[Bret L]

Unlike Dr. William Pierce, I'm no physicist. But, I am firmly of the
school that says that you don't have to be Frank Perdue to discern
chicken salad from chicken ****.

Expensive small speakers are an exercise in asymptotically pursuing
results in the way that American automotive engineers, and aerospace
engineers, correctly identified as ridiculous. Europeans pursued high
specific output, small displacement engines, often building technical
tours de force like the DOHC Alfa Romeo fours whereas Detroit built
heavy slow turning engines to much derision amongst the self-styled
cognoscenti.

But why is a small displacement high specific output engine BETTER?
Well, if cars are taxed by displacement, it's less tax. Or in racing
where displacement sets class. But in daily service, it doesn't
matter.

Europeans claimed their small engines were more efficient....but were
they? No, not in terms of specific fuel consumption. American engines
got comparable or better BSFC figures, but the Europeans DID get them
over a wider band of torque and RPM, because they used multiple
carburetors and then fuel injection. That signficantly increased cost
and made servicing expensive, though. European engines were also,
surprisingly,, very heavy for their displacement, with exceptions such
as VW and Porsche. The durable race-honed 3.8/4.2 Jaguar six weighs
more than a big block Chevy: the BMW 2.5 liter six outweighed most
American small block V8's, and even the tiny BMC fours in MGs and
Triumphs were within sixty or seventy pounds of a small block Chevy
despite having less than half the displacement.

There is no replacement for displacement.

Expensive small speakers may make sense in space restricted installs
but I often see them on stands in a room that would easily accomodate
a sizable pair of horn loaded cabinets. There is no way they can
compete any more than a MGB's 2 liter four can compete with a 350
Chevy in power. The bass is not authoritative, the dynamics are
strained, and the money is wasted. Comparing a set of Harbeths to a
pair of modified JBL tweetered Klipschhorns is an exercise in
futility. The Harbeths can be replaced by many much less expensive
speakers in this test without much difference: the difference is
trivial. But the huge air moving capacity of the klipsch woofer
combined with a really fine tweeter and a good laminated block
midrange horn devastates the little guys.

The drivers you get from the better vendors through Madisound are
just as good as what Harbeth has and their engineers aren't all that
much smarter. Even if they were, the laws of physics mean that it's
like hot rodding a MGB engine. If you race against someone who takes
it out and puts a small block Chevy in, he will beat you and you will
look foolish.

[GeoSynch]

"Bret L" wrote:

If you race against someone who takes it out and puts a small block Chevy in,
he will beat you and you will look foolish.

Conclusion: Marc Phillips is a masochist who likes to get beaten and be made to
look foolish.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 22, 5:38*pm, Bret L wrote:
*Unlike Dr. William Pierce, I'm no physicist. But, I am firmly of the
school that says that you don't have to be Frank Perdue to discern
chicken salad from chicken ****.

*Expensive small speakers are an exercise in asymptotically pursuing
results in the way that American automotive engineers, and aerospace
engineers, correctly identified as ridiculous. Europeans pursued high
specific output, small displacement engines, often building technical
tours de force like the DOHC Alfa Romeo fours whereas Detroit built
heavy slow turning engines to much derision amongst the self-styled
cognoscenti.

*But why is a small displacement high specific output engine BETTER?
Well, if cars are taxed by displacement, it's less tax. Or in racing
where displacement sets class. But in daily service, it doesn't
matter.

*Europeans claimed their small engines were more efficient....but were
they? No, not in terms of specific fuel consumption. American engines
got comparable or better BSFC figures, but the Europeans DID get them
over a wider band of torque and RPM, because they used multiple
carburetors and then fuel injection. That signficantly increased cost
and made servicing expensive, though. European engines were also,
surprisingly,, very heavy for their displacement, with exceptions such
as VW and Porsche. The durable race-honed 3.8/4.2 Jaguar six weighs
more than a big block Chevy: the BMW 2.5 liter six outweighed most
American small block V8's, and even the tiny BMC fours in MGs and
Triumphs were within sixty or seventy pounds of a small block Chevy
despite having less than half the displacement.

*There is no replacement for displacement.

*Expensive small speakers may make sense in space restricted *installs
but I often see them on stands in a room that would easily accomodate
a sizable pair of horn loaded cabinets. There is no way they can
compete any more than a MGB's 2 liter four can compete with a 350
Chevy in power. The bass is not authoritative, the dynamics are
strained, and the money is wasted. *Comparing a set of Harbeths to a
pair of modified JBL tweetered Klipschhorns is an exercise in
futility. The Harbeths can be replaced by many much less expensive
speakers in this test without much difference: the difference is
trivial. But the huge air moving capacity of the klipsch woofer
combined with a really fine tweeter and a good laminated block
midrange horn devastates the little guys.

*The drivers you get from the better vendors through Madisound are
just as good as what Harbeth has and their engineers aren't all that
much smarter. Even if they were, the laws of physics mean that it's
like hot rodding a MGB engine. If you race against someone who takes
it out and puts a small block Chevy in, he will beat you and you will
look foolish.

We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

I heard a pair of Harbeth bookshelf speakers some years ago. They were
being driven by a SS amp, but the salesdroid refused to switch out his
scratchy old jazz LP to something more musical. A few days later, in the
same shop, a different 'droid had them hooked up to CJ gear. He was
spinning a Vivaldi composition for strings on CD, but it was just ending
so I didn't get to hear much. I was impressed. Then he wanted to play some
nasty metal rock, so of course he had to bring in a sub and hook it up. I
didn't wait around for that. The next time I went by, all the Harbeths
were sold. Turns out they had picked up a closeout odd lot. Oh well. I
don't recall which models they had, but it was during the mid-90s.

[Bret L]

We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,
both with the more expensive audiophile amps (Mark Levinsons in fact)
and some nice tube amps (the amps made no difference really) and the
sound was what it was, a decent but in no way exceptionable speaker of
that size, at a whopping price. These were the model on sale as
current in 2008 that are three ways about , I'm guessing two and a
half feet high. I recall that the dealer wanted roughly eleven
thousand dollars for these things. It was what it was, a decent
speaker of that size, but the dynamics were nothing compared even to a
Altec 604 in the plain old vented box of about the same height and
somewhat wider across. The treble was, to be honest maybe a little
more even at points, but not in any way better to what even the
inexpensive Beyma tweeters can do much less the JBL 2404H.

Now was it way smaller than a horn? Yes. Would it fit where the horn
wouldn't? Yes. Was it an attractive product for the SAF? Okay. But it
was maybe $1500, $2000 worth of sound at the very most. It just was
sonically nowhere near what you can have done for ten grand and never
touch any tool whatsoever.

It was Boston Bland British style, to put it bluntly. I think Harbeth
is one of the most overpriced products you can find except for
anything from Captain Catchfire or Mr. Sexpert Mark Levinson (whose
sex manual he co-wrote with then wife Kim Cattrall was followed
shortly by their divorce...and the book was remaindered, sales having
went flaccid on the reasonable premise that if the chef gets fired the
cookbook he wrote might be questioned)...

[GeoSynch]

The MidYut droned:

[Ba]Boon said:

a discussion of audio.

I heard a pair of Harbeth bookshelf speakers

A smattering of audio post by 'lil Georgie.

Is something afoot ... or rather, a-gimp?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 22, 5:38*pm, Bret L wrote:
*Unlike Dr. William Pierce, I'm no physicist.

And unlike nearly everybody, you're a nobody.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 22, 7:01*pm, Bret L wrote:
We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

*I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,
both with the more expensive audiophile amps (Mark Levinsons in fact)
and some nice tube amps (the amps made no difference really) and the
sound was what it was, a decent but in no way exceptionable speaker of
that size, at a whopping price. These were the model on sale as
current in 2008 that are three ways about , I'm guessing two and a
half feet high. I recall that the dealer wanted roughly eleven
thousand dollars for these things. *It was what it was, a decent
speaker of that size, but the dynamics were nothing compared even to a
Altec 604 in the plain old vented box of about the same height and
somewhat wider across. The treble was, to be honest maybe a little
more even at points, but not in any way better to what even the
inexpensive Beyma tweeters can do much less the JBL 2404H.

*Now was it way smaller than a horn? Yes. Would it fit where the horn
wouldn't? Yes. Was it an attractive product for the SAF? Okay. But it
was maybe $1500, $2000 worth of sound at the very most. It just was
sonically nowhere near what you can have done for ten grand and never
touch any tool whatsoever.

*It was Boston Bland British style, to put it bluntly. I think Harbeth
is one of the most overpriced products you can find except for
anything from Captain Catchfire or Mr. Sexpert Mark Levinson (whose
sex manual he co-wrote with then wife Kim Cattrall was followed
shortly by their divorce...and the book was remaindered, sales having
went flaccid on the reasonable premise that if the chef gets fired the
cookbook he wrote might be questioned)...

Okay, so your hearing is suspect. Fair enough.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 22, 7:01*pm, Bret L wrote:
We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

*I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,

Where was the stereo place, Bratzi? There isn't a dealer anywhere near
where you live, unless you count Acoustic Sounds. That's not really a
"stereo place," is it. They don't sell Mark Levinson, either.

You see, the last time we talked about this, you hadn't heard
Harbeths. Now suddenly you've heard them in both a house (I don't
believe an audiophile with Harbeths would invite you over) and in a
"stereo place." What stereo place? Who demonstrated them for you?

[Bret L]

On Oct 22, 11:01 pm, Boon wrote:
On Oct 22, 7:01 pm, Bret L wrote:



We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,

Where was the stereo place, Bratzi? There isn't a dealer anywhere near
where you live, unless you count Acoustic Sounds. That's not really a
"stereo place," is it. They don't sell Mark Levinson, either.

You see, the last time we talked about this, you hadn't heard
Harbeths. Now suddenly you've heard them in both a house (I don't
believe an audiophile with Harbeths would invite you over) and in a
"stereo place." What stereo place? Who demonstrated them for you?

You're quite a gumshoes. I have indeed been in Chad Kassem's place,
but this was not where this happened. This happened in another city,
if I name the place you're going to call him and ask why he demos them
to wascally wascists so I won't say, but actually I think he two
stepped them from another dealer to see if they were going to go over
in his market. It happened i was there with some people I know who had
bought a truckload of used gear from the dealer and he did allow us to
take them to the guy's house for a house demo. That audiophile had a
pile of vintage tube amps and we listened to them with two or three
vintage amps plus the ones he built around Sowter Acro opt's and Ampeg
SVT power transformers. Plus a solid state McIntosh, I want to say a
7270, or something pretty close. He had a marantz 8B that had been
converted in the late 70s to use WE 350A outputs, and is a future
project to convert back (the chassis needs welding since the PO
drilled holes for the plate leads and removed the meter-but at least
he kept the parts). This was the amp we settled on We had access to
several other speaker pairs including a fairly current Sonus Faber and
several vintage deals, some 8 inch Tannoy DCs in soffit cabs and the
604s-old Alnico 604s with the less good multicell horn, and some huge
Bozaks.

Neither the SFs nor these Harbeths could be called really bad, but
those 604s had dynamics that made them sound dull as dishwater. Yes,
both had smoother trebles, violas and light male voices sounded better
on both. But the booty zone was simply not happening.

You can get a fresh coned set of vintage Alnico 604s for about
twelve hundred bucks and a set of the large domestic Altec pattern
cabs for between from pocket change to maybe a grand. Mastering Lab
crossovers would add a grand. Any others a couple hundred if not
included with the drivers. This is JFK/MM era tech and your Harbeths
can not compete fully, what does that say? It says there is no
replacement, as I said earlier, for displacement.

The Sonus Fabers couldn't either. They were actually a little worse
than the Harbeths all the way around but I never took them that
seriously to begin with.

The DCs were fully the equal of the Harbeths in the treble for
smoothess, as expected, they didn't pass the booty zone test
either.....but again, eight inches. And you can find DCs for a small
fraction, again, of the over ten grand these yuppie-ass Harbeths cost.

Face it, you are going to bat for a crappy value, overpriced pussy-
ass speaker. You are like a Porsche buff that can't admit the 911 is
still a museum piece and the 928 was the best car Porsche ever made
for the street and they should have stuck with it, just ditched the
troublesome four liter DOHC v-8 and bought a LS-1 crate motor which is
lighter, more powerful and more reliable. (They should have made a
street 917 with a lugbrazed Reynolds 531 frame to, but, then again,
Benz refused to make the C-111...)

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 22, 11:38*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Oct 22, 11:01 pm, Boon wrote:





On Oct 22, 7:01 pm, Bret L wrote:

We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

*I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,

Where was the stereo place, Bratzi? There isn't a dealer anywhere near
where you live, unless you count Acoustic Sounds. That's not really a
"stereo place," is it. They don't sell Mark Levinson, either.

You see, the last time we talked about this, you hadn't heard
Harbeths. Now suddenly you've heard them in both a house (I don't
believe an audiophile with Harbeths would invite you over) and in a
"stereo place." What stereo place? Who demonstrated them for you?

*You're quite a gumshoes. I have indeed been in Chad Kassem's place,
but this was not where this happened. This happened in another city,
if I name the place you're going to call him and ask why he demos them
to wascally wascists so I won't say, but actually I think he two
stepped them from another dealer to see if they were going to go over
in his market. It happened i was there with some people I know who had
bought a truckload of used gear from the dealer and he did allow us to
take them to the guy's house for a house demo. That audiophile had a
pile of vintage tube amps and we listened to them with two or three
vintage amps plus the ones he built around Sowter Acro opt's and Ampeg
SVT power transformers. Plus a solid state McIntosh, I want to say a
7270, or something pretty close. *He had a marantz 8B *that had been
converted in the late 70s to use WE 350A outputs, and is a future
project to convert back (the chassis needs welding since the PO
drilled holes for the plate leads and removed the meter-but at least
he kept the parts). This was the amp we settled on We had access to
several other speaker pairs including a fairly current Sonus Faber and
several vintage deals, some 8 inch Tannoy DCs in soffit cabs and the
604s-old Alnico 604s with the less good multicell horn, and some huge
Bozaks.

*Neither the SFs nor these Harbeths could be called really bad, but
those 604s had dynamics that made them sound dull as dishwater. Yes,
both had smoother trebles, violas and light male voices sounded better
on both. But the booty zone was simply not happening.

*You can get a fresh coned set of vintage Alnico 604s *for *about
twelve hundred bucks and a set of the large domestic Altec pattern
cabs for between from pocket change to maybe a grand. Mastering Lab
crossovers would add a grand. Any others a couple hundred if not
included with the drivers. This is JFK/MM era tech and your Harbeths
can not compete fully, what does that say? It says there is no
replacement, as I said earlier, for displacement.

*The Sonus Fabers couldn't either. They were actually a little worse
than the Harbeths all the way around but I never took them that
seriously to begin with.

*The DCs were fully the equal of the Harbeths in the treble for
smoothess, as expected, they didn't pass the booty zone test
either.....but again, eight inches. And you can find DCs for a small
fraction, again, of the over ten grand these yuppie-ass Harbeths cost.

*Face it, you are going to bat for a crappy value, overpriced *pussy-
ass speaker. You are like a Porsche buff that can't admit the 911 is
still a museum piece and the 928 was the best car Porsche ever made
for the street and they should have stuck with it, just ditched the
troublesome four liter DOHC v-8 and bought a LS-1 crate motor which is
lighter, more powerful and more reliable. (They should have made a
street 917 with a lugbrazed Reynolds 531 frame to, but, then again,
Benz refused to make the C-111...)

Well, I've heard the 604s in some Japanese single-driver designs, and
they are intriguing. I would never choose one over a Harbeth 40 (or
even a 30). It's all about preferences, and your preference seems to
be forward, aggressive sounding speakers.

And the 928 was built for people who couldn't handle the 911. So we're
aware of your driving skills as well!

[Bret L]

On Oct 23, 9:10*am, Boon wrote:
On Oct 22, 11:38*pm, Bret L wrote:



On Oct 22, 11:01 pm, Boon wrote:

On Oct 22, 7:01 pm, Bret L wrote:

We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

*I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,

Where was the stereo place, Bratzi? There isn't a dealer anywhere near
where you live, unless you count Acoustic Sounds. That's not really a
"stereo place," is it. They don't sell Mark Levinson, either.

You see, the last time we talked about this, you hadn't heard
Harbeths. Now suddenly you've heard them in both a house (I don't
believe an audiophile with Harbeths would invite you over) and in a
"stereo place." What stereo place? Who demonstrated them for you?

*You're quite a gumshoes. I have indeed been in Chad Kassem's place,
but this was not where this happened. This happened in another city,
if I name the place you're going to call him and ask why he demos them
to wascally wascists so I won't say, but actually I think he two
stepped them from another dealer to see if they were going to go over
in his market. It happened i was there with some people I know who had
bought a truckload of used gear from the dealer and he did allow us to
take them to the guy's house for a house demo. That audiophile had a
pile of vintage tube amps and we listened to them with two or three
vintage amps plus the ones he built around Sowter Acro opt's and Ampeg
SVT power transformers. Plus a solid state McIntosh, I want to say a
7270, or something pretty close. *He had a marantz 8B *that had been
converted in the late 70s to use WE 350A outputs, and is a future
project to convert back (the chassis needs welding since the PO
drilled holes for the plate leads and removed the meter-but at least
he kept the parts). This was the amp we settled on We had access to
several other speaker pairs including a fairly current Sonus Faber and
several vintage deals, some 8 inch Tannoy DCs in soffit cabs and the
604s-old Alnico 604s with the less good multicell horn, and some huge
Bozaks.

*Neither the SFs nor these Harbeths could be called really bad, but
those 604s had dynamics that made them sound dull as dishwater. Yes,
both had smoother trebles, violas and light male voices sounded better
on both. But the booty zone was simply not happening.

*You can get a fresh coned set of vintage Alnico 604s *for *about
twelve hundred bucks and a set of the large domestic Altec pattern
cabs for between from pocket change to maybe a grand. Mastering Lab
crossovers would add a grand. Any others a couple hundred if not
included with the drivers. This is JFK/MM era tech and your Harbeths
can not compete fully, what does that say? It says there is no
replacement, as I said earlier, for displacement.

*The Sonus Fabers couldn't either. They were actually a little worse
than the Harbeths all the way around but I never took them that
seriously to begin with.

*The DCs were fully the equal of the Harbeths in the treble for
smoothess, as expected, they didn't pass the booty zone test
either.....but again, eight inches. And you can find DCs for a small
fraction, again, of the over ten grand these yuppie-ass Harbeths cost.

*Face it, you are going to bat for a crappy value, overpriced *pussy-
ass speaker. You are like a Porsche buff that can't admit the 911 is
still a museum piece and the 928 was the best car Porsche ever made
for the street and they should have stuck with it, just ditched the
troublesome four liter DOHC v-8 and bought a LS-1 crate motor which is
lighter, more powerful and more reliable. (They should have made a
street 917 with a lugbrazed Reynolds 531 frame to, but, then again,
Benz refused to make the C-111...)

Well, I've heard the 604s in some Japanese single-driver designs, and
they are intriguing. I would never choose one over a Harbeth 40 (or
even a 30). It's all about preferences, and your preference seems to
be forward, aggressive sounding speakers.

And the 928 was built for people who couldn't handle the 911. So we're
aware of your driving skills as well!

The Corvair was hounded out of existence for a level of power
oversteer that was nothing like even the early 911s. Yet, even the
fact that the early 930s very typically ran into trees backwards
(despite having been hobbled with only four gears) has not convinced
people that a true rear engine car makes no sense from an engineering
standpoint.

After realizing the writing for a rear engine sports car was on the
wall and that emissions demanded liquid cooling, as did further power
increases, Porsche very sensibly designed the high point of their
roadgoing car design career (the 917 being not a viable road car) in
the 928. They also had the 924, which shared an engine with some AMC
products, and the 944 which used half the 928 engine, and none of the
three sharing very much in usable parts.

The 928 was abandoned because it actually was a first rate car and
Porsche lovers wanted something substantially less. About the only
good thing to come out of this debacle was that as with the very
excellent 914 chassis, the 928 can be had non-running cheaply enough
that the hobby mechanic can find oen with a bum engine and stick a SBC
in there. The downside is that the very excellent transaxle is
unsupported and is the critical part: if it goes, you're screwed
economically speaking. 928 conversion owners are in the position of
analog Tek scope owners: if anything critical goes, you are holding a
worthless pile of metal.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 23, 4:30*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Oct 23, 9:10*am, Boon wrote:





On Oct 22, 11:38*pm, Bret L wrote:

On Oct 22, 11:01 pm, Boon wrote:

On Oct 22, 7:01 pm, Bret L wrote:

We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

*I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,

Where was the stereo place, Bratzi? There isn't a dealer anywhere near
where you live, unless you count Acoustic Sounds. That's not really a
"stereo place," is it. They don't sell Mark Levinson, either.

You see, the last time we talked about this, you hadn't heard
Harbeths. Now suddenly you've heard them in both a house (I don't
believe an audiophile with Harbeths would invite you over) and in a
"stereo place." What stereo place? Who demonstrated them for you?

*You're quite a gumshoes. I have indeed been in Chad Kassem's place,
but this was not where this happened. This happened in another city,
if I name the place you're going to call him and ask why he demos them
to wascally wascists so I won't say, but actually I think he two
stepped them from another dealer to see if they were going to go over
in his market. It happened i was there with some people I know who had
bought a truckload of used gear from the dealer and he did allow us to
take them to the guy's house for a house demo. That audiophile had a
pile of vintage tube amps and we listened to them with two or three
vintage amps plus the ones he built around Sowter Acro opt's and Ampeg
SVT power transformers. Plus a solid state McIntosh, I want to say a
7270, or something pretty close. *He had a marantz 8B *that had been
converted in the late 70s to use WE 350A outputs, and is a future
project to convert back (the chassis needs welding since the PO
drilled holes for the plate leads and removed the meter-but at least
he kept the parts). This was the amp we settled on We had access to
several other speaker pairs including a fairly current Sonus Faber and
several vintage deals, some 8 inch Tannoy DCs in soffit cabs and the
604s-old Alnico 604s with the less good multicell horn, and some huge
Bozaks.

*Neither the SFs nor these Harbeths could be called really bad, but
those 604s had dynamics that made them sound dull as dishwater. Yes,
both had smoother trebles, violas and light male voices sounded better
on both. But the booty zone was simply not happening.

*You can get a fresh coned set of vintage Alnico 604s *for *about
twelve hundred bucks and a set of the large domestic Altec pattern
cabs for between from pocket change to maybe a grand. Mastering Lab
crossovers would add a grand. Any others a couple hundred if not
included with the drivers. This is JFK/MM era tech and your Harbeths
can not compete fully, what does that say? It says there is no
replacement, as I said earlier, for displacement.

*The Sonus Fabers couldn't either. They were actually a little worse
than the Harbeths all the way around but I never took them that
seriously to begin with.

*The DCs were fully the equal of the Harbeths in the treble for
smoothess, as expected, they didn't pass the booty zone test
either.....but again, eight inches. And you can find DCs for a small
fraction, again, of the over ten grand these yuppie-ass Harbeths cost..

*Face it, you are going to bat for a crappy value, overpriced *pussy-
ass speaker. You are like a Porsche buff that can't admit the 911 is
still a museum piece and the 928 was the best car Porsche ever made
for the street and they should have stuck with it, just ditched the
troublesome four liter DOHC v-8 and bought a LS-1 crate motor which is
lighter, more powerful and more reliable. (They should have made a
street 917 with a lugbrazed Reynolds 531 frame to, but, then again,
Benz refused to make the C-111...)

Well, I've heard the 604s in some Japanese single-driver designs, and
they are intriguing. I would never choose one over a Harbeth 40 (or
even a 30). It's all about preferences, and your preference seems to
be forward, aggressive sounding speakers.

And the 928 was built for people who couldn't handle the 911. So we're
aware of your driving skills as well!

*The Corvair was hounded out of existence for a level of power
oversteer that was nothing like even the early 911s. Yet, even the
fact that the early 930s very typically ran into trees backwards
(despite having been hobbled with only four gears) has not convinced
people that a true rear engine car makes no sense from an engineering
standpoint.

*After realizing the writing for a rear engine sports car was on the
wall and that emissions demanded liquid cooling, as did further power
increases, *Porsche very sensibly designed the high point of their
roadgoing car design career (the 917 being not a viable road car) in
the 928. They also had the 924, which shared an engine with some AMC
products, and the 944 which used half the 928 engine, and none of the
three sharing very much in usable parts.

*The 928 was abandoned because it actually was a first rate car and
Porsche lovers wanted something substantially less. About the only
good thing to come out of this debacle was that as with the very
excellent 914 chassis, the 928 can be had non-running cheaply enough
that the hobby mechanic can find oen with a bum engine and stick a SBC
in there. The downside is that the very excellent transaxle is
unsupported and is the critical part: if it goes, you're screwed
economically speaking. 928 conversion owners are in the position of
analog Tek scope owners: if anything critical goes, you are holding a
worthless pile of metal.

Wow, I thought this was an audio discussion.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 23, 9:18*pm, Boon wrote:
On Oct 23, 4:30*pm, Bret L wrote:





On Oct 23, 9:10*am, Boon wrote:

On Oct 22, 11:38*pm, Bret L wrote:

On Oct 22, 11:01 pm, Boon wrote:

On Oct 22, 7:01 pm, Bret L wrote:

We've had this discussion before. It came down to the fact that you
hadn't heard Harbeth and yet you knew how they were going to sound.

For some reason you thought you'd retry this troll. The only reason I
responded was to encourage what seemed to be a discussion of audio.
You said you've heard Harbeth...okay...where? What models? What
amplification? If you're judging this from some ten minute demo in one
of your dreaded "audio saloons," then you don't know what you're
talking about. You know nothing of the Harbeth cabinet design, you
know nothing about their in-house drivers.

Surprise me and show me that you know something about Harbeth before
you dismiss them. I had a pair of Harbeth Monitor 40.1s in my system
for nearly a year. Let's start there.

*I know I heard them both in a stereo place and in a private house,

Where was the stereo place, Bratzi? There isn't a dealer anywhere near
where you live, unless you count Acoustic Sounds. That's not really a
"stereo place," is it. They don't sell Mark Levinson, either.

You see, the last time we talked about this, you hadn't heard
Harbeths. Now suddenly you've heard them in both a house (I don't
believe an audiophile with Harbeths would invite you over) and in a
"stereo place." What stereo place? Who demonstrated them for you?

*You're quite a gumshoes. I have indeed been in Chad Kassem's place,
but this was not where this happened. This happened in another city,
if I name the place you're going to call him and ask why he demos them
to wascally wascists so I won't say, but actually I think he two
stepped them from another dealer to see if they were going to go over
in his market. It happened i was there with some people I know who had
bought a truckload of used gear from the dealer and he did allow us to
take them to the guy's house for a house demo. That audiophile had a
pile of vintage tube amps and we listened to them with two or three
vintage amps plus the ones he built around Sowter Acro opt's and Ampeg
SVT power transformers. Plus a solid state McIntosh, I want to say a
7270, or something pretty close. *He had a marantz 8B *that had been
converted in the late 70s to use WE 350A outputs, and is a future
project to convert back (the chassis needs welding since the PO
drilled holes for the plate leads and removed the meter-but at least
he kept the parts). This was the amp we settled on We had access to
several other speaker pairs including a fairly current Sonus Faber and
several vintage deals, some 8 inch Tannoy DCs in soffit cabs and the
604s-old Alnico 604s with the less good multicell horn, and some huge
Bozaks.

*Neither the SFs nor these Harbeths could be called really bad, but
those 604s had dynamics that made them sound dull as dishwater. Yes,
both had smoother trebles, violas and light male voices sounded better
on both. But the booty zone was simply not happening.

*You can get a fresh coned set of vintage Alnico 604s *for *about
twelve hundred bucks and a set of the large domestic Altec pattern
cabs for between from pocket change to maybe a grand. Mastering Lab
crossovers would add a grand. Any others a couple hundred if not
included with the drivers. This is JFK/MM era tech and your Harbeths
can not compete fully, what does that say? It says there is no
replacement, as I said earlier, for displacement.

*The Sonus Fabers couldn't either. They were actually a little worse
than the Harbeths all the way around but I never took them that
seriously to begin with.

*The DCs were fully the equal of the Harbeths in the treble for
smoothess, as expected, they didn't pass the booty zone test
either.....but again, eight inches. And you can find DCs for a small
fraction, again, of the over ten grand these yuppie-ass Harbeths cost.

*Face it, you are going to bat for a crappy value, overpriced *pussy-
ass speaker. You are like a Porsche buff that can't admit the 911 is
still a museum piece and the 928 was the best car Porsche ever made
for the street and they should have stuck with it, just ditched the
troublesome four liter DOHC v-8 and bought a LS-1 crate motor which is
lighter, more powerful and more reliable. (They should have made a
street 917 with a lugbrazed Reynolds 531 frame to, but, then again,
Benz refused to make the C-111...)

Well, I've heard the 604s in some Japanese single-driver designs, and
they are intriguing. I would never choose one over a Harbeth 40 (or
even a 30). It's all about preferences, and your preference seems to
be forward, aggressive sounding speakers.

And the 928 was built for people who couldn't handle the 911. So we're
aware of your driving skills as well!

*The Corvair was hounded out of existence for a level of power
oversteer that was nothing like even the early 911s. Yet, even the
fact that the early 930s very typically ran into trees backwards
(despite having been hobbled with only four gears) has not convinced
people that a true rear engine car makes no sense from an engineering
standpoint.

*After realizing the writing for a rear engine sports car was on the
wall and that emissions demanded liquid cooling, as did further power
increases, *Porsche very sensibly designed the high point of their
roadgoing car design career (the 917 being not a viable road car) in
the 928. They also had the 924, which shared an engine with some AMC
products, and the 944 which used half the 928 engine, and none of the
three sharing very much in usable parts.

*The 928 was abandoned because it actually was a first rate car and
Porsche lovers wanted something substantially less. About the only
good thing to come out of this debacle was that as with the very
excellent 914 chassis, the 928 can be had non-running cheaply enough
that the hobby mechanic can find oen with a bum engine and stick a SBC
in there. The downside is that the very excellent transaxle is
unsupported and is the critical part: if it goes, you're screwed
economically speaking. 928 conversion owners are in the position of
analog Tek scope owners: if anything critical goes, you are holding a
worthless pile of metal.

Wow, I thought this was an audio discussion.

If there's one thing that Bratzi knows it's audio, cars and racism.