View Full Version : Is Audio discussed here?
Will
May 15th 09, 12:24 AM
I did a quick browse of RAO. I found threads about politics, education,
racial issues, and other social concerns.
Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
zip cord.
No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
appears that EVERY thread is off topic. Just an observation.
George M. Middius[_4_]
May 15th 09, 12:44 AM
Will said:
> Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
> vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
> zip cord.
> No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
> No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
None of that has anything to do with consumer audio. Those are 'borg
topics. They bore the crap out of Normals.
You can go back to the Hive now.
On 14 Mai, 19:24, Will > wrote:
> I did a quick browse of RAO. *I found threads about politics, education,
> racial issues, and other social concerns.
>
> Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
> vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
> zip cord.
>
> No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
>
> No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
>
> This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> appears that EVERY thread is off topic. *Just an observation.
All those issues were resolved about 10 years ago.
You are late to the party.
MiNe 109
May 15th 09, 01:21 AM
In article >,
Will > wrote:
> I did a quick browse of RAO. I found threads about politics, education,
> racial issues, and other social concerns.
>
> Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
> vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
> zip cord.
>
> No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
>
> No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
>
> This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> appears that EVERY thread is off topic. Just an observation.
What do you want to talk about? How about that Linn super-tweeter Aktiv
option?
Stephen
On May 14, 6:01�pm, "Soundhaspriority" > wrote:
> "Will" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >I did a quick browse of RAO. �I found threads about politics, education,
> >racial issues, and other social concerns.
>
> > Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection, vinyl
> > vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat zip cord.
>
> > No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> > so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
>
> > No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
>
> > This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> > appears that EVERY thread is off topic. �Just an observation.
>
> Will, I'm sorry, but the group is very dysfunctional. Years ago, it was much
> better. I would say, look elsewhere. You may see some recent posts by me on
> various audio topics, but there was very little follow-through.
Gee, I followed up on one of your audio posts once, and you wound up
sending hateful emails to friends of mine. THAT'S why there's no
follow-through, Bob.
On May 14, 6:24 pm, Will > wrote:
> I did a quick browse of RAO. I found threads about politics, education,
> racial issues, and other social concerns.
>
> Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
> vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
> zip cord.
>
> No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
>
> No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
>
> This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> appears that EVERY thread is off topic. Just an observation.
I liked the days when only half the threads were off topic. i used to
really enjoy discussing audio, but the dialogue got ****ish and then
that's when the political stuff became dominant.
There were always off topic posts and ALWAYS WILL BE unless the group
is MODERATED. Now, I am not volunteering for the job and no one else
is either. And if they were I'd be very suspicious of them.
On 14 Mai, 23:28, ScottW2 > wrote:
..
a long semantic debate which is ultimately
> preference based.
>
we can't have those kind of discussions here
On 14 Mai, 23:32, ScottW2 > wrote:
> > Gee, I followed up on one of your audio posts once, and you wound up
> > sending hateful emails to friends of mine. THAT'S why there's no
> > follow-through, Bob.
>
> *That seems to happen to you a lot. I wonder why?
>
he tells off scum like Bob and Arny
On May 14, 10:42 pm, wrote:
> On 14 Mai, 23:32, ScottW2 > wrote:
>
> > > Gee, I followed up on one of your audio posts once, and you wound up
> > > sending hateful emails to friends of mine. THAT'S why there's no
> > > follow-through, Bob.
>
> > That seems to happen to you a lot. I wonder why?
>
> he tells off scum like Bob and Arny
Oh, pull your head out of your ass. That's the stupidest bunch of ****
I have heard here in months.
Will
May 15th 09, 02:08 PM
ScottW2 wrote:
> On May 14, 6:01 pm, "Soundhaspriority" > wrote:
>> "Will" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> I did a quick browse of RAO. I found threads about politics, education,
>>> racial issues, and other social concerns.
>>> Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection, vinyl
>>> vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat zip cord.
>>> No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
>>> so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
>>> No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
>>> This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
>>> appears that EVERY thread is off topic. Just an observation.
>> Will, I'm sorry, but the group is very dysfunctional. Years ago, it was much
>> better. I would say, look elsewhere. You may see some recent posts by me on
>> various audio topics, but there was very little follow-through.
>>
>> There are some non U.S groups that are in a little better shape: aus.hi-fi,
>
> Pretty much a flame fest with some knowledgable tube DIY'ers.
>
>> and I've heard the U.K has a pretty good group. The pro audio groups are
>> functional, but they discourage discussion of the issues that interest you.
>
> They don't feel those issues are worth discussing...beyond maybe the
> speakers. Even RAHE which had a nice discussion on speakers broke
> down pretty much into a long semantic debate which is ultimately
> preference based.
>
> No one's discouraging audio discussions. But it appears there really
> isn't all that much to discuss. You mentioned 5 topics all of which
> have been covered repeatedly over the years here. Check the archives.
> But if you want, you can always start a thread and see what happens.
>
> ScottW
Scott,
Searching archives is boring compared to finding active content, and
preference based arguments are fun, this is rec.audio.OPINION after all!
:) We you kinda busted me, I started THIS thread to see if anyone would
bite on the stuff I listed. I can list three more off the top of my head!
SACD - How much of the sonic improvements are in the encode compared to
the mastering?
Remastered vs unremastered CDs - who likes the original issues better?
What portable mp3 player has the best amplification? if I want to use my
AKG cans instead of the earbuds that came with it. . .
MiNe 109
May 15th 09, 02:46 PM
In article >,
Will > wrote:
> Searching archives is boring compared to finding active content, and
> preference based arguments are fun, this is rec.audio.OPINION after all!
> :) We you kinda busted me, I started THIS thread to see if anyone would
> bite on the stuff I listed. I can list three more off the top of my head!
>
> SACD - How much of the sonic improvements are in the encode compared to
> the mastering?
Dunno.
> Remastered vs unremastered CDs - who likes the original issues better?
Not as a rule, but some original issues have advantages: mastering style
closer to original in eq, dynamic range, etc.
> What portable mp3 player has the best amplification? if I want to use my
> AKG cans instead of the earbuds that came with it. . .
The one with an outboard amp. Or so they say at headphone forums.
Stephen
On May 14, 8:32�pm, ScottW2 > wrote:
> On May 14, 6:22�pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 14, 6:01 pm, "Soundhaspriority" > wrote:
>
> > > "Will" > wrote in message
>
> > ...
>
> > > >I did a quick browse of RAO. I found threads about politics, education,
> > > >racial issues, and other social concerns.
>
> > > > Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection, vinyl
> > > > vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat zip cord.
>
> > > > No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> > > > so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
>
> > > > No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
>
> > > > This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> > > > appears that EVERY thread is off topic. Just an observation.
>
> > > Will, I'm sorry, but the group is very dysfunctional. Years ago, it was much
> > > better. I would say, look elsewhere. You may see some recent posts by me on
> > > various audio topics, but there was very little follow-through.
>
> > Gee, I followed up on one of your audio posts once, and you wound up
> > sending hateful emails to friends of mine. THAT'S why there's no
> > follow-through, Bob.
>
> �That seems to happen to you a lot. I wonder why?
Twice is a lot? There you go with your inadequate sample sizes again.
On May 14, 9:38�pm, wrote:
> On May 14, 10:42 pm, wrote:
>
> > On 14 Mai, 23:32, ScottW2 > wrote:
>
> > > > Gee, I followed up on one of your audio posts once, and you wound up
> > > > sending hateful emails to friends of mine. THAT'S why there's no
> > > > follow-through, Bob.
>
> > > �That seems to happen to you a lot. I wonder why?
>
> > he tells off scum like Bob and Arny
>
> Oh, pull your head out of your ass. That's the stupidest bunch of ****
> I have heard here in months.
I don't know...some of those articles from Steve Sailer and Revilo P.
Oliver are in the running and may be impossible to beat.
On May 14, 11:37*pm, "Soundhaspriority" > wrote:
> "ScottW2" > wrote in message
>
> I installed some parametric equalizers today, to make my listening room
> better for mastering, but I doubt anybody's interested. *Tomorrow I'll
> install the clone LCD display, so I can begin measurements.
>
> I did have an interesting vinyl experience at a buddy's house. I'll write it
> up and post it.
>
> Bob Morein
> (310) 237-6511
So how did you calibrate the EQs? Did you generate white or pink
noise, and use
a spectrum analyzer, with a flat mic in your listening position? Did
you do it "by ear."?
MiNe 109
May 16th 09, 11:41 PM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On May 14, 5:21*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > In article >,
> >
> > *Will > wrote:
> > > I did a quick browse of RAO. *I found threads about politics, education,
> > > racial issues, and other social concerns.
> >
> > > Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
> > > vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
> > > zip cord.
> >
> > > No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> > > so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
> >
> > > No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
> >
> > > This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> > > appears that EVERY thread is off topic. *Just an observation.
> >
> > What do you want to talk about? How about that Linn super-tweeter Aktiv
> > option?
>
> Ok...so why just the super tweeter?
Because the expense of an extra amp for the low power requirements of a
super-tweeter seems especially uneconomic.
> The problems with passive
> crossovers are worse with low frequency crossovers.
That's why I'm not complaining about those.
> I don't see a "super-tweeter" Aktiv option when I glanced at Linns site.
http://www.linn.co.uk/majik_109
No relation.
Download the Info Sheet. There's a super-tweeter and the speaker has an
Aktiv option. The lowest-powered Linn amp is listed at 100 watts.
Stephen
> http://www.linn.co.uk/how_go_aktiv
>
> ScottW
MiNe 109
May 17th 09, 04:32 AM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On May 16, 3:41*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On May 14, 5:21*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
> >
> > > > *Will > wrote:
> > > > > I did a quick browse of RAO. *I found threads about politics,
> > > > > education,
> > > > > racial issues, and other social concerns.
> >
> > > > > Missing is the discussion of tube vs solid state, speaker selection,
> > > > > vinyl vs CD, direct drive vs belt drive, and high dollar wires vs fat
> > > > > zip cord.
> >
> > > > > No rants about certain magazines never posting bad reviews, or how
> > > > > so-and-so has wax filled ears, etc.
> >
> > > > > No debate over subjective listening tests vs ABX.
> >
> > > > > This newsgroup has always hosted off-topic threads, but these days it
> > > > > appears that EVERY thread is off topic. *Just an observation.
> >
> > > > What do you want to talk about? How about that Linn super-tweeter Aktiv
> > > > option?
> >
> > > Ok...so why just the super tweeter?
> >
> > Because the expense of an extra amp for the low power requirements of a
> > super-tweeter seems especially uneconomic.
>
> The use of "super-tweeter" is uneconomic IMO.
> What's its operating range?
IIRC from Stereophile, 6 kHz.
> > > *The problems with passive
> > > crossovers are worse with low frequency crossovers. *
> >
> > That's why I'm not complaining about those.
> >
> > > *I don't see a "super-tweeter" Aktiv option when I glanced at Linns site.
> >
> > http://www.linn.co.uk/majik_109
> >
> > No relation.
> >
> > Download the Info Sheet. There's a super-tweeter and the speaker has an
> > Aktiv option. The lowest-powered Linn amp is listed at 100 watts.
>
> You obviously don't have to use a Linn amp.
Shhh! is wrong: you are a genius.
Stephen
MiNe 109
May 17th 09, 11:12 PM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On May 16, 8:32*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On May 16, 3:41*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> >
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On May 14, 5:21*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> > > > > > In article >,
<snip Will>
> > > > > > What do you want to talk about? How about that Linn super-tweeter
> > > > > > Aktiv
> > > > > > option?
> >
> > > > > Ok...so why just the super tweeter?
> >
> > > > Because the expense of an extra amp for the low power requirements of a
> > > > super-tweeter seems especially uneconomic.
> >
> > > The use of "super-tweeter" is uneconomic IMO.
> > > What's its operating range?
> >
> > IIRC from Stereophile, 6 kHz.
>
> Not so super.
That's what Linn and Stereophile called it.
> > > > > *The problems with passive
> > > > > crossovers are worse with low frequency crossovers. *
> >
> > > > That's why I'm not complaining about those.
> >
> > > > > *I don't see a "super-tweeter" Aktiv option when I glanced at Linns
> > > > > site.
> >
> > > >http://www.linn.co.uk/majik_109
> >
> > > > No relation.
> >
> > > > Download the Info Sheet. There's a super-tweeter and the speaker has an
> > > > Aktiv option. The lowest-powered Linn amp is listed at 100 watts.
> >
> > > *You obviously don't have to use a Linn amp.
> >
> > Shhh! is wrong: you are a genius.
>
> Why did you complain about Linn lacking a lower power amp than 100
> watts?
Money. I have no complaints about the performance of the system as I've
never heard it and am generally in favor of active electronic crossovers.
> Anyway, nothing in the data sheet indicates the supertweeter
> efficiency in Aktiv mode.
> If its still 88 db/1W/1m...it can use 100 W amp. You gain a bit with
> impedance improvement to 7 ohms....but you'll still be pretty limited
> on peak output.
I don't know about that. For Kabers, the overall 8 ohm rating becomes a
nominal 4 ohms/driver in Aktive mode.
Stephen
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
May 17th 09, 11:54 PM
On May 16, 10:32*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> Shhh! is wrong:
Am not.
George M. Middius[_4_]
May 18th 09, 12:02 AM
Shhhh! said:
> > Shhh! is wrong:
>
> Am not.
Sarcasm not detected.
MiNe 109
May 18th 09, 12:45 AM
In article
>,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:
> On May 16, 10:32*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
>
> > Shhh! is wrong:
>
> Am not.
And worse: it's not so "obvious" that one can use a non-Linn device as
the crossover boards are installed inside a Linn amp. I doubt other
companies design theirs with Linn-compatible slots.
Stephen
George M. Middius[_4_]
May 18th 09, 12:53 AM
What's this? Are you going heretic, Witless?
> > I doubt other companies design theirs with Linn-compatible slots.
> They make
The Krooborg despises Linn, Scooter. In fact, all 'borgs hate the company
with a white-hot passion. I believe the intensity of hatred they have for
Linn rivals their animosity toward The Magazine and the Lord High Editor.
Why are you rejecting Official Borgma? Are you having a breakdown?
--
"I prefer substantive discussion over continuous expressions of unjustified outrage."
Scottie Witlessmongrel, RAO, March 24, 2009
George M. Middius[_4_]
May 18th 09, 01:11 AM
Well, that's settled. A chihuahua is dumber than a Bug Eater.
> > What's this? Are you going heretic, Witless?
>
> You are my hero.
Oh, stop.
--
>> There all nuts.
> Were you trying to say "There go all the nuts"? Or "Where are all the nuts"?
For an old english teacher you suck at interpretation. How about "they're all nuts. "
Scottie Witlessmongrel, 28 October 2008
MiNe 109
May 18th 09, 04:35 AM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On May 17, 3:12*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On May 16, 8:32*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> >
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On May 16, 3:41*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >,
> >
> > > > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > On May 14, 5:21*pm, MiNe 109 * >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In article >,
> >
> > <snip Will>
> >
> > > > > > > > What do you want to talk about? How about that Linn
> > > > > > > > super-tweeter
> > > > > > > > Aktiv
> > > > > > > > option?
> >
> > > > > > > Ok...so why just the super tweeter?
> >
> > > > > > Because the expense of an extra amp for the low power requirements
> > > > > > of a
> > > > > > super-tweeter seems especially uneconomic.
> >
> > > > > The use of "super-tweeter" is uneconomic IMO.
> > > > > What's its operating range?
> >
> > > > IIRC from Stereophile, 6 kHz.
> >
> > > *Not so super.
> >
> > That's what Linn and Stereophile called it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > > *The problems with passive
> > > > > > > crossovers are worse with low frequency crossovers. *
> >
> > > > > > That's why I'm not complaining about those.
> >
> > > > > > > *I don't see a "super-tweeter" Aktiv option when I glanced at
> > > > > > > Linns
> > > > > > > site.
> >
> > > > > >http://www.linn.co.uk/majik_109
> >
> > > > > > No relation.
> >
> > > > > > Download the Info Sheet. There's a super-tweeter and the speaker
> > > > > > has an
> > > > > > Aktiv option. The lowest-powered Linn amp is listed at 100 watts.
> >
> > > > > *You obviously don't have to use a Linn amp.
> >
> > > > Shhh! is wrong: you are a genius.
> >
> > > *Why did you complain about Linn lacking a lower power amp than 100
> > > watts?
> >
> > Money. I have no complaints about the performance of the system as I've
> > never heard it and am generally in favor of active electronic crossovers.
> >
> > > Anyway, nothing in the data sheet indicates the supertweeter
> > > efficiency in Aktiv mode.
> > > If its still 88 db/1W/1m...it can use 100 W amp. *You gain a bit with
> > > impedance improvement to 7 ohms....but you'll still be pretty limited
> > > on peak output.
> >
> > I don't know about that. For Kabers, the overall 8 ohm rating becomes a
> > nominal 4 ohms/driver in Aktive mode.
>
> Check your info sheet. IRC, Overall impedance of 4 ohms in
> passive crossover goes to
> 7 ohms per driver in Aktiv mode.
I don't see what the Majik info sheet has to do with my Kabers.
> I know for Orions, the loads presented the amplifiers are
> quite benign and easy to drive.
I imagine Linn drivers are similar.
> BTW, I was listening to Classics reissue of Allman Brothers Live
> at the Filmore East last night. I can't recall listening to it since
> completing my speakers. Absolutely amazing.
I have the old cd but it's missing a disc. Great playing.
Stephen
MiNe 109
May 18th 09, 04:39 AM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On May 17, 4:45*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:
> >
> > > On May 16, 10:32*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> >
> > > > Shhh! is wrong:
> >
> > > Am not.
> >
> > And worse: it's not so "obvious" that one can use a non-Linn device as
> > the crossover boards are installed inside a Linn amp. I doubt other
> > companies design theirs with Linn-compatible slots.
>
> They make a stand alone version for some speakers.
Of course. I have one for the Kabers.
> http://www.linn.co.uk/klimax_aktiv_crossover
Yes, every current speaker that isn't in the Majik line. It's good to
see the six-channel Chakra amp has the slots needed for the cards.
Stephen
MiNe 109
May 18th 09, 08:29 PM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> > I don't see what the Majik info sheet has to do with my Kabers.
>
> I guess we'll have to take Linn's word for your Kabers over yours.
>
> ftp://194.128.160.114/Manual/KABER_(E).pdf
>
> Aktiv 8 ohms
> Passive 4 ohms
Thanks for looking that up. I was going off memory of what the guy who
sold them to me said, not from a manual. The only other reference I
needed was the difference in frequency range (Aktiv went a bit lower).
Looks like the "Tower of Song" is operating on 100 watt per side from
three channels of amplification.
> > > I know for Orions, the loads presented the amplifiers are
> > > quite benign and easy to drive.
> >
> > I imagine Linn drivers are similar.
> >
> > > BTW, I was listening to Classics reissue of Allman Brothers Live
> > > at the Filmore East last night. *I can't recall listening to it since
> > > completing my speakers. *Absolutely amazing.
> >
> > I have the old cd but it's missing a disc. Great playing.
>
> This reissue is superb. Definitely the best version I've heard.
Sounds good!
Stephen
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.