralic-aries-wireless-streaming-bridge Pictures:
  11. FWIW I have a G1 on its way - a nice Xmas present which might, or might not, arrive by Dec 25. It will replace an Aries which will then go up for sale. It will fit into this ystem: Roon on this PC -> LAN cabling -> (the new G1) -> LKS DA-004 -> Violectric 281 -> Focal Utopia headphones with MIT cabling. Overseas transport costs are getting scary!!
  12. Interested? If so maybe we can work out some mutually agreeable price? I can do without it and it is rarely being used so should go somwhere where is is more appreciated! John
  13. Hi No it is still here. I have it used in another place at the moment but it is still for sale if you are interesated.
  14. Item: Golden KEF Muo Portable Speaker Location: Northern Tasmania Price: $225 (Cheapest price new is $320) Item Condition: Mint Reason for selling: Not used Payment Method: Bank Transfer Extra Info: This has been sitting here unused for ages so time for it to find another home. Bought on impulse. My personal situation is that I'm now pretty much home bound so a portable is no longer used. It charges with the cord from any USB 5V supply. Read the review below from http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/kef-muo for more information or feel free to get in ntouch if I can tell you more. Thanks for reading John What is the KEF Muo? The KEF Muo is a high-end Bluetooth speaker of tiny proportions. It’s dinky enough to slip into a handbag, or a small pocket inside a rucksack. But at £299, the price is anything but small. For those raising an eyebrow, I’m not surprised – for this money you could easily get your hands on a seriously good wireless home-bound speaker. But I’m not turned off, because in many respects the KEF Muo totally flattens the sound quality on offer from usual recommendations such as the Bose SoundLink Mini II. The speaker drivers used here are a cut above. However, for those considering such an outlay for a portable speaker, take note of the sound quality section of this review carefully – this speaker may not be for everyone. 
 KEF Muo – Design and Features Surely splashing out £300 for a speaker that’s only big enough serve as a soundbar for an iPad is absurdity? This isn’t an unreasonable preconception to have of the KEF Muo at first sight. However, I don’t think pictures really do justice to how well made the Muo is. The body is formed of a single piece of metal; only the end caps are separate parts. The Muo is largely made of aluminium, with lightly rubberised plastic on the ends. It’s far classier than the Beats Pill or the Bose SoundLink Mini II. It’s a little larger too. KEF’s Muo has been designed by the same people behind some of the company’s top-end speakers. And I get the impression that this is the smallest size it was possible for designer Ross Lovegrove opt for. The Muo is home to the same-sized drivers as the significantly larger B&W T7 – which are 50mm a piece. And it is these drivers that are the most interesting feature in the KEF Muo. The UniQ drivers are of the same family as you’ll find in the company’s bookshelf and larger model of speakers. Their design is similar, not the same.The drivers here pack mid and treble driver sections into the same unit – which is clever. Hi-fi enthusiasts reading this may have come across a similar idea in dual-concentric drivers. There are rubbery pads on the underside While these aren’t common, many have been made over past few decades. It’s this smart driver design that gives the Muo a real chance of justifying its price. Elsewhere, the speaker features most of the extras you’d expect. There’s NFC and aptX, and an aux input to let you plug in non-wireless sources. You can pair two of them for stereo sound, although I’ve not been able to try this out. The KEF Muo isn’t waterproof, however. The Muo’s battery is rated to last up to 12 hours. Expect around half that if you’re going to play at max volume, though. KEF Muo – Sound Quality This tiny speaker absolutely isn’t a “me too” Bluetooth speaker. With hundreds of companies cranking out portable speakers these days, the Muo sticks to catering for the KEF audience, rather than someone browsing HMV for something to hook up to their iPhone. You can hear this in the sound the Muo delivers. For mid-range and treble detail and fidelity, the Muo outstrips everything we’ve heard at this size. What is manages to achieve with only two 50mm drivers and a passive radiator is impressive. The KEF Muo is capable of playing at loud volumes too, making the Bose SoundLink Mini II seem quite tame in comparison. It isn’t only the detail that’s notable, but how pronounced the Muo’s mids are. It projects vocals powerfully, with great dynamics for such a small unit. Most recently I heard the Beats Pill try for a similarly bold style of presentation, but where that speaker ends up sounding a little crude and “basic” when pushed, the Muo can crank up the volume to uncomfortable levels without sounding like its drivers are trying to pop out of its frame. Looking and listening a little closer, the sort of tricks KEF has needed to use to pull this off become clear. Where most small speakers split the frequency duties between a pair of small drivers as one team and the radiator as another, the Muo breaks things down further. One 50mm driver is used for higher-end frequencies, the other for slightly lower ones. It seems likely this “lower frequency” UniQ driver is what feeds into the bass radiator. While the speaker is able to reach a reasonable bass floor for such a small speaker, I found that the sound was perhaps a little too much by the UniQ units. The KEF Muo sound is a lot less thick, and in some respects less cohesive, than the best cheaper portable speakers. Low and mid-bass is quite spartan compared with favourites such as the Bose SoundLink Mini II and Jam Heavy Metal. While this doesn’t stop the Muo from giving that “high-end” impression, it does make for a slightly less relaxing sound. In radically upscaling its ambitions in some areas, it has had to hold back in others. So while in some respects I’m far more impressed by the Muo over its rivals, there’s a sense that it’s “missing” a few elements. And it appears that while some lower-end speakers do their best to mimic the tonal balance of much larger speaker systems, the KEF Muo is more about demonstrating what the companies 50mm UniQ drivers can do. You get great mid and treble quality, but the KEF Muo doesn’t sound as “full” playing certain content. As a result, the Bose SoundLink Mini II may be of greater appeal to some. And if you can stomach a larger box, the Bowers & Wilkins T7 is another strong alternative. However, if you want a hint of high-fidelity sound in a speaker that you can hold in your hand, you need to give the Muo a listen. Should I buy the KEF Muo? The KEF Muo sets a new standard for the quality of sound you can expect from such a small speaker. It may be expensive, but this is a good portable speaker for those who truly appreciate the texture and detail of music, but have been underwhelmed by the small speakers currently on the market. For more casual listening, though, the KEF Muo sound isn’t quite as “full” in all areas of the frequency range as some lower-grade wireless units. While not harsh or hard, those who like speakers to sound bassy or “warm” may be better off opting for something a little cheaper – or going for a bigger box. Verdict If you’re fed up with the limited definition offered by the majority of small speakers, then the KEF Muo will truly impress. Score 4 /5 Pictures:
  15. All too true. Our moods are variable due to a large number of factors, some in our control, others not. What we enjoy one day we might not enjoy the next. Enjoyment of music and its reproduction via a system is very subjective so opinions are personal and should not be extrapolated generally. And this makes arriving at a satisfactory system very challenging when one cannot audition before buying and can only process the opinion of others as a guide.
  • Create New...