Re: Audio "subjectivists" ****ting in their own nest?

[Schizoid Man]

"Margaret von B." > wrote in message

> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I think
> it was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****.

I completely agree. Inner resolution? Attack? Decay? Soundscape width?
Soundscape depth? To actually rate its Inner Resolution as 3.5 and its
Attack as 4 is sheer lunacy.

Perhaps it would be wise if he explained exactly what these attributes/specs
are and how he went about measuring them. If not, I'll have to discount this
review as complete horse manure.

[Schizoid Man]

"Margaret von B." > wrote in message

> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation.

Agreed. Arny's rants do have substance when it comes down to validating
digital components.

However, when testing speakers I have found my ears to be more reliable than
a sound level meter. After all, it's my ears and not the sound level meter
that is going to do the listening! ;-)

I know, it's not a perfect analogy...

[Margaret von B.]

"Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Margaret von B." > wrote in message
>
>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
>> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation.
>
> Agreed. Arny's rants do have substance when it comes down to validating
> digital components.
>
> However, when testing speakers I have found my ears to be more reliable
> than a sound level meter. After all, it's my ears and not the sound level
> meter that is going to do the listening! ;-)
>

I have found that when it comes to speakers, room interaction is very
important. I still think that more than half the systems over $50K I have
heard could probably be bested by a pair of Gradient Revolutions in its
various configurations combined with $5K worth of electronics or so. It is
not the perfect speaker and it is not TOTALLY immune to the room but it is
VERY good in both regards. For those who want to establish a benchmark and
discover just how good a properly designed system can sound in a properly
designed room, I recommend a trip to Alan Goodwin's place in Waltham (by
appoinment only). It is the antidote for hotel room/convention center
setups. :-)

Cheers,

Margaret

[George M. Middius]

Margaret von B. said:

> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I think it
> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big thumbs down
> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>
> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do not buy
> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>
> What do the rest of you think?

I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.

[Lionel]

In >, Margaret von B. wrote :

> I have found that when it comes to speakers, room interaction is very
> important.

Grazie mille Maggie to share such important discovery with RAO boors !
Is it already published ?

[Lionel_Chapuis]

George "Betty Boop" Middius wrote:


> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.

George has a natural respect for the very rich person... ;-)




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[Lionel_Chapuis]

George "Betty Boop" Middius wrote:


> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.

George has a natural respect for t




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[Margaret von B.]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Margaret von B. wrote :
>
>> I have found that when it comes to speakers, room interaction is very
>> important.
>
> Grazie mille Maggie to share such important discovery with RAO boors !
> Is it already published ? squeak squeak squeak.

Glad to shine a little light into your endless dark tunnel.

Margaret

[Margaret von B.]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Margaret von B. said:
>
>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I think
>> it
>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
>> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big thumbs
>> down
>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>
>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do not
>> buy
>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>
>> What do the rest of you think?
>
> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>

George, I think you totally misunderstood me. I'm not flaming the guy. He
doesn't come across like an idiot. I'm guessing that the Ongaku was
fundamentally a shrewd business move that has paid itself back with
interest. For one thing, he seems to be making a good living doing what he
loves. Cannot beat that. Sometimes goodwill is elusive, expensive and
everything.

Cheers,

Margaret

[Lionel]

In >, Margaret von B. wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Margaret von B. wrote :
>>
>>> I have found that when it comes to speakers, room interaction is very
>>> important.
>>
>> Grazie mille Maggie to share such important discovery with RAO boors !
>> Is it already published ? squeak squeak squeak.
>
> Glad to shine a little light into your endless dark tunnel.

....I'm afraid that if George read that he will have an embarrassing
erection !

:-D

[Lionel]

In >, Margaret von B. wrote :

> George, I think you totally misunderstood me.

Worst, George hates the female. ;-)

[Margaret von B.]

<Lionel_Chapuis> wrote in message
...
> George "Betty Boop" Middius wrote:
>
>
>> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
>> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>
> George has a natural respect for t
>
>

Oh my, not even a squeak. Did you run out of air? Crawl toward the ring
muscle, little one.

Cheers,

Margaret

:-)

[Lionel]

In >, Margaret von B. wrote :

> little one.

Maggie, please ! You have recently awoved that your courage is just at the
level of your audio knowledge... literary. ;-)

[Lionel]

Margaret von IronLady wrote :

> little one.

Maggie, please ! You have recently avowed that your courage is just at the
level of your audio knowledge... literary. ;-)

[George M. Middius]

Margaret von B. said:

> > I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> > could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.

> George, I think you totally misunderstood me. I'm not flaming the guy. He
> doesn't come across like an idiot. I'm guessing that the Ongaku was
> fundamentally a shrewd business move that has paid itself back with
> interest.

Rochy lost a bundle on the Ongaku. He ended up selling it for $20K. The
point, however, is that HE SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY A STEREO AMP! We're not
talking about blowing part of an inheritance or a nice lotto prize. HE
SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings and $100K
equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the house in order buy a
grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms of an investment, it was about
the worst choice he could possibly have made. Fine jewelry would be
better. Art would be better. Even penny stocks would be better because
there's a chance, however small, that they'll skyrocket. A grotesquely
overpriced amplifier has no chance of doing that. In fact, as far as I
know, there's only one brand of amplifier whose resale prices have ever
overtaken their retail prices. And that brand didn't start out with retail
in the mind-boggling stratosphere.

Once again, Rochy SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! He voluntarily
became homeless so he could have a precious, underperforming, overpriced
paperweight. How many speakers can that amp drive adequately? Not many.
How many speakers reveal whatever miracle might be designed into the amp?
Even fewer. Rochy SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY A ****ING 5-WATT AMPLIFIER!!!!!!!

> For one thing, he seems to be making a good living doing what he
> loves. Cannot beat that. Sometimes goodwill is elusive, expensive and
> everything.

This observation may well be true. He's certainly got many RAO regulars
beat on the mellowness scale.

[George M. Middius]

Margaret von B. said:

> >> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> >> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.

> > George has a natural respect for t

> Oh my, not even a squeak. Did you run out of air? Crawl toward the ring
> muscle, little one.

Maybe Rochy's over-the-top, feverishly demented audiophilia was too much
even for Sluttie to rationalize. Hence the choking-on-her-own-words.

[Clyde Slick]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Margaret von B. said:
>
>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I think
>> it
>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
>> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big thumbs
>> down
>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>
>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do not
>> buy
>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>
>> What do the rest of you think?
>
> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>

Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Schizoid Man]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings and $100K
> equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the house in order buy a
> grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms of an investment, it was about
> the worst choice he could possibly have made. Fine jewelry would be
> better. Art would be better.

Not according to Fremer.

In his review of the Wavac, he drones on about why owning a $350,000 amp is
better than owning a Picasso.

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Margaret von B. wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In >, Margaret von B. wrote :
>>>
>>>> I have found that when it comes to speakers, room interaction is very
>>>> important.
>>>
>>> Grazie mille Maggie to share such important discovery with RAO boors !
>>> Is it already published ? squeak squeak squeak.
>>
>> Glad to shine a little light into your endless dark tunnel.
>
> ...I'm afraid that if George read that he will have an embarrassing
> erection !
>


"At least" you can be funny at times.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> Margaret von B. said:
>>
>>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I think
>>> it
>>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
>>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
>>> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big thumbs
>>> down
>>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>>
>>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do not
>>> buy
>>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>>
>>> What do the rest of you think?
>>
>> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
>> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>>
>
> Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
> year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.

Now it's better, you seem to be in a world you correctly apprehend...
Why the ****, few post ago, did you feel obliged to speak about things you
don't understand, eh Art ?

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Margaret von B. wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In >, Margaret von B. wrote :
>>>>
>>>>> I have found that when it comes to speakers, room interaction is very
>>>>> important.
>>>>
>>>> Grazie mille Maggie to share such important discovery with RAO boors !
>>>> Is it already published ? squeak squeak squeak.
>>>
>>> Glad to shine a little light into your endless dark tunnel.
>>
>> ...I'm afraid that if George read that he will have an embarrassing
>> erection !
>>
>
>
> "At least" you can be funny at times.

I would be glad to write the same thing about you. :-(

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Margaret von B. said:
>>>
>>>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I
>>>> think
>>>> it
>>>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
>>>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why I
>>>> occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big thumbs
>>>> down
>>>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>>>
>>>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do not
>>>> buy
>>>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>>>
>>>> What do the rest of you think?
>>>
>>> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
>>> could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>>>
>>
>> Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
>> year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.
>
> Now it's better, you seem to be in a world you correctly apprehend...
> Why the ****, few post ago, did you feel obliged to speak about things you
> don't understand, eh Art ?

sorry, I couldn't quite apprehend what you said.
Was it something about today's comprehending of Bin Laden's associate?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Margaret von B. said:
>>>>
>>>>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I
>>>>> think
>>>>> it
>>>>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level of
>>>>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why
>>>>> I occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big
>>>>> thumbs down
>>>>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do not
>>>>> buy
>>>>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do the rest of you think?
>>>>
>>>> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so
>>>> he could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
>>> year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.
>>
>> Now it's better, you seem to be in a world you correctly apprehend...
>> Why the ****, few post ago, did you feel obliged to speak about things
>> you don't understand, eh Art ?
>
> sorry, I couldn't quite apprehend what you said.
> Was it something about today's comprehending of Bin Laden's associate?

I'm just saying that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong :

"Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"

....At that you seem to feel better when the subject comes to accounting.

What's wrong with that ?

[Lionel]

In >, Schizoid Man wrote :

>
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>
>> SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings and $100K
>> equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the house in order buy
>> a grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms of an investment, it was
>> about the worst choice he could possibly have made. Fine jewelry would be
>> better. Art would be better.
>
> Not according to Fremer.
>
> In his review of the Wavac, he drones on about why owning a $350,000 amp
> is better than owning a Picasso.


RAO high-end audio "lovers" typical discussion...
....And what about musique ?

:-D

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> > I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so he
> > could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.

> Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
> year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.

Dream on.

[George M. Middius]

Schizoid Man said:

> > SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings and $100K
> > equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the house in order buy a
> > grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms of an investment, it was about
> > the worst choice he could possibly have made. Fine jewelry would be
> > better. Art would be better.
>
> Not according to Fremer.
>
> In his review of the Wavac, he drones on about why owning a $350,000 amp is
> better than owning a Picasso.

Where is this review? I have to check it out now.

[Schizoid Man]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

>
> Schizoid Man said:
>
>> > SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings and
>> > $100K
>> > equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the house in order
>> > buy a
>> > grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms of an investment, it was
>> > about
>> > the worst choice he could possibly have made. Fine jewelry would be
>> > better. Art would be better.
>>
>> Not according to Fremer.
>>
>> In his review of the Wavac, he drones on about why owning a $350,000 amp
>> is
>> better than owning a Picasso.
>
> Where is this review? I have to check it out now.

http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/704wavac/index.html

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Margaret von B. said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I
>>>>>> think
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason why
>>>>>> I occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big
>>>>>> thumbs down
>>>>>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> buy
>>>>>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do the rest of you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so
>>>>> he could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
>>>> year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.
>>>
>>> Now it's better, you seem to be in a world you correctly apprehend...
>>> Why the ****, few post ago, did you feel obliged to speak about things
>>> you don't understand, eh Art ?
>>
>> sorry, I couldn't quite apprehend what you said.
>> Was it something about today's comprehending of Bin Laden's associate?
>
> I'm just saying that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong :
>
> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>

Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears it?
That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Margaret von B. said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While I agree with their conclusion (great value for the money), I
>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> was a pure accident. Their presumed ability to carve out this level
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And a reason
>>>>>>> why I occasionally think that Arny's rants have some foundation. Big
>>>>>>> thumbs down
>>>>>>> for all the equipment reviews like this one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I consider myself on the subjective side of things but I simply do
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> buy
>>>>>>> stuff like this. Credibility rating: Zero.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do the rest of you think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so
>>>>>> he could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not bad if the Ongaku would appreciate 30% per
>>>>> year and could be leveraged with a thirty year mortgage.
>>>>
>>>> Now it's better, you seem to be in a world you correctly apprehend...
>>>> Why the ****, few post ago, did you feel obliged to speak about things
>>>> you don't understand, eh Art ?
>>>
>>> sorry, I couldn't quite apprehend what you said.
>>> Was it something about today's comprehending of Bin Laden's associate?
>>
>> I'm just saying that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong
>> :
>>
>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>
>
> Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears it?
> That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?

Is it what I wrote ? Did I comment about sound, ?
I just said that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong and
that even a high-school teenager knows that.

"Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"

Now feel free to speak about a specific sensorial organization but avoid to
make generalities which make you look stupid (if not congenital...).

;-)

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> > "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
> > the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"

> Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears it?
> That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?

You can spread sound waves on toast, but you can only smell a sound.

[George M. Middius]

Schizoid Man said:

>>>> SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings
>>>> and $100K equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the
>>>> house in order buy a grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms
>>>> of an investment, it was about the worst choice he could possibly
>>>> have made. Fine jewelry would be better. Art would be better.

> >> Not according to Fremer.
> >> In his review of the Wavac, he drones on about why owning a $350,000 amp
> >> is better than owning a Picasso.

> > Where is this review? I have to check it out now.

> http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/704wavac/index.html

I mis-read your post the first time.... thought you said Ferstler, not
Fremer. Now that I've caught my breath, I have to say Fremer's far-out
rationalizations kind of make Ferstler seem respectable. He dances around
the truth of a product like the Wavac by insisting it should be viewed in
terms of how much it costs.

Nowhere, to his credit, does he suggest it's actually an investment.
Wouldn't you say comparing an amplifier to a Picasso painting is idiotic?
I would. But at least he doesn't take the final leap of illogic.

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...

>>>
>>> I'm just saying that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong
>>> :
>>>
>>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind,
>>> of
>>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>>
>>
>> Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears
>> it?
>> That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
>> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?
>
> Is it what I wrote ? Did I comment about sound, ?
> I just said that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong and
> that even a high-school teenager knows that.
>
> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>
> Now feel free to speak about a specific sensorial organization but avoid
> to
> make generalities which make you look stupid (if not congenital...).
>
> ;-)


Duh.. Lionel, my question logically followed from my definition.
Sound is one of those 'perceptions'.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Clyde Slick said:
>
>> > "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind,
>> > of
>> > the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>
>> Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears
>> it?
>> That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
>> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?
>
> You can spread sound waves on toast, but you can only smell a sound.


Agreed, (I think).



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> >> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?

> > You can spread sound waves on toast, but you can only smell a sound.

> Agreed, (I think).

Lionella learned her "science" in Wonderland.

[Margaret von B.]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Margaret von B. said:
>
>> > I'd suggest reining in your indignation. Rochy once sold his house so
>> > he
>> > could buy a $100K Ongaku amplifier.
>
>> George, I think you totally misunderstood me. I'm not flaming the guy. He
>> doesn't come across like an idiot. I'm guessing that the Ongaku was
>> fundamentally a shrewd business move that has paid itself back with
>> interest.
>
> Rochy lost a bundle on the Ongaku. He ended up selling it for $20K. The
> point, however, is that HE SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY A STEREO AMP! We're not
> talking about blowing part of an inheritance or a nice lotto prize. HE
> SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! If you had $20K in savings and $100K
> equity in a house, would you consider liquidating the house in order buy a
> grotesquely overpriced amplifier? In terms of an investment, it was about
> the worst choice he could possibly have made. Fine jewelry would be
> better. Art would be better. Even penny stocks would be better because
> there's a chance, however small, that they'll skyrocket. A grotesquely
> overpriced amplifier has no chance of doing that. In fact, as far as I
> know, there's only one brand of amplifier whose resale prices have ever
> overtaken their retail prices. And that brand didn't start out with retail
> in the mind-boggling stratosphere.
>
> Once again, Rochy SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! He voluntarily
> became homeless so he could have a precious, underperforming, overpriced
> paperweight. How many speakers can that amp drive adequately? Not many.
> How many speakers reveal whatever miracle might be designed into the amp?
> Even fewer. Rochy SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY A ****ING 5-WATT AMPLIFIER!!!!!!!
>

With this response you should have positively nullified all of The Limp
One's accusations about your audio MO. At least in my mind you have. :-) I'm
merely suggesting that the Ongaku purchase probably had little to do with
the amplifier itself. Maybe he was simply buying publicity, reputation,
credibility and other intangibles that I call goodwill. All that can be
extremely expensive. It could have been his "I have arrived" act. This
happens all the time in merchant banking and advertising, for example, where
surprisingly often people in the biz seem to think that if one's got a
Porsche Turbo or 3 weeks worth of Prada in the closet for each season, they
must know what they are doing. I realize that there isn't that kind of money
in the audio business but maybe even in certain audio circles this principle
applies.

As an example of calculated image building in audio business, look at the
folllowing link

http://goodwinshighend.com/aboutus.htm

These guys clearly want their customers to understand that they will be
dealing with peers, not some $20K a year clerks. Just like their customers
would deal with their doctors, attorneys, bankers and personal trainers. And
I KNOW these folks have been VERY succesful as far as high end audio/theater
retail goes.

Again, I know nothing about Rocky's background or this Ongaku story but I'm
merely suggesting that it might not have been as absurd as it seems. Of
course I may be wrong. But we cannot be the only ones discussing him because
of that Ongaku. :-)


>> For one thing, he seems to be making a good living doing what he
>> loves. Cannot beat that. Sometimes goodwill is elusive, expensive and
>> everything.
>
> This observation may well be true. He's certainly got many RAO regulars
> beat on the mellowness scale.
>

He must be from California, Oregon or New Hampshire. :-) Seems like a cool
guy to me though.

Cheers,

Margaret

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>>>
>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>
>>>>
>>>> I'm just saying that your following definition is *scientifically*
>>>> wrong
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind,
>>>> of
>>>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears
>>> it?
>>> That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
>>> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?
>>
>> Is it what I wrote ? Did I comment about sound, ?
>> I just said that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong and
>> that even a high-school teenager knows that.
>>
>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>
>> Now feel free to speak about a specific sensorial organization but avoid
>> to
>> make generalities which make you look stupid (if not congenital...).
>>
>> ;-)
>
>
> Duh.. Lionel, my question logically followed from my definition.
> Sound is one of those 'perceptions'.

Duh.. Sackman, even if your statement is true for hearing it doesn't provide
a correct definition of perception in general !
(this sounds like a technical discussion with "8 hz" Dave) ;-)

If you can catch a high-school girl, ask her. ;-)

[George M. Middius]

Margaret von B. said:

> > Once again, Rochy SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY AN AMPLIFIER!! He voluntarily
> > became homeless so he could have a precious, underperforming, overpriced
> > paperweight. How many speakers can that amp drive adequately? Not many.
> > How many speakers reveal whatever miracle might be designed into the amp?
> > Even fewer. Rochy SOLD HIS HOUSE TO BUY A ****ING 5-WATT AMPLIFIER!!!!!!!

> With this response you should have positively nullified all of The Limp
> One's accusations about your audio MO.

?

I thought Harold said he doesn't know what I "stand for" or something
silly like that. In Clerkie's persistent delusional state, audio seems to
represent Ragnarok, and everybody has to choose a side for coming
climactic battle. Forgive me if I don't wrap myself in a cocoon of
ideology over something as trivial as audio. (Other than, needless to say,
Krooger is vile and disgusting and everybody who apologizes for him should
be forcibly separated from anything better than a ghetto blaster.)


> At least in my mind you have. :-) I'm
> merely suggesting that the Ongaku purchase probably had little to do with
> the amplifier itself. Maybe he was simply buying publicity, reputation,
> credibility and other intangibles that I call goodwill. All that can be
> extremely expensive. It could have been his "I have arrived" act. This
> happens all the time in merchant banking and advertising, for example, where
> surprisingly often people in the biz seem to think that if one's got a
> Porsche Turbo or 3 weeks worth of Prada in the closet for each season, they
> must know what they are doing. I realize that there isn't that kind of money
> in the audio business but maybe even in certain audio circles this principle
> applies.

You should poke around on Rochy's Web site and see if this theory is borne
out by anything he has posted there. The text accompanying his
announcement of the Ongaku reeked of foolishness. He used the kind of
language you'd expect if he'd just scored the best weed available in North
America.

> As an example of calculated image building in audio business, look at the
> folllowing link
>
> http://goodwinshighend.com/aboutus.htm
>
> These guys clearly want their customers to understand that they will be
> dealing with peers, not some $20K a year clerks. Just like their customers
> would deal with their doctors, attorneys, bankers and personal trainers. And
> I KNOW these folks have been VERY succesful as far as high end audio/theater
> retail goes.

That's fine for a merchant, but Rochy is a wannabe.

> Again, I know nothing about Rocky's background or this Ongaku story but I'm
> merely suggesting that it might not have been as absurd as it seems. Of
> course I may be wrong. But we cannot be the only ones discussing him because
> of that Ongaku. :-)

Actually, the storm has long passed. The event happened several years ago.

> >> For one thing, he seems to be making a good living doing what he
> >> loves. Cannot beat that. Sometimes goodwill is elusive, expensive and
> >> everything.
> >
> > This observation may well be true. He's certainly got many RAO regulars
> > beat on the mellowness scale.

> He must be from California, Oregon or New Hampshire. :-) Seems like a cool
> guy to me though.

Yes, I'm sure he's infinitely more bearable than Krooger or Nousiane.

[Arny Krueger]

Margaret von B. wrote:

> "Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
> ...

>> "Margaret von B." >
wrote in
>> message

>>> detail from a digital component is frankly bull****. And
a reason
>>> why I occasionally think that Arny's rants have some
foundation.

Please explain.

>> Agreed. Arny's rants do have substance when it comes down
to
>> validating digital components.

It's not the rants, its the homework behind them that
provides substance.

>> However, when testing speakers I have found my ears to be
more
>> reliable than a sound level meter.

I would surely hope so! A SPL meter is a very simple
primitive basic piece of test equipment. It is a tiny
fraction of all the test equipment that one would use to
properly evaluate a speaker. In the end it all comes down to
listening. Test equipment is just a proxy for listening.

>> After all, it's my ears and not
>> the sound level meter that is going to do the listening!
;-)

Agreed.

> I have found that when it comes to speakers, room
interaction is very
> important.

The room is nearly all-important. The room and the speaker
have nearly equal roles in providing good sound. The only
way to bypass much of the room is near-field monitoring. The
only ways to bypass the room entirely are headphones and
earphones.


>I still think that more than half the systems over $50K I
> have heard could probably be bested by a pair of Gradient
Revolutions
> in its various configurations combined with $5K worth of
electronics
> or so.

Interesting - someone mentions a speaker that I've actually
heard. In the spirit of a discussion of the effects of rooms
on the sound of speakers, I can only assume that I listened
to Gradient Revolutions in the absolutely wrong room,
because they were far less than impressive to me. BTW, there
were other visible and audible signs of a suboptimal room.
The room was so bad that I didn't know why anybody asked me
to listen to even dogs barking in it.

> It is not the perfect speaker and it is not TOTALLY immune
to
> the room but it is VERY good in both regards.

Let's see why.

http://stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/616/

First, note that this is Stereophile - a magazine that
caters to audio neophites. The following highly relevant
note would go without saying among learned readers:

"Inevitably, we hear the room's response function (or,
should I say, colorations) superimposed over the
loudspeaker's anechoic response. "

As would this truism:

"Unfortunately, a flat anechoic response is almost always
wrong for the average audiophile listening room-especially
in the bass, where room gain is a given."

The guts of this speaker are described as following:

"Frequencies above 200Hz are reproduced by a concentric
midrange/tweeter driver designed and made in cooperation
with SEAS in Norway. The concentricity of the drivers
approximates a single point source of sound, and ensures
excellent coherency under nearfield monitoring conditions. A
1" aluminum-dome tweeter is mounted at the apex of a
6.5"-diameter fiberglass cone, so the midrange diaphragm
acts as a wave guide to control treble dispersion. Gradient
points out that an inevitable drawback of this arrangement
is on-axis roughness in the treble response."

In essence, we have a rebirth of the KEF Q-series driver,
with a bath and a shave. Note that Pinkerton and I have been
giving our Q-15s favorable comments for years.

Next we find the signs of some clever engineering:

"A cardioid radiation pattern was selected as a design goal
for the mid/treble drive unit. ... Resistively loaded slots
in the sides of the enclosure are designed to allow some
interference between the front and back waves of the driver
to yield the desired contouring of the radiation pattern.
The resultant cardioid pattern's front-to-back attenuation
is 20dB."

Lest anyone think that this is unique, let me allude to an
allegedly hypercardiod speaker that was demonstrated to
SMWTMS a few months back. If a cardioid pattern gives some
amount of resistance to possible detrimental room
characteristics, then a hypercardioid even better.

Those of us who deign to record with directional microphones
should be familiar with the benefits of omnidirectional,
cardioid, and hypercardioid microphones. I own at least six
of each, 30 total. A big part of recording is *mikeology* -
the art of choosing the best microphone for the application
at hand. As loudspeakers are built with different radiation
patterns, and characterized accordingly, the audio art
progresses.

<Digression> I've learned a certain amount about the effects
of microphone radiation patterns by making multitrack
recordings with several different microphone arrays active
at the same time. Rather than agonizing over how to mic a
session, I just mic it a number of different ways. I then
work things out by ear, when I do the mixdown.

My favorite mic arrays include close-working, X-Y, and
spaced arrays. I frequently use omnis, cardioid,
broad-acceptance cardioid, and hypercardioid mics
concurrently. A lesser-seen but valuable variation that I
frequently use is an X-Y array of hypercardiods. <End
Digression>

Our next sign of clever engineering is as follows:

"To control standing waves, the Gradient's woofer system
uses a dipole radiation pattern."

Note that some arrogant and stupid people around here like
to pick on Mike McKelvy. Mike has more brains
hand-on-experience and common sense than all of his RAO
tormenters put together. This is for instance demonstrated
by Mike's repeated favorable mention of the loudspeaker
designs of Linkwitz. One hallmark of Linkwitz designs is
the bipolar woofer. If Stereophile is smart to mention the
potential advantages of bipolar woofers, why isn't McKelvy
smart to mention Linkwitz designs which are based on bipolar
woofers?

>For those who want to
> establish a benchmark and discover just how good a
properly designed
> system can sound in a properly designed room, I recommend
a trip to
> Alan Goodwin's place in Waltham (by appoinment only). It
is the
> antidote for hotel room/convention center setups. :-)

Regrettably, it appears that all of the favorable technology
in Gradient speakers still can't overcome a badly-chosen
room. I'm on good terms with an area owner, perhaps I'll
have to presume on his good graces to hear them *right*.

[John Stone]

On 5/5/05 6:51 AM, in article , "Arny
Krueger" > wrote:

> "Frequencies above 200Hz are reproduced by a concentric
> midrange/tweeter driver designed and made in cooperation
> with SEAS in Norway. The concentricity of the drivers
> approximates a single point source of sound, and ensures
> excellent coherency under nearfield monitoring conditions. A
> 1" aluminum-dome tweeter is mounted at the apex of a
> 6.5"-diameter fiberglass cone, so the midrange diaphragm
> acts as a wave guide to control treble dispersion. Gradient
> points out that an inevitable drawback of this arrangement
> is on-axis roughness in the treble response."
>
> In essence, we have a rebirth of the KEF Q-series driver,
> with a bath and a shave. Note that Pinkerton and I have been
> giving our Q-15s favorable comments for years.

Actually, the SEAS coaxial is not a "rebirth" of the KEF. Both were
developed simultaneously and independently as a natural outgrowth of the
introduction of the compact neodymium tweeter. KEF applied for, and received
a patent, first in Britain and much later in the US. SEAS has been granted a
broad license from KEF in recognition of the simultaneous development and
proper implementation of the concept. BTW,the Gradient product has been
around for a very long time.

[Arny Krueger]

John Stone wrote:
> On 5/5/05 6:51 AM, in article
,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>> "Frequencies above 200Hz are reproduced by a concentric
>> midrange/tweeter driver designed and made in cooperation
>> with SEAS in Norway. The concentricity of the drivers
>> approximates a single point source of sound, and ensures
>> excellent coherency under nearfield monitoring
conditions. A
>> 1" aluminum-dome tweeter is mounted at the apex of a
>> 6.5"-diameter fiberglass cone, so the midrange diaphragm
>> acts as a wave guide to control treble dispersion.
Gradient
>> points out that an inevitable drawback of this
arrangement
>> is on-axis roughness in the treble response."
>>
>> In essence, we have a rebirth of the KEF Q-series driver,
>> with a bath and a shave. Note that Pinkerton and I have
been
>> giving our Q-15s favorable comments for years.
>
> Actually, the SEAS coaxial is not a "rebirth" of the KEF.
Both were
> developed simultaneously and independently as a natural
outgrowth of
> the introduction of the compact neodymium tweeter.

Works for me!

> KEF applied for,
> and received a patent, first in Britain and much later in
the US.
> SEAS has been granted a broad license from KEF in
recognition of the
> simultaneous development and proper implementation of the
concept.

With no financial arrangements at all?

> BTW,the Gradient product has been around for a very long
time.

Yes, the 1995 date of the Stereophile review makes that
very clear.

[Arny Krueger]

George M. Middius wrote:

> Rochy once sold his house so he could buy a $100K Ongaku
amplifier.

In the Middius book of honor, it is the the sales price but
the discount that matters.

[John Stone]

On 5/5/05 7:35 AM, in article , "Arny
Krueger" > wrote:

> John Stone wrote:

>
>> KEF applied for,
>> and received a patent, first in Britain and much later in
> the US.
>> SEAS has been granted a broad license from KEF in
> recognition of the
>> simultaneous development and proper implementation of the
> concept.
>
> With no financial arrangements at all?
>
Let's just say they are "favorable" and leave it at that.

[George M. Middius]

Look over, there its, Krooglish from the Krooborg.

> In the Middius book of honor, it is the the sales price but
> the discount that matters.

You need a new rain-coat, Arnii. Wear it in the snow, with radar's, LOt"S.

;-)

[Mike McKelvy]

Schizo said:

Agreed. Arny's rants do have substance when it comes down to validating

digital components.

>However, when testing speakers I have found my ears to be more
reliable than
>a sound level meter. After all, it's my ears and not the sound level
meter
>that is going to do the listening! ;-)


>I know, it's not a perfect analogy...


For years Arny and everyone else that claims to be in the objectivist
category, ahve been saying the same thing about speakers, they
generally don't need ABX due to the fact that the differences between
them tend to be gross enough that testing for subtle differences is a
waste.

[Schizoid Man]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message

> Schizo said:
>
> Agreed. Arny's rants do have substance when it comes down to validating
>
> digital components.
>
>>However, when testing speakers I have found my ears to be more
> reliable than
>>a sound level meter. After all, it's my ears and not the sound level
> meter
>>that is going to do the listening! ;-)
>
>
>>I know, it's not a perfect analogy...
>
>
> For years Arny and everyone else that claims to be in the objectivist
> category, ahve been saying the same thing about speakers, they
> generally don't need ABX due to the fact that the differences between
> them tend to be gross enough that testing for subtle differences is a
> waste.

I'm glad you replied to this, McKelvy.

Since you're a self-proclaimed man of 'science', how come you reject the
phenomenon of global warming, or deny the effect of deforestation on the
environment?

[Surf]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote
>
> For years.......


When's your surgery, Mike?

[Joseph Oberlander]

Schizoid Man wrote:

> http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/704wavac/index.html

Page two has a wonderful quote:
"That's what the SH-833 did with every instrument or voice it
reproduced. It made everything seem more alive, more real, more pure.
Was it the truth, or a euphonic coloration? If it truly sounded more
alive, more convincing of reality, does it matter? Do you really think
that hard, brittle-sounding amplifiers that measure "perfectly" are
giving you "the truth"? I can't answer that question."

***

In other words, completel subjectivity and doesn't care how
it really is working. Heh.

Also, I noted this:

"Price: $350,000/pair. Approximate number of dealers: 10.
Warranty: 1 year parts & labor; 6 months, tubes."

***
ONE YEAR? Surely they can offer a better warranty for
$350,000. Bryston does a twenty year warranty that's
fully transferrable for $3500.

[Schizoid Man]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message

> Also, I noted this:
>
> "Price: $350,000/pair. Approximate number of dealers: 10.
> Warranty: 1 year parts & labor; 6 months, tubes."
>
> ***
> ONE YEAR? Surely they can offer a better warranty for
> $350,000. Bryston does a twenty year warranty that's
> fully transferrable for $3500.

Good observation. The warranty would be insulting if it wasn't so
ludicrously outrageous.

[Schizoid Man]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
>
> Schizoid Man wrote:
>
>> http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/704wavac/index.html
>
> Page two has a wonderful quote:
> "That's what the SH-833 did with every instrument or voice it reproduced.
> It made everything seem more alive, more real, more pure. Was it the
> truth, or a euphonic coloration? If it truly sounded more alive, more
> convincing of reality, does it matter? Do you really think that hard,
> brittle-sounding amplifiers that measure "perfectly" are giving you "the
> truth"? I can't answer that question."
>
> ***
>
> In other words, completel subjectivity and doesn't care how
> it really is working. Heh.

But then, a good Michael Fremer article is like a good Barry Manilow album.
You have to make concessions.

[George M. Middius]

Schizoid Man said:

> > "Price: $350,000/pair. Approximate number of dealers: 10.
> > Warranty: 1 year parts & labor; 6 months, tubes."
> >
> > ***
> > ONE YEAR? Surely they can offer a better warranty for
> > $350,000. Bryston does a twenty year warranty that's
> > fully transferrable for $3500.
>
> Good observation. The warranty would be insulting if it wasn't so
> ludicrously outrageous.

Maybe Fremer is right, and these amps are marketed as "investments". If
the "investors" don't use them, there's no need for a warranty.

Did you anticipate that comic books published in the '30s and '40s and
selling for a few cents would someday command thousands of dollars if kept
in mint condition? I didn't. ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:
> Schizoid Man wrote:
>
>>
http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/704wavac/index.html
>
> Page two has a wonderful quote:
> "That's what the SH-833 did with every instrument or voice
it
> reproduced. It made everything seem more alive, more real,
more pure.
> Was it the truth, or a euphonic coloration? If it truly
sounded more
> alive, more convincing of reality, does it matter? Do you
really think
> that hard, brittle-sounding amplifiers that measure
"perfectly" are
> giving you "the truth"? I can't answer that question."
>
> ***
>
> In other words, completel subjectivity and doesn't care
how
> it really is working. Heh.
>
> Also, I noted this:
>
> "Price: $350,000/pair. Approximate number of dealers: 10.
> Warranty: 1 year parts & labor; 6 months, tubes."
>
> ***
> ONE YEAR? Surely they can offer a better warranty for
> $350,000. Bryston does a twenty year warranty that's
> fully transferrable for $3500.

A warranty is only good if the people backing it up remain
in business. Just guessing, but the Wavac warranty duration
might be just about right.

[Mike McKelvy]

The Middiot sez:

>Maybe Fremer is right, and these amps are marketed as "investments".
If
>the "investors" don't use them, there's no need for a warranty.

More likely, you are as big a ****ing looney as Fremer. Any audio
device that costs 350K ought to have better than a YEAR WARRANTY.

>Did you anticipate that comic books published in the '30s and '40s and

>selling for a few cents would someday command thousands of dollars if
kept
>in mint condition? I didn't. ;-)

Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
appreciated in value.

[Mike McKelvy]

>But then, a good Michael Fremer article is like a good Barry Manilow
album.
>You have to make concessions.

Like selling your soul?

[ScottW]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> The Middiot sez:
>
>>Maybe Fremer is right, and these amps are marketed as "investments".
> If
>>the "investors" don't use them, there's no need for a warranty.
>
> More likely, you are as big a ****ing looney as Fremer. Any audio
> device that costs 350K ought to have better than a YEAR WARRANTY.
>
>>Did you anticipate that comic books published in the '30s and '40s and
>
>>selling for a few cents would someday command thousands of dollars if
> kept
>>in mint condition? I didn't. ;-)
>
> Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
> appreciated in value.
>

Lets see Trots said my mitsu TT was book valued at $15. I just saw one go
on e-bay for over $200.
I've seen original large advents sell for over 200/pair which is what I paid
in '73 so thats above original retail.

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

Scottieborg said:

> >>Did you anticipate that comic books published in the '30s and '40s and
> >>selling for a few cents would someday command thousands of dollars if kept
> >>in mint condition? I didn't. ;-)

> > Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
> > appreciated in value.

Mickey, I killfiled you years ago, so I forgot how you love to garbage up
quoted text in your posts. Are you proud of being widely known as a
retard's retard, or are you so heavily medicated that you can't hear the
laughter?

> Lets[sic] see[sic] Trots said my mitsu TT was book valued at $15. I just saw one go
> on e-bay for over $200.

That's not necessarily appreciation. Maybe Gregipus was simply wrong about
the resale value of the 'table.

> I've seen original large advents sell for over 200/pair which is what I paid
> in '73 so thats above original retail.

Interesting point. I wasn't accounting for current values adjusted for
inflation.

How much warranty are you getting on your $6000 back operation, Mickey?






This post reformatted by the Resistance,
laboring tirelessly to de-Kroogerize Usenet.

[Mike McKelvy]

ScottW said:

>Lets see Trots said my mitsu TT was book valued at $15. I just saw
one go
>on e-bay for over $200.
E-Bay is famous for people being able to sell things for more than they
are generally worth. I remember a news story about the state of Orefon
selling off it's used office equipment there, because they got an
average of 5 times the price they would have gotten through their
normal methods.



>I've seen original large advents sell for over 200/pair which is what
I paid
>in '73 so thats above original retail.

There will always be some people who have over estimated the worth of
things they like, but they do not form the entire market.

All of that aside, I doubt very seriously that a $350K amp as bad as
the Wavac, will appreciate in the general marketplace.

[Clyde Slick]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> The Middiot sez:
>
>>Maybe Fremer is right, and these amps are marketed as "investments".
> If
>>the "investors" don't use them, there's no need for a warranty.
>
> More likely, you are as big a ****ing looney as Fremer. Any audio
> device that costs 350K ought to have better than a YEAR WARRANTY.
>
>>Did you anticipate that comic books published in the '30s and '40s and
>
>>selling for a few cents would someday command thousands of dollars if
> kept
>>in mint condition? I didn't. ;-)
>
> Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
> appreciated in value.
>

Marantz 7C
McIntosh 275

and on and on



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>

>
> How much warranty are you getting on your $6000 back operation, Mickey?
>

That reminds me of a Bob Newhart joke from his show.

He got suckered by a sweet acting female tv journalist to be
interviewed on her show. On the air, she turned into a viper.
She asked how much of a fee he charged.
He answered, $50 per hour.
She said retorted, and for that $50 an hour, you can't even
guarentee you will cure your patient.
Bob answered, well, my plumber charges me $50
an hour, and he doesn't give a warranty, either.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"Signal" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike McKelvy" emitted :
>
>>More likely, you are as big a ****ing looney as Fremer. Any audio
>>device that costs 350K ought to have better than a YEAR WARRANTY.
>
> 350K is the price including one years warranty.
>
What is the price with a ten year waranty?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> ScottW said:
>
>>Lets see Trots said my mitsu TT was book valued at $15. I just saw
> one go
>>on e-bay for over $200.
> E-Bay is famous for people being able to sell things for more than they
> are generally worth. I remember a news story about the state of Orefon
> selling off it's used office equipment there, because they got an
> average of 5 times the price they would have gotten through their
> normal methods.
>
>
>
>>I've seen original large advents sell for over 200/pair which is what
> I paid
>>in '73 so thats above original retail.
>
> There will always be some people who have over estimated the worth of
> things they like, but they do not form the entire market.
>
> All of that aside, I doubt very seriously that a $350K amp as bad as
> the Wavac, will appreciate in the general marketplace.
>

I can't wait to pick it up as a steal at $200k



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Margaret von B.]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> The Middiot sez:
>
>
> Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
> appreciated in value.
>

I don't really disagree with you but many tuners by Kenwood, Sansui,
Mitsubishi, Denon, McIntosh and bunch of other mfgs have actually done so.
Will never happen with digital stuff though. Happens all the time with
shortwave radios, most recently with the 2010 portable. I sold mine on e-bay
for 2X the Fry's purchase price on ebay 9 months after it was discontinued.
Crazy stuff.

Cheers,

Margaret

[Margaret von B.]

"Margaret von B." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> The Middiot sez:
>>
>>
>> Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
>> appreciated in value.
>>
>
> I don't really disagree with you but many tuners by Kenwood, Sansui,
> Mitsubishi, Denon, McIntosh and bunch of other mfgs have actually done so.
> Will never happen with digital stuff though. Happens all the time with
> shortwave radios, most recently with the 2010 portable. I sold mine on
> e-bay
> for 2X the Fry's purchase price on ebay 9 months after it was
> discontinued.
> Crazy stuff.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Margaret
>
>

Also the McIntosh MPI's can fetch insane prices if in mint condition. I got
a MPI-4 that is just too groovy to sell.

Margaret

[George M. Middius]

Margaret von B. said:

> Also the McIntosh MPI's can fetch insane prices if in mint condition. I got
> a MPI-4 that is just too groovy to sell.

Bingo.

[Mike McKelvy]

Margaret said:

Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has

> appreciated in value.


>I don't really disagree with you

Why should you be the only one?

but many tuners by Kenwood, Sansui,
>Mitsubishi, Denon, McIntosh and bunch of other mfgs have actually done
so.

I would be surprised if this represents more than the tiniest of niches
in an already niche market.


>Will never happen with digital stuff though.

How do you improve on perfect?

Happens all the time with
>shortwave radios, most recently with the 2010 portable. I sold mine on
e-bay
>for 2X the Fry's purchase price on ebay 9 months after it was
discontinued.
>Crazy stuff.

No doubt. :-)

[Sander deWaal]

"Mike McKelvy" > said:

>Please provide a list of any audio equipment that you know of that has
>appreciated in value.


Almost all tube amps from the '60s, like Marantz 8B, McIntosh series,
Quad II, Radford STA/SC series etc.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[Sander deWaal]

"Mike McKelvy" > said:

>E-Bay is famous for people being able to sell things for more than they
>are generally worth.


It can be argued that E-bay prices dictate the market value.
$700 for a quad of NOS Mullard EL34s, anyone? ;-)

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>
>>
>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In >, Clyde Slick wrote :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Lionel" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just saying that your following definition is *scientifically*
>>>>> wrong
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind,
>>>>> of
>>>>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you saying that there is such a thing as a sound, before one hears
>>>> it?
>>>> That a sound leaves a speaker and goes to your ears?
>>>> What is the difference between a sound and a sound wave?
>>>
>>> Is it what I wrote ? Did I comment about sound, ?
>>> I just said that your following definition is *scientifically* wrong and
>>> that even a high-school teenager knows that.
>>>
>>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind,
>>> of
>>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>>
>>> Now feel free to speak about a specific sensorial organization but avoid
>>> to
>>> make generalities which make you look stupid (if not congenital...).
>>>
>>> ;-)
>>
>>
>> Duh.. Lionel, my question logically followed from my definition.
>> Sound is one of those 'perceptions'.
>
> Duh.. Sackman, even if your statement is true for hearing it doesn't
> provide
> a correct definition of perception in general !
> (this sounds like a technical discussion with "8 hz" Dave) ;-)
>
> If you can catch a high-school girl, ask her. ;-)

I explained what it is.
If you want a definition, read a dictionary.
If you want an explanation, listen to me.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Lionel]

Clyde Slick wrote :

"Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"

> I explained what it is.
> If you want a definition, read a dictionary.
> If you want an explanation, listen to me.


Just a tip for you about stimulus that *never* transit *to the brain* :

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

reflex : (noun) an automatic instinctive unlearned reaction to a stimulus.

Ankle jerk reflex :
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
"The ankle jerk reflex, also known as the Achilles reflex, occurs when the
Achilles tendon is tapped while the foot is dorsi-flexed. A positive result
would be the jerking of the foot towards its plantar surface.
The achilles reflex checks if the s1 and s2 nerve roots are intact and could
be indicative of sciatic nerve pathology. It is clasically delayed in
hypothyroidism."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want an explanation, listen to me or read the following... :-D

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reflex arc
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
"A reflex arc is the neural pathway mediating a reflex. It generally does
not involve the brain. Instead of the brain it can include a spinal reflex
integration center composed of interneurons to connect affector and
effector signals. While the reflex generation may be initiated by
nociceptive input, an extensive processing takes place within the spinal
cord. The neural connection from the primary sensory neurons to the motor
neurons is a poly-synaptic pathway ([1])."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Slick wrote :
>
> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>
>> I explained what it is.
>> If you want a definition, read a dictionary.
>> If you want an explanation, listen to me.
>
>
> Just a tip for you about stimulus that *never* transit *to the brain* :
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> reflex : (noun) an automatic instinctive unlearned reaction to a stimulus.
>
> Ankle jerk reflex :
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
> "The ankle jerk reflex, also known as the Achilles reflex, occurs when the
> Achilles tendon is tapped while the foot is dorsi-flexed. A positive
> result
> would be the jerking of the foot towards its plantar surface.
> The achilles reflex checks if the s1 and s2 nerve roots are intact and
> could
> be indicative of sciatic nerve pathology. It is clasically delayed in
> hypothyroidism."
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you want an explanation, listen to me or read the following... :-D
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Reflex arc
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
> "A reflex arc is the neural pathway mediating a reflex. It generally does
> not involve the brain. Instead of the brain it can include a spinal reflex
> integration center composed of interneurons to connect affector and
> effector signals. While the reflex generation may be initiated by
> nociceptive input, an extensive processing takes place within the spinal
> cord. The neural connection from the primary sensory neurons to the motor
> neurons is a poly-synaptic pathway ([1])."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------


Very nice.
Too bad it has nothing at all to do with the subject at hand.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Clyde Slick wrote :
>>
>> "Perceptions are the processing, by the conscious and unconcious mind, of
>> the various types of information received and transmittd to the brain"
>>
>>> I explained what it is.
>>> If you want a definition, read a dictionary.
>>> If you want an explanation, listen to me.
>>
>>
>> Just a tip for you about stimulus that *never* transit *to the brain* :
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> reflex : (noun) an automatic instinctive unlearned reaction to a
>> stimulus.
>>
>> Ankle jerk reflex :
>> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
>> "The ankle jerk reflex, also known as the Achilles reflex, occurs when
>> the Achilles tendon is tapped while the foot is dorsi-flexed. A positive
>> result
>> would be the jerking of the foot towards its plantar surface.
>> The achilles reflex checks if the s1 and s2 nerve roots are intact and
>> could
>> be indicative of sciatic nerve pathology. It is clasically delayed in
>> hypothyroidism."
>>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> If you want an explanation, listen to me or read the following... :-D
>>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Reflex arc
>> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
>> "A reflex arc is the neural pathway mediating a reflex. It generally does
>> not involve the brain. Instead of the brain it can include a spinal
>> reflex integration center composed of interneurons to connect affector
>> and effector signals. While the reflex generation may be initiated by
>> nociceptive input, an extensive processing takes place within the spinal
>> cord. The neural connection from the primary sensory neurons to the motor
>> neurons is a poly-synaptic pathway ([1])."
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Very nice.
> Too bad it has nothing at all to do with the subject at hand.

I apologize if you are not the author of what you use to write...

:-D