S&V Magazine Turntable Cover Story

[whosbest54[_2_]]

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/e4128e278e55918b?dm
ode=source>
http://tinyurl.com/2osx3d

I'd be appreciated if folks would comment further on the S&V cover
article more specifically as well as my comments on it. IMHO, sniping at
each other in a general way about the status of S&V and their
staffing status isn't very constructive.

Is the article useful? Should it have been published as it was
presented?

Were my comments on the mark? If not, why not?

Mr. Atkinson, would you publish this article generally as presented? If
not, what are your problems with it?

whosbest54
--
The flamewars are over...if you want it.

Unofficial rec.audio.opinion Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://www.geocities.com/whosbest54/

Unofficial rec.music.beatles Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://www.geocities.com/whosbest54/rmb.html

[whosbest54[_2_]]

In article . com>,
says...
>
>
>On Aug 9, 9:59 am, whosbest54 >
>wrote:
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/e4128e278e55918b?dm
>> ode=source>http://tinyurl.com/2osx3d
>>
>> I'd be appreciated if folks would comment further on the S&V cover
>> article more specifically as well as my comments on it. IMHO, sniping at
>> each other in a general way about the status of S&V and their
>> staffing status isn't very constructive.
>>
>> Is the article useful? Should it have been published as it was
>> presented?
>>
>> Were my comments on the mark? If not, why not?
>
> As I said, it is not legit to require TT/Arms be compared with
>the same cart as that cart may not be an optimum match with
>all 3. TT/Arm/Carts must be the "starting point".
>
Well, maybe. I think beyond a certain price point such "optimal matching"
can't be detected by listening.

>Peeling that 3-layered onion gets tricky particularly for 2 carts
>of differing compliance which can't be compared on a common
>arm. MC MM comparisions are equally difficult without the ability
>to use one preamp.
>
>I do think the use of differing music for describing each system
>presentation is a bit odd & less than useful though I doubt people
>are really interested in comparing 3 TTs of such widely different
>market objectives.
>
>But doing a useful comparison of directly competing TTs means
>****ing off someone....and advertiser funded publications simply
>can't do that.
>
I agree that given what the author did, side by side comparisons are useless.

Scott, can you recommend a web audio forum where there is significant
membership and useful discussions? This place has been into bashing way, way
too long and it seems many of more prolific posters are mainly into that.
How about Audio Asylum or Audioforums?

I love the freedom of usenet, but I note over the last couple years that many
(but not all) of the text groups are dying due to lack of meaningful
participation.

whosbest54
--
The flamewars are over...if you want it.

Unofficial rec.audio.opinion Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://www.geocities.com/whosbest54/

Unofficial rec.music.beatles Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://www.geocities.com/whosbest54/rmb.html