By now you know which components comprise TWBAS 2012, which means it’s time for me to tell you why I chose them. This is the potentially controversial part -- the part where you learn about my decision-making process, and what differentiates these products from the pack.
But before I tell you why I chose each particular product, I should tell you what criteria I based my choices on. You’ve likely already figured this out, but I did not hear even one of them beforehand -- many were still in the R&D phase when I chose them. I don’t suggest you buy your state-of-the-art stereo system this way, but the unknown is part of what makes TWBAS 2012 so exciting -- like diving from the top of a skyscraper in a wingsuit.
On August 1, 2011, on our Ultra Audio website, the SoundStage! Network published “TWBAS 2012: The Selection Process Begins.” At that point, as I began the methodical process of deciding precisely which components would be mated in The World’s Best Audio System 2012, the virtual slate was clean. But as that process continued, I couldn’t help but reflect on the history of The World’s Best Audio System. It’s been one wild ride.
The whole thing began in 2003, when I first had the idea of setting up and writing about a no-limits-of-any-kind supersystem in my own listening room. It sure did light my fire -- what audio writer wouldn’t want such an assignment? The first TWBAS article, published in February 2004, profiled an audio system comprising products from Halcro, Wilson Audio, EMM Labs, and Shunyata Research. From then on, “TWBAS” was a regular column on Ultra Audio, a place in which I wrote about the best individual audio components I could find. Since then I’ve written some 40 installments, not counting multiple “Opinion” pieces and related features published on other SS!N sites: The TWBAS archives are spread across multiple versions of the SoundStage! Network’s Ultra Audio: the original articles (February 2004 through February 2009), the middle installments (up through June 2010), and the current iteration.
I can hardly contain my excitement. Of all the articles and reviews I write each year for the SoundStage! Network, none gets me more juiced than expounding on our The World’s Best Audio System events and diving into our coverage of the annual Consumer Electronics Show. Here’s your insider’s guide to what’s coming and where to find it, and a few tidbits of information that might pique your interest.
On Sunday, January 8, at about 4:30 p.m., the SoundStage! Network will broadcast streaming video and photos from the Mirage Hotel and Casino, revealing the components that will comprise TWBAS 2012 -- a two-channel audio system that I predict will be sine pari. Bookmark www.SoundStageGlobal.com right now. I’ll be there, along with our SoundStage! Network staff, and will host a number of the companies that will be participating in TWBAS 2012 in March. You’ll hear about the products and learn why they were selected -- mostly live.
I’ve attended 11 of the last 12 Consumer Electronics Shows in Las Vegas, Nevada. I’ve been to Germany’s High End show (formerly in Frankfurt, now in Munich) for ten years running. I’ve done Rocky Mountain, Montreal, and I enjoyed several of the Stereophile shows way back in the day. I know audio shows pretty well.
But I didn’t realize how much politics is involved in the systems heard at shows until I started planning the first The World’s Best Audio System event in 2008. I’ve just finalized the companies and products that will make up TWBAS 2012, which gave me another opportunity to ponder how high-end politics work.
Just like sportswriters, reviewers of high-end audio equipment are given ample opportunity to get it just right or completely wrong. Like sportscasters, we like to proclaim winners and losers, and we try to understand and predict trends in the audio/video industry. As a regular listener to The Herd with Colin Cowherd on ESPN Radio, I’ve often enjoyed the Monday segment called "Colin Was Right, Colin Was Wrong," in which Cowherd revels in his sports predictions of the past weekend that have proved correct, and agonizes over where he went wrong. Such forthrightness in freely admitting errors is refreshing and interesting -- it’s something most "personalities" don’t do. It’s even more interesting to track which of Cowherd’s failed predictions he admits to and which he doesn’t -- and there are a lot of the latter. But even with those omissions, I give him credit for the segment for its entertainment value. I thought it would be interesting to do, for your entertainment, the same thing here.
Oh, the sacrifices we make for this hobby of ours! My curse and blessing is a second-floor listening room I call the Music Vault, where I do the listening for all of the reviews you’ve read in my column, “The World’s Best Audio System.” Equipment doesn’t just magically appear there, though I wish it did.
We all know that, generally, the better the audio component, the heavier it is. The problem of moving heavy gear into the Music Vault is compounded by the stairwell leading up into the room, which includes a small landing with a 90° left-hand turn -- and maneuvering really heavy gear up the stairs and around the bend is an absolute nightmare. Let’s see . . . I’ve hauled Wilson Audio Specialties X-2 Alexandria speakers (600 pounds each) and a WATCH Dog (almost 300 pounds), JL Audio’s Gotham g213 (almost 400 pounds), and Rockport’s Altairs (515 pounds each) and their modular but even more mammoth Arrakis (900 pounds each). And there have been many small-fry products, like the EgglestonWorks Andra (215 pounds) and the PBN Audio Montana Sammy (250 pounds) -- around here, we don’t consider anything “heavy” until it tops 300 pounds. For anything over 500 pounds, we hire outside help.
But, as Harry Callahan once said, “A man’s got to know his limitations.” When I decided on the speaker for TWBAS 2012, it became obvious to me that something had to change. I can’t yet tell you that speaker’s name, but I can say that it’s a one-piece model, it’s extremely heavy, and it’s taller than the Rockport Technologies Altair. To get a pair of them up into the Vault, I had to figure out something new.
Anyone who follows politics can spot a talking point a mile away. A talking point is an oft-repeated statement designed to convince those listening or reading that a particular stance is correct. The problem with talking points is that they so seldom contain any substance. You hear them again and again until you fall asleep from boredom, still left wondering what the politician’s stance on the issue is, actually.
Audio reviewers have their own talking points. Often, after reading a review, I wonder just what the real deal is with the product reviewed. I know the reviewer thought it was good, but I still don’t know if the reviewer thought it was better or worse than the competition. Why? There are many reasons. The reviewer might not be confident enough in his or her skills, or hasn’t heard enough of the competition, to go out on a limb and declare a winner. Perhaps the reviewer doesn’t want to offend anyone, and figures that treading the middle ground is the safest bet. Perhaps there really isn’t much difference at all between two products, and they’re essentially interchangeable. Maybe the reviewer just doesn’t know which is better. Regardless of the reason, the reader is left wondering.
In 2008, I developed an event based on my column, "The World’s Best Audio System," which I began writing in 2004 (current archives, preceding archives, column beginning). The idea was simple, somewhat controversial, and highly ambitious: With cost not a consideration, pick the absolute best audio components available at any price, assemble them into a singular super stereo system in my Music Vault listening room, and have representatives of each company fly to North Carolina (where I live) for a celebratory gathering. If you were a regular reader of Ultra Audio back then, you probably followed along. (If you missed it, see "TWBAS 2009: The Arrival" and "TWBAS 2009: The Event.")
On the AV Science Forum, a message board dedicated to high-end audio and video, The World’s Best Audio System 2009 (TWBAS 2009) garnered incredible traffic, with almost 140,000 views and over 1100 responses to a thread announcing the project. In fact, the TWBAS 2009 articles generated much interesting discussion in über-high-end-audio circles worldwide. Why did you pick those components? Did you really think this system was the best? Who are you to proclaim what’s best, anyway? I still get e-mail about that event. In fact, "The World’s Best Audio System" produces 28,500 Google hits today.
Now it’s summer 2011, and I’ve begun planning The World’s Best Audio System 2012. The goal of TWBAS 2012 is nothing short of assembling and writing about the most cutting-edge audio system of all time. Sounds like fun, doesn’t it?
In somewhat of a break with the traditional thinking of bigger is always better, The Beauty of Music is not about superhuge speakers and 1000W amplifiers. This system was assembled for one purpose: to get the small details as right as rain, to reconstruct the gestalt of a musical performance without fail, and to bring to the listener all the nuance and beauty that can be wrung from the most stellar recordings. Sure, you can buy bigger, more bombastic sound for less money; but the audible synergy of the components comprising this system is special -- like that perfect family photo snapped at just the right moment.
The Beauty of Music
|Tidal Piano Cera loudspeakers:||$23,990/pair|
|Gryphon Audio Designs Colosseum power amplifier:||$43,500|
|Gryphon Audio Designs Mirage preamplifier:||$25,750|
|dCS Debussy digital-to-analog converter:||$11,999|
|Apple MacBook Pro laptop:||$1800|
|Amarra music player:||$695|
|AudioQuest Redwood speaker cables:||$6900/8' pair
|AudioQuest Sky interconnects:||$4600/2m XLR pair (two pairs)|
|AudioQuest Diamond USB cable:||$695/1.5m cord
|AudioQuest NRG-100 power cords:||$1279/6’ cord (two cords)|
There’s no doubt in my mind that the goal of high-end audio is to reproduce the sound of live music in the home. That’s the endgame, the ultimate: Make it sound real. As if we’re really there with the musicians.
But live music isn’t an audio reviewer’s real reference. A reviewer’s reference comprises a selection of hopefully well-recorded and well-rounded audio tracks played through his or her audio system. That system -- the reference system -- is what the reviewer uses to evaluate and compare audio components. A reviewer doesn’t switch back and forth in quick succession between a live venue and a listening room, attempting to hear differences. No. A reviewer plays the same recordings over and over, comparing how they sound with the reference system intact vs. how they sound through that same reference system, one of its component replaced by the product being reviewed.
Given that, what should a reviewer's reference system be? It should be as accurate -- that is, as neutral -- as possible. I can go into the nuts and bolts of the meanings of accurate and neutral another time, but essentially, these terms mean that what comes out of an audio system should be the same as what goes into it. A reviewer should try to assemble a reference system that is as close to this ideal as possible. Among other things, this means using electronics within their safe operating ranges (e.g., amps that don’t clip with most speakers). With electronics, that’s pretty easy to accomplish these days. Pick a Bryston, a Coda, a Gryphon, or a Simaudio amp, for example, and source components that include modern D/A converters, and you’re almost there. What’s usually hardest to get right is the speakers -- typically, the most flawed link in the chain of audio components.
All contents available on this website are copyrighted by SoundStage!® and Schneider Publishing Inc., unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved.
This site was designed by Rocket Theme, Karen Fanas, and The SoundStage! Network.
To contact us, please e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org