"dave weil" wrote in message

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:56:37 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:48 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

That's certainly been my feeling. Why buy a CD partially filled
with poor music when a DVD is cheaper and has more and better
content?

Stated differently - if one is going to sit down and listen, why
just listen when you can also watch something that is relevant to
the music?

There are several good reasons.

The main one is that music is highly based on the imagination of the
listener. You can actually minimize the impact of the music by tying
images chosen by someone else to the listening of said music.

Or, you can increase the impact of the music, or you can change it.
You don't have to watch if you don't want to. If you don't watch you
have the experience(s) you've described which I agree can have
tremendous value, but if you do watch, you have the benefit of a
different experience.

This isn't to say that it can't be effective. But for instance, I
usually don't like watching videos of symphony orchestras performing
music. I simply find it distracting. Sometimes the editing is
distracting, sometimes it's just the camera angles. Others might
disagree of course.

I agree, but I like having the choice.

Then there's the issue of artistic videos interpreting music.
Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

I agree, but I like having the choice.

So, there are plenty of good reasons for forgoing watching video
while listening to music.

I agree, but I like having the choice.

You didn't ask about choice. You asked why someone wouldn't want to
watch.

Acutally, I didn't ask about anything. I restated someone else's question.

I answered your question.

Except it wasn't my question.

"Robert Morein" said:

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

"All amps are equal, but some are more equal than others".
-John Atkinson, tongue firmly in cheek, to Tom Nousaine.

*grin*

Oh, and a happy 2004 to everyone!

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

"Robert Morein" said:

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

"All amps are equal, but some are more equal than others".
-John Atkinson, tongue firmly in cheek, to Tom Nousaine.

*grin*

Oh, and a happy 2004 to everyone!

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

"Robert Morein" said:

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

"All amps are equal, but some are more equal than others".
-John Atkinson, tongue firmly in cheek, to Tom Nousaine.

*grin*

Oh, and a happy 2004 to everyone!

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" said:

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

"All amps are equal, but some are more equal than others".
-John Atkinson, tongue firmly in cheek, to Tom Nousaine.

*grin*

Oh, and a happy 2004 to everyone!

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal to Arny
and Stew.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" said:

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

"All amps are equal, but some are more equal than others".
-John Atkinson, tongue firmly in cheek, to Tom Nousaine.

*grin*

Oh, and a happy 2004 to everyone!

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal to Arny
and Stew.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" said:

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

"All amps are equal, but some are more equal than others".
-John Atkinson, tongue firmly in cheek, to Tom Nousaine.

*grin*

Oh, and a happy 2004 to everyone!

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal to Arny
and Stew.

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

Further, there's even more ******** in your sweeping generalisation
that metal dome and soft dome tweeters have a characteristic sound.
They don't.

It depends upon whether you go by averages, or the "exception that breaks
the rule."
There certainly are exceptions.

Yup, so many that there ain't no rule................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

Further, there's even more ******** in your sweeping generalisation
that metal dome and soft dome tweeters have a characteristic sound.
They don't.

It depends upon whether you go by averages, or the "exception that breaks
the rule."
There certainly are exceptions.

Yup, so many that there ain't no rule................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

Further, there's even more ******** in your sweeping generalisation
that metal dome and soft dome tweeters have a characteristic sound.
They don't.

It depends upon whether you go by averages, or the "exception that breaks
the rule."
There certainly are exceptions.

Yup, so many that there ain't no rule................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal
to Arny and Stew.

Morein, we're hoping for your brain transplant to finally be approved.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal
to Arny and Stew.

Morein, we're hoping for your brain transplant to finally be approved.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal
to Arny and Stew.

Morein, we're hoping for your brain transplant to finally be approved.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Agreed. While intuition might suggest that metal domes might have
stronger high frequency response, the most popular dome-type
tweeters with the most extended response (40 KHz & beyond) have
fabric diaphragms.

I have a set of Polks with the new Audax ring drivers, and they STILL
sound soft, compared to a typical metal dome.

I note Morein that you can't even cite the name of any speakers with metal
dome tweeters.

Once again we have the "tacit admission", forced by Arny from his victims by
a twisted mind.

I have several sets of speakers with metal domes, Arny. How could anyone
avoid them? They are ubiquitous, and frequently good.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Agreed. While intuition might suggest that metal domes might have
stronger high frequency response, the most popular dome-type
tweeters with the most extended response (40 KHz & beyond) have
fabric diaphragms.

I have a set of Polks with the new Audax ring drivers, and they STILL
sound soft, compared to a typical metal dome.

I note Morein that you can't even cite the name of any speakers with metal
dome tweeters.

Once again we have the "tacit admission", forced by Arny from his victims by
a twisted mind.

I have several sets of speakers with metal domes, Arny. How could anyone
avoid them? They are ubiquitous, and frequently good.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Agreed. While intuition might suggest that metal domes might have
stronger high frequency response, the most popular dome-type
tweeters with the most extended response (40 KHz & beyond) have
fabric diaphragms.

I have a set of Polks with the new Audax ring drivers, and they STILL
sound soft, compared to a typical metal dome.

I note Morein that you can't even cite the name of any speakers with metal
dome tweeters.

Once again we have the "tacit admission", forced by Arny from his victims by
a twisted mind.

I have several sets of speakers with metal domes, Arny. How could anyone
avoid them? They are ubiquitous, and frequently good.

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they
complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

You have only one set of speakers?

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they
complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

You have only one set of speakers?

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they
complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

You have only one set of speakers?

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 14:32:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


You didn't ask about choice. You asked why someone wouldn't want to
watch.

Acutally, I didn't ask about anything. I restated someone else's question.

I answered your question.

Except it wasn't my question.

Once you restated it without answering it, you inherited it.

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 14:32:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


You didn't ask about choice. You asked why someone wouldn't want to
watch.

Acutally, I didn't ask about anything. I restated someone else's question.

I answered your question.

Except it wasn't my question.

Once you restated it without answering it, you inherited it.

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 14:32:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


You didn't ask about choice. You asked why someone wouldn't want to
watch.

Acutally, I didn't ask about anything. I restated someone else's question.

I answered your question.

Except it wasn't my question.

Once you restated it without answering it, you inherited it.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal
to Arny and Stew.

Morein, we're hoping for your brain transplant to finally be approved.

I wouldn't want it to turn out like yours -- dropped by UPS.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal
to Arny and Stew.

Morein, we're hoping for your brain transplant to finally be approved.

I wouldn't want it to turn out like yours -- dropped by UPS.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


A happy 2004 to everyone, with best hopes for a safe earwax removal
to Arny and Stew.

Morein, we're hoping for your brain transplant to finally be approved.

I wouldn't want it to turn out like yours -- dropped by UPS.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Agreed. While intuition might suggest that metal domes might have
stronger high frequency response, the most popular dome-type
tweeters with the most extended response (40 KHz & beyond) have
fabric diaphragms.

I have a set of Polks with the new Audax ring drivers, and they
STILL sound soft, compared to a typical metal dome.

I note Morein that you can't even cite the name of any speakers with
metal dome tweeters.

Once again we have the "tacit admission", forced by Arny from his
victims by a twisted mind.

Where did I mention "tacit admission"?

I didn't.

Morien is free-associating again.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Agreed. While intuition might suggest that metal domes might have
stronger high frequency response, the most popular dome-type
tweeters with the most extended response (40 KHz & beyond) have
fabric diaphragms.

I have a set of Polks with the new Audax ring drivers, and they
STILL sound soft, compared to a typical metal dome.

I note Morein that you can't even cite the name of any speakers with
metal dome tweeters.

Once again we have the "tacit admission", forced by Arny from his
victims by a twisted mind.

Where did I mention "tacit admission"?

I didn't.

Morien is free-associating again.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Agreed. While intuition might suggest that metal domes might have
stronger high frequency response, the most popular dome-type
tweeters with the most extended response (40 KHz & beyond) have
fabric diaphragms.

I have a set of Polks with the new Audax ring drivers, and they
STILL sound soft, compared to a typical metal dome.

I note Morein that you can't even cite the name of any speakers with
metal dome tweeters.

Once again we have the "tacit admission", forced by Arny from his
victims by a twisted mind.

Where did I mention "tacit admission"?

I didn't.

Morien is free-associating again.

"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in
:

"Powell" wrote in message
...
Given the rather conspicious reliable evidence
that I've got considerable emperical experience
with these and many other amps, one is tempted to ask
what the heck are you ranting about, Powell?

Rubbish. Talking about amps is not experience.
We all know you've not subscribed to any audio
magazines in the last 20 years... so you're not
even well read on the subject.

Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day for suggesting that
magazines will keep you "well read".

Although I subscribe to several print magazines they are really
worthless. By the time a review is published the product is
usually darn near obsolete. I can't remember how many years it's
been since I read something first in an audio mag. Q&A is
instead usually Q & wrongA. Feature articles usually miss the
mark even if they aren't scientifically flawed. I've kept all my
mag subscriptions through the years except Stereophile which I
failed to renew a few months ago. My colleagues and I took great
enjoyment from the gut busting laughs Stereophile offers every
month. For awhile, we made Top Ten lists for each issue and put
them in the humor email list. In the end it just got boring
laughing at the same stuff issue after issue no matter how
outrageous.

I'd like to see a poll of how many true audio professionals get
trade rags. Even including free subscriptions I bet the numbers
are quite low.



Rusty,

Do you have any recommendations for something worthwhile in a magazine?


r


--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in
:

"Powell" wrote in message
...
Given the rather conspicious reliable evidence
that I've got considerable emperical experience
with these and many other amps, one is tempted to ask
what the heck are you ranting about, Powell?

Rubbish. Talking about amps is not experience.
We all know you've not subscribed to any audio
magazines in the last 20 years... so you're not
even well read on the subject.

Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day for suggesting that
magazines will keep you "well read".

Although I subscribe to several print magazines they are really
worthless. By the time a review is published the product is
usually darn near obsolete. I can't remember how many years it's
been since I read something first in an audio mag. Q&A is
instead usually Q & wrongA. Feature articles usually miss the
mark even if they aren't scientifically flawed. I've kept all my
mag subscriptions through the years except Stereophile which I
failed to renew a few months ago. My colleagues and I took great
enjoyment from the gut busting laughs Stereophile offers every
month. For awhile, we made Top Ten lists for each issue and put
them in the humor email list. In the end it just got boring
laughing at the same stuff issue after issue no matter how
outrageous.

I'd like to see a poll of how many true audio professionals get
trade rags. Even including free subscriptions I bet the numbers
are quite low.



Rusty,

Do you have any recommendations for something worthwhile in a magazine?


r


--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in
:

"Powell" wrote in message
...
Given the rather conspicious reliable evidence
that I've got considerable emperical experience
with these and many other amps, one is tempted to ask
what the heck are you ranting about, Powell?

Rubbish. Talking about amps is not experience.
We all know you've not subscribed to any audio
magazines in the last 20 years... so you're not
even well read on the subject.

Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day for suggesting that
magazines will keep you "well read".

Although I subscribe to several print magazines they are really
worthless. By the time a review is published the product is
usually darn near obsolete. I can't remember how many years it's
been since I read something first in an audio mag. Q&A is
instead usually Q & wrongA. Feature articles usually miss the
mark even if they aren't scientifically flawed. I've kept all my
mag subscriptions through the years except Stereophile which I
failed to renew a few months ago. My colleagues and I took great
enjoyment from the gut busting laughs Stereophile offers every
month. For awhile, we made Top Ten lists for each issue and put
them in the humor email list. In the end it just got boring
laughing at the same stuff issue after issue no matter how
outrageous.

I'd like to see a poll of how many true audio professionals get
trade rags. Even including free subscriptions I bet the numbers
are quite low.



Rusty,

Do you have any recommendations for something worthwhile in a magazine?


r


--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 17:51:06 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they
complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

You have only one set of speakers?

No, the other ones are driven by an Audiolab 8000P, a Denon PMA350II
and a Rotel RA920AX, so I spread the honours pretty evenly around the
world! :-)

BTW, the Krell and Audiolab sound excactly the same on the big
Apogees, but the Audiolab gets very hot after a while.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 17:51:06 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they
complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

You have only one set of speakers?

No, the other ones are driven by an Audiolab 8000P, a Denon PMA350II
and a Rotel RA920AX, so I spread the honours pretty evenly around the
world! :-)

BTW, the Krell and Audiolab sound excactly the same on the big
Apogees, but the Audiolab gets very hot after a while.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 17:51:06 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:40:47 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:10:51 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

The sound of the traditional MOSFET circuit has both followers and
detractors, to which I add my personal observation that they
complement
metal dome tweeters very well, but are not as good with fabric types.

Absolute bolllocks! As with bipolars and even a select few tube amps,
a good amp sounds like a good amp, i.e. it sounds like its input
signal. They all sound the same, hence they don't 'complement' any
particular kind of tweeter.

No they don't all sound the same. Otherwise, you could get rid of your
KSA-50 and get a good Japanese receiver.

Indeed I could - but it might struggle to drive my 3-ohm speakers.

You have only one set of speakers?

No, the other ones are driven by an Audiolab 8000P, a Denon PMA350II
and a Rotel RA920AX, so I spread the honours pretty evenly around the
world! :-)

BTW, the Krell and Audiolab sound excactly the same on the big
Apogees, but the Audiolab gets very hot after a while.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.44...
Rusty,

Do you have any recommendations for something worthwhile in a
magazine?

Not really. I'm pretty bummed about the state of print these
days.

I actually get some use out of a couple of HT magazines such as
Audio Video Interiors, Widescreen Review, The Perfect Vision, and
the Robb Report...mostly due to the HT picture layouts and
content review. I still subscribe to Home Theater Mag and
Sound&Vision but just barely. I recently wrote a letter to the
editor for a recent projector review. The review was printed 20
months after the projector was generally available...and 4 months
after it was discontinued. Further the review was flawed because
they couldn't figure out how to calibrate. A quick web search
would have given them service menu access. They desaturated the
color instead of properly adjusting the color decoder and also
used an incorrect gamma setting. Poor review but due to the
un-timely nature it didn't really matter.

"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.44...
Rusty,

Do you have any recommendations for something worthwhile in a
magazine?

Not really. I'm pretty bummed about the state of print these
days.

I actually get some use out of a couple of HT magazines such as
Audio Video Interiors, Widescreen Review, The Perfect Vision, and
the Robb Report...mostly due to the HT picture layouts and
content review. I still subscribe to Home Theater Mag and
Sound&Vision but just barely. I recently wrote a letter to the
editor for a recent projector review. The review was printed 20
months after the projector was generally available...and 4 months
after it was discontinued. Further the review was flawed because
they couldn't figure out how to calibrate. A quick web search
would have given them service menu access. They desaturated the
color instead of properly adjusting the color decoder and also
used an incorrect gamma setting. Poor review but due to the
un-timely nature it didn't really matter.

"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.44...
Rusty,

Do you have any recommendations for something worthwhile in a
magazine?

Not really. I'm pretty bummed about the state of print these
days.

I actually get some use out of a couple of HT magazines such as
Audio Video Interiors, Widescreen Review, The Perfect Vision, and
the Robb Report...mostly due to the HT picture layouts and
content review. I still subscribe to Home Theater Mag and
Sound&Vision but just barely. I recently wrote a letter to the
editor for a recent projector review. The review was printed 20
months after the projector was generally available...and 4 months
after it was discontinued. Further the review was flawed because
they couldn't figure out how to calibrate. A quick web search
would have given them service menu access. They desaturated the
color instead of properly adjusting the color decoder and also
used an incorrect gamma setting. Poor review but due to the
un-timely nature it didn't really matter.

In article , says...

Your typical Crown, QSC, or Hafler would probably bury a Carver when it
comes to difficult loads.

My TFM 35 never had any problems driving my apogee's to very loud levels.


I'm currently using one rated at 175watts rms X 2 at 4 ohms.

Consider the fact that your typical Crown, QSC or Hafler has 4-ohm bridged
ratings. That correspond to a 2 ohm load.

Some Carvers can also be bridged to more than double their power rating.

I love the look of the Carvers with the two analog power
meters on the front.

I'd trade a really sensitive, accurate clipping light for fancy meters in a
heart beat.

Agreed. The meters are really not that usefull.
-------------
Alex

In article , says...

Your typical Crown, QSC, or Hafler would probably bury a Carver when it
comes to difficult loads.

My TFM 35 never had any problems driving my apogee's to very loud levels.


I'm currently using one rated at 175watts rms X 2 at 4 ohms.

Consider the fact that your typical Crown, QSC or Hafler has 4-ohm bridged
ratings. That correspond to a 2 ohm load.

Some Carvers can also be bridged to more than double their power rating.

I love the look of the Carvers with the two analog power
meters on the front.

I'd trade a really sensitive, accurate clipping light for fancy meters in a
heart beat.

Agreed. The meters are really not that usefull.
-------------
Alex

In article , says...

Your typical Crown, QSC, or Hafler would probably bury a Carver when it
comes to difficult loads.

My TFM 35 never had any problems driving my apogee's to very loud levels.


I'm currently using one rated at 175watts rms X 2 at 4 ohms.

Consider the fact that your typical Crown, QSC or Hafler has 4-ohm bridged
ratings. That correspond to a 2 ohm load.

Some Carvers can also be bridged to more than double their power rating.

I love the look of the Carvers with the two analog power
meters on the front.

I'd trade a really sensitive, accurate clipping light for fancy meters in a
heart beat.

Agreed. The meters are really not that usefull.
-------------
Alex