What Does The Best Mean?

[MylesBAstor]

The best to you? The most musical? Or should it be say the component that when you evaluate all the various performance criterias scores the best?

[JackD201]

The best to me with my consumer hat on for sure. I don't think anybody who really likes music reproduction goes for anything other than what suits his or her tastes and pushes the right buttons. To do otherwise would simply lead to burnout. Business wise, what's best to my clients. Lot's of communication required when it comes to that. I leave the decision of whats best for them up to them. I can only suggest.

[Steve Lefkowicz]

No such thing as "the best" except for possibly with the disclaimer "the best I've heard, taking into account my biases, expectations and experiences."
I'm guessing no two people here would agree on "the best" piece of equipment in any category.

[Garth]

likely very true but we could argue about it for a very long time.

[Guest]

The best makes me want to play another record.

[Hugh]

No such thing as "the best" except for possibly with the disclaimer "the best I've heard, taking into account my biases, expectations and experiences."
I'm guessing no two people here would agree on "the best" piece of equipment in any category.

Agreed 100%.

[mep]

Our entire hobby is based on subjectivism and it has to be unless you are a dolt. Hopefully everyone assembles a system that pleases their ears and makes them want to listen to their music collection. As much as objectivists like to proclaim their love of measurements they don't have and DBTs they have never been involved in (much less making their purchasing decisions based upon blind listening so expectation bias doesn't creep into their brain like they try to convince everyone else to do), at the end of the day they too have to put their money where their ears guide them and not their imaginary measurements.

And having said the above, specs do mean something to those of us that have some basic understanding of how our components work. You can't buy a .2mV MC cartridge and 'match' it with a phono section with 40dB of gain. You have to understand the output impedance of your preamp and make sure it will mate with the input impedance of your power amp. You have to understand the compliance of your cartridge and the mass of your tonearm so they are matched correctly and your woofers don't try and jump out of your speaker cabinet while your amp is working overtime. You need to understand the sensitivity of your speakers so you match them with a compatible amp. 84dB speakers don't mate well with a 20 watt amp for instance.

[Garth]

The best is what I can almost afford

Mine is a sliding scale

1 If anyone spends more on audio than I do they are crazy

2 anyone who spends less than I do is not trying hard enough

3 I never add up how much I have spent ( it would likely prove I am crazy )

4 The scale moves up and down on my thoughts at given moment

5 not perfect but it works for me

6 If a piece of gear music or what ever sounds good but your hand is not moving toward your wallet walk away.

7 If you hear a something that is so good but out of your price range ( try crime I hear it pays well )

[MylesBAstor]

The best is what I can almost afford

Mine is a sliding scale

1 If anyone spends more on audio than I do they are crazy

2 anyone who spends less than I do is not trying hard enough

3 I never add up how much I have spent ( it would likely prove I am crazy )

4 The scale moves up and down on my thoughts at given moment

5 not perfect but it works for me

6 If a piece of gear music or what ever sounds good but your hand is not moving toward your wallet walk away.

7 If you hear a something that is so good but out of your price range ( try crime I hear it pays well )

[MylesBAstor]

No such thing as "the best" except for possibly with the disclaimer "the best I've heard, taking into account my biases, expectations and experiences."
I'm guessing no two people here would agree on "the best" piece of equipment in any category.

I agree with the first part but not necessarily the last if you really go through and rate different performance areas. But there can be a lot of ties too! But is there a difference between best overall and best? The latter would pertain to and encompass more individual preferences.

There can be no THE best unless one a) hears all the products in that category and b) in their system. (of course sometimes this is understood!) Going to shows or an audiobuddies home is no substitute. Yes you can get an idea of what a product but all bets are off until you hear the product in your system. As we all know, there are always unpredictable synergies that can occur when one combines lots of variables whether it be an audio or biological system.

I will add that a good reviewer should be able to remove their preferences when doing the review. I do think that people could agree on the initial starting group though.

[JCOConnell]

To me the best is : The most realistic sounding. i.e. most dynamic, widest response, least strained, smoothest, least noisy, etc. Its all about recreating the original sound field and ambience and nothing else. call me capt. obvious.

[chris h]

I call you "Captain Right On The Mark"

[nc42acc]

The best is the best because I say it is the best. Isn't this the way this industry works?

[MylesBAstor]

The best is the best because I say it is the best. Isn't this the way this industry works?

[Bill Hart]

The "best" in audio can mean a variety of things. One is something that is an enduring benchmark, e.g. the Quad 57, one of the first, if not the first commercial electrostats, that is still regarded as a high point for midrange clarity and coherence. Another is some cutting edge amp or speaker or whatever which is, for a brief moment in time, declared "the best," only to be thrown to the trash heap of obscurity a month or year later, because it is no longer in vogue among those who must have the best. One is enduring, though it is compromised; the other isn't even though it may be still be a great performing piece of gear that can bring its owner musical satisfaction and may be rediscovered years later as jewel. And sometimes, what is best for a time sounds dated twenty or thirty years later. So, I guess the trick is to find the enduring stuff, not simply the best at the moment.

[Guest]

The "best" in audio can mean a variety of things. One is something that is an enduring benchmark, e.g. the Quad 57, one of the first, if not the first commercial electrostats, that is still regarded as a high point for midrange clarity and coherence. Another is some cutting edge amp or speaker or whatever which is, for a brief moment in time, declared "the best," only to be thrown to the trash heap of obscurity a month or year later, because it is no longer in vogue among those who must have the best. One is enduring, though it is compromised; the other isn't even though it may be still be a great performing piece of gear that can bring its owner musical satisfaction and may be rediscovered years later as jewel. And sometimes, what is best for a time sounds dated twenty or thirty years later. So, I guess the trick is to find the enduring stuff, not simply the best at the moment.

I think there's some truth in what you say. On the other hand my sense over the years is that audiophiles tend to mythologize the past. Then again when, a while back, I pulled out my CJ PV-8 preamp and Quicksilver 8417 Monos - the thrilling days of yester-year sounded pretty damn good.

[Bill Hart]

Tima- I still have a love affair with the original Quad; look at the revival of the Technics SP-10 with better plinthing; or certain rim drive or other vintage tables I gather some like older arms for the right cartridge (FRE or in DKarmeli's case, an older, long SME). SET revival - it wasn't even on the radar when I started fooling around with this stuff. Mono playback, correctly done.

[cpp]

For me, 'The Best is Yet To Come'