Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: In article , (paul packer) wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:33:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham Agreed. Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. :-) U2 - Rattle and Hum. Graham |
#82
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
" wrote: Eeyore wrote: I said: I raised his hackles by quoting two respected designers and manufacturers of high-end transistor audio equipment D'Agostino.and Meitner. Both had the inegrity (and courage) to say that they hope one day to equal the quality of tube and vinyl. . Mr. Eeyore responds; That's utterly absurd. Tube circuitry is heavily flawed. Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham There you are : Meitner of Museatex and D'Agostino of Krell on one side the RAO distinguished chapel members Eeyore and Krivis on the other. What is a poor nontechnical audiophile to think and do? Ludovic Mirabel. Meitner of Museatex and D'Agostino of Krell are clearly mentally defective. I imagine they can't hear very well too either in order to make such a statement. Graham |
#83
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:29:52 -0700, " wrote: There you are : Meitner of Museatex and D'Agostino of Krell on one side the RAO distinguished chapel members Eeyore and Krivis on the other. What is a poor nontechnical audiophile to think and do? Perhaps look to see who stands to make the most money from your belief in foo-foo dust, and then ignore them? Hint: Meitner and D'Agostino are the ones that have realized that the higher they price a product, the better some people will think it is. BTW, what's with your completely wierd style of quoting where you include everything twice? Ludo like to perplex. Graham |
#84
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
|
#85
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." The guy with his mp3 player turned up to max distort "likes it" too. I guess he must be right. There's a guy in uk.rec.audio who's been banging on about his superior valve amps and home-made speakers who posted some mp3 of the sound it makes. Good God ! The guy must be stone deaf ! It sounded shockingly bad. I guess that explains why he doesn't like decent kit. Graham |
#86
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: Here's some interesting commentary from FVA: The basic engineering purpose of using the tube is that the summing node of input and feedback on a reasonable tube circuit will have in excess of 200 volts of headroom before overload. A typical solid state device circuit will have 0.2 volts or much less headroom before the feedback loop clips and fails, all other things being equal. This is complete unadulterated rubbish ! Graham |
#88
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Harry Lavo wrote: wrote in message Stuart Krivis wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: (paul packer) wrote: Eeyore wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham Agreed. Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. :-) Maybe you should have taken better care of your records. No wonder klutzes like you went running toward the CD when it came out. Boon Boy, ain't that the truth. I had a Thorens turntable, Pritchard tonearm, and ADC 25 cartridge shortly after getting out of college, replacing my Garrard / Shure set up. Kept records dust free, in their covers when not playing, and tracked at light weights. Most of my records have very little noise to this day, some 44 years later. I buy used LP's in college towns (but with my tastes, probably from profs rather than students) and about 1/2 of them are in excellent condition. The other half sound as if they were tracked for twenty years in a VM changer, at five grams, and sat open in piles when not being played. The difference is not subtle. And *this* is what the anti-vinyl fundamentalists quote as the problem with LP's. Little do they realize that it usually signals a lack of care and sometimes lesser equipment on their part. There are *plenty* more problems with vinyl than just the difficulty of decent care. Graham |
#89
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." The guy with his mp3 player turned up to max distort "likes it" too. I guess he must be right. There's a guy in uk.rec.audio who's been banging on about his superior valve amps and home-made speakers who posted some mp3 of the sound it makes. Good God ! The guy must be stone deaf ! It sounded shockingly bad. I guess that explains why he doesn't like decent kit. He recorded his system? Even the best system in the world, in the best room, would sound pretty bad once fed back into a microphone/recorder setup and played back through another pair of speakers? Ever tried it? I have, just for kicks, years ago, and the end result simply doesn't sound anything like the system. |
#90
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Harry Lavo wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message ... Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." The guy with his mp3 player turned up to max distort "likes it" too. I guess he must be right. There's a guy in uk.rec.audio who's been banging on about his superior valve amps and home-made speakers who posted some mp3 of the sound it makes. Good God ! The guy must be stone deaf ! It sounded shockingly bad. I guess that explains why he doesn't like decent kit. He recorded his system? Even the best system in the world, in the best room, would sound pretty bad once fed back into a microphone/recorder setup and played back through another pair of speakers? Ever tried it? I have, just for kicks, years ago, and the end result simply doesn't sound anything like the system. Harry, are you really trying to talk sense to a bunch of tech. school graduates venting their childish views about music reproduction, here, where no one can stop them? Let them argue with each other about tube impendances and such. When they try to venture into the country of the real pioneers of audio they come up with idiocies like explaining to us why d'Appolito and Meitner see fit to payi homage to analogue recording . Why? Simple: because they want to sell their NON_ANALOGUE products for "megabucks". Incredible as this may sound that's exactly what one of them said. And repeated. Ludovic Mirabel |
#91
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Harry Lavo wrote: "Eeyore" wrote Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." The guy with his mp3 player turned up to max distort "likes it" too. I guess he must be right. There's a guy in uk.rec.audio who's been banging on about his superior valve amps and home-made speakers who posted some mp3 of the sound it makes. Good God ! The guy must be stone deaf ! It sounded shockingly bad. I guess that explains why he doesn't like decent kit. He recorded his system? Even the best system in the world, in the best room, would sound pretty bad once fed back into a microphone/recorder setup and played back through another pair of speakers? Ever tried it? I have, just for kicks, years ago, and the end result simply doesn't sound anything like the system. I'm aware of the problems involved but he did at least use a decent 'reference' mic for the job. In short, there was no way what he had could ever have been a decent sounding setup. Graham |
#92
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
" wrote: Harry, are you really trying to talk sense to a bunch of tech. school graduates venting their childish views about music reproduction, here, where no one can stop them? Let them argue with each other about tube impendances and such. When they try to venture into the country of the real pioneers of audio they come up with idiocies like explaining to us why d'Appolito and Meitner see fit to payi homage to analogue recording . Why? Simple: because they want to sell their NON_ANALOGUE products for "megabucks". Incredible as this may sound that's exactly what one of them said. And repeated. What's so special about these 2 pricks d'Appolito and Meitner ? Do you think no-one else counts ? Graham |
#93
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Poopie whined: What's so special about these 2 pricks d'Appolito and Meitner ? They're successful and you're not. -- "Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible." A. Krooger, Aug. 2006 |
#94
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote: wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." It's always been about personal preference. That's why the objectivists always sound so foolish. There's nothing foolish about something that sounds good *objectively* ! There's nothing foolish about something that sounds good subjectively, either. Boon Graham |
#95
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 13:49:06 -0700, wrote: Maybe you should dispense with electronics altogether. I bet you can find an old Victrola on Ebay or something. Then you can be acoustic all the way from vinyl to your ears. It's older, so it's just got to be better. Maybe you should stick with MP3s then. It's newer, so it has to be better! One doesn't really follow from the other. You need to work on your logic there. Still, I guess I can be charitable and give you a "touche'" It's close enough to a snappy comeback to count in rao anyway. You keep talking about logic, yet you're the one who thinks he knows what things sound like before he hears them. Boon |
#96
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 13:23:43 -0400, Stuart Krivis
wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: In article , (paul packer) wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:33:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham Agreed. Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. :-) Agreed. |
#97
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On 4 Oct 2006 17:56:31 -0700, "Jenn" wrote:
I remember one poster here who refused to believe that I have several LPs that are of "ticks and pops". No, I'm quite prepared to believe you "have several LPs that are of "ticks and pops" :-) |
#98
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:51:11 -0400, Stuart Krivis
wrote: It's a wonder that records work as well as they do, but they really haven't progressed much since the time of Edison. Maybe the vinyl lovers here hear as well as Edison did? "Gentlemen, that's a band!" "Eh?" |
#99
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 19:13:16 -0700, " wrote: Let them argue with each other about tube impendances and such. When Did you mean tube appendages? they try to venture into the country of the real pioneers of audio they come up with idiocies like explaining to us why d'Appolito and Meitner see fit to payi homage to analogue recording . Why? Simple: because they want to sell their NON_ANALOGUE products for "megabucks". Ok, so I was wrong. They want to sell their "non-analog" products for peanuts. Is that better? You never did explain why you suddenly started haranguing me about solid state equipment. Did you have a few neurons misfire or something? Hmmm... are you trying to claim that you're a real pioneer of audio, or that D'Agostino and Meitner are? Yeah, Ludo, something else misfired and you're now talking about a speaker designer instead of D'Agostino like in the original conversation. D' Appolito is far more of a designer though, so maybe we should talk about him. At least he's worthy of respect, instead of just another charlatan separating people from their money great big chunks at a time. We could talk about Lise Meitner. She was a pioneer. --------------------------------------------- Mr. Krivis , this is getting to be one of those endless RAO gangfights and I always suffered from proneness to getting easily bored. I may have given inadvertedly the impression that I want to fight under the banner of: "everything analogue is better than everything digital" . I'll repeat what I said recently: there is plenty of awful cds. and awful lps. around. Many cds sre miles better than many lps. It depends on the audio engineer, recording location, pressing manufacture care etc. etc. My impression is that the best lps especially those from the "golden era" of simple miking and before the mixing gadgets etc. started to proliferate, before the recording engineers decided that they will adjust the sound according to their idea of what the peasants out there like, those best lps are still unsurpassed. (Some London, some Everest 35mmfilm, some Columbia). That's my ears and yours may tell you something different. But I have no patience with "scientific" trumpeting that everything digital is better than everything analogue. Especially as many who repeat it do not listen to the music that I value. As is my privilege. I'm saying all this to you because your recent posting came very closely to this my point of view. The "my digital is better than your analogue stance" is , shall I say, not very sophisticated. But it goes against my grain to be so conciliatory and statesman-like. So I'll still repeat that you're talking strange logic when you say that D'Agostino (I don't know how I got Appolito into this. Maybe because I love the gorgeous sound of those Italian names. You, of course would spot it) and Meitner praise the virtues of analogue in order to sell digital . Also I have Meitner designed amp. and I think that it is an exceptionally good buy for the money. I don't know where you got "megabucks" from and why you call him , of all people, a charlatan and worse. But these are minor quibbles. I suggest that this discussion reached the end of its usefulness. Time to get back to listening to music, reading books etc. But you may feel differently as is your privilege. Ludovic Mirabel |
#100
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn
wrote: In article , (paul packer) wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:33:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham Agreed. Cool.... more used records available for me. Good luck with the cleaning machine. |
#101
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:38:06 -0400, Stuart Krivis
wrote: Boob I see you finally signed yourself correctly. :-) LOL! |
#102
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On 4 Oct 2006 10:29:52 -0700, "
wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham There you are : Meitner of Museatex and D'Agostino of Krell on one side the RAO distinguished chapel members Eeyore and Krivis on the other. What is a poor nontechnical audiophile to think and do? Ludovic Mirabel. Don't forget me, Ludo! I must tip the balance, surely. |
#103
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 11:26:17 -0400, Stuart Krivis
wrote: You're the one who acts like a Luddite. Don't you mean Ludo-ite? |
#104
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
paul packer said: Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. Agreed. Is that the punchline? Real 'borgs get their spines stiffened by snotting on the very idea that Normals might like LPs and turntables. What do you get out of it? -- "Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible." A. Krooger, Aug. 2006 |
#105
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:47:42 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Boy, ain't that the truth. I had a Thorens turntable, Pritchard tonearm, and ADC 25 cartridge shortly after getting out of college, replacing my Garrard / Shure set up. Kept records dust free, in their covers when not playing, and tracked at light weights. Most of my records have very little noise to this day, some 44 years later. I buy used LP's in college towns (but with my tastes, probably from profs rather than students) and about 1/2 of them are in excellent condition. The other half sound as if they were tracked for twenty years in a VM changer, at five grams, and sat open in piles when not being played. The difference is not subtle. And *this* is what the anti-vinyl fundamentalists quote as the problem with LP's. Little do they realize that it usually signals a lack of care and sometimes lesser equipment on their part. There are *plenty* more problems with vinyl than just the difficulty of decent care. Which is why I said "More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too." in the first place. It's a wonder that records work as well as they do It is quite frankly a near miracle that they can indeed sound really quite good if you can afford decent kit. , but they really haven't progressed much since the time of Edison. Maybe the vinyl lovers here hear as well as Edison did? I'm increasingly wondering about that ! Graham |
#106
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:30:19 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:29:52 -0700, " wrote: There you are : Meitner of Museatex and D'Agostino of Krell on one side the RAO distinguished chapel members Eeyore and Krivis on the other. What is a poor nontechnical audiophile to think and do? Perhaps look to see who stands to make the most money from your belief in foo-foo dust, and then ignore them? Hint: Meitner and D'Agostino are the ones that have realized that the higher they price a product, the better some people will think it is. BTW, what's with your completely wierd style of quoting where you include everything twice? Ludo like to perplex. Ah, but does he realize he is doing it? :-) I think it's instinctive. :~) Graham |
#107
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:32:02 +0100, Eeyore wrote: wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. :-) Maybe you should have taken better care of your records. No wonder klutzes like you went running toward the CD when it came out. Maybe he had a life to lead ? Nah, I hang out on Usenet, so I can't have a life anymore than the rest of the people here. But how about when you used to play your records ? Graham |
#108
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
wrote: Eeyore wrote: wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." It's always been about personal preference. That's why the objectivists always sound so foolish. There's nothing foolish about something that sounds good *objectively* ! There's nothing foolish about something that sounds good subjectively, either. Don't expect anyone else to like it though ! Graham |
#109
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
paul packer wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 17:56:31 -0700, "Jenn" wrote: I remember one poster here who refused to believe that I have several LPs that are of "ticks and pops". No, I'm quite prepared to believe you "have several LPs that are of "ticks and pops" :-) I'm surprised that the Parsons/Court soundcheck CD doesn't have these too ! Graham |
#110
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
paul packer wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: (paul packer) wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:33:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham Agreed. Cool.... more used records available for me. Good luck with the cleaning machine. Keith Monks Audio made a really good one btw. Graham |
#111
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
wrote in message oups.com... Harry Lavo wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message ... Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." The guy with his mp3 player turned up to max distort "likes it" too. I guess he must be right. There's a guy in uk.rec.audio who's been banging on about his superior valve amps and home-made speakers who posted some mp3 of the sound it makes. Good God ! The guy must be stone deaf ! It sounded shockingly bad. I guess that explains why he doesn't like decent kit. He recorded his system? Even the best system in the world, in the best room, would sound pretty bad once fed back into a microphone/recorder setup and played back through another pair of speakers? Ever tried it? I have, just for kicks, years ago, and the end result simply doesn't sound anything like the system. Harry, are you really trying to talk sense to a bunch of tech. school graduates venting their childish views about music reproduction, here, where no one can stop them? Let them argue with each other about tube impendances and such. When they try to venture into the country of the real pioneers of audio they come up with idiocies like explaining to us why d'Appolito and Meitner see fit to payi homage to analogue recording . Why? Simple: because they want to sell their NON_ANALOGUE products for "megabucks". Incredible as this may sound that's exactly what one of them said. And repeated. Ludovic Mirabel Yeah, I saw that.... grin |
#112
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Stuart Krivis wrote:
On 4 Oct 2006 13:03:35 -0700, "Jenn" wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." Bravo. You're right, he's free to listen to whatever funky equipment he likes. A permission from thy holy self?! Well thank you your holyness (bows down in deep respect)... The guy with his mp3 player turned up to max distort "likes it" too. I guess he must be right. Does he use his own ear/brain to listen, or does he use others'? Yeah, we'll just suspend ...... In fact, it's easier to ...... Hell, why not just do a lousy job of conducting ..... So, do you get in on the lousy quaility ...... Why don't you just sock it man, just sock it, ok, why don't you, why? The (wo)man likes it, prefers it, period. It's not about being right or wrong, it's about preference, period. Get over it, period. Stop the bitchin and the naggin and the yammerin about why one is not supposed to like something you are partialy able to measure as inferior, just stop the yammerin, ok? Period. Now go measure something, period. Btw, I very much dislike vinyl too, btw. |
#113
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: Stuart Krivis wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:47:42 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Boy, ain't that the truth. I had a Thorens turntable, Pritchard tonearm, and ADC 25 cartridge shortly after getting out of college, replacing my Garrard / Shure set up. Kept records dust free, in their covers when not playing, and tracked at light weights. Most of my records have very little noise to this day, some 44 years later. I buy used LP's in college towns (but with my tastes, probably from profs rather than students) and about 1/2 of them are in excellent condition. The other half sound as if they were tracked for twenty years in a VM changer, at five grams, and sat open in piles when not being played. The difference is not subtle. And *this* is what the anti-vinyl fundamentalists quote as the problem with LP's. Little do they realize that it usually signals a lack of care and sometimes lesser equipment on their part. There are *plenty* more problems with vinyl than just the difficulty of decent care. Which is why I said "More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too." in the first place. It's a wonder that records work as well as they do It is quite frankly a near miracle that they can indeed sound really quite good if you can afford decent kit. , but they really haven't progressed much since the time of Edison. Maybe the vinyl lovers here hear as well as Edison did? I'm increasingly wondering about that ! Nettkkkoping fjukkwit Bertie |
#114
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: Stuart Krivis wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:32:02 +0100, Eeyore wrote: wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. :-) Maybe you should have taken better care of your records. No wonder klutzes like you went running toward the CD when it came out. Maybe he had a life to lead ? Nah, I hang out on Usenet, so I can't have a life anymore than the rest of the people here. But how about when you used to play your records ? thise were the days, eh pooh pooh, you and your GF s playing your 45s and chatting all night, nettkkkopn gfjukktard. Bertie |
#115
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:30:14 GMT, Jenn wrote: Cool.... more used records available for me. More scratches, pops, ticks, hum, rumble, and distortion for you too. :-) Maybe you should have taken better care of your records. No wonder klutzes like you went running toward the CD when it came out. Maybe he had a life to lead ? Unlike you planespotter bertie |
#116
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ? - 1 attachment
Eeyore wrote in
: Jenn wrote: In article , (paul packer) wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:33:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote: Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Graham Agreed. Cool.... more used records available for me. You might not like the stuff I listen to ! Yeah, "1001 different 737 engines conducted by Sir Simon Rattle" Planespotter bertie |
#117
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: Stuart Krivis wrote: On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:33:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote: I raised his hackles by quoting two respected designers and manufacturers of high-end transistor audio equipment D'Agostino.and Meitner. Both had the inegrity (and courage) to say that they hope one day to equal the quality of tube and vinyl. . That's utterly absurd. Tube circuitry is heavily flawed. Vinyl is hopelessly flawed. Which doesn't bode well for the quality of D'Agostino and Meitner's _current_ equipment. :-) "One day our stuff will make it up to the level of being really crappy." Actually, I feel it is possible to do a pretty good job with tubes in some cases. A couple of EEs I respect have said that, as with SS, you can get good results with tubes if you use them properly. I have certainly heard good results with some tube preamps, for instance. A tube PA is totally stuffed by the need to use an output transformer though. It appears to me that the best SS and tube gear are all converging on the same point - neutral and stable operation. The best of each breed sound very similar. However, I choose to own SS myself for a number of reasons, with heat and maintainance being up there at the top. Good enough reasons, although I did once design a mosfet amp with a quiscent dissipation of 110W/ch. oow ,aren't you speshul You're an even sadder fjuktard than I initially gave you credit for Bertie |
#118
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: Stuart Krivis wrote: Here's some interesting commentary from FVA: The basic engineering purpose of using the tube is that the summing node of input and feedback on a reasonable tube circuit will have in excess of 200 volts of headroom before overload. A typical solid state device circuit will have 0.2 volts or much less headroom before the feedback loop clips and fails, all other things being equal. This is complete unadulterated rubbish ! No surprise there, everythng you post is complete unadulterated rubbih At least you had the god sense to run awya from the other froups that knew that, though Pussy netttkkkop Bertie |
#119
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: " wrote: Harry, are you really trying to talk sense to a bunch of tech. school graduates venting their childish views about music reproduction, here, where no one can stop them? Let them argue with each other about tube impendances and such. When they try to venture into the country of the real pioneers of audio they come up with idiocies like explaining to us why d'Appolito and Meitner see fit to payi homage to analogue recording . Why? Simple: because they want to sell their NON_ANALOGUE products for "megabucks". Incredible as this may sound that's exactly what one of them said. And repeated. What's so special about these 2 pricks d'Appolito and Meitner ? Do you think no-one else counts ? sez the netttkopping brit fjukktard bertie |
#120
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Arny ! Why don't you STFU ?
Eeyore wrote in
: wrote: Eeyore wrote: wrote: Stuart Krivis wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 10:50:56 -0700, wrote: People like Krivis will never understand the concept of personal preference. Nearly everyone I know who prefers vinyl does so because they "like it better." No one is saying that vinyl measures better, or So you admit it's down to "I like it." It's always been about personal preference. That's why the objectivists always sound so foolish. There's nothing foolish about something that sounds good *objectively* ! There's nothing foolish about something that sounds good subjectively, either. Don't expect anyone else to like it though ! Jerkofff bertier |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why tubes are the paradigm | Audio Opinions | |||
A Question for Arny about the lawsuit | Audio Opinions |