I am looking to invest a little more on the power end (currently have a
receiver) and am looking to spend about $1,000 for an integrated
amplifier. Need USA power supply. Open to suggestions...

Thanks, EB

"EB" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am looking to invest a little more on the power end (currently have a
receiver) and am looking to spend about $1,000 for an integrated
amplifier. Need USA power supply. Open to suggestions...

Thanks, EB

"EB" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am looking to invest a little more on the power end (currently have a
receiver) and am looking to spend about $1,000 for an integrated
amplifier. Need USA power supply. Open to suggestions...

Thanks, EB

How much power are you wanting? Or are you interested in getting as much as
possible for the money you want to spend?

If you could get a separate amp and preamp for that price would it work for
you?

My point of view is, you will be unlikely to find sonic differences between
different amps or between amps and receivers, it's not impossible, but
unlikely if done blind and level matched. There are people who disagree,
it's your money so follow whatever advice you wish. Here's mine.

The pro audio market makes a lot of gear that equals that in the consumer
market, but is much less expensive due to lower advertisng costs among other
things.

One of the best buys in amplifiers currently is the Beheringer A500, which
is rated at 160 wpc in stereo @ 8 ohms, and 230 wpc @ 4 ohms. When tested
by the Audio Critic it actually came out at 120 wpc @ 8 ohms, still
respectable if nt as advertised. What makes this a good deal despite the
difference in advdertised power vs. tested power is the price, $179.00 from
http://www.zzounds.com/item--BEHA500 . Since this amp is capable of being
bridged to mono for at least 3 times the output of it's stereo rating you
could get 2 of them and have stereo amplification of 360 wpc for $358.00
plus shipping, and have pletnty of money left over for a preamp.

There are other pro amps available for more money and with more power, or
you can stay with consumer products. I think any amp that can put out 120
wpc and cost less than 200.00 is worth a look. Even if should fail in a
year, it's harly catostrophic at that price.

The main drawback is a bit of rolloff in the high frequency of about .5 dB,
but depending on your age, you may never notice.

I am looking for at least 50W Per Channel Continuous. My speakers are
Cambridge Soundworks Tower II. Willing to buy used...

My audio sources to the int-amp would be SqueezeBox 2, CD Player,
Phono, Tape

EB

EB wrote:

I am looking for at least 50W Per Channel Continuous. My speakers are
Cambridge Soundworks Tower II. Willing to buy used...

If I was in your situation and had $1000 burning a hole in my pocket,
I'd spend the money on upgrading the speakers. Unless your current
receiver is really a POS.

My $.02.

//Walt

I am not seeing the Khartago on their website...

EB

"EB" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am not seeing the Khartago on their website...

EB

I just checked and I didn't see it either.

The advice about upgrading your speakers is very good. That kind of money
will go very far towards making your listening experience a better one.

What do you have driving your current speakers?
How much power?
As to proamps sounding bad, that's a decision you should make after more
research, don't take anybody's word for it. You can check on the amp I
recomended at The Audio Critic webzine.
Here is an excerpt of their review: Well, there are a number of things
going on. To begin with, the measured performance of the A500 isn't up to
the level of a Bryston or a McIntosh, although that doesn't mean the A500
will sound worse. (As I have said, and written, innumerable times, any two
amplifiers with high input impedance, low output impedance, flat frequency
response, and sufficiently low distortion and noise will sound exactly the
same at matched levels if not clipped.) Then there are construction details,
such as the XLR input jacks without push tabs, the bare-wires-only output
terminals, the flimsy front panel, etc., etc., that would obviously be
better on costlier amplifiers. The fact remains, however, that Behringer is
able to offer sophisticated audio equipment at lower prices than anyone
else. It's a lesson to all of us audiophiles.

Two things are obvious from these measurements. The minimum distortion never
goes below -72 dB (0.025%), even in the best case, and the clipping levels
are approximately 120 watts and 180 watts (generously!) at 8? and 4?. Not
that there is anything wrong these numbers; they indicate a completely
transparent amplifier of considerable power-but Behringer's specs are 0.01%
distortion and 160/230 watts into 8?/4?. As I said, maybe it's just my
sample, or maybe the manual was printed before actual production units came
off the line, or maybe Behringer's measurement conditions are based on a
totally different standard. (I use the Audio Precision SYS-2722 instrument,
the de facto standard in the USA.)
Fig. 5 shows the FFT spectrum of a 1 kHz tone at clipping level into 8?, in
the same channel as Fig. 3. The Fig. 3 numbers are confirmed, but the good
news is that the distortion is almost completely dominated by the second
harmonic, which is basically harmless. (Thank heaven for FFT.)



The measurements of the Behringer A500 are not quite as good as those of any
number of more expensive solid-state amplifiers but they are more than good
enough to meet all the criteria for transparent sound as specified above, in
the second paragraph of this review. There is no such thing as an effect
without a cause, and there is no scientifically verifiable characteristic
that would cause the A500 to sound different from any other amplifier that
meets those criteria. The main reason why golden-eared audiophiles hear
differences between amplifiers that do meet those criteria is that they don't
listen at matched levels. (Let's not even bring up the more complicated
subject of double-blind listening tests.) If one amplifier is just 0.2 dB
louder than another, it will sound different, and therefore "better" or
"worse."

The Behringer A500 is an amazing phenomenon at the price. There is nothing
else like it. I'll tell you what. If you need a new power amplifier, or
maybe just a spare amplifier, throw caution to the wind. Be the last of the
big-time spenders. Buy the A500 at the lowest price you can find (maybe
$180?) and take a chance on it. After all, it comes with a one-year
warranty.

_____________________________________________

For the price, as I said, there's very little risk,a nd you can use the rest
of the money for a fine preamp or possibly a preamp/tuner.

He wants a receiver not a power amplifier. Quit trying to sell him
what he has not asked for.

"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com

He wants a receiver not a power amplifier. Quit trying to
sell him what he has not asked for.

Actually, the OP didn't say he wants a receiver, he said he wanted an
integrated amp.

In the $1,000 price range separates seems like a viable option.

"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...
He wants a receiver not a power amplifier. Quit trying to sell him
what he has not asked for.

I'm not trying to sellhim anything, I'm just explaining why I made the
recomendation, and why it is a reasonable one.

In article .com,
"EB" wrote:

I am looking to invest a little more on the power end (currently have a
receiver) and am looking to spend about $1,000 for an integrated
amplifier. Need USA power supply. Open to suggestions...

NAD C372 and Rotel RA-1062 to start.

Stephen

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to CSW Tower II's.
I am happy with this set up for the most part (my listening room is not
ideal, but not bad), especially the speakers. But I am curious to see
if getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably, but I want
to keep the experimenting to around $1,000. The Odyssey brand looks
interesting, will have to contact them as the website doesn't list all
their product.

EB

"EB" wrote in message
oups.com

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to CSW
Tower II's.

Intersting choice of speakers.

I am happy with this set up for the most part (my
listening room is not ideal, but not bad), especially the
speakers.


But I am curious to see if getting a better
amp will improve the sound noticeably, but I want to keep
the experimenting to around $1,000.

I think that if you want to improve the sound noticably, you might want to
look into adding a subwoofer.

In article .com,
"EB" wrote:

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to CSW Tower II's.
I am happy with this set up for the most part (my listening room is not
ideal, but not bad), especially the speakers. But I am curious to see
if getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably, but I want
to keep the experimenting to around $1,000. The Odyssey brand looks
interesting, will have to contact them as the website doesn't list all
their product.

I see that your receiver has preamp outputs, a 'direct mode,' and is
rated at 80 watts. Although I've never heard a Marantz receiver, it
would take a big jump in amplifier power to make a noticeable
difference, assuming a reasonably small room and competent amps.
Similarly, it would take a good preamp to improve on a 'direct mode.'
You can try engaging and disengaging the 'direct' to see if it makes
much of a difference to you.

There's a Marantz integrated in your price range that might be an
improvement if the advertised '25 watts in Class A' means anything.
I'd guess integrated amps from NAD, Rotel, Arcam, etc might be more
refined and used high-end (Bryston, for one) can be a good value, but
maybe you should be looking at better speakers: Paradigm, B&W, PSB, etc.

Stephen

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article
.com,
"EB" wrote:

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to
CSW Tower II's. I am happy with this set up for the most
part (my listening room is not ideal, but not bad),
especially the speakers. But I am curious to see if
getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably,
but I want to keep the experimenting to around $1,000.

The Odyssey brand looks interesting, will have to
contact them as the website doesn't list all their
product.

Looks like a lot of hype to me. 4 period break-in - give me a break!

http://www.odysseyaudio.com/setup_tweak.html

I see that your receiver has preamp outputs, a 'direct
mode,' and is rated at 80 watts. Although I've never
heard a Marantz receiver, it would take a big jump in
amplifier power to make a noticeable difference, assuming
a reasonably small room and competent amps. Similarly, it
would take a good preamp to improve on a 'direct mode.'
You can try engaging and disengaging the 'direct' to see
if it makes much of a difference to you.

There's a Marantz integrated in your price range that
might be an improvement if the advertised '25 watts in
Class A' means anything.

It probably doesn't.

I'd guess integrated amps from NAD, Rotel, Arcam, etc
might be more refined and used high-end (Bryston, for
one) can be a good value, but maybe you should be looking
at better speakers: Paradigm, B&W, PSB, etc.

Stephen, I guess you've never looked at current Bryston prices - they
completely blow his $1k budget, at least for new equipment. There's Bryston
4B on eBay with a reserve in the $700 range. It would take an amp in that
power range to be appreciably louder than what he's got.

His CSW speakers have a lot of potential - they aren't cheapie computer
speakers and CSW has a good rep for delivering value within the obvious
limits of 8" woofers.

The receiver itself doesseem to have a lot of potential as a springboard for
a number of different kinds of upgrades. The preamp outputs and power amp
inputs mean that bumping up amplifier power or adding a subwoofer is a
cakewalk.

His speakers are floor-standing but the woofers are only 8". They are
probably very robust down to about 40 Hz, but there is a lot of music below
that if his neighbors are far enough away (i.e., not an apartment).

On balance the receiver does make me kinda smile. The tip-off is its
weight - 18 pounds or about the same as anybody's classic 100 wpc low cost
receiver. By derating it to 80 wpc Marantz made the receiver's amplifer
specs look heads-and-shoulders better than say a competitive 100 wpc
Pioneer. Odds are that under the cover the electronics are pretty much the
same, just more conservatively rated.

Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass is an issue
until I move into a house. I was thinking that I could get more
detail of the music by upgrading to better amplification. But maybe
not.

EB

EB said:

Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass is an issue
until I move into a house. I was thinking that I could get more
detail of the music by upgrading to better amplification. But maybe
not.

Different speakers would serve this purpose better. You might look into
ProAcs (the real ones, not some cheesy knockoffs).

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article
.com,
"EB" wrote:

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to
CSW Tower II's. I am happy with this set up for the most
part (my listening room is not ideal, but not bad),
especially the speakers. But I am curious to see if
getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably,
but I want to keep the experimenting to around $1,000.

The Odyssey brand looks interesting, will have to
contact them as the website doesn't list all their
product.

Looks like a lot of hype to me. 4 period break-in - give me a break!

http://www.odysseyaudio.com/setup_tweak.html

Why not Outlaw?

I see that your receiver has preamp outputs, a 'direct
mode,' and is rated at 80 watts. Although I've never
heard a Marantz receiver, it would take a big jump in
amplifier power to make a noticeable difference, assuming
a reasonably small room and competent amps. Similarly, it
would take a good preamp to improve on a 'direct mode.'
You can try engaging and disengaging the 'direct' to see
if it makes much of a difference to you.

There's a Marantz integrated in your price range that
might be an improvement if the advertised '25 watts in
Class A' means anything.

It probably doesn't.

Heat?

I'd guess integrated amps from NAD, Rotel, Arcam, etc
might be more refined and used high-end (Bryston, for
one) can be a good value, but maybe you should be looking
at better speakers: Paradigm, B&W, PSB, etc.

Stephen, I guess you've never looked at current Bryston prices - they
completely blow his $1k budget, at least for new equipment. There's Bryston
4B on eBay with a reserve in the $700 range.

Yes, used high-end like Bryston can be a good value. I think he'd be
better off with new speakers.

It would take an amp in that
power range to be appreciably louder than what he's got.

Yes, as I pointed out, a big jump for a noticeable difference.

His CSW speakers have a lot of potential - they aren't cheapie computer
speakers and CSW has a good rep for delivering value within the obvious
limits of 8" woofers.

Paradigm Reference 40s go down to 36 with 7" woofers.

The receiver itself doesseem to have a lot of potential as a springboard for
a number of different kinds of upgrades. The preamp outputs and power amp
inputs mean that bumping up amplifier power or adding a subwoofer is a
cakewalk.

Indeed. If that 'direct mode' experiment shows the preamp doesn't
degrade the sonic experience, it would be easy to add an amp.

His speakers are floor-standing but the woofers are only 8". They are
probably very robust down to about 40 Hz, but there is a lot of music below
that if his neighbors are far enough away (i.e., not an apartment).

Apparently it is an apartment.

On balance the receiver does make me kinda smile. The tip-off is its
weight - 18 pounds or about the same as anybody's classic 100 wpc low cost
receiver. By derating it to 80 wpc Marantz made the receiver's amplifer
specs look heads-and-shoulders better than say a competitive 100 wpc
Pioneer. Odds are that under the cover the electronics are pretty much the
same, just more conservatively rated.

There's a reason the Marantz integrated (27 pounds) might be better.

Stephen

"EB" wrote in message
ups.com
Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass
is an issue until I move into a house. I was thinking
that I could get more detail of the music by upgrading to
better amplification. But maybe not.

After subwoofers, the next big sonic improvement to look at might be room
acoustics.

This guy has a good rep among both pros and high end audiophiles:

http://www.realtraps.com/

"EB" wrote in message
oups.com...
I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to CSW Tower II's.
I am happy with this set up for the most part (my listening room is not
ideal, but not bad), especially the speakers. But I am curious to see
if getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably, but I want
to keep the experimenting to around $1,000. The Odyssey brand looks
interesting, will have to contact them as the website doesn't list all
their product.

The increase in power from a new amp might very well add more punch to your
music, especially in the bass. It is doubtful that it would do anything
more in terms of other improvement. Better punch is however something of a
gain and should not be discounted.

Your receiver is set up so that you could indeed just add an amp and not
need an integrated amp since you could continue to use the preamp functions
of the receiver.

Adding a powered subwoofer would also give you the same effect, possibly
more so. There is much useful information in the Low frequency area, plus
you make the main speakers work less hard and reduce distortion.

You have some very good options and most of them don't require a grand to
implement.

EB wrote:

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to CSW Tower II's.
I am happy with this set up for the most part (my listening room is not
ideal, but not bad), especially the speakers. But I am curious to see
if getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably, but I want
to keep the experimenting to around $1,000. The Odyssey brand looks
interesting, will have to contact them as the website doesn't list all
their product.

EB

Note that everyone's going to give you a different answer on this,
depending upon their personal prejudices, and the value of their
particular advice is also dependent upon those prejudices and their
experience. The objectivists will steer you towards the worst sounding
equipment, and the worst offender is nyob...peoplepc.com, who will
absolutely guarantee that you have the worst possible sounding system
for $1,000.

Point being, if you were to follow the advice of each person, you'd end
up with extremely different sounding stereo each time. So it seems to
me a bit of a crap shoot to spend $1,000 this way. Particularly if
you're not going to listen to the product you wish to purchase, to see
what it sounds like. You should do research and read reviews before you
buy. If you're looking for good stuff used, try www.audiogon.com, and
you're sure to find a good amp for well within your budget. You can
even get a tube amp there well within your budget. They're not the last
word in detail and you do have to replace tubes every few years, but
they generally can communicate the musical message better than their SS
counterparts. As for SS, a good integrated will be superior to
separates at the same cost. If you can find an Audio Refinement
integrated within your budget, new or used, I think you'd be very happy
with that.

I checked that Odyssey site and wasn't particularly impressed with
their design philosophies. They talked too much about how much metal
was in their amps, the LEDs, the fancy lighting crap on the front
panel, the brand names of the parts... I'm quite sure there are better
designs than them... But note there is a certain hiearchy to follow
when upgrading a hifi kit; the order of importance is source, then amp,
then speakers. So if you already have a good source, then the amp is
the best choice to upgrade.

Shovels comes down to earth.

You should do research and read reviews before you
buy. If you're looking for good stuff used, try www.audiogon.com, and
you're sure to find a good amp for well within your budget.

Are you feeling OK, Shovels? You sound unnaturally cogent.

wrote:
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...
He wants a receiver not a power amplifier. Quit trying to sell him
what he has not asked for.

I'm not trying to sellhim anything, I'm just explaining why I made the
recomendation, and why it is a reasonable one.

You are right. He did, and I was wrong. Dunno why I said that.

Be that as it may: another factor is there is very little difference
between a "stereo power amplifier" and a "line stage integrated
amplifier". The latter has a volume control, several sets of input
jacks and a selector. They both work at the same input level more or
less. And on pro amps many have attenuators, if not the ideal kind,
already!

If you only listen to digital sources get a DAC that has a volume
control, such as the better-than-pretty-good Benchmark. It will drive
most power amps directly. I recently rigged up a temporary system with
a cheap CD player, a Benchmark DAC, a pair of un-upgraded, beat up but
maintained Altec 1590B solid state amplifiers and some large JBL three
way speakers-they may have been sold for home or studio monitor use-and
the result was actually a listenable system of better quality than one
would rightly expect: not magnificent, but one could do worse at many
high end saloons. External DACs are incapable of playing SACD or many
DVD-A sources though, and the Benchmark runs in four figures.

Those who don't believe in highbit digital, then, have the most to
gain from a good DAC.

EB wrote:

Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass is an issue
until I move into a house. I was thinking that I could get more
detail of the music by upgrading to better amplification. But maybe
not.

EB, do NOT listen to these crazy gooks ranting about everything sounding
the same. Listen to what your ears will tell you. You have nothing to
lose with odyssey. You can audition and return if you don't like what
you are hearing.

If you are looking for low level information with no loss of detail,
lively midrange, bass authority with strict control on your speakers,
you are looking for odyssey. You WILL see and hear what "high end" means
when you hook one up.

These borg'll tell you different, of course, it's their religion.

Fella wrote:
EB wrote:

Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass is an issue
until I move into a house. I was thinking that I could get more
detail of the music by upgrading to better amplification. But maybe
not.

EB, do NOT listen to these crazy gooks ranting about everything sounding
the same.

er....have a 'Nam flashback, are we?



--

___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

"Fella" wrote in message

EB wrote:

Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass
is an issue until I move into a house. I was thinking
that I could get more detail of the music by upgrading
to better amplification. But maybe not.

EB, do NOT listen to these crazy gooks ranting about
everything sounding the same.

Did anybody say "everytthing sounds the same" in this thead?

I don't think so.

Therefore we can conclude that Fella is again ranting incoherently.

Listen to what your ears will tell you.

Hence my comments about room acoustics given that a subwoofer is out of the
picture.

You have nothing to lose with odyssey.

You sure do have something to lose - the possibility of a better sounding
listening room.

You can audition and return if you don't like what you are hearing.

Begging the question why even go there when there is so much real good that
can be done elsewhere.

If you are looking for low level information with no loss
of detail, lively midrange, bass authority with strict
control on your speakers, you are looking for odyssey.

In fact these desireable qualities are readily availble with many options.
Room acoustics improvements have the strongest effect on these of any of the
available options.

You WILL see and hear what "high end" means when you hook
one up.

We all know that Fella is a "everything sounds dramatically differrent"
electronics junky. He's implicitly telling you that room acoustics don't
matter nearly as much.

The fact of the matter is that nothing controls the sound quality as much as
your listening room. If you're lucky enough to already have an ideal
listening room, then move on. But that would make you one of a very tiny
group of audiophiles.

wrote in message
oups.com...

EB wrote:

I currently have a Marantz 4320 receiver connected to CSW Tower II's.
I am happy with this set up for the most part (my listening room is not
ideal, but not bad), especially the speakers. But I am curious to see
if getting a better amp will improve the sound noticeably, but I want
to keep the experimenting to around $1,000. The Odyssey brand looks
interesting, will have to contact them as the website doesn't list all
their product.

EB

Note that everyone's going to give you a different answer on this,
depending upon their personal prejudices, and the value of their
particular advice is also dependent upon those prejudices and their
experience.

But all of them will in fact give him some sort of improvement that is real
and audible.

The objectivists will steer you towards the worst sounding
equipment, and the worst offender is nyob...peoplepc.com, who will
absolutely guarantee that you have the worst possible sounding system
for $1,000.

And you base that on what? Did someone come down from the mothreship and
paint an L shape on your head and you took that for a sign? GMAFB.

Point being, if you were to follow the advice of each person, you'd end
up with extremely different sounding stereo each time. So it seems to
me a bit of a crap shoot to spend $1,000 this way. Particularly if
you're not going to listen to the product you wish to purchase, to see
what it sounds like. You should do research and read reviews before you
buy. If you're looking for good stuff used, try www.audiogon.com, and
you're sure to find a good amp for well within your budget.

A most worthless peice of advice if ever there was one. A place where they
think power cords are something that make an audible difference.

You can
even get a tube amp there well within your budget. They're not the last
word in detail and you do have to replace tubes every few years, but
they generally can communicate the musical message better than their SS
counterparts.

If the message is more distortion, sure they do.

As for SS, a good integrated will be superior to
separates at the same cost. If you can find an Audio Refinement
integrated within your budget, new or used, I think you'd be very happy
with that.

I checked that Odyssey site and wasn't particularly impressed with
their design philosophies. They talked too much about how much metal
was in their amps, the LEDs, the fancy lighting crap on the front
panel, the brand names of the parts... I'm quite sure there are better
designs than them... But note there is a certain hiearchy to follow
when upgrading a hifi kit; the order of importance is source, then amp,
then speakers. So if you already have a good source, then the amp is
the best choice to upgrade.

But of course you are not giving advice based on your biases, right?

The Bug Eater seizes an opportunity to vent his pent-up rage.

"Gooks?" Do you have any idea what you just said, you stupid piece of ****?
You ignorant ****
idiot boy

Oh dear. Did I make you say all those mean things, Mickey? I'm sure your
bad behavior is somehow all my fault, just as Krooger's bad behavior is
all the fault of Atkinson and Zelniker.

Don't bother to explain; your blanket excuse that "it's obvious" can be
gratuitously extended to cover almost any amount of hypocrisy.

Steven Sullivan wrote:

Fella wrote:

EB wrote:


Sadly, I do live in a side by side condo so booming bass is an issue
until I move into a house. I was thinking that I could get more
detail of the music by upgrading to better amplification. But maybe
not.


EB, do NOT listen to these crazy gooks ranting about everything sounding
the same.


er....have a 'Nam flashback, are we?




I used the word as a synonym of guck, yuck, slime, etc, look it up, it
*also* means that. Though I admit, perhaps it was a wrong choice given
that the other context is more "popular" because of the usual "hangups"
.... So, apoligies to anyone that might be offended..

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:08:34 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



Shovels comes down to earth.

You should do research and read reviews before you
buy. If you're looking for good stuff used, try www.audiogon.com, and
you're sure to find a good amp for well within your budget.

Are you feeling OK, Shovels? You sound unnaturally cogent.

Mr. Sound's absurd endorsements of Belt-type tweaks put me well
offside before his third post. But his clash with Trevor Wilson in the
turntable earth wire thread sealed my opinion of him as terminally
irrational and definitely in need of TLC. What the hell has happened
to RAO lately? Between that nonsense and Jute's equally irrational
attacks on Jenn for innocently posting to a thread whose title
happened to slur him, I'm becoming afraid....very afraid. You're one
of the stalwarts of RAO, George. Can you explain how an NG can
suddenly sink into a morass of illogicality?

"paul packer" wrote in message


Can you explain how an NG can suddenly sink into a morass of
illogicality?

Simple Paul, the explanation is the well-known fact that you're very slow to
observe that which is obvious to many of us. You're finally perceiving the
consequences of the intellectual anarchism that Middius and his clique have
practiced here over the years.

paul packer said:

Different speakers would serve this purpose better. You might look into
ProAcs (the real ones, not some cheesy knockoffs).

Is this audio-related reply really from you, George, or is Brian
impersonating you as well?

Don't be silly. It was a troll.

paul packer wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:08:34 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



Shovels comes down to earth.

You should do research and read reviews before you
buy. If you're looking for good stuff used, try www.audiogon.com, and
you're sure to find a good amp for well within your budget.

Are you feeling OK, Shovels? You sound unnaturally cogent.

Mr. Sound's absurd endorsements of Belt-type tweaks put me well
offside before his third post. But his clash with Trevor Wilson in the
turntable earth wire thread sealed my opinion of him as terminally
irrational and definitely in need of TLC. What the hell has happened
to RAO lately?

Between that nonsense and Jute's equally irrational
attacks on Jenn for innocently posting to a thread whose title
happened to slur him, I'm becoming afraid....very afraid. You're one
of the stalwarts of RAO, George. Can you explain how an NG can
suddenly sink into a morass of illogicality?


LOL. Good one, Paul!




___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority

paul packer said:

You're one of the stalwarts of RAO, George. Can you explain
how an NG can suddenly sink into a morass of illogicality?

Nope.

Bret Ludwig wrote:
wrote:
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...
He wants a receiver not a power amplifier. Quit trying to sell him
what he has not asked for.

I'm not trying to sellhim anything, I'm just explaining why I made the
recomendation, and why it is a reasonable one.

You are right. He did, and I was wrong. Dunno why I said that.

Be that as it may: another factor is there is very little difference
between a "stereo power amplifier" and a "line stage integrated
amplifier". The latter has a volume control, several sets of input
jacks and a selector. They both work at the same input level more or
less. And on pro amps many have attenuators, if not the ideal kind,
already!

If you only listen to digital sources get a DAC that has a volume
control, such as the better-than-pretty-good Benchmark. It will drive
most power amps directly. I recently rigged up a temporary system with
a cheap CD player, a Benchmark DAC, a pair of un-upgraded, beat up but
maintained Altec 1590B solid state amplifiers and some large JBL three
way speakers-they may have been sold for home or studio monitor use-and
the result was actually a listenable system of better quality than one
would rightly expect: not magnificent, but one could do worse at many
high end saloons. External DACs are incapable of playing SACD or many
DVD-A sources though, and the Benchmark runs in four figures.

Those who don't believe in highbit digital, then, have the most to
gain from a good DAC.

I primarily use FLAC files (served from a 17W headless linux computer
running Slim Server) as a source sent to a Slim Devices Squeeze Box 2.
The SB2 has a Burr-Brown DAC that I am happy with right now.

EB

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 08:52:53 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



paul packer said:

Different speakers would serve this purpose better. You might look into
ProAcs (the real ones, not some cheesy knockoffs).

Is this audio-related reply really from you, George, or is Brian
impersonating you as well?

Don't be silly. It was a troll.

Now don't be shy, George. You've done it once; you can do it again.

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:18:30 -0500, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



paul packer said:

You're one of the stalwarts of RAO, George. Can you explain
how an NG can suddenly sink into a morass of illogicality?

Nope.

Playing it safe, eh, George? Good move.

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 08:46:16 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


Can you explain how an NG can suddenly sink into a morass of
illogicality?

Simple Paul, the explanation is the well-known fact that you're very slow to
observe that which is obvious to many of us. You're finally perceiving the
consequences of the intellectual anarchism that Middius and his clique have
practiced here over the years.

You've missed the mark again, Arnie, and after all that practice with
the darts too! Damn!!

Much as I know you'd like to blame Middius for everything from soil
erosion to the possibility of earth being hit by a comet, I think we
can pass on Middius here. Lately certain quite clever people have
moved into RAO, people who, if slighted, in their imaginations or
otherwise. have a tendency to endlessly obsess and rant, seeking
non-existant culprits and undeserved justice. This has changed the
tone of RAO. I asked Middius as a regular for his opinion. He (perhaps
wisely) declined. You are also at least as much a regular. Therefore I
ask for your opinion. Now let's see your searing powers of NG
analysis, Arnie, without bias or insult. What's happening?

paul packer said:

You're one of the stalwarts of RAO, George. Can you explain
how an NG can suddenly sink into a morass of illogicality?

Nope.

Playing it safe, eh, George? Good move.

I assumed you were pointing your finger at me. If you've forgotten how I
feel about the 'borgs, I'll be glad to post a refresher for you.