Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
A properly updated Marantz 7C is at least the equal of any
commercially available pre today, with the exception of its phono stage being good really only with a few carts. How would you bring the 7C into the twenty first century? I have my own ideas but those actually interested in audio, if any, may share their ideas first. |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 14, 8:16�am, John Stone wrote:
On 6/13/10 4:13 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: �A properly updated Marantz 7C is at least the equal of any commercially available pre today, with the exception of its phono stage being good really only with a few carts. What does "properly updated" mean? The stock 7C is decidedly sub par by today's standards in almost any measurement of specs. �It's basically the same thing as a pair of Marantz 1's, dating back to the early 50's. It used a crude half wave unregulated HV power supply, and was loaded with "bumble bee" caps that are, by now, all leaky as hell. It couldn't drive even moderately low impedance amps without considerable bass droop. The volume control didn't track very well and had a tendency to get noisy or fail altogether. Residual noise in the line stage was high enough to be annoying with high sensitivity speakers. While it was reasonably well built for the day, �was nice looking, and had decent tone controls, it also had 50's style RCA jacks which were horrible. �How would you bring the 7C into the twenty first century? I have my own ideas but those actually interested in audio, if any, may share their ideas first. I'd sell at a ridiculous price it to some gullible Japanese collector who worships at the altar of 50's Marantz equipment, and then go out and buy a modern preamp. Agreed. I heard one recently, one that was supposedly in perfect condition, and I just couldn't get that excited about it. And the price they wanted for it was obscene. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 14, 8:16*am, John Stone wrote:
On 6/13/10 4:13 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: *A properly updated Marantz 7C is at least the equal of any commercially available pre today, with the exception of its phono stage being good really only with a few carts. What does "properly updated" mean? The stock 7C is decidedly sub par by today's standards in almost any measurement of specs. *It's basically the same thing as a pair of Marantz 1's, dating back to the early 50's. It used a crude half wave unregulated HV power supply, and was loaded with "bumble bee" caps that are, by now, all leaky as hell. It couldn't drive even moderately low impedance amps without considerable bass droop. The volume control didn't track very well and had a tendency to get noisy or fail altogether. Residual noise in the line stage was high enough to be annoying with high sensitivity speakers. While it was reasonably well built for the day, *was nice looking, and had decent tone controls, it also had 50's style RCA jacks which were horrible. I would build a modern and better power supply, for starters. In fact in a commercial product I'd build a chassis like the many communications equipment mainframes where the PS would be unitized and either physically bolt to the back of the chassis or could be run remotely via an umbilical. This beats the CE regulations because the set is one piece in those markets. All components would be modern and of good quality. A stereo stepped attenuator would replace the volume control pots . Residual line noise would be lower with a better power supply and with fewer noisy components of course. An article on this was put forth in Audio Amateur magazine in the mid-1980s. That was actually the start of American, versus mainly Oriental, interest in the Marantz 7 (and its impossibly close copy the McIntosh C22) : people realized how well the old beast worked when updated. As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 14, 5:27*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Jun 14, 8:16*am, John Stone wrote: On 6/13/10 4:13 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: *A properly updated Marantz 7C is at least the equal of any commercially available pre today, with the exception of its phono stage being good really only with a few carts. What does "properly updated" mean? The stock 7C is decidedly sub par by today's standards in almost any measurement of specs. *It's basically the same thing as a pair of Marantz 1's, dating back to the early 50's. It used a crude half wave unregulated HV power supply, and was loaded with "bumble bee" caps that are, by now, all leaky as hell. It couldn't drive even moderately low impedance amps without considerable bass droop. The volume control didn't track very well and had a tendency to get noisy or fail altogether. Residual noise in the line stage was high enough to be annoying with high sensitivity speakers. While it was reasonably well built for the day, *was nice looking, and had decent tone controls, it also had 50's style RCA jacks which were horrible. *I would build a modern and better power supply, for starters. *In fact in a commercial product I'd build a chassis like the many communications equipment mainframes where the PS would be unitized and either physically bolt to the back of the chassis or could be run remotely via an umbilical. This beats the CE regulations because the set is one piece in those markets. *All components would be modern and of good quality. *A stereo stepped attenuator would replace the volume control pots . Residual line noise would be lower with a better power supply and with fewer noisy components of course. *An article on this was put forth in Audio Amateur magazine in the mid-1980s. That was actually the start of American, versus mainly Oriental, interest in the Marantz 7 (and its impossibly close copy the McIntosh C22) : people realized how well the old beast worked when updated. *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? You didn't answer that one. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 15, 5:11*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Jun 14, 5:27*pm, Bret L wrote: On Jun 14, 8:16*am, John Stone wrote: On 6/13/10 4:13 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: *A properly updated Marantz 7C is at least the equal of any commercially available pre today, with the exception of its phono stage being good really only with a few carts. What does "properly updated" mean? The stock 7C is decidedly sub par by today's standards in almost any measurement of specs. *It's basically the same thing as a pair of Marantz 1's, dating back to the early 50's. It used a crude half wave unregulated HV power supply, and was loaded with "bumble bee" caps that are, by now, all leaky as hell. It couldn't drive even moderately low impedance amps without considerable bass droop. The volume control didn't track very well and had a tendency to get noisy or fail altogether. Residual noise in the line stage was high enough to be annoying with high sensitivity speakers. While it was reasonably well built for the day, *was nice looking, and had decent tone controls, it also had 50's style RCA jacks which were horrible. *I would build a modern and better power supply, for starters. *In fact in a commercial product I'd build a chassis like the many communications equipment mainframes where the PS would be unitized and either physically bolt to the back of the chassis or could be run remotely via an umbilical. This beats the CE regulations because the set is one piece in those markets. *All components would be modern and of good quality. *A stereo stepped attenuator would replace the volume control pots . Residual line noise would be lower with a better power supply and with fewer noisy components of course. *An article on this was put forth in Audio Amateur magazine in the mid-1980s. That was actually the start of American, versus mainly Oriental, interest in the Marantz 7 (and its impossibly close copy the McIntosh C22) : people realized how well the old beast worked when updated. *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? I wouldn't. I would build a new unit from scratch with the features I wanted. A good DIYer could do it for maybe three hundred bucks in parts, if he made his own step attenuator from switches and boards, with a little scrounging. |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 15, 9:06*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Jun 15, 5:11*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Jun 14, 5:27*pm, Bret L wrote: On Jun 14, 8:16*am, John Stone wrote: On 6/13/10 4:13 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: *A properly updated Marantz 7C is at least the equal of any commercially available pre today, with the exception of its phono stage being good really only with a few carts. What does "properly updated" mean? The stock 7C is decidedly sub par by today's standards in almost any measurement of specs. *It's basically the same thing as a pair of Marantz 1's, dating back to the early 50's. It used a crude half wave unregulated HV power supply, and was loaded with "bumble bee" caps that are, by now, all leaky as hell. It couldn't drive even moderately low impedance amps without considerable bass droop. The volume control didn't track very well and had a tendency to get noisy or fail altogether. Residual noise in the line stage was high enough to be annoying with high sensitivity speakers. While it was reasonably well built for the day, *was nice looking, and had decent tone controls, it also had 50's style RCA jacks which were horrible. *I would build a modern and better power supply, for starters. *In fact in a commercial product I'd build a chassis like the many communications equipment mainframes where the PS would be unitized and either physically bolt to the back of the chassis or could be run remotely via an umbilical. This beats the CE regulations because the set is one piece in those markets. *All components would be modern and of good quality. *A stereo stepped attenuator would replace the volume control pots .. Residual line noise would be lower with a better power supply and with fewer noisy components of course. *An article on this was put forth in Audio Amateur magazine in the mid-1980s. That was actually the start of American, versus mainly Oriental, interest in the Marantz 7 (and its impossibly close copy the McIntosh C22) : people realized how well the old beast worked when updated. *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? *I wouldn't. I would build a new unit from scratch with the features I wanted. A good DIYer could do it for maybe three hundred bucks in parts, if he made his own step attenuator from switches and boards, with a little scrounging. Then again, the McIntosh C2200 is still a much more intriguing preamp than the 7C. Isn't it funny that Marantz, McIntosh and Luxman are making their best- sounding equipment today, in 2010? A DIYer really can't match that stuff. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 16, 6:37*am, John Stone wrote:
On 6/15/10 9:06 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: *I would build a modern and better power supply, for starters. *In fact in a commercial product I'd build a chassis like the many communications equipment mainframes where the PS would be unitized and either physically bolt to the back of the chassis or could be run remotely via an umbilical. This beats the CE regulations because the set is one piece in those markets. *All components would be modern and of good quality. *A stereo stepped attenuator would replace the volume control pots .. Residual line noise would be lower with a better power supply and with fewer noisy components of course. *An article on this was put forth in Audio Amateur magazine in the mid-1980s. That was actually the start of American, versus mainly Oriental, interest in the Marantz 7 (and its impossibly close copy the McIntosh C22) : people realized how well the old beast worked when updated. *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? *I wouldn't. I would build a new unit from scratch with the features I wanted. A good DIYer could do it for maybe three hundred bucks in parts, if he made his own step attenuator from switches and boards, with a little scrounging. The Audio Research SP3a would be a much better preamp to clone than the 7.. (There's actually no such thing as a 7C The C part is the wood case. ) ARC based their preamp on the Marantz 7, but with numerous enhancements like regulated power supply for B+ and heaters, better parts, etc. It also sounded far better than the Marantz, but mechanical design left a lot to be desired. It was a spaghetti factory inside. But given you would start from scratch, you could easily improve the mechanical quality. The basic design was very stable. I had both the 7 and SP3 in my audio systems, and compared the two extensively. It was no contest. The ARC won hands down. The Marantz 7 was really nothing special. Just a well executed, basic preamp. In fact, it really wasn't that much different from the Dyna PAS series, except that Marantz added a set of cathode followers for the phono and line stages, and of course used higher quality parts. But even Dyna had DC heaters and unlike Marantz used a full wave B+ supply.- Hide quoted text - I reviewed an SP-3 for TONE last year and you're absolutely right. We used it in an all conrad-johnson system where it substituted for an ART 2 preamplifier, and there was very little difference in the sound. We then put in the later (SS?) SP-4 and the whole soundstage shrunk to about half of its former size. The SP-3 is a dynamite tubed preamplifier, and it's actually fetching high prices on Audiogon and eBay due to its great sound quality, not its collectability. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 16, 9:11*am, Boon wrote:
On Jun 16, 6:37*am, John Stone wrote: On 6/15/10 9:06 PM, in article , "Bret L" wrote: *I would build a modern and better power supply, for starters. *In fact in a commercial product I'd build a chassis like the many communications equipment mainframes where the PS would be unitized and either physically bolt to the back of the chassis or could be run remotely via an umbilical. This beats the CE regulations because the set is one piece in those markets. *All components would be modern and of good quality. *A stereo stepped attenuator would replace the volume control pots . Residual line noise would be lower with a better power supply and with fewer noisy components of course. *An article on this was put forth in Audio Amateur magazine in the mid-1980s. That was actually the start of American, versus mainly Oriental, interest in the Marantz 7 (and its impossibly close copy the McIntosh C22) : people realized how well the old beast worked when updated. *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? *I wouldn't. I would build a new unit from scratch with the features I wanted. A good DIYer could do it for maybe three hundred bucks in parts, if he made his own step attenuator from switches and boards, with a little scrounging. The Audio Research SP3a would be a much better preamp to clone than the 7. (There's actually no such thing as a 7C The C part is the wood case. ) ARC based their preamp on the Marantz 7, but with numerous enhancements like regulated power supply for B+ and heaters, better parts, etc. It also sounded far better than the Marantz, but mechanical design left a lot to be desired. It was a spaghetti factory inside. But given you would start from scratch, you could easily improve the mechanical quality. The basic design was very stable. I had both the 7 and SP3 in my audio systems, and compared the two extensively. It was no contest. The ARC won hands down. The Marantz 7 was really nothing special. Just a well executed, basic preamp. In fact, it really wasn't that much different from the Dyna PAS series, except that Marantz added a set of cathode followers for the phono and line stages, and of course used higher quality parts. But even Dyna had DC heaters and unlike Marantz used a full wave B+ supply.- Hide quoted text - I reviewed an SP-3 for TONE last year and you're absolutely right. We used it in an all conrad-johnson system where it substituted for an ART 2 preamplifier, and there was very little difference in the sound. We then put in the later (SS?) SP-4 and the whole soundstage shrunk to about half of its former size. The SP-3 is a dynamite tubed preamplifier, and it's actually fetching high prices on Audiogon and eBay due to its great sound quality, not its collectability. The SP-6 is also a very good preamp. You can pick one up used for about a grand. I doubt you could match that with a DIY project unless your time isn't worth anything. That explains why Bratzi would do it. |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 15, 10:08*pm, Boon wrote:
On Jun 15, 9:06*pm, Bret L wrote: *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? *I wouldn't. I would build a new unit from scratch with the features I wanted. A good DIYer could do it for maybe three hundred bucks in parts, if he made his own step attenuator from switches and boards, with a little scrounging. Then again, the McIntosh C2200 is still a much more intriguing preamp than the 7C. Isn't it funny that Marantz, McIntosh and Luxman are making their best- sounding equipment today, in 2010? A DIYer really can't match that stuff. Bull****. Most of this stuff is so complicated that it would indeed be infeasible for a DIYer to emulate, but that does not mean it's good. Its very complexity with "features" like on-the-fly cartridge loading via remote control introduce new issues. Actually, my real hope is that commercial vendors would pick up on the idea I put forth, and manufacturing them in some quantity the price would come down. But the DIYer is the core true audiophile per se, and is much to be celebrated. You don't have to build your own stuff to be an audiophile but it is the most rewarding facet, in my opinion, of the hobby. As far as the ARC SP-3a, http://www.arcdb.ws/SP3/ARC_SP3A1_schematic.gif http://sites.google.com/site/mpbarne...archsp-3preamp give useful info. It does seem to be a M7 derivative and to me that just validates what I originally said. As Simone Signoret said when informed Yves Montand, her husband, had been putting it to Marilyn..... |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 16, 5:57*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Jun 15, 10:08*pm, Boon wrote: On Jun 15, 9:06*pm, Bret L wrote: *As far as high output impedance, it's fine with most all tube amplifiers. If lower output impedance is needed, one refinement would be to provide for transformers to be added via sockets as was done in so much commercial gear. This would provide for true balanced 600 ohm output so it could fit in tho the Real World of pro audio if needed whilst not inflicting the considerable cost of the transformers on users not needing them. Why would you go to all of this bother when there are better products available for far cheaper without butchering up an expensive old Marantz? *I wouldn't. I would build a new unit from scratch with the features I wanted. A good DIYer could do it for maybe three hundred bucks in parts, if he made his own step attenuator from switches and boards, with a little scrounging. Then again, the McIntosh C2200 is still a much more intriguing preamp than the 7C. Isn't it funny that Marantz, McIntosh and Luxman are making their best- sounding equipment today, in 2010? A DIYer really can't match that stuff. *Bull****. Most of this stuff is so complicated that it would indeed be infeasible for a DIYer to emulate, but that does not mean it's good. Its very complexity with "features" like on-the-fly cartridge loading via remote control introduce new issues. Mmmm...okay. You start off with bull****, and then you go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with what I said. News flash: when you say "bull****," you usually have to follow that up with a contrary statement. Or can we add Tourette's to your long list of psychological disorders? The stuff is good. I've heard it, and it's good. You probably have NOT heard any of it, as you have been proven as a liar in this respect more than once. *Actually, my real hope is that commercial vendors would pick up on the idea I put forth, and manufacturing them in some quantity the price would come down. But the DIYer is the core true audiophile per se, and is much to be celebrated. You don't have to build your own stuff to be an audiophile but it is the most rewarding facet, in my opinion, of the hobby. The most rewarding facet of the hobby IS and WILL ALWAYS BE listening to music, Jesus, you're a nutcase. If your so-called audio ideas were worth anything, someone would be doing it. Instead, we get a Bratzi wishlist that rarely reflects anything that has to do with marketing, sound quality, user interface or common sense. *As far as the ARC SP-3a, http://www.arcdb.ws/SP3/ARC_SP3A1_sc...archsp-3preamp give useful info. It does seem to be a M7 derivative and to me that just validates what I originally said. *As Simone Signoret said when informed Yves Montand, her husband, had been putting it to Marilyn..... So now you've spun off into your own little world again. Figures. |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 16, 6:56*pm, Boon wrote:
*Bull****. Most of this stuff is so complicated that it would indeed be infeasible for a DIYer to emulate, but that does not mean it's good. Its very complexity with "features" like on-the-fly cartridge loading via remote control introduce new issues. Mmmm...okay. You start off with bull****, and then you go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with what I said. News flash: when you say "bull****," you usually have to follow that up with a contrary statement. Or can we add Tourette's to your long list of psychological disorders? The stuff is good. I've heard it, and it's good. You probably have NOT heard any of it, as you have been proven as a liar in this respect more than once. In your imagination that is. *Actually, my real hope is that commercial vendors would pick up on the idea I put forth, and manufacturing them in some quantity the price would come down. But the DIYer is the core true audiophile per se, and is much to be celebrated. You don't have to build your own stuff to be an audiophile but it is the most rewarding facet, in my opinion, of the hobby. The most rewarding facet of the hobby IS and WILL ALWAYS BE listening to music, Jesus, you're a nutcase. If you just want to listen to music you do not become an audiophile per se. You buy a halfway decent receiver and speakers and use them forever, oblivious to what the market does. The saloons found that out when they sponsored concerts, usually chamber music, classical guitar or light jazz. The attendees wall guys that had 1970s Pioneer gear and no intention of upgrading, and if they did, they preferred the cheapest pair of two way speakers in the store and a Rotel integrated. THIS IS A TECHNICAL , NOT MUSICAL HOBBY. IT"S ABOUT BEING A GEARHEAD. IT"S A WHITE MALE KIND OF THING. Duhhhhhhhhhhhh. If your so-called audio ideas were worth anything, someone would be doing it. Instead, we get a Bratzi wishlist that rarely reflects anything that has to do with marketing, sound quality, user interface or common sense. I daresay I know more about UI than you do. A Tektronix scope, a Leica camera-that's good UI. Ampex 351, AG350, AG440, Studer (but NOT Revox) -pretty good. Much of what's found in high end saloons today- yecch. *As far as the ARC SP-3a, http://www.arcdb.ws/SP3/ARC_SP3A1_sc...ites.google.co... give useful info. It does seem to be a M7 derivative and to me that just validates what I originally said. *As Simone Signoret said when informed Yves Montand, her husband, had been putting it to Marilyn..... So now you've spun off into your own little world again. Figures.- Hide quoted text - Analogies are typically lost on the willfully obtuse. That's you (and ****ter). |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 16, 8:55*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Jun 16, 6:56*pm, Boon wrote: *Bull****. Most of this stuff is so complicated that it would indeed be infeasible for a DIYer to emulate, but that does not mean it's good. Its very complexity with "features" like on-the-fly cartridge loading via remote control introduce new issues. Mmmm...okay. You start off with bull****, and then you go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with what I said. News flash: when you say "bull****," you usually have to follow that up with a contrary statement. Or can we add Tourette's to your long list of psychological disorders? The stuff is good. I've heard it, and it's good. You probably have NOT heard any of it, as you have been proven as a liar in this respect more than once. *In your imagination that is. No, it's been proven. Koetsu, Harbeth, you name it....you haven't heard it much less used it. *Actually, my real hope is that commercial vendors would pick up on the idea I put forth, and manufacturing them in some quantity the price would come down. But the DIYer is the core true audiophile per se, and is much to be celebrated. You don't have to build your own stuff to be an audiophile but it is the most rewarding facet, in my opinion, of the hobby. The most rewarding facet of the hobby IS and WILL ALWAYS BE listening to music, Jesus, you're a nutcase. *If you just want to listen to music you do not become an audiophile per se. You buy a halfway decent receiver and speakers and use them forever, oblivious to what the market does. The saloons found that out when they sponsored concerts, usually chamber music, classical guitar or light jazz. The attendees wall guys that had 1970s Pioneer gear and no intention of upgrading, and if they did, they preferred the cheapest pair of two way speakers in the store and a Rotel integrated. *THIS IS A TECHNICAL , NOT MUSICAL HOBBY. IT"S ABOUT BEING A GEARHEAD. IT"S A WHITE MALE KIND OF THING. Duhhhhhhhhhhhh. That's a huge load of ****. There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If your so-called audio ideas were worth anything, someone would be doing it. Instead, we get a Bratzi wishlist that rarely reflects anything that has to do with marketing, sound quality, user interface or common sense. *I daresay I know more about UI than you do. A Tektronix scope, a Leica camera-that's good UI. Ampex 351, AG350, AG440, Studer (but NOT Revox) -pretty good. Much of what's found in high end saloons today- yecch. You have no idea what you're talking about. I've reviewed dozens of high end components and many of them are a dream to use. You wouldn't know because you have no access to it. None. You're talking out of your ass...again. You're totally full of **** and everyone knows it. *As far as the ARC SP-3a, http://www.arcdb.ws/SP3/ARC_SP3A1_sc...ites.google.co.... give useful info. It does seem to be a M7 derivative and to me that just validates what I originally said. *As Simone Signoret said when informed Yves Montand, her husband, had been putting it to Marilyn..... So now you've spun off into your own little world again. Figures.- Hide quoted text - *Analogies are typically lost on the willfully obtuse. That's you (and ****ter). Bull****. Analogies need to make sense. As a professional editor, I'm telling you your posts don't follow normal thought processes. That's because you're autistic. Quit wasting everyone's time. |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 16, 9:13*pm, Boon wrote:
.. There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You would not know a white supremacist if he bit you on the ass. You have probably never even MET an ideologically cogent white supremacist, although admittedly they are not all that common. I'm a white nationalist, which is a very different thing, although you are free to not like that either. At least i am straightforward in my beliefs. You're a regular Snuffleuffagus. You have no idea what you're talking about. I've reviewed dozens of high end components and many of them are a dream to use. You wouldn't know because you have no access to it. None. You're talking out of your ass...again. You're totally full of **** and everyone knows it. Show me a piece of high end saloon sold consumer gear that has an interface that works as well as a Tek 2245b scope or a HP 8920 service monitor. |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 20, 2:19*am, Bret L wrote:
. You have probably never even MET an ideologically cogent white supremacist, undoubtedly true, because there ain't no such thing. |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 20, 1:19*am, Bret L wrote:
On Jun 16, 9:13*pm, Boon wrote: . There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. *You would not know a white supremacist if he bit you on the ass. What a stupid thing to say. Most white supremacists are observed as white supremacists becuase they espouse white supremacist beliefs. You have probably never even MET an ideologically cogent white supremacist, although admittedly they are not all that common. I have met several. That's another naive and stupid thing to say. It's like me saying to you, "you have never met a real liberal." I'm a white nationalist, which is a very different thing, although you are free to not like that either. I don't like that because it is based upon a fallacy that white people are entitiled to North America. At least i am straightforward in my beliefs. You're a regular Snuffleuffagus. That's another really stupid thing to say. You are simple in your beliefs because you are simple-minded. You have no idea what you're talking about. I've reviewed dozens of high end components and many of them are a dream to use. You wouldn't know because you have no access to it. None. You're talking out of your ass...again. You're totally full of **** and everyone knows it. *Show me a piece of high end saloon sold consumer gear that has an interface that works as well as a Tek 2245b scope or a HP 8920 service monitor. The Sooloos. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 20, 6:37*pm, Boon wrote:
On Jun 20, 1:19*am, Bret L wrote: On Jun 16, 9:13*pm, Boon wrote: . There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. *You would not know a white supremacist if he bit you on the ass. What a stupid thing to say. Most white supremacists are observed as white supremacists becuase they espouse white supremacist beliefs. White supremacists are fairly rare. A white supremacist is someone who says the white race is superior by some objective standard. I make no such claim. I make the claim that whites are a distinctive, not necessarily better, race and have the right to survive no differently that of any other race. I don't want to exterminate any race. I want to preserve one in particular, which harms no one else. You bet I disdain miscegenation, although say if a black and a Chinese want to intermarry it's none of my business. When it involves my people, I will do what I can within the bounds of law and elementary decency to deter or, failing that, isolate it. I deal with race mixers the way Chrissie Hynde deals with carnivores. I avoid them socially. I will not award them, as Malice Rosenbomb said, the sanction of the victim. Can that be awkward ? Yes, it can. You have probably never even MET an ideologically cogent white supremacist, although admittedly they are not all that common. I have met several. That's another naive and stupid thing to say. It's like me saying to you, "you have never met a real liberal." A real liberal by what definition? A classical liberal? Yeah, I have friends who are classical liberals. Extreme leftist liberals who can't quite bring themselves to call themselves Marxists? Yeah, I had to put up with their **** in school for years. I'm a white nationalist, which is a very different thing, although you are free to not like that either. I don't like that because it is based upon a fallacy that white people are entitiled to North America. As RPO said, we had North America (actually, most of all the Americas) because we took it, but we took it because we were as one Indian said-correctly-we were better Indians than the Indians. It WAS ours and we are losing it because of a failure of the will combined with poisonous alien internal influence. We did things with it in three long generations which the previous occupants hadn't in twenty thousand years. We went from a few sparse settlements to Apollo XI in three hundred years. The entire population of North America in 1300 AD was less than that of any of NYC's boroughs today. If being white is so bad, give up your car, your electronics, all clothes except animal skins, and go live on a reservation. But if you are over 30 or so, don't even bother, just jump off the nearest cliff, because that was the life expectancy. *Show me a piece of high end saloon sold consumer gear that has an interface that works as well as a Tek 2245b scope or a HP 8920 service monitor. The Sooloos. Well yeah, it does work well. But it's still a personal computer in drag with a (very good) embedded application. The 8920 on the other hand, especially if you get the internal HP BASIC (yeah, go to statements suck....) is seven or eight different instruments integrated with a controller that does what it needs to do and nothing else. It is to its competition, the IFR 1200 and 1500 series as a real Ferrari is to a kit car resembling same with a Fiero chassis. |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 23, 5:41*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Jun 20, 6:37*pm, Boon wrote: On Jun 20, 1:19*am, Bret L wrote: On Jun 16, 9:13*pm, Boon wrote: . There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. *You would not know a white supremacist if he bit you on the ass. What a stupid thing to say. Most white supremacists are observed as white supremacists becuase they espouse white supremacist beliefs. *White supremacists are fairly rare. No, they're not. They're as common as double-wides. A white supremacist is someone who says the white race is superior by some objective standard. No, idiot. A white supremacist says whites are a superior race. Usually they're not smart enough to offer an "objective standard." They operate on fear, as do you. I make no such claim. I make the claim that whites are a distinctive, not necessarily better, race and have the right to survive no differently that of any other race. I don't want to exterminate any race. I want to preserve one in particular, which harms no one else. You bet I disdain miscegenation, although say if a black and a Chinese want to intermarry it's none of my business. When it involves my people, I will do what I can within the bounds of law and elementary decency to deter or, failing that, isolate it. I deal with race mixers the way Chrissie Hynde deals with carnivores. *I avoid them socially. I will not award them, as Malice Rosenbomb said, the sanction of the victim. *Can that be awkward ? Yes, it can. How many species of human being are there? One. Those are your people, idiot. And we're all thriving as a species. You have probably never even MET an ideologically cogent white supremacist, although admittedly they are not all that common. I have met several. That's another naive and stupid thing to say. It's like me saying to you, "you have never met a real liberal." *A real liberal by what definition? A classical liberal? Yeah, I have friends who are classical liberals. Extreme leftist liberals who can't quite bring themselves to call themselves Marxists? Yeah, I had to put up with their **** in school for years. You're going off on a tangent because you can't answer the question honestly. I'm a white nationalist, which is a very different thing, although you are free to not like that either. I don't like that because it is based upon a fallacy that white people are entitiled to North America. *As RPO said, we had North America (actually, most of all the Americas) because we took it, but we took it because we were as one Indian said-correctly-we were better Indians than the Indians. It WAS ours and we are losing it because of a failure of the will combined with poisonous alien internal influence. We did things with it in three long generations which the previous occupants hadn't in twenty thousand years. We went from a few sparse settlements to Apollo XI in three hundred years. *The entire population of North America in 1300 AD was less than that of any of NYC's boroughs today. Which doesn't even answer the question...again. Your dumb argument assumes that technology and manifest destiny are intertwined. *If being white is so bad, give up your car, your electronics, all clothes except animal skins, and go live on a reservation. But if you are over 30 or so, don't even bother, just jump off the nearest cliff, because that was the life expectancy. No one said being white is bad. But it's funny how you think in "black and white"...another symptom of your autism. *Show me a piece of high end saloon sold consumer gear that has an interface that works as well as a Tek 2245b scope or a HP 8920 service monitor. The Sooloos. *Well yeah, it does work well. So that should be the end of the discussion. But wait: But it's still a personal computer in drag with a (very good) embedded application. It's an ergonomic dream. The 8920 on the other hand, especially if you get the internal HP BASIC (yeah, go to statements suck....) is seven or eight different instruments integrated with a controller that does what it needs to do and nothing else. *It is to its competition, the IFR 1200 and 1500 series as a real Ferrari is to a kit car resembling same with a Fiero chassis. Now you're going off on another stupid tangent. Just say "You're right and I'm wrong" and move on. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
"Boon" wrote in message
There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If irony killed! Posting in RAO easily meets any reasonable definition of being alone. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
On Jun 20, 2:19 am, Bret L wrote: . You have probably never even MET an ideologically cogent white supremacist, undoubtedly true, because there ain't no such thing. Yup. ideologically cogent white supremacist is obviously an oxymoron. |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 26, 4:22*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Boon" wrote in message There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If irony killed! Posting in RAO easily meets any reasonable definition of being alone. Thoothie let you out of your cage? |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 26, 3:22*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Boon" wrote in message There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If irony killed! I make perfect sense to Sue and Pastor Matt, don't I. Posting in RAO easily meets any reasonable definition of being alone. Is that why you wasted more than a decade of your life posting on it? If irony killed, indeed. |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 26, 8:53*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 26, 4:22*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Boon" wrote in message There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If irony killed! Posting in RAO easily meets any reasonable definition of being alone. Thoothie let you out of your cage? For Arny, posting on RAO is like running onto the freeway with his eyes closed. He's probably going to get run over, but it's the closest he gets to actually having an exciting life. |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
In article
, Boon wrote: On Jun 26, 3:22*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Boon" wrote in message There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If irony killed! I make perfect sense to Sue and Pastor Matt, don't I. Posting in RAO easily meets any reasonable definition of being alone. Is that why you wasted more than a decade of your life posting on it? If irony killed, indeed. What does responding to a ten-day-old post mean in Arny-land? Stephen |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jun 27, 8:28*pm, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article , *Boon wrote: On Jun 26, 3:22 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Boon" wrote in message There's a reason why you're alone and spend all your time spamming an audio group with white supremacist posts. You're a whackjob. You are totally out of touch with the world around you. People come on RAO and see your posts and wonder "Who the **** is this guy and what is his problem?" Well, you're a white supremacist and you're autistic, for starters. You don't make sense to normal people. Autistic people rarely do. If irony killed! I make perfect sense to Sue and Pastor Matt, don't I. Posting in RAO easily meets any reasonable definition of being alone. Is that why you wasted more than a decade of your life posting on it? If irony killed, indeed. What does responding to a ten-day-old post mean in Arny-land? It means nine days of Thoothie not letting him near a pc. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Stock, it is a very musical, sweet sounding preamp, and combined with tube amps from Marantz, Mac, etc; and speakers like vintage Klipsch, Altec, JBL, you'll have a very seductive but not entirely accurate sounding system. That is what Asian audiophiles enjoy and why they pay the big bucks, and if you ever had the pleasure of listening to such a system, you would understand why. But mine is anything but stock. First, Larry Smith of PAC installed solid state power supply regulation. I then proceeded to POOGE it (Audio Amateur 1/81), and installed Teflon bypass caps. Carbon comp resistors were replaced with carefully matched carbon films. And the output caps, too small for lo-z solid state amps (or in my case, a modded Rane electronic crossover) are now 4.7 mF. This modification was actually recommended by Saul Marantz in a letter to Absolute Sound. He said, " If used to drive input of 100K Ohms or less, there is a loss of low bass due to the .22 mF output coupling cap. This can be increased by adding 1 mF mylars in parallel..." Last edited by Stager : July 4th 10 at 02:58 AM |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
Stock, it is a very musical, sweet sounding preamp, and combined with tube amps from Marantz, Mac, etc; and speakers like vintage Klipsch, Altec, JBL, you'll have a very seductive but not entirely accurate sounding system. That is what Asian audiophiles enjoy and why they pay the big bucks, and if you ever had the pleasure of listening to such a system, *you would understand why. But mine is anything but stock. First, Larry Smith of PAC installed solid state power supply regulation. I then proceeded to POOGE it (Audio Amateur 1/81), and installed Teflon bypass caps. Carbon comp resistors were replaced with carefully matched carbon films. And the output caps, too small for lo-z solid state amps (or in my case, a modded Rane electronic crossover) are now 4.7 mF. This modification was actually recommended by Saul Marantz Smith in a letter to Absolute Sound. He said, " If used to drive input of 100K Ohms or less, there is a loss of low bass due to the .22 mF output coupling cap. This can be increased by adding 1 mF mylars in parallel..." Oriental listeners listen with their eyes and see with their ears. It's all status, really. There are i am sure exceptions but this is in the main true. POOGE was a great series and TAA was at its zenith in those days. These schmucks have no idea just how good it was. |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
In praise of the Marantz 7c
On Jul 6, 7:52*am, Bret L wrote:
Stock, it is a very musical, sweet sounding preamp, and combined with tube amps from Marantz, Mac, etc; and speakers like vintage Klipsch, Altec, JBL, you'll have a very seductive but not entirely accurate sounding system. That is what Asian audiophiles enjoy and why they pay the big bucks, and if you ever had the pleasure of listening to such a system, *you would understand why. But mine is anything but stock. First, Larry Smith of PAC installed solid state power supply regulation. I then proceeded to POOGE it (Audio Amateur 1/81), and installed Teflon bypass caps. Carbon comp resistors were replaced with carefully matched carbon films. And the output caps, too small for lo-z solid state amps (or in my case, a modded Rane electronic crossover) are now 4.7 mF. This modification was actually recommended by Saul Marantz Smith in a letter to Absolute Sound. He said, " If used to drive input of 100K Ohms or less, there is a loss of low bass due to the .22 mF output coupling cap. This can be increased by adding 1 mF mylars in parallel..." *Oriental listeners listen with their eyes and see with their ears. It's all status, really. There are i am sure exceptions but this is in the main true. You're so full of ****. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
In praise of older systems | Pro Audio | |||
Now let us praise Otto Herbert Schmitt | Vacuum Tubes | |||
RNC Praise | Pro Audio | |||
praise for Apple Tech support | Pro Audio |