Interesting Roger Sanders interview

[sleepysurf]

Just read this lengthy online interview with Roger Sanders... http://www.monoandstereo.com/2013/11/interview-with-roger-sanders.html

Quite interesting!

He (correctly, IMHO) calls out the "B.S." going on in the industry, and general downward trend in that regard. Even if you don't agree with everything he says, you've got to give him credit for honestly sharing his perspective.

 

[amey01]

There is a difference between honest and simply trying to support/market one's own products. I don't know where Roger sits. I guess only he does.

 

[twich54]

good read Alan………..Classic Roger for sure !

I buy most of what he says…….. especially the part of 'stupidity' , with regards to so many of the 'AudioFools' !!

 

[User211]

I think he makes some excellent points, but maybe this is a little too much:

"10) Do you see your speakers as state of the art?

Yes. There is no speaker made that can match the performance of mine. "

Ahem. On engineering grounds alone, all BS removed in other words, I doubt that is actually true.

 

[Hocky]

His speakers are pretty damn good. Horribly ugly and no dispersion, through, so it is a very specific use case.

 

[bonzo]

I agree there is no correlation between price and performance - in the same family, maybe, to some extent

 

[amey01]

I agree there is no correlation between price and performance - in the same family, maybe, to some extent

I disagree - there is clearly a correlation between the extravagance of the casework and price......

On engineering grounds alone, all BS removed in other words, I doubt that is actually true.

This is one of the things I was referring to when I made my first comment. Obviously not - there is no such thing as a best or worst speaker - just speakers which are suitable for a particuar task or preference.

Oh, and it's contradictory too - one of my extreme bug-bears........Under "9" he quotes:

Balanced topology is inferior to unbalanced. This is because balanced equipment is much more complex so has twice the noise and distortion of unbalanced equipment.

and then three paragraphs later.........

they would discover that there is no difference in the sound of a balanced and unbalanced system.

More than a bug-bear, this makes me tune right out, as he clearly does not know what he is trying to say, let alone make a coherent point which might actually be correct.

 

[User211]

I just read a bit more... and he is right about a lot of things - certainly I didn't understand sampling theory for a long time until a few people on another forum actually explained it well to me.

I know full well that the equipment I use is technically flawed - but I have swapped in far more technically adept equipment and not actually liked it over the technically more flawed gear. Why is this? I've spent hours assessing amps at various volume levels, volume matched them with pink noise and an SPL meter and my conclusion is simply this.

If the technically flawed equipment is flawed in such a way that it gives me a presentation I prefer to listen to in the long run, then that's what I want to listen to. That may be sad but it is true. If that's due to expectation bias or the other variables Roger explains then that's also fine.

That said I don't regard audio engineering as important engineering in the sense that lives do not depend on it etc. Where such things are an issue, and I am personally involved in them, I apply massive effort to ensure I understand as much as I need to know to get the job done well.

That Roger has a deeper understanding of audio engineering than many I do not doubt. I've never heard his gear though, and I'm not sure whether I'd prefer it over any other system engineered to be as technically (or more so dare I say) proficient as Roger's.

 

[User211]

This is one of the things I was referring to when I made my first comment. Obviously not - there is no such thing as a best or worst speaker - just speakers which are suitable for a particuar task or preference.

But then he does say later: "1) Loudspeakers are the most important component in your system. All are seriously flawed. You should put most of your money and effort into getting the best ones you can."

Indeed. TBH even if your amp knocks out as much as 1% THD that is nowt compared to what most speakers are doing. Then again, why add to it would be the engineer's answer.

 

[Bernard]

Justin, any comment on his statement, "However, tube equipment is inferior to solid state equipment and simply does not perform as well."?:devil:

 

[User211]

On the bench he's right, on the ear? Hmm...

 

[Gordon Gray]

Three quotes from the interview.

1) DSD and SACD digital formats are extremely noisy.

2) It simply isn't possible to use Class A operation in powerful amplifiers due to all the wasted heat.

3) Tube equipment is inferior to solid state equipment and simply does not perform as well.

Maybe Roger had lunch and shared the same cool aid with Ethan Winer and Peter Ackzel. :rocker:

GG

PS: I do respect Mr. Sanders but it seems he has fallen into the same trap as have other egocentrics in the audio industry. But then again, maybe the world is flat.

And I also have heard his stuff at RMAF. Yes, very good but I refuse to listen to and live with a speaker that has a 6" wide sweet spot. Or maybe it's 12".

And yes Justin, you are correct. He seems to be demeaning / dismissive or not accept the fact that we all hear differently and that one person's preference regarding speakers, amps, etc. over another is somehow insignificant and doesn't represent "value" in the mind of that particular individual if it does not conform to the views of Mr. Sanders.

 

[User211]

And yes Justin, you are correct. He seems to be demeaning / dismissive or not accept the fact that we all hear differently and that one person's preference regarding speakers, amps, etc. over another is somehow insignificant and doesn't represent "value" in the mind of that particular individual if it does not conform to the views of Mr. Sanders.

Absolutely. TBH though flaws in the technical specs of one component can actually help cancel out imperfections in the other. Presumably one reason why some kit matches or mates better with some equipment but not other equipment.

Such a hard line approach has merits but it is all a bit too freakin' serious. At the end of the day boys just wanna have fun listening to good music with kit they like the looks and sound of. If it turns out the kit is technically flawed who cares if the punter is happy?

It's a hobby - don't hate it - enjoy it I say. No more or less than that

 

[Gordon Gray]

I have no patience for "absolutists" given the inherent "subjective" nature of this hobby.

And, as you say, in the end it's all about enjoying and emotionally connecting with the music.

To not recognize this basic fact is silly and indefensible from a reality based / pragmatic perspective.

 

[JonFo]

Classic Sanders stuff, no holds barred and drill into detail. Love it.

I do like that he calls BS on the industry at large, and while one can quibble about details or preferences, he's generally correct about the state of affairs.

I lament that the reversion to old-school tech and voodoo is limiting the R&D investment in truly ground breaking technologies.

For instance, I do believe that the future of high-performance amps will be designs similar to the NAD DDFA topology used in the 7050 and the M2. Basically, PowerDAC's.

 

[JonFo]

Roger is rightfully proud of his stuff, his amps are indeed the best for electrostats.

They should be the most popular amp on the board, as they truly enable the MLs to deliver their best.

 

[Rich]

Roger is rightfully proud of his stuff, his amps are indeed the best for electrostats.

They should be the most popular amp on the board, as they truly enable the MLs to deliver their best.

Exactly! While I don't necessarily agree with all of Roger's opinions, there is no question that he knows his stuff and produces some of the best electrostatic speakers (and the amps to drive them) in the world. His amps are superb and they really should be the most popular amps on this board. Quality, technical proficiency, and value (bang for the buck) are through the roof.

 

[Pneumonic]

Many thanks for posting this.

Rogers makes superior gear which, I can't imagine, will be bested by much out there.

Roger is a brilliant designer who is a fountain of knowledge, knowledge which he freely shares with anybody who wishes to call him up on the phone. Or even email.