Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
[email protected] bretludwig@ymail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 128
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

Was America a better place then? I think so.

To be sure, a hundred years ago, any major city stank of ****, human
and horse, there was no air conditioning, and people must have had
body odor most of the time. Indoor plumbing was not a common practice
much before 1900 and not universal until the Roaring Twenties, and
having central hot water heating was in fact only nearly universal at
roughly the dawn of WWII. The upper classes had them a generation
earlier of course, and so we forget that many working class families
could remember chamber pots within living memory.

The next fifty years, from 1909 to 1959, brought the most
foundational changes technologically in every aspect of life, from
birth to childhood to working life, retirement, and death, of any
similar period in human history. An Egyptian or Chinese for four
thousand years, perhaps, could live to sixty (although most did not)
and reflect back on his, or her, experience from the age of ten with
little change in day to day life. A Briton from earliest to later
Victorian life would have seen more change, but the basics were
relatively similar. But an American, male or female, working or middle
or patrician in class, would find such a massive upheaval that in
fact, most people still alive in 1969 who had been born in 1909-ten
years onward from even then and after the tumultuus six or seven years
that constituted the tumultuous 1960s-were not particularly stunned or
shocked by the television images they watched as American Neil
Armstrong stepped off the lunar lander ladder onto the moon. In fact,
it was not considered remarkable that most Americans born in 1909 did
watch the lunar landing. That fifty percent of the population would
see their sixtieth birthday was a historical milestone few took for
anything but routine.

Most modern people would consider it more pleasant to live in 1959
than in 1909. But would either be preferable to 2009? It's of course a
moot question, since time travel is either absolutely impossible or is
sufficiently far in the future that those visiting us today in their
own past are universally discreet so as we can not detect them, or
even tangentially infer their presence.

My own opinion is that intellectually 1909 was far better than today,
and that a learned person might well prefer it, but that 1959 overall
was probably the zenith of American life and the best time in history
simply to have experienced the country, although the foundations were
even then being attacked by termites of various species.

The concern allegedly of interest here is, or was, the business of
sound reproduction. In that, 1959 was truly the golden era. The
technology was sufficiently advanced to permit results that today can
be improved only asymptotically, yet, cost cutting and cheapening were
not the order of the day. Profit margins were good, and talented
people still designed and good workers still assembled and tested each
item here in the United States. With the exception of some very
specific items in Britain and Germany, all the best items were made in
the United States. People making them could afford to own a house and
feed a family. And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Jon Yaeger Jon Yaeger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 645
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

in article
,
at wrote on 1/18/09 1:23 PM:

Was America a better place then? I think so.

To be sure, a hundred years ago, any major city stank of ****, human
and horse, there was no air conditioning, and people must have had
body odor most of the time. Indoor plumbing was not a common practice
much before 1900 and not universal until the Roaring Twenties, and
having central hot water heating was in fact only nearly universal at
roughly the dawn of WWII. The upper classes had them a generation
earlier of course, and so we forget that many working class families
could remember chamber pots within living memory.

The next fifty years, from 1909 to 1959, brought the most
foundational changes technologically in every aspect of life, from
birth to childhood to working life, retirement, and death, of any
similar period in human history. An Egyptian or Chinese for four
thousand years, perhaps, could live to sixty (although most did not)
and reflect back on his, or her, experience from the age of ten with
little change in day to day life. A Briton from earliest to later
Victorian life would have seen more change, but the basics were
relatively similar. But an American, male or female, working or middle
or patrician in class, would find such a massive upheaval that in
fact, most people still alive in 1969 who had been born in 1909-ten
years onward from even then and after the tumultuus six or seven years
that constituted the tumultuous 1960s-were not particularly stunned or
shocked by the television images they watched as American Neil
Armstrong stepped off the lunar lander ladder onto the moon. In fact,
it was not considered remarkable that most Americans born in 1909 did
watch the lunar landing. That fifty percent of the population would
see their sixtieth birthday was a historical milestone few took for
anything but routine.

Most modern people would consider it more pleasant to live in 1959
than in 1909. But would either be preferable to 2009? It's of course a
moot question, since time travel is either absolutely impossible or is
sufficiently far in the future that those visiting us today in their
own past are universally discreet so as we can not detect them, or
even tangentially infer their presence.

My own opinion is that intellectually 1909 was far better than today,
and that a learned person might well prefer it, but that 1959 overall
was probably the zenith of American life and the best time in history
simply to have experienced the country, although the foundations were
even then being attacked by termites of various species.

The concern allegedly of interest here is, or was, the business of
sound reproduction. In that, 1959 was truly the golden era. The
technology was sufficiently advanced to permit results that today can
be improved only asymptotically, yet, cost cutting and cheapening were
not the order of the day. Profit margins were good, and talented
people still designed and good workers still assembled and tested each
item here in the United States. With the exception of some very
specific items in Britain and Germany, all the best items were made in
the United States. People making them could afford to own a house and
feed a family. And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.



Gee Bret, I would have thought that your favorite interval would have been
from 1933 to 1945 in a particular European country . . .

  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,415
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 12:35*pm, Jon Yaeger wrote:

Gee Bret, I would have thought that your favorite interval would have been
from 1933 to 1945 in a particular European country . . .


I would've placed Bratzi's favorite era and location as pre-1865
southern US, when a white man knew where a white man stood.

Bratzi is one sick puppy.
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
[email protected] bretludwig@ymail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 128
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 12:46 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jan 18, 12:35 pm, Jon Yaeger wrote:

Gee Bret, I would have thought that your favorite interval would have been
from 1933 to 1945 in a particular European country . . .


I would've placed Bratzi's favorite era and location as pre-1865
southern US, when a white man knew where a white man stood.

Bratzi is one sick puppy.


Aee my more recent post for the answer. A white man is a
manufacturing man and for that reason I would, with some reluctance,
have worn blue in 1865 and USAAF khaki in 1945.
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Engineer[_2_] Engineer[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 209
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 1:23*pm, wrote:
*Was America a better place then? I think so.


(snip)

And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.


Bret, I am an optimist... IMO, it is better now. We can still collect
and build the 1959 audio stuff (and I do!) but at the same time have
an affordable LCD home theatre (I don't!), use a cellphone (yes!) and
fly to Oz at any time (I have!) One good thing about 1909 and earlier
was that the "inquiring scientist/engineer" could know a good
percentage of the then current knowledge in a number of technical
disciplines. Now he/she can never even cover one discipline but must
specialize (as I have!) Of course, if we know the basic physics,
maths and chemistry we can at least be told how most stuff works - but
we can't make it in the basement like they did!
Anyway, most of us live longer now ("three score and ten" is
obsolete... I hope, nearly there!) and if we are active and inquiring
thoughout our lives it can even be fun.
The beer's still good, too!
Cheers,
Roger


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
[email protected] bretludwig@ymail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 128
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 10:09 pm, Engineer wrote:
On Jan 18, 1:23 pm, wrote:

Was America a better place then? I think so.


(snip)

And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.


Bret, I am an optimist... IMO, it is better now. We can still collect
and build the 1959 audio stuff (and I do!) but at the same time have
an affordable LCD home theatre (I don't!), use a cellphone (yes!) and
fly to Oz at any time (I have!) One good thing about 1909 and earlier
was that the "inquiring scientist/engineer" could know a good
percentage of the then current knowledge in a number of technical
disciplines. Now he/she can never even cover one discipline but must
specialize (as I have!) Of course, if we know the basic physics,
maths and chemistry we can at least be told how most stuff works - but
we can't make it in the basement like they did!
Anyway, most of us live longer now ("three score and ten" is
obsolete... I hope, nearly there!) and if we are active and inquiring
thoughout our lives it can even be fun.
The beer's still good, too!


In America the beer is way better IF you shun the major brews, which
only bikers and Mexicans drink anymore. Where American beer sucked
fifty years ago, we now have a selection of brews as good as any
although I like German, Canadian and British beers occasionally too as
well as the Czech beers. Nothing Asian because most use rice and it
gives me the ****s.

  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 11:22*pm, wrote:

Nothing Asian because most use rice and it
gives me the ****s.


And that is different from your natural state how?


Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Clyde Slick Clyde Slick is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,545
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On 18 Ian, 23:22, wrote:


*In America the beer is way better IF you shun the major brews, which
only bikers and Mexicans drink anymore. Where American beer sucked
fifty years ago, we now have a selection of brews as good as any
although I like German, Canadian and British beers occasionally too as
well as the Czech beers. Nothing Asian because most use rice and it
gives me the ****s.-


c'mon guys, each of you put up a couple of bucks
and I'll send him a couple of cases of Kirin,
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 19, 9:20*am, Clyde Slick wrote:

c'mon guys, each of you put up a couple of bucks
and I'll send him a couple of cases of Kirin,


Yeah - and when he passed, he could be buried in a shoe-box given all
that would be left.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
[email protected] thorenstd124@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 11:23*am, wrote:
*Was America a better place then? I think so.

*To be sure, a hundred years ago, any major city stank of ****, human
and horse, there was no air conditioning, and people must have had
body odor most of the time. Indoor plumbing was not a common practice
much before 1900 and not universal until the Roaring Twenties, and
having central hot water heating was in fact only nearly universal at
roughly the dawn of WWII. The upper classes had them a generation
earlier of course, and so we forget that many working class families
could remember *chamber pots within living memory.

*The next fifty years, from 1909 to 1959, brought the most
foundational changes technologically in every aspect of life, from
birth to childhood to working life, retirement, and death, of any
similar period in human history. An Egyptian or Chinese for four
thousand years, perhaps, could live to sixty (although most did not)
and reflect back on his, or her, experience from the age of ten with
little change in day to day life. A Briton from earliest to later
Victorian *life would have seen more change, but the basics were
relatively similar. But an American, male or female, working or middle
or patrician in class, would find such a massive upheaval that in
fact, most people still alive in 1969 who had been born in 1909-ten
years onward from even then and after the tumultuus six or seven years
that constituted the tumultuous 1960s-were not particularly stunned or
shocked by the television images they watched as American Neil
Armstrong stepped off the lunar lander ladder onto the moon. In fact,
it was not considered remarkable that most Americans born in 1909 did
watch the lunar landing. That fifty percent of the population would
see their sixtieth birthday was a historical milestone few took for
anything but routine.

*Most modern people would consider it more pleasant to live in 1959
than in 1909. But would either be preferable to 2009? It's of course a
moot question, since time travel is either absolutely impossible or is
sufficiently far in the future that those visiting us today in their
own past are universally discreet so as we can not detect them, or
even tangentially infer their presence.

*My own opinion is that intellectually 1909 was far better than today,
and that a learned person might well prefer it, but that 1959 overall
was probably the zenith of American life and the best time in history
simply to have experienced the country, although the foundations were
even then being attacked by termites of various species.

*The concern allegedly of interest here is, or was, the business of
sound reproduction. In that, 1959 was truly the golden era. The
technology was sufficiently advanced to permit results that today can
be improved only asymptotically, yet, cost cutting and cheapening were
not the order of the day. Profit margins were good, and talented
people still designed and good workers still assembled and tested each
item here in the United States. With the exception of some very
specific items in Britain and Germany, all the best items were made in
the United States. People making them could afford to own a house and
feed a family. And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.


I have both an unusual type of autism,and mitochondrial
disease.Neither of which could have been diagnosed fifty years ago.As
an autistic,I can't be anything but blunt.The internet,and the
advances in medicine,genetics,etc. are the only things that make life
in the early 21st century at all wortwhile.Other than that,the whole
of western civilization has gone dramatically downhill in the last
thirty years.As a leftist,and a socialist,I say the downfall began
with the election of Ronald Reagan,and the ensuing rise of the
religious right in America.

The twentieth century was marked by musical innovation and
revoulutions,from "Le Sacre du Printemps" to The Sex Pistols.Punk,now
over thirty years in the past was the last of this.The lack of any
classical composers to emerge in the past sixty years,as well known as
Bartok,or a Shostakovich speaks for itself.Both high culture,and pop
culture has gone dramatically downhill since the early 1980s.Teenage
kids still love Buddy Holly,Miles Davis,The Doors,and The Velvet
Underground,generations after they are gone,in part because they have
no equal today.In part because technology and corporations have each
done their part to ruin music,beginning with the rise of the CD in the
early 80s.Today's classical artists sound boring,and pedestrian,when
compared to a Furtwangler,a Menhuin,or a Stokowski. A Kenneth
Wilkinson,or a team like a C.Robert,and Wilma Cozart-Fine has no place
in the classical recording biz anymore,even if their equals ARE out
there.

Most of the major components in my system,like my Marantz 8,and my
Thorens,are all around fifty years old.The only exciting development
since the CD,has been the triode revolution,and what are we talking
about here,but modifications in seventy five/eighty year old
technology.Can you say Loftin-White?

Fifty or a hundred years ago,Coca-Cola had real sugar,and tasted like
Coca-Cola.Same with all soda.Fifty years ago,most packaged supermarket
food was better quality than it was now.You did not have to worry
about dying from substandard ingredients imported from China,to cut
corners on cost and quality.There was still a vibrant manufacturing
base,in this country.Unions were alive and well.

I wish I could move to a prosperous,well run country like Venezuela.

Hugo Chavez is the greatest president ever,


Roger


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?


wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 11:23 am, wrote:
Was America a better place then? I think so.


The twentieth century was marked by musical innovation and
revoulutions,from "Le Sacre du Printemps" to The Sex Pistols.Punk,now
over thirty years in the past was the last of this.The lack of any
classical composers to emerge in the past sixty years,as well known as
Bartok,or a Shostakovich speaks for itself.Both high culture,and pop
culture has gone dramatically downhill since the early 1980s.Teenage
kids still love Buddy Holly,Miles Davis,The Doors,and The Velvet
Underground,generations after they are gone,in part because they have
no equal today.In part because technology and corporations have each
done their part to ruin music,beginning with the rise of the CD in the
early 80s.Today's classical artists sound boring,and pedestrian,when
compared to a Furtwangler,a Menhuin,or a Stokowski. A Kenneth
Wilkinson,or a team like a C.Robert,and Wilma Cozart-Fine has no place
in the classical recording biz anymore,even if their equals ARE out
there.


Hi Roger. Excellent post. Most of which I agree with

Iain



  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Clyde Slick Clyde Slick is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,545
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On 19 Ian, 12:25, "Iain Churches" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Jan 18, 11:23 am, wrote:





Was America a better place then? I think so.


The twentieth century was marked by musical innovation and
revoulutions,from "Le Sacre du Printemps" to The Sex Pistols.Punk,now
over thirty years in the past was the last of this.The lack of any
classical composers to emerge in the past sixty years,as well known as
Bartok,or a Shostakovich speaks for itself.Both high culture,and pop
culture has gone dramatically downhill since the early 1980s.Teenage
kids still love Buddy Holly,Miles Davis,The Doors,and The Velvet
Underground,generations after they are gone,in part because they have
no equal today.In part because technology and corporations have each
done their part to ruin music,beginning with the rise of the CD in the
early 80s.Today's classical artists sound boring,and pedestrian,when
compared to a Furtwangler,a Menhuin,or a Stokowski. A Kenneth
Wilkinson,or a team like a C.Robert,and Wilma Cozart-Fine has no place
in the classical recording biz anymore,even if their equals ARE out
there.


Hi Roger. Excellent post. Most of which I agree with

Iain- Ascunde citatul -

- Afișare text în citat -


we are waiting for the two of you to marry and run off to live
happilyever after in Venezuela, unless that's the part of the
you don't agree with.
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 19, 2:08*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 19 Ian, 12:25, "Iain Churches" wrote:





wrote in message


....
On Jan 18, 11:23 am, wrote:


Was America a better place then? I think so.


The twentieth century was marked by musical innovation and
revoulutions,from "Le Sacre du Printemps" to The Sex Pistols.Punk,now
over thirty years in the past was the last of this.The lack of any
classical composers to emerge in the past sixty years,as well known as
Bartok,or a Shostakovich speaks for itself.Both high culture,and pop
culture has gone dramatically downhill since the early 1980s.Teenage
kids still love Buddy Holly,Miles Davis,The Doors,and The Velvet
Underground,generations after they are gone,in part because they have
no equal today.In part because technology and corporations have each
done their part to ruin music,beginning with the rise of the CD in the
early 80s.Today's classical artists sound boring,and pedestrian,when
compared to a Furtwangler,a Menhuin,or a Stokowski. A Kenneth
Wilkinson,or a team like a C.Robert,and Wilma Cozart-Fine has no place
in the classical recording biz anymore,even if their equals ARE out
there.


Hi Roger. Excellent post. Most of which I agree with


Iain- Ascunde citatul -


- Afișare text în citat -


we are waiting for the two of you to marry and run off to live
happilyever after in Venezuela, unless that's the part of the
you don't agree with.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Clyde:

You need to understand that there is little or no connection between
Politics as-practiced and Reality as-observed. Whatever feather of
whichever wing you inhabit.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Clyde Slick Clyde Slick is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,545
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On 19 Ian, 14:15, Peter Wieck wrote:
On Jan 19, 2:08*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:





On 19 Ian, 12:25, "Iain Churches" wrote:


wrote in message


....
On Jan 18, 11:23 am, wrote:


Was America a better place then? I think so.


The twentieth century was marked by musical innovation and
revoulutions,from "Le Sacre du Printemps" to The Sex Pistols.Punk,now
over thirty years in the past was the last of this.The lack of any
classical composers to emerge in the past sixty years,as well known as
Bartok,or a Shostakovich speaks for itself.Both high culture,and pop
culture has gone dramatically downhill since the early 1980s.Teenage
kids still love Buddy Holly,Miles Davis,The Doors,and The Velvet
Underground,generations after they are gone,in part because they have
no equal today.In part because technology and corporations have each
done their part to ruin music,beginning with the rise of the CD in the
early 80s.Today's classical artists sound boring,and pedestrian,when
compared to a Furtwangler,a Menhuin,or a Stokowski. A Kenneth
Wilkinson,or a team like a C.Robert,and Wilma Cozart-Fine has no place
in the classical recording biz anymore,even if their equals ARE out
there.


Hi Roger. Excellent post. Most of which I agree with


Iain- Ascunde citatul -


- Afișare text în citat -


we are waiting for the two of you to marry and run off to live
happilyever after in Venezuela, unless that's the part of the
you don't agree with.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Clyde:

You need to understand that there is little or no connection between
Politics as-practiced and Reality as-observed. Whatever feather of
whichever wing you inhabit.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA- Ascunde citatul -

-


non sequitor
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
Engineer[_2_] Engineer[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 209
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 18, 11:22*pm, wrote:
On Jan 18, 10:09 pm, Engineer wrote:





On Jan 18, 1:23 pm, wrote:


*Was America a better place then? I think so.


(snip)


And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.


Bret, I am an optimist... IMO, it is better now. *We can still collect
and build the 1959 audio stuff (and I do!) but at the same time have
an affordable LCD home theatre (I don't!), use a cellphone (yes!) and
fly to Oz at any time (I have!) *One good thing about 1909 and earlier
was that the "inquiring scientist/engineer" could know a good
percentage of the then current knowledge in a number of technical
disciplines. *Now he/she can never even cover one discipline but must
specialize (as I have!) *Of course, if we know the basic physics,
maths and chemistry we can at least be told how most stuff works - but
we can't make it in the basement like they did!
Anyway, most of us live longer now ("three score and ten" is
obsolete... I hope, nearly there!) and if we are active and inquiring
thoughout our lives it can even be fun.
The beer's still good, too!


*In America the beer is way better IF you shun the major brews, which
only bikers and Mexicans drink anymore. Where American beer sucked
fifty years ago, we now have a selection of brews as good as any
although I like German, Canadian and British beers occasionally too as
well as the Czech beers. Nothing Asian because most use rice and it
gives me the ****s.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Bret, I, too, shun the major brews. I mostly drink dark beer from the
smaller breweries here in Canada. Sleeman's Dark is pretty good, as is
Alexander Keith's Amber Ale and Wellington County Dark Ale. But
sometimes I drink Keith's IPA. I have never like American pale
beers. In Britain HSB is very good indeed, I have sunk many a pint
over the years, but I have never seen it over here. Oh, yes, London
Pride (a classic British bitter) in cans is also very good and it is
shipped to Canada, perhaps to the US, too. Then there's
Smethwick's... but this is getting a a bit OT!
Cheers,
Roger


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tubes
[email protected] rapidronnie@cbgb.net is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default America: Better 50, even 100 years ago?

On Jan 19, 10:29*am, "
wrote:
On Jan 18, 11:23*am, wrote:



*Was America a better place then? I think so.


*To be sure, a hundred years ago, any major city stank of ****, human
and horse, there was no air conditioning, and people must have had
body odor most of the time. Indoor plumbing was not a common practice
much before 1900 and not universal until the Roaring Twenties, and
having central hot water heating was in fact only nearly universal at
roughly the dawn of WWII. The upper classes had them a generation
earlier of course, and so we forget that many working class families
could remember *chamber pots within living memory.


*The next fifty years, from 1909 to 1959, brought the most
foundational changes technologically in every aspect of life, from
birth to childhood to working life, retirement, and death, of any
similar period in human history. An Egyptian or Chinese for four
thousand years, perhaps, could live to sixty (although most did not)
and reflect back on his, or her, experience from the age of ten with
little change in day to day life. A Briton from earliest to later
Victorian *life would have seen more change, but the basics were
relatively similar. But an American, male or female, working or middle
or patrician in class, would find such a massive upheaval that in
fact, most people still alive in 1969 who had been born in 1909-ten
years onward from even then and after the tumultuus six or seven years
that constituted the tumultuous 1960s-were not particularly stunned or
shocked by the television images they watched as American Neil
Armstrong stepped off the lunar lander ladder onto the moon. In fact,
it was not considered remarkable that most Americans born in 1909 did
watch the lunar landing. That fifty percent of the population would
see their sixtieth birthday was a historical milestone few took for
anything but routine.


*Most modern people would consider it more pleasant to live in 1959
than in 1909. But would either be preferable to 2009? It's of course a
moot question, since time travel is either absolutely impossible or is
sufficiently far in the future that those visiting us today in their
own past are universally discreet so as we can not detect them, or
even tangentially infer their presence.


*My own opinion is that intellectually 1909 was far better than today,
and that a learned person might well prefer it, but that 1959 overall
was probably the zenith of American life and the best time in history
simply to have experienced the country, although the foundations were
even then being attacked by termites of various species.


*The concern allegedly of interest here is, or was, the business of
sound reproduction. In that, 1959 was truly the golden era. The
technology was sufficiently advanced to permit results that today can
be improved only asymptotically, yet, cost cutting and cheapening were
not the order of the day. Profit margins were good, and talented
people still designed and good workers still assembled and tested each
item here in the United States. With the exception of some very
specific items in Britain and Germany, all the best items were made in
the United States. People making them could afford to own a house and
feed a family. And a considerable number of audiophiles built a good
percentage of their own systems from component parts, giving them
knowledge and experience later 'appliance operators' would never
attain.


I have both an unusual type of autism,and mitochondrial
disease.Neither of which could have been diagnosed fifty years ago.As
an autistic,I can't be anything but blunt.The internet,and the
advances in medicine,genetics,etc. are the only things that make life
in the early 21st century at all wortwhile.Other than that,the whole
of western civilization has gone dramatically downhill in the last
thirty years.As a leftist,and a socialist,I say the downfall began
with the election of Ronald Reagan,and the ensuing rise of the
religious right in America.

The twentieth century was marked by musical innovation and
revoulutions,from "Le Sacre du Printemps" to The Sex Pistols.Punk,now
over thirty years in the past was the last of this.The lack of any
classical composers to emerge in the past sixty years,as well known as
Bartok,or a Shostakovich speaks for itself.Both high culture,and pop
culture has gone dramatically downhill since the early 1980s.Teenage
kids still love Buddy Holly,Miles Davis,The Doors,and The Velvet
Underground,generations after they are gone,in part because they have
no equal today.In part because technology and corporations have each
done their part to ruin music,beginning with the rise of the CD in the
early 80s.Today's classical artists sound boring,and pedestrian,when
compared to a Furtwangler,a Menhuin,or a Stokowski. A Kenneth
Wilkinson,or a team like a C.Robert,and Wilma Cozart-Fine has no place
in the classical recording biz anymore,even if their equals ARE out
there.

Most of the major components in my system,like my Marantz 8,and my
Thorens,are all around fifty years old.The only exciting development
since the CD,has been the triode revolution,and what are we talking
about here,but modifications in seventy five/eighty year old
technology.Can you say Loftin-White?


Yes, it was a terrible design because the operating points went all
over the place as it all ran off a huge multitapped resistor. Later
variants floated the front end supply sort of like a Circlotron, but
the die was cast. Terrible design in terms of efficiency too.

Actually, the Circlotron wasn't bad. There was also a Finnish design
based around a special autoformer that did some thing similar that
worked well too. But the RC coupled graded power supply system won
because it was better.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
10 years later mrlefty Audio Opinions 4 October 18th 06 09:56 PM
TT after many years without [email protected] High End Audio 3 December 29th 05 08:47 PM
Sorry I have to ask this after 3 years.... ThePaulThomas Pro Audio 44 June 2nd 04 02:46 PM
Sorry I have to ask this after 3 years.... ThePaulThomas Pro Audio 0 June 1st 04 08:32 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:42 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"