Best CD/Radio for a boat?

[WotEver]

6 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

I've got a couple of Kef Egg speakers which were no longer used at home. Much much  better than the previous cheap car radio type spekers.

Yup, there are lots out there that can improve the sound for not a lot of money

However, that's not the point that Rachel was making. 

[Naughty Cal]

4 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

I've got a couple of Kef Egg speakers which were no longer used at home. Much much  better than the previous cheap car radio type spekers.

We have a pair of those in our bedroom at home. 

In fact we really need to get rid of some speakers at home 

The Wharfedale's in the living room are only there as ornaments (big ornaments) as we use the Bose soundbar instead. 

2 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Yup, there are lots out there that can improve the sound for not a lot of money

However, that's not the point that Rachel was making. 

Yes it was. You really need to go and read what has been written 

[WotEver]

11 hours ago, frahkn said:

I agree, anyway you probably wouldn't want the loss of quality that mp3 versus cd would involve.

 

 

3 hours ago, cuthound said:

With the kind of speakers usually found on a boat, you would be unable to hear the difference.

 

2 hours ago, Naughty Cal said:

Speakers can be upgraded for not a lot of money.

12 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

You really need to go and read what has been written

I think you should be more careful what you quote before giving rubbish answers. 

[WotEver]

13 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

we use the Bose soundbar instead. 

Proof enough that you wouldn't know an accurate sound if it hit you in the face. 

[Naughty Cal]

4 minutes ago, WotEver said:

 

 

I think you should be more careful what you quote before giving rubbish answers. 

Yes. Read it.

Speakers can be "upgraded" for not a lot of money.

Which they clearly can.

You can go on with this all day if you like. It is only making you look like a tit.

3 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Proof enough that you wouldn't know an accurate sound if it hit you in the face. 

Difference being I don't get paid to need to know an accurate sound.

What I listen to in the comfort of my home is entirely up to me. Much the same as with boats.

The vast majority of boat owners dont need an accurate sound, they need a sound that they like. Which can be achieved by changing existing speakers for better ones which needn't cost the earth.

[WotEver]

6 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

You can go on with this all day if you like

This is great fun. Is it going to end like your definitive guide to the operation of swing bridges? Loads of squirming and obfuscation ending with silence on the subject?

Put very simply so that you won't struggle to understand, one poster said that you might want to use wavs instead of MP3s to keep the quality up. Next poster quite accurately stated that you'd never hear the difference with speakers on a boat. You then inaccurately stated that they could be updated 'cheaply'. 

Now do you understand where you were wrong, or do you want to keep making yourself look silly?

[Naughty Cal]

1 minute ago, WotEver said:

This is great fun. Is it going to end like your definitive guide to the operation of swing bridges? Loads of squirming and obfuscation ending with silence on the subject?

Put very simply so that you won't struggle to understand, one poster said that you might want to use wavs instead of MP3s to keep the quality up. Next poster quite accurately stated that you'd never hear the difference with speakers on a boat. You then inaccurately stated that they could be updated 'cheaply'. 

Now do you understand where you were wrong, or do you want to keep making yourself look silly?

I stated that speakers can be upgraded cheaply, which they can.

Nowhere have I mentioned wavs or MP3.

Go back and have a look.

You decided to pontificate. No one else.

There will be no squirming from me. I know what I have written and that it is correct.

[rusty69]

[Naughty Cal]

Just now, rusty69 said:

No chance.

We are just getting started.

[WotEver]

1 minute ago, Naughty Cal said:

I stated that speakers can be upgraded cheaply, which they can.

Nowhere have I mentioned wavs or MP3.

Go back and have a look.

You decided to pontificate. No one else.

There will be no squirming from me. I know what I have written and that it is correct.

My dear, I suggest you look very closely (I can loan you some specs if you require) at which post you quoted, and the context in which that post had been made. 

Or are you simply saying that you quoted a post at random purely to make the obvious point that speakers can be changed?

Perhaps I should quote a post from this thread and reply that I have to cut the grass this weekend. 

[Naughty Cal]

8 minutes ago, WotEver said:

My dear, I suggest you look very closely (I can loan you some specs if you require) at which post you quoted, and the context in which that post had been made. 

Or are you simply saying that you quoted a post at random purely to make the obvious point that speakers can be changed?

Perhaps I should quote a post from this thread and reply that I have to cut the grass this weekend. 

Reply with what you want.

The fact remains that what I posted is correct.

Our gardener is coming on Monday so we won't be cutting the grass this weekend.

[Jess--]

2 hours ago, Robbo said:

I do like the look of the Fusion stuff myself, does anyone actually have one here and can comment on the sound quality?

I have a fusion (MS-CD600) on my boat and it appears to work fine (multiple zones are a nice touch), however I can't comment on the sound quality from it as the speakers attached to it are total **** and they have been installed in stupid positions (2 speakers at the back on the left of the boat with less than a foot between them and then a third in the kitchen and a fourth in the bathroom???)

I have just finished up building a hidden 10" sub that will be used with a pair of small satellite speakers (4" cubes) on a 2.1 amplifier, once its installed I doubt that the fusion will ever be turned on again as everything will be run from either a phone on bluetooth or the tv.

 

 

[frahkn]

5 hours ago, Naughty Cal said:

 

Difference being I don't get paid to need to know an accurate sound.

What I listen to in the comfort of my home is entirely up to me. Much the same as with boats.

The vast majority of boat owners dont need an accurate sound, they need a sound that they like. Which can be achieved by changing existing speakers for better ones which needn't cost the earth.

I think that, like much else, it depends what you are accustomed to.

For example, I recently went to hear Laura Marling, before the set the PA played a couple of Cohen albums. The sound quality was appalling but there was no apparent disquiet in the audience. I went to the bar because I literally could not remain listening to music being destroyed.

On the boat I mostly have the tuner for radio 4, when listening to music I use good headphones.

Obviously, it goes without saying that what you put up with at home is indeed entirely up to yourself - best of luck with that!

 

Frank.

[Richard10002]

12 hours ago, WotEver said:

This is great fun. Is it going to end like your definitive guide to the operation of swing bridges? Loads of squirming and obfuscation ending with silence on the subject?

Put very simply so that you won't struggle to understand, one poster said that you might want to use wavs instead of MP3s to keep the quality up. Next poster quite accurately stated that you'd never hear the difference with speakers on a boat. You then inaccurately stated that they could be updated 'cheaply'. 

Now do you understand where you were wrong, or do you want to keep making yourself look silly?

I can hear a massive difference between the quality of the sound between the crappy car stereo speakers on my boat and the Kef Eggs I've fitted. I dont know if it is bigger than the difference between an MP3 and a wav, but it was a relatively cheap massive upgrade.

I thought this was along the lines of what NautyCal said and meant, and didnt attach her comment the mp3 v wav differences.

 

As a matter of interest, is it possible that the difference between mp3 and wav could be bigger than the difference between my crappy speakers and my kefs. If it is, it could be worth seeking the improvement but, if it's one of those incremental increases that hifi enthusiasts seek, it probably wouldnt be worth it, (to me).

[frahkn]

6 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

I can hear a massive difference between the quality of the sound between the crappy car stereo speakers on my boat and the Kef Eggs I've fitted. I dont know if it is bigger than the difference between an MP3 and a wav, but it was a relatively cheap massive upgrade.

I thought this was along the lines of what NautyCal said and meant, and didnt attach her comment the mp3 v wav differences.

 

As a matter of interest, is it possible that the difference between mp3 and wav could be bigger than the difference between my crappy speakers and my kefs. If it is, it could be worth seeking the improvement but, if it's one of those incremental increases that hifi enthusiasts seek, it probably wouldnt be worth it, (to me).

As a general proposition, I would avoid hi-fi enthusiasts, music enthusiasts however are another matter!

As another general proposition, other things being equal (which I admit, they rarely are), the better the speakers the more noticeable the difference between mp3 and wav.

Frank.

[Jess--]

the biggest giveaway with mp3's is the top end, anything above around 10khz is horribly notched (the lower the bitrate the wider the notches) and to compound the problem a lot of mp3 encoders slap a high cut filter in at 16khz making anything above only appear as a lower frequency alias which sounds warbly / watery

To my ears 128kbs is horrible to listen to, 160 & 192kbs are acceptable for general listening and 320kbs is fairly close to original
a wav file recorded in 16 bit / 44,100 khz sampling rate is totally indistinguishable from the original CD (as it should be since it's an exact match)

one thing that is often overlooked on an audio setup is the speaker cables and they can make a huge difference.
on one of the rides we operate the speaker cables were left in storage when we set the ride up, so we quickly bough some generic "speaker wire" and used that, the system sounded horrible, nothing but poorly controlled bass and almost non-existant treble.
the next day our proper cables were recovered and the system sounded perfect again (or at least as near perfect it ever could)
I'm not suggesting that people go for oxygen free copper cables or any of the overpriced stuff from companies like monster, just get something that is capable of carrying the current without a massive volt drop (for a 100w system I reckon on using a cable that is good for 10A @ 12v as a minimum)

[WotEver]

8 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

is it possible that the difference between mp3 and wav could be bigger than the difference between my crappy speakers and my kefs.

Nope. The difference between a decent MP3 and a wav is far more subtle than that between a crappy speaker and a mediocre one. 

The previous two posts explain it well - no point in me repeating any of it. 

[Chewbacka]

7 hours ago, Jess-- said:

the biggest giveaway with mp3's is the top end, anything above around 10khz is horribly notched (the lower the bitrate the wider the notches) and to compound the problem a lot of mp3 encoders slap a high cut filter in at 16khz making anything above only appear as a lower frequency alias which sounds warbly / watery

To my ears 128kbs is horrible to listen to, 160 & 192kbs are acceptable for general listening and 320kbs is fairly close to original
a wav file recorded in 16 bit / 44,100 khz sampling rate is totally indistinguishable from the original CD (as it should be since it's an exact match)

one thing that is often overlooked on an audio setup is the speaker cables and they can make a huge difference.
on one of the rides we operate the speaker cables were left in storage when we set the ride up, so we quickly bough some generic "speaker wire" and used that, the system sounded horrible, nothing but poorly controlled bass and almost non-existant treble.
the next day our proper cables were recovered and the system sounded perfect again (or at least as near perfect it ever could)
I'm not suggesting that people go for oxygen free copper cables or any of the overpriced stuff from companies like monster, just get something that is capable of carrying the current without a massive volt drop (for a 100w system I reckon on using a cable that is good for 10A @ 12v as a minimum)

I agree with everything you say, BUT in my case I can't hear much above 10kHz so a bit of a roll off above and a high cut at 16kHz is the least of my problems.  Too many years working in factories.  -  Now a bit of pointless pedantry, the sample rate is 44.1kHz or 44,100Hz - sorry about that .  As an aside I remember a demonstration by Philips of their final pre silicon prototype CD player, it was the size of a 3 draw filing cabinet.

Whilst I struggle to hear much difference between 128kb and 192kb I do find that if I listen - especially on headphones - to 128kb or lower I get 'fatigued' and don't listen for much over an hour, so tend to encode at the higher bit rates.

[keith.]

The O/P merely wanted to know if any member could recommend a radio/CD player that didn't need an always live lead for their boat. They received one recommendation for specialist marine equipment without the clarity of whether Fusion needed an always live lead or not. They also received the comment that one member was going to replace a Sony unit for something else. 

Since then it has degenerated into one poster trying to demonstrate how much money they must have with a gardener and Wharfdale speakers that they now no longer use and another poster explaining that bit rate is all important to audio quality.

 

The O/P still doesn't have an answer to his question. I have learnt a fair bit from this site in general terms but like the whole internet it is difficult to get specific facts without fronting up with cash.

Edited April 8, 2017 by keith.
Poor grammar

[bizzard]

I used to do a bit of evening van work for extra money years ago, 1980's, for a courier for whom I maintained their vans. One of their contracts was with Polygram records who had factories and stock warehouses in Chadwell Heath and Walthamstow. They decided to close the Walthamstow factory and we had the job of clearing some of the gear out. They had a listening room where the directors and managers would listen to hear the quality of a new release, what they called ''Test pressing'' before it when into full scale production. The room was quite surprising. Just like an ordinary living room in a house with and ordinary Garrard record deck and a pair of Celestion speakers. On questioning this set up I was told that we listen to the quality of the records on that ordinary equipment because it is pretty much what most folk have at home to listen to their music. Their headquarters, an old mansion in Berkeley Square also had similar ordinary listening equipment in an ordinary room where they also listened to the test pressing of a new release.

[Jess--]

2 hours ago, Chewbacka said:

I agree with everything you say, BUT in my case I can't hear much above 10kHz so a bit of a roll off above and a high cut at 16kHz is the least of my problems.  Too many years working in factories.  -  Now a bit of pointless pedantry, the sample rate is 44.1kHz or 44,100Hz - sorry about that .  As an aside I remember a demonstration by Philips of their final pre silicon prototype CD player, it was the size of a 3 draw filing cabinet.

Damn.... you got me... I blame posting after 1 AM

1 hour ago, keith. said:

The O/P merely wanted to know if any member could recommend a radio/CD player that didn't need an always live lead for their boat. They received one recommendation for specialist marine equipment without the clarity of whether Fusion needed an always live lead or not. They also received the comment that one member was going to replace a Sony unit for something else. 

Since then it has degenerated into one poster trying to demonstrate how much money they must have with a gardener and Wharfdale speakers that they now no longer use and another poster explaining that bit rate is all important to audio quality.

 

The O/P still doesn't have an answer to his question. I have learnt a fair bit from this site in general terms but like the whole internet it is difficult to get specific facts without fronting up with cash.

The fusion radio I have doesn't appear to NEED a permanent live to retain settings although it does have one, in my case it's wired so the permanent live get disconnected by the isolator (so not permanent) and the line that would normally go to the ignition (ACC position) is wired to a switch that is used to turn the radio on / off.

1 hour ago, bizzard said:

I used to do a bit of evening van work for extra money years ago, 1980's, for a courier for whom I maintained their vans. One of their contracts was with Polygram records who had factories and stock warehouses in Chadwell Heath and Walthamstow. They decided to close the Walthamstow factory and we had the job of clearing some of the gear out. They had a listening room where the directors and managers would listen to hear the quality of a new release, what they called ''Test pressing'' before it when into full scale production. The room was quite surprising. Just like an ordinary living room in a house with and ordinary Garrard record deck and a pair of Celestion speakers. On questioning this set up I was told that we listen to the quality of the records on that ordinary equipment because it is pretty much what most folk have at home to listen to their music. Their headquarters, an old mansion in Berkeley Square also had similar ordinary listening equipment in an ordinary room where they also listened to the test pressing of a new release.

A similar setup these days would probably include a mobile phone, earbud headphones and a cheap bluetooth speaker

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, keith. said:

The O/P merely wanted to know if any member could recommend a radio/CD player that didn't need an always live lead for their boat. They received one recommendation for specialist marine equipment without the clarity of whether Fusion needed an always live lead or not. They also received the comment that one member was going to replace a Sony unit for something else. 

Since then it has degenerated into one poster trying to demonstrate how much money they must have with a gardener and Wharfdale speakers that they now no longer use and another poster explaining that bit rate is all important to audio quality.

 

The O/P still doesn't have an answer to his question. I have learnt a fair bit from this site in general terms but like the whole internet it is difficult to get specific facts without fronting up with cash.

roflmao

[Robbo]

2 hours ago, keith. said:

The O/P merely wanted to know if any member could recommend a radio/CD player that didn't need an always live lead for their boat. They received one recommendation for specialist marine equipment without the clarity of whether Fusion needed an always live lead or not. They also received the comment that one member was going to replace a Sony unit for something else. 

Since then it has degenerated into one poster trying to demonstrate how much money they must have with a gardener and Wharfdale speakers that they now no longer use and another poster explaining that bit rate is all important to audio quality.

 

The O/P still doesn't have an answer to his question. I have learnt a fair bit from this site in general terms but like the whole internet it is difficult to get specific facts without fronting up with cash.

The Fusions don't need a always on power.  The full installation manuals are on their website to double check for the model you want.

https://www.fusionentertainment.com/marine/products/stereo-units

[Richard10002]

11 hours ago, frahkn said:

As a general proposition, I would avoid hi-fi enthusiasts, music enthusiasts however are another matter!

As another general proposition, other things being equal (which I admit, they rarely are), the better the speakers the more noticeable the difference between mp3 and wav.

Frank.

But how noticeable is "more noticeable"? - given my reference points, (crappy speaker v OK speaker), and Wotevers concise response below, (above??), it seems not to be worth chasing after for the ordinary Joe?

Without spending the money on better speakers, and the gear to feed them with wav files, how can the ordinary Joe find out if the difference is worth chasing, (for them as individuals)?

As an ordinary Joe, I am happy to chase better sound, if the increment is big enough/noticeable. I have 3 sets of headphones, Sainsburys Kitsound £25 bluetooth. Jabra Sport Bluetooth £135, and Shure SE535 £300, (now £350-£400).  There is no doubt that I gravitate towards the Shures when convenient, and I never use the Kitsound. The Jabra are good when I want a short wire and bluetooth.

By the same token, I am truly impressed, (close to blown away), by the sound that comes out of a Bose Soundlink Mini 2 and a Bose Solo 5 fed by bluetooth from an iPhone 6s.

[Richard10002]

10 hours ago, Jess-- said:

I'm not suggesting that people go for oxygen free copper cables or any of the overpriced stuff from companies like monster, just get something that is capable of carrying the current without a massive volt drop (for a 100w system I reckon on using a cable that is good for 10A @ 12v as a minimum)

So... having read all the hype about cables and the fact that very expensive ones are better, is it all to do with current and voltage drop? After all, the speaker doesn't know what kind of wire is connected to it, and all the wire can do is carry a current and voltage, (presumably fluctuating in a variety of ways), from amp to speaker. I suppose it is also to do with how well a wire provides the same to the speaker as it receives from the amp, both in terms of levels and timings?