18-Feb-2016, 12:02
I don't think it is the lack of tinkering at all. But in all fairness McChicken, it would have been better for you to have posted this AFTER you have already trialled your Phantoms. So then you can challenge some of the potentially misguided assertions from audiophiles.
I am an audiophile. My main set-up consists of Kef Reference 4.2 speakers, with Bryston power amplifiers. I also have a record collection and feel more comfortable with a direct analogue path for those. I am not into tinkering for tiny potential changes in sound, but I am someone who likes the ability to upgrade and change components from time to time, such as the DAC or the SACD player.
I did promise to post a thread comparing the Kef set-up with the Phantoms, and I will do this shortly. But let's just say there is nothing non-audiophile worthy about the Phantoms, but speaker placement is not just important, it is critical. Because the speakers lack a large cabinet, the effect the room plays seems to be amplified and this can cause not just subtle but radical changes in sound.
I am an audiophile. My main set-up consists of Kef Reference 4.2 speakers, with Bryston power amplifiers. I also have a record collection and feel more comfortable with a direct analogue path for those. I am not into tinkering for tiny potential changes in sound, but I am someone who likes the ability to upgrade and change components from time to time, such as the DAC or the SACD player.
I did promise to post a thread comparing the Kef set-up with the Phantoms, and I will do this shortly. But let's just say there is nothing non-audiophile worthy about the Phantoms, but speaker placement is not just important, it is critical. Because the speakers lack a large cabinet, the effect the room plays seems to be amplified and this can cause not just subtle but radical changes in sound.
