The Audiophiliac

It's pricey. The "Neil Young Archives, Vol. 1: 1963-1972" Blu ray box goes for $349; the DVD is $250; and the CD set a mere $100. The Blu-ray box contains a sprawling 11-disc collection. Young's been working on this set for what feels like decades; was it worth the wait?

There's a beautifully bound, embossed-"leather," covered book with tons of cool pictures. Hard-core fans will love it, everyone else will look through it once and be done with it.

There's only one unreleased live disc, "Live at the Riverboat 1969." The Blu ray box also includes "Live at Canterbury House" (not a Blu-ray, just a DVD and CD), "Live at the Fillmore East 1970," and "Live at Massey Hall 1971," which have been individually released over the past couple of years. I already bought them, as I'm sure many fans have. What a rip off to make us buy them again.

Most discs have music running times of under 60 minutes, so why oh why didn't Neil fill up more of the discs' capacity, or did he just need to justify an exorbitant MSRP? $350 for 11 discs? Strange, Hollywood movies that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make retail for under 20 bucks a pop, so why does Neil charge $31 for a disc for music he made nearly 40 years ago? Rip off.

The Blu-ray features ultrahigh resolution 24-bit /192 kHz stereo sound, which you can play over some newer AV receivers, but I'm not so sure that any high-end electronics can access the superduper-sounding PCM tracks. Surround sound? Only one disc has surround. Blu-ray sound quality is about the same as the previously released 24 bit/96 kHz sound on the DVDs that came out years ago. Don't buy the Blu-ray box for the sound; the DVDs are fine.

I had a rough time navigating the Blu-rays' stupidly designed menus and accessing some of the "bonus" material and "hidden" tracks. Hey, I paid my money, why do I have to go round and round to find the music I paid for?

As for video "content," I don't know about you, but watching an LP playing on a turntable or reel-to-reel tapes spinning gets old really fast. Reading pages of text off my TV is also less than entertaining. The photo galleries are nice.… Read more

I know, I know, you don't have room for a decent set of speakers.

I've tried to tell you guys that when it comes to speakers, size still matters. Bigger speakers have tremendous size and performance advantages over pipsqueak models.

But since my pal Brent Butterworth wrote up the new Super Mini Cube speaker for the Sound & Vision Web site I figured something was up. The Super Mini Cube is supertiny; it's less than an inch cube, with a 0.75-inch driver, and better yet, it's powered by a built-in lithium battery. There's also … Read more

Let's face it: Musicians' income from CDs and downloads is on the wane, so they have to make a buck where they can.

Ticket prices for local venues in New York City can be pretty steep. Small jazz clubs can easily run $30, plus a two-drink minimum.

Steve Knopper's "High Ticket Prices Could Hurt Concert Business" article in Rolling Stone at least pointed to relative "bargains" among the big summer tours. Tom Petty and Bruce Springsteen's shows have ticket prices under $100; Dave Matthews Band's seats go for $32 to $75; Pearl … Read more

I get letters about this all the time.

They usually go something like this: "I'm no audiophile, but can you explain why all of the new, slim, pretty, thin HDTV's sound so bad? I bought a 46-inch Samsung LN46A850 for its great picture, but when I got it home, the sound was tinny. So I bought a sound bar but it had its own issues and I don't want to use multiple remotes. Any ideas?"

The problem is mostly caused by just how skinny these TVs are: There's no room for decent speakers. More than that, I'm sorry to say that sound quality isn't a priority for TV manufacturers, and they know that most buyers accept "good enough" sound. So there's no real demand from consumers to get better sound from TVs. And I guess the manufacturers assume anyone who really cares will spring for a better sound system.

My advice: Check out Zvox speakers; I've reviewed many over the years for CNET. The best bang for the buck model is the 315. It sounds great for $199, and since you can hook it up to the TV's audio outputs, you won't need to use a separate remote (that's also true for some other manufacturers' soundbars).

Consider the 315 only if your TV has a headphone jack--or if its audio output jacks can be set to "variable." Then you'll be able to control the 315's volume with your TV's remote (the 315 doesn't have its own remote).

To learn more about the 315 check out my CNET review.… Read more

Sony's making high-end speakers?

It's kind of like hearing master chef Mario Batali is concocting a $25 Quarter Pounder for McDonalds. It's just that I associate Sony speakers with the sort I hear in home-theater-in-a-box systems. You know, little plastic boxes with low-tech drivers. Those speakers can be decent enough, but they're light years away from bona-fide high-end audio devices.

Well, the Sountina NSA-PF1 doesn't look like anything I've seen from Sony, or any other speaker manufacturer. Exact design details are sketchy, other than to claim the speaker uses "Four columns linking these … Read more

Jim Marshall was one of the chief photographers at the Monterey Pop Festival and the original Woodstock. He took historic backstage shots of The Beatles' last concert. And he chronicled San Francisco's acid rock heyday.

Marshall was everywhere.

He shot more than 500 album covers over his 50-year career.

MarshallPhoto.com, his new Web site, offers 160 fine art images for sale. Sure, the prints are expensive. But if you have the bucks, I'm sure they'll be a great investment. Or try to find his terrific out-of-print book, "Not Fade Away: The Rock and Roll Photography of Jim Marshall.&… Read more

NAD is a lesser well-known brand than Denon, Marantz, Onkyo, Pioneer, or Sony, but in my opinion NAD makes better-sounding electronics.

Introduced in the late 1970s, NAD's 3020 quickly became one of the best-selling integrated stereo amplifiers of all time. Not just because it sounded better than anything going for two or three times its humble MSRP, the 3020 had that special something that made it, well, lovable. Over the years NAD maintained its leadership position by consistently designing great-sounding, unpretentious products.

A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of attending an advance preview of NAD's upcoming Master Series M2 Direct Digital Amplifier ($5,999). Yikes, the price was a lot higher than I expected, but don't worry, NAD still makes affordable electronics. Its 40 watt per channel C 315BEE stereo integrated amp goes for $349. It's impossible to beat for the price.

But the M2 is something else again. NAD claims it's not just another digital amplifier, and that's a good thing. I've heard some really nice digital amps over the years, but most don't cut it for serious audiophiles. It's not so much that they sound bad, just kind of bland. They gloss over detail and make everything sound the same.

So the first thing I noticed about the M2 was its resolution and clarity. In other words if I didn't know it was digital, I wouldn't have guessed. It's right up there with the better high-end amplifiers. The M2 is a 250 watt per channel stereo integrated amp.… Read more

I get this one a lot, what should I do about my--fill-in-the-blank--broken headphones, buzzing speakers, static noises, intermittent sound, or when my subwoofer stops subbing?

Only rarely can I solve the problem with a quick fix; I always first advise contacting the dealer or Web site that sold you the product. Service is their responsibility and if they don't provide it, you shouldn't buy from them.

Of course, the best time to ask about service is before you buy any product. Will they replace a product if it fails within 90 days of purchase? Do they pay for return shipping? I'm talking about audio products here, but that advice works for any tech purchase. … Read more

Editors' note, October 3, 2012: This is an update of a poll from May 16, 2009.

I recently visited EarsNova, a high-end store in NYC, and heard one of the best-sounding hi-fis in my experience. The store's big Rockport Technologies speakers, Constellation Audio amplifiers, and dCS Digital gear reached beyond merely reproducing music, and with my eyes closed, the music sounded as close to lifelike as I've heard. The sound floated free of the speakers; it was effortlessly clear. The illusion worked best with orchestral music, but a few purely acoustic singer-songwriter CDs were almost as palpably realistic. And that's the goal: blurring the line between hi-fi and real, live music; that's what great sound sounds like to me. Lifelike rock recordings are harder to pull off, mostly because they almost always are so heavily processed and compressed they can't sound realistic.

You don't need to be an audiophile to hear the difference between average-sounding and great-sounding recordings, but you do have to listen. Really listen.

First try this experiment and set a benchmark: Listen to someone playing an acoustic guitar, in your room. Then play a recording of an acoustic guitar. Notice any difference in the sound quality between the two? Yeah, it's not even close. If your real, live guitar player can sing, next compare the sound of that person's voice to the recording's vocal. The recording's singer will most likely sound small, tonally thin, like the voice is coming out of tiny boxes. It might be hard to tell the singer has a flesh-and-blood body connected to that voice. The live guitar sounds big and clear -- very clear -- without any edge or harshness. Few recordings of guitar sound like the real thing.

My point here is to first establish a standard of what good sound sounds like to me. I like recordings that sound realistic. After all, if the musician on the record is playing a Gretsch Synchromatic 400 Acoustic Archtop guitar, I'd like to hear its unique sound. But if the producer and engineer recorded the Gretsch through a pickup instead of a microphone, equalized its sound, compressed its dynamic range, added digital reverb, and processed it to death -- there won't be much left to the Gretsch's sound. Then it's just a generic guitar, which is why I would describe the sound of the recording as "bad." … Read more