$17k Blu-ray Player

GilmourD said:
For that price, it better have audio outputs that sport an all-tube preamp and and each channel best have it's own all-tube Class AB power amp packing some gorgeously wound transformers (each channel would need its own). And it better be wired to military spec like old Hiwatt amps.
Click to expand...

Again the lack of knowledge runs rampant. You would want two not one amplifier and you definitely would want to avoid and “A” “B” switching type amp at all costs. If you really want a tube amp clearly open ended triode is the proper way to go.;)
 
BillR said:
Again the lack of knowledge runs rampant. You would want two not one amplifier and you definitely would want to avoid and “A” “B” switching type amp at all costs. If you really want a tube amp clearly open ended triode is the proper way to go.;)
Click to expand...

Actually, I've always found that a properly biased Class AB Tetrode or Pentode amp (like a 6L6GC, 6550, or 6CA7 for the tetrode or an EL34 for the pentode) sounds a bit sweeter and cleaner to my ear in comparison to a single-ended triode, tetrode, or pentode. The thing is that people tend not to really worry about biasing as much as they should and they end up with ugly crossover distortion.

However, that's just my opinion. The Class A vs. Class AB / Triode vs. Tetrode vs. Pentode fight has been going on longer than either of us have been alive (unless you were born in the '30s).
 
GilmourD said:
Actually, I've always found that a properly biased Class AB Tetrode or Pentode amp (like a 6L6GC, 6550, or 6CA7 for the tetrode or an EL34 for the pentode) sounds a bit sweeter and cleaner to my ear in comparison to a single-ended triode, tetrode, or pentode. The thing is that people tend not to really worry about biasing as much as they should and they end up with ugly crossover distortion.

However, that's just my opinion. The Class A vs. Class AB / Triode vs. Tetrode vs. Pentode fight has been going on longer than either of us have been alive (unless you were born in the '30s).
Click to expand...

Damn this lack of editing...

The thing is, you missed the fact that I said that each channel would have its own pre- and poweramps.

Also, another fight has also been fixed bias vs. cathode biasing. LOL Oh, the trouble we could get into with this topic. :p
 
Looks nice? It's a freaking box!

This is the ugliest Bluray player I've seen so far. What exactly is "better" about this that justifies it costing $200 more, let alone $16000?
 
Ockie said:
Well this is high end A/V equipment. It's for those folks who have to have the best. Some folks dumps millions into their A/V setups, this would make up for part of that.

If you think this is nuts, you should search up for Pear HDMI cables.
Click to expand...
I Googled "Pear HDMI" and I got this thread. :)
 
All that money and it won't change the fact that the source disk is an extremely compressed version of the original.
 
mdameron said:
It'll only work right with Monster® cables.
Click to expand...

Actually, no it won’t work right with Monster Cable. While Monster does make some very nice midrange and lower end cables for a player like that you need to think more in terms of upper end Audio Quest, Kimber etc.;)
 
If only I had that much money to blow on these things.. but even if I did.. would probably spend it on some other things haha
 
BillR said:
Actually, no it won’t work right with Monster Cable. While Monster does make some very nice midrange and lower end cables for a player like that you need to think more in terms of upper end Audio Quest, Kimber etc.;)
Click to expand...

Or, you know, generic stuff.
 
GilmourD said:
Actually, I've always found that a properly biased Class AB Tetrode or Pentode amp (like a 6L6GC, 6550, or 6CA7 for the tetrode or an EL34 for the pentode) sounds a bit sweeter and cleaner to my ear in comparison to a single-ended triode, tetrode, or pentode. The thing is that people tend not to really worry about biasing as much as they should and they end up with ugly crossover distortion.

However, that's just my opinion. The Class A vs. Class AB / Triode vs. Tetrode vs. Pentode fight has been going on longer than either of us have been alive (unless you were born in the '30s).
Click to expand...

Slightly off topic but if you love good sound do some research on the man that discovered Intermodulation Distortion (TIM). Do a bit of research on Matti Otala and especially his OTL design (output transformerless) AMPS. Good stuff about real audio and why we hear what we do, or don’t. A quick Google search on Matti Otala alone is an eye opener.:)
 
Slap an Apple logo on it and a lowercase "i" in the name. People will be lining up to hemorrhage cash at the thing and high-fiving one another after their purchases.
 
Would have been the perfect addition to the 6 million dollar home theatre except that it doesn't have any Tubes in it... if it had them the dude would hook up 8 of them in parallel and space them evenly around the seating area because it would result in better "imaging".

Definitely a "status symbol" device. It may actually output higher quality signals out the analog audio ports, but through the HDMI... heh, I've got a bridge to sell you if you believe that its digital output for Bluray discs is superior than your 1080p24fps Sony player.
 
There is a difference between quality in electronics just like in everything else. I spent $1200 on a 10kg DVD-player when I could have bought a slim-line $50 player or use my XBOX 360. Why? Because it looks and sounds better! The XBOX 360 looks like a VCD-player in comparison =P (you probably have to have a big screen to notice the difference though like a projector displaying 100")

I would never pay $17k though, but that's nothing compared to some speaker cables I saw at a local Hi-Fi store that costs €10k per meter =P That is insane!
 
Considering that the output is likely a digital bitstream for both the audio and video, it's the amplifier and display that you should dump the mad cash into, not this piece of junk. It probably has a crappier user interface than the $600 Sony player.

If you've already bought the best amplifier and display on the planet, then send the other 16000 to a 3rd world relief fund and save a bunch of lives or something.
 
I guess $17k is what it takes to make a Blu-Ray disc not look like the next-gen optical disc equivalent of upgrading to Windows ME.
 
Fooshnik said:
All that money and it won't change the fact that the source disk is an extremely compressed version of the original.
Click to expand...

Watch this thing not play brand-new Blu-Ray Profile 1.1 movies b/c of BD-Java issues like the Samsungs before firmware updates. You would have a very expensive brick.
 
I have had two different Goldmund CD transports and I can tell you that they do make top notch audio equipment. What are you paying for? Well for one thing the swiss craftsmanship is terrific. A Goldmund CD transport is an extremely HEAVY, well made device. The idea behind "mechanical grounding" is that the units are built like tanks, or anvils and thus the transport mechanism is subjected to less vibration.

It is basically a spare no expense approach to transport design. And it does yield results, Goldmund players typically have a more pristine, detailed sound than other high-end players. Goldmund equipment is usually a little on the bright side.

Of course the players I experienced were no where near $16,000. Not by a long shot.

With respect to the price, there are probably a lot of factors that go into setting the price, including the cost of research and development of the player, the licensing of technology used in the player, the cost of materials and construction, the value of the dollar and finally profit. They won't produce that many of these.

Is it "worth" $16,000? Probably not. You would have to do a serious comparison with a more reasonably priced player and decide for yourself. For some people a marginal improvement in picture quality and sound is worth the price. For others, $16,000 on a blue ray player would not be worth it even if the picture was twice as good.

A lot of high-end audio products are overpriced and don't perform. But it is a mistake to think that these players are designed just to be expensive. It is usually a case of form following function. The prices may be artifically high, but the devices themselves are designed to perform, not to show off.

I am not saying this isn't a rediculous product at this price, I am just saying that there is a lot more substance to it than say, Saddam's gold AK-47. :D
 
I bet they are forced to make it with lead free solder and as there isnt a good alternative it might last oooh, 3 years :D
Think of the films you could get instead!

Even better, rip the films you bought instead to your hard drive slowly and error free, you dont need to worry about using an expensive error prone transport and the ludicrous cost of correcting those errors real time.
Play straight from hard drive, problem solved, better quality and you save $1,000s :D
 
Blackstone said:
I have had two different Goldmund CD transports and I can tell you that they do make top notch audio equipment. What are you paying for? Well for one thing the swiss craftsmanship is terrific. A Goldmund CD transport is an extremely HEAVY, well made device. The idea behind "mechanical grounding" is that the units are built like tanks, or anvils and thus the transport mechanism is subjected to less vibration.

It is basically a spare no expense approach to transport design. And it does yield results, Goldmund players typically have a more pristine, detailed sound than other high-end players. Goldmund equipment is usually a little on the bright side.

Of course the players I experienced were no where near $16,000. Not by a long shot.

With respect to the price, there are probably a lot of factors that go into setting the price, including the cost of research and development of the player, the licensing of technology used in the player, the cost of materials and construction, the value of the dollar and finally profit. They won't produce that many of these.

Is it "worth" $16,000? Probably not. You would have to do a serious comparison with a more reasonably priced player and decide for yourself. For some people a marginal improvement in picture quality and sound is worth the price. For others, $16,000 on a blue ray player would not be worth it even if the picture was twice as good.

A lot of high-end audio products are overpriced and don't perform. But it is a mistake to think that these players are designed just to be expensive. It is usually a case of form following function. The prices may be artifically high, but the devices themselves are designed to perform, not to show off.

I am not saying this isn't a rediculous product at this price, I am just saying that there is a lot more substance to it than say, Saddam's gold AK-47. :D
Click to expand...

I don't believe in extreme high-end home theater, however, because the source material is not good enough and the fact that it involves audio AND visual makes it more of an "event" than just reproducing music. So you can get away with less. I own some very nice audio equipment but my DVD player says Sony and I got it for $80.
 
Nenu said:
I bet they are forced to make it with lead free solder and as there isnt a good alternative it might last oooh, 3 years :D
Think of the films you could get instead!

Even better, rip the films you bought instead to your hard drive slowly and error free, you dont need to worry about using an expensive error prone transport and the ludicrous cost of correcting those errors real time.
Play straight from hard drive, problem solved, better quality and you save $1,000s :D
Click to expand...

Yes I agree with this 100%. In fact the CD transport, one of Goldmund's specialties, is, arguably, obsolete. I actually replaced my Goldmund CD transport with a $300 device that simply pulls WAV files from my harddrive and into my DAC.
 
This isn't NEWS... there were idiots that spend too much money wayyyy before i was born :D
 
if i can knock it over and give it a good beating....and survives it might be worth the 17k lol
 
reaperr said:
if i can knock it over and give it a good beating....and survives it might be worth the 17k lol
Click to expand...

It may not survive, but I bet their warranty exchange is top notch.
 
blakflag said:
Considering that the output is likely a digital bitstream for both the audio and video, it's the amplifier and display that you should dump the mad cash into, not this piece of junk. It probably has a crappier user interface than the $600 Sony player.

If you've already bought the best amplifier and display on the planet, then send the other 16000 to a 3rd world relief fund and save a bunch of lives or something.
Click to expand...

Why do people say stuff like this? If I've got $16k or more sitting in the bank why the fuck should I give it to someone else? If I earned it the money belongs to me. How about I keep it in the bank and take care of myself with it. There is a day where I'd like to have enough money in the bank to not have to work.

Then again, maybe I'm just being realistic again. I know that not everyone approves of that.
 
So much money for a device used to watch a movie, YET not a darn thing worth watching. Crappy Hollywood movies nowadays.
 
Dan_D said:
Why do people say stuff like this? If I've got $16k or more sitting in the bank why the fuck should I give it to someone else? If I earned it the money belongs to me. How about I keep it in the bank and take care of myself with it. There is a day where I'd like to have enough money in the bank to not have to work.

Then again, maybe I'm just being realistic again. I know that not everyone approves of that.
Click to expand...

qft to this. It's your money and you can do what you want with it.
 
Ockie said:
qft to this. It's your money and you can do what you want with it.
Click to expand...

I'd like to add that if I had millions of dollars in the bank and I was essentially taken care of for life and never had to work again unless I just went completely retarded with my money, then charity is fine. I'm all for giving back if you have a surplus, but giving $16k away without a significant surplus over that amount in the bank is also just as foolish as buying a $17k Blu-Ray player that isn't worth it over a $600.00 one.
 
People really have to learn about the point of diminishing return...

Spending more money will often improve something...but at a certain point to improve something further the cost greatly increases and the noticible benefits deminish.

I saw an earlier post about buying a Lamborghini...at least here you spend more money and you have something tangible (even if the cost isn't worth what it is).

$7000/ft Speaker wire does not do anything to the quality of the sound that is noticible by a human (it's probably only noticible on a scope and likely in long runs)...unless of course they can somehow manufacturer it to purposly color the sound in which case it. See also tube amps or records that people like because they have a certain sound which is obviously "colored" from the original (which defeats the main goal of an Audiophile which is perfect reproduction)

How perfect was the original concert hall and what kind of equipment were they using for amplification anyways?

This $17K player is probably a really good one, but most people probably couldn't tell the difference between it and a $400 entry level player (and even fewer could tell between it and a $1000 unit).

It's amusing to watch people who don't have a clue how any of the technology works thinking that something is going to benefit them when it actually doesn't. Physics is physics.
 
I wouldn't blame them. They know rich people tend to spend blindly. Why not inflate to Monster Cable proportions?
 
20080113_777424c14aa2d629963cXBk6ldn95elI.jpg


20080112_bbb4bd05e4670333985car2hkIMlJ5BL.jpg


20080113_acedb56a15ac33daa011Sa1wemGJx0KW.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top