Like

Archive through October 10, 2004

 

Classical 1
Unregistered guest
John A. - your point is very well taken, sir. Yes, I DO try to find the best recordings possible, and yet have given to local libraries literally hundreds of discs which I feel did not meet my standards of "good" recordings. I have found many DG discs, for example, which I felt were badly recorded. Especially ones up to the very late 80s.
I understand that Chanticleer, for example, previews every master, and OKs or not the final recording. That is one reason they are perceived as being "so good."
I had the good fortune recently to be in San Francisco, where Michael Tilson Thomas was performing the Mahler 2nd. Oh, my! What a wonderful recording that SHOULD be! We'll see how the SACD matches up to my perception of the original, "live" performance. I was on the main floor, just off-center, about half-way back - my usual "favorite" position. There, I get the hall reverbs as well as the straight path from the stage. In cases such as this, I'm afraid that the SACD "ambiance" will make for a more accurate reproduction than my 2-channel system will show. But - again - whenever the CD comes out, I shall buy it, and close my eyes, and remember. . .
Looking back over the past 25 years, I must have spent way, way too much money on concert tickets! Oh, yes, and opera, also. Houston was especially fine - San Francisco a revelation - Chicago Lyric always top-notch, though the seating is rather cramped, and I'm rather large!
But I have extra-special memories of the tiny little opera house in Central City, Colorado where, every summer, they produce quality operas in an historic building with, I believe, only about 700 seats. I always try for balcony, center front - where I nearly hang over the stage! The singers may not be quite up to Renee Fleming, but they give it their all - and it is magical. I once saw "Faust" there - and broke down in tears with Margarite's aria from prison, as did most of the audience. It was THAT good!
Unfortunately, sir, I do not and cannot get a recording of Central City performances. I think that you, with your obvious history of European concert performances, would be enchanted.
So - yes, good recordings are essential to top-notch memory-journeys, IF they are available - but I find that most of the performances that I yearn to "reproduce" are available in quality recording form. So far, anyway!
More later. . .
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Rantz - In response to:

" ... well recorded/engineered hi-res multi-channel music suprasses stereo for my enjoyment levels. I am well over the ghee whiz factor ..."

I'm not trying to suggest that no one should enjoy MC, in fact I want to encourage as many as possible to explore this format and hopefully find a satisfaction level that I have yet to encounter. And that should be possible no matter what equipment you own. I have known a fair number of musicians and conductors that have a system that I would consider no more than mid fi but they find the enjoyment in the music because of they way they listen to music. I don't think it is too difficult to achieve satisfaction from whatever system you enjoy listening to, it certainly doesn't have to be Krell or Mac. One of my favorite things as a salesperson was to sell a small, inexpensive system to someone who wanted better than the big box stores offered. I seldom saw them again for more audio gear but they often stopped to pick up more music. I never had anyone who was unhappy with their purchase.
But I come at the MC world from the unfortunate vantage of a former audio salesperson who heard the promises of the industry for over twenty five years and had to justify a purchase to those clients who wanted to know about the new toy. Whether it was CD4, bucket brigade delays or Dolby Digtal the promise was always to bring the listener and the performer closer toegther. The early Yamaha and Sony digital delays had dozens of preset surround modes that both manufacturers claimed were modeled around their own extensive tests in various venues that, when selected, would give a perfect representation of that space. Both, in their desire to have more buttons and functions than anyone else, had the ability to move your seating location or change the number of people listening with you and so on. These also gave poor results and have faded from memory. So my recollection of SACD and DVD-A is they represent yet another attempt to bring listener and performer together in the same space.
Now my argument is if the format cannot perform this function any better than two channel what is the purpose of the format? I understand SACD started as a two channel format that was intended to be a higher resolution format than red book CD's. The conversion to surround came as an answer to the commercial pressures from DVD-A. But, in both formats, is the reason for MC no more than because the speakers are already there? I would hope there is more to it than that. If not then I'll just stick to two channel.
Industries change for three reasons, I believe, though not being an economist there could be more. First, they change for economic reasons (profit); second, they change because someone has a better idea and the abiltiy to get it to market; third, they will change when forced to (legislation). It is unlikely the MC market will change due to the third factor; but, that is how cars became safer, the workplace became safer and products and our environment became safer. The first factor is the most common reason for change. This is why we have CD's and why John rails at Sony's marketing. I feel that CD's got a hold in the market not because they represented better sound but more likely, due to economics (read bean counters), the state of LP manufacture had sunk to such low levels of quality. The convenience of CD's and the lack of the problems of LP's meant consumers were willing to pay more money for the same music they already owned. (As we have discussed, this was when consumers owned the music they purchased.)
But the market for a better product had existed, if only in small quantities, for years before CD was invented. And that market was looking for recordings that put the listener more immediately in touch with the performer. The market that developed from that desire was created by those who thought they had a better way to make a recording; one that would offer a sense of the performance occurring in front of the listener. This is the very basis for High End Audio.
In my opinion this product did its job quite well on many occasions. As Classical 1 suggests the memory of hearing a performance filled in enough holes in the technical side of playback that I could be quite satisfied with the results.
Therefore if I have a product that suits my needs and I am asked to replace that product with another that does the job no better; why should I be expected to make that change? Like the manufacturer I have no economic reason to do so. If I am presented with a product that, to my opinion, actually performs the job at a lower level of quality (guitars split in two and splashed around the room) than I already have; why would I ever change?
There exists far too much equipment and too many recordings for me to say that MC is a failure from my limited experience; but, in my experience so far I have heard nothing that makes me want to have this format at an added expense to myself. I hope that changes because from the first time anyone hears a surround demonstration the possibilities are enticing.
How will it change? Only if the format is allowed to progress will there be a chance that the sound may improve. If the format withers from inattention of consumers then no one wins and the money spent by consumers will have been thrown away most likely. So please continue to enjoy the format. Be exhuberant, joyful, and ready to share the mesage with all you meet. And I will wait patiently on the side. If the economics of the format allow, someone with a better idea will eventually come along and make a better product. Until then I'll stick with my two channels and more money for music.
As to those who just don't care; may your lives be filled with Corvairs and Vioxx.





Kegger - Understanding Mr. Lucas' relationship with Doby Labs will explain why the Star Wars reissues are in Dolby. DTS is a verbotten subject at Skywalker Ranch.





 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 781
Registered: Aug-04
Jan,

Thanks and your opinions are well stated as usual. Just a couple of points:

"in fact I want to encourage as many as possible to explore this format and hopefully find a satisfaction level that I have yet to encounter."

Great, good to see. Not only do I think we all should encourage all audio lovers to explore their favourite formats, but also to desist in denegrating them - unless it's about a particular recording.

Unfortunately, I can't prove to you that I've found a satisfaction level with hi-rez MC that you are yet to encounter. But, there's no real point. Satisfaction levels could be like one's pain threshold - it differs with everyone.

"Therefore if I have a product that suits my needs and I am asked to replace that product with another that does the job no better; why should I be expected to make that change?"

(a) Who is asking you to replace anything?
(b) You should be expected to do only as you please!

I hope I don't come across as to be telling everyone they should toss their stereo gear and adopt MC. My point is that I like both and have a preference for quality MC hi-rez. I just see no reason for this format to be continuously subject to such negativity. Criticizing particular recordings is one thing and I have no problem with that. It's true that not all recordings are excellent, let alone even good, but when MC recordings have been mixed/engineered correctly they can be truly wonderful amd IMHO, much better than 2c.

If hi-rez MC does nothing for you then so be it. I am yet to hear "guitars slit in two and splashed around the room" unless the recording is aimed at effects rather than the music. For the most part, I think MC separates the instruments and gives one the impression of being among the band, or in the audience with the band in front and ambient sounds from the sides and rear.

But all that is irrelevent to me as long as I like what I hear. Such as: the excellent CD recording of "Riding with the King." I recently acquired the DVD-A version. It's not big on effect sounds but I'll listen to the latter over the CD anytime. To me, it's seems more real: depth, clarity and imagery is just excellent.

Here's to the music!

 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 782
Registered: Aug-04
Ghia

I do understand that the tweaks mentioned in my jab at the Mac owners are related to the bookshelf speakers. It's just that you're all Mac owners.

BTW - I have tried taking my floostanders off the stands, different positions and so on, but the sound seems best where they are now. Room acoustics and furniture placement are the reasons for this I think.

Enjoy your new toys!
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2224
Registered: Dec-03
Classical 1,

Many thanks. I look to recorded music for the same sorts of reasons, and my appetite is whetted by a severe case of "don't get around much any more". At least musically. And this may change. No sane person will read all those archives at the top of the page, but some of the posts in the earliest one may help provide the context to this thread, started by J. Vigne and by me with the intention of examining, what, if anything, multichannel has to offer, and why people listen to recordings in the first place.

Thanks, too, Jan.

As before, I am struck by the parallel with the debate concerning mono versus stereo. It is long ago, and I was probably not paying much attention; stereo had been adopted long before I got my own, first little system.

But the "mono rules" people made similar points, such as

1. Stereo is for gee-whiz special effects, not music.
2. It is expensive; you need twice as many speakers, amplifier channels, etc - why not spend your money on a better-sounding single channel?
3. Pretty well all recordings are in mono (this was true until well into the 60s).
4. The few stereo recordings promise what they cannot deliver "like being there" (in some cases "better than being there"!)
5. Engineers often do not know where to put microphones.
6. Stereo is a distraction from the music itself.
7. The need to provide arresting stereo effects gets in the way of performers' judgement about disposition in performance.

...and so on.

In my view we are roughly at the stage with multichannel that we were at with stereo when much of the mono catalogue was being electronically reprocessed "to give stereo effect on stereo equipment". And that was dire, from a musical point of view, no question. Matrixed surround-sound effects (Prologic etc) can be done by our equipement, not just by the engineers, and that is a small difference.

I do think multi-channel sound, properly recorded and played back, has a lot of potential. It will never displace stereo completely, just has stereo has not entirely displaced mono, but it is possible to imagine a time, not too distant, where almost everything is presented with multi-channel as, at least, an option.

If movies have introduced the demand for "special effects" and the take-up of multi-channel systems, it does not follow that these cannot be put to good use for music alone. Again, this is a difference - the demand for stereo came initially from "Audiophile"-type people, and the "entertainment" demand caught up, later.

What we need, I think, is some sensible and critical awareness of what multichannel can do. Maybe we have achieved something on this thread, in a small way. I still hear the guys on "CD review" speaking disparagingly of "ping-pong stereo"; it is still there in some new recordings.

The other new feature is the obtacle the recording industry has placed, deliberately, in the way of people adopting surround sound formats. Right now I have loaned my Mahler 5 DVD-A to my audio to dealer, to check it out on players, and see if they can carry out the required "firmware upgrade" themselves on an NAD T533; the one on display in the shop had exactly the same problem as mine. I give them marks for that, and NAD, who have responded to me, and I think have been caught on the hop with new and stronger copy protection. I have heard nothing from EMI, not even "sorry". The recording industry is shooting itself in the foot with these new possibilities, in my view. Nothing comparable took place with the introduction of stereo. Did it? HDCD is a rearguard action, and irrelevant. It is sold as "Giving better sound". I believe the Emperor has no clothes. "Better sound" is often touted, and I suppose people such as Old Dogs, listen, decide for themselves, and are inclined to damn the whole lot of 'em when they do not deliver on their promises.

I very much think it would be in the industry's interests for me to be able to burn a few copies of "Spem in alium" and send them to friends; it is minority stuff, a narrow market niche: only the really dedicated Early Music specialist is likely to buy it on spec., and most of those are probably busy singing or playing the sackbutt or something. But what you can really do with multichannel (in that case 4.0) is on that single DVD-A, for anyone with ears. However, the industry doesn't see copying in that way. It has no confidence itself in the superiority of the new product. How it can then lament the slow take-up of mutichannel recordings, I have no idea. I suppose it has grown accustomed to market control, and wants to be able to go on telling people what to buy. I doubt if this happened with the introduction of stereo, either.

Was it then a simpler world, with more of the spirit of Adam Smith than Bill Gates, or I am I just suffering from the "former-golden-age" nostalgia that afflicts people, I have noticed, as they get older?
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2225
Registered: Dec-03
Just to say "hear, hear" to My Rantz, whose last two posts I had not read before posting as above.

No-one is urging anyone to replace anything. Keep your CDs. And your LPs. Just consider that we have more options, now.

We should always decide for ourselves. And always listen to the music, not the medium that delivers it. The medium itself should be transparent. That is what some of the great stereo recording engineers were aiming for, and they did great things. They helped get music out into the world.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


I'm going to guess the Republicans are hoping Friday come pretty quick. As the day has gone on more and more of Mr. Cheney's statements are being shown to be less than truthful. Matter of fact some are just outright lies. No matter, George will save the day.

Hi-Oh, Silver. Away!!!


 

Marc C
Unregistered guest
Guys,

Am pretty much looking at some older Klipsch's - Quartets or KG 5.5's or something else I can pick up for $4-500. Or possibly some old JBL monitors - 4312 or something - to see what those are about. Won't be spending much as these would be a 2nd pair of speakers to go along with whatever small monitor I pick up.

Would run a vintage Luxman, Marantz, or something of the like through them - on the warm side and can be had pretty cheap - until I could pick up something more substantial. All these speakers being pretty efficient, it wouldn't take much from either to drive them. (Mind you if I see some guy selling his Hafler DH-220 and DH-110 for $100 - I'm going to jump on it.) All this stuff is more than respectable for a basic music lover like myself.

Jan,

How loud is loud? Well, don't know about measurements. I had some Cerwin Vega VS 120's in my 10x12 bedroom for a while, which was fun. Completely rocked and shook my room - things falling off my shelves etc. - and apartment for that matter. (Roomate commented on how she could hear me cackling in the background after each song.) My receivers in so far haven't been great, so somehow I think one with some punch and quality will give some great effect without having to be as loud. But certain things I like conveyed - the slam of Keith Moon, the thunder of John Entwistle, the rumble of Tommy Shannon (bass for Double Trouble/Stevie Ray), the throaty tone of Leslie West - that kind of stuff. Am a bit weary of Klipsch in that I've heard their horns are a bit bright. Bright at mid and low volume is ok. Bright and loud - bad.

Rick B,

That line about blowing up Budweiser plants and having 4 million bass boats of rednecks with coolers and shotguns heading across the Atlantic is just classic.


Debates: I'm surprised at how all these "skilled" debaters, especially Edwards, miss constant opportunities to absolutely cut off the other at the knees. (Dick opened some holes I could have driven a semi-truck through.) Nobody is getting creamed, but they're not doing close to what they could either. Decent stuff - but at some point got hit with a feeling in the pit of my stomach last night that we can really be in deep sh*t with either ticket. With regards to this nation as a whole, this presidential race, and who we are currently choosing from in terms of tickets - to use Kerry's words - we can do better. Looking at the big picture - I think every single one of these guys, in one way or another, stinks... Taking a step back and looking, the whole situation is an outrage.
 

Classical 1
Unregistered guest
Ah, yes - the debates. End of comment.
Anyway, John A. - you don't need to "get around much anymore" - from what I gather, you have heard many and varying performances over the years. Call up the memories and try to find discs of those that meant the most to you, even years afterward. It will bring a smile to your face.
I am promised, by UPS, my probably-insane venture into CD tweakdom, in the form of Walker's "Vivid" CD "enhancer - to be delivered to my home by Friday. If it doesn't snow heavily, that is! I shall use it on some discs, and report to this august assemblage the results.
Will wiping this liquid onto the discs and polishing them make an audible difference? Will I have wasted $45 in my quest for less strident sound from "regular" CDs? Stay tuned. . .
Oh, yes - my Marantz-playing friend is quite enamored of the brass cones! But when he came over for a drink that became several I made the mistake of telling about the maple speaker stands as reported on this forum. Now he's going to the Mapleshade web site, and will probably add even more "tweaks" to his arsenal. But he seems happy, so I don't want to pour cold water on his enthusiasm - or any other part of his body!
My Paradigms, by the way, sit happily on 19-inch stands - plates on top and bottom, metal tube filled with sand in between. I'm told that these stands "sound" wonderful. That, I just don't understand at all!
More later. . .
 

Classical 1
Unregistered guest
J. Vigne - in re-reading one of your earlier comments - I'm with you "half the way." I listen in 2-channel here in Colorado, and in both 2-channel and surround in Florida. But, to be perfectly honest, most of my surround experiences there are with DVD movies, not CD music.
More later. . .
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 537
Registered: Dec-03
Cheers to all the "OD's"!

Well Mrs. Barnes finally got around to asking why the Spendors are on the living room floor. I gave her a brief explanantion, and she gave me the cow watching a passing train expression. I had her listen for 30 seconds back on the stands, then put them back on the floor. She said without hesitation, that the bass was much better with the floor position. What a woman! I then asked if she would like to help me rub my cones, and she said why not. WHAT A WOMAN! So how was your afternoon? That explains the no progress on the stands yesterday..................

MarcC,

Thank you!

Classical 1,

Pass along to your friend that IMHO, the Mapleshade Golden Helix speaker cable is the best I have heard at any price.

Jan,

A politician lying to us? Who could imagine such a thing? Are we not in search of truth, justice, and the American way, Kemosabe?
 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 269
Registered: Mar-04
Hey, just want to take a second to apologise for my cantankerous remarks yesterday in https://www.ecoustics.com/cgi-bin/bbs/show.pl?tpc=1&post=153915#POST153915
I had just finished 24 straight hours at work, taking care of some "fires" and would have been better served going straight off to bed rather than trying to make a point. :-) Its funny, what makes sense to a clouded mind sounds quite absurd when the mind is clearer. So, anyway, sorry.

I do enjoy the banter, though neither side is likely to persuade the other. I guess I'm still in the gee-whiz stage of MC, because given the choice, I'll take that hands down over stereo every time, usually with a smile on my face. And I don't see it as being there at a live performance, just as another option. Options are good.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2226
Registered: Dec-03
Not cantenkerous at all, Sem. It was a good point, I thought. Options are good, yes. And not everyone wants the perfectionist's reproduction of some performance somewhere. One reason for the strength of feeling by some of us is that the ads and the hype promise more than they deliver, or ever could, in that department, I think. But if it is not what someone wants, anyway, I can see "so what?" makes complete sense. It is easy to get obsessive about hifi.
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 785
Registered: Aug-04
Rick,

"That explains the no progress on the stands yesterday.................. "

Heh heh heh - typical old dog!


Sem,

"Deal with it."

Too late - I dealt with it. The shrink said it wasn't the multi-channel, it's the voices in my head. That's what makes it so real. I can't thank you enough for the advice. :-)

John A

"It is easy to get obsessive about hifi."

Isn't it though! Image what it would be without the womenfolk to us in check! Look at how Rick was saved :-)


 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1596
Registered: Dec-03
and look how kegger won't be.
 

J.Vigne
Unregistered guest


Ghia is rubbing gimbals and Rick is getting his driver massaged. How old I feel!



 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 538
Registered: Dec-03
Woof............Stretch............Yawn...........
.........Nap!




It's good to be an old dog.......................
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1597
Registered: Dec-03
yo rick!

I'm sure you took it that way.

but when I said to bad the spendors sens was to low
for a smaller tube amp.
that wasn't a knock on them, just an observation as to what it would
take to drive them very nicely.
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 786
Registered: Aug-04
Strewth, I can't believe I wrote that last sentence in my previous post. Having a rough night!

I just got up ... put a shirt on and a button fell off. I picked up my briefcase to do some work and the handle came off. Now I'm afraid to go to the bathroom.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1598
Registered: Dec-03
ha ha lol rantz
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 539
Registered: Dec-03
Kegger,

No problem my friend, I knew exactly what you meant.

Rantz,

Don't touch ANYTHING!
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 787
Registered: Aug-04
I can't take credit Kegger. I was just reading about Rodney Dangerfield's death. These are some of his famous one liners as was the bathroom joke.

1. I was so poor growing up ... if I wasn't a boy I'd have had nothing to play with.

2. A girl phoned me the other day and said, "Come on over, nobody's home." I went over. Nobody was home.

3. My girlfriend always wants to talk to me during sex. Just the other night she called me from a hotel.

4. One day I came home early from work ... I saw a guy jogging with no clothes on. I said to the guy: "Hey buddy, why are you doing that?" He said: "Because you came home early."

5. I was such an ugly kid ... when I played in the sandbox, the cat kept covering me up.

6. I could tell my parents hated me. My bath toys were a toaster and radio.

7. I was an ugly baby ... my mother never breast fed me. She told me she only liked me as a friend.

8. I'm so ugly ... my father carried around a picture of the kid who came with his wallet.

9. When I was born the doctor came into the waiting room and said to my father: "I'm sorry. We did everything we could but he pulled through."

10. I'm so ugly ... my mother had morning sickness ... AFTER I was born.

11. I remember the time that I was kidnapped and they sent a piece of my finger to my father. He said he wanted more proof.

12. Once when I was lost, I saw a policeman, and asked him to help me find my parents. I said: "Do you think we'll ever find them?" He said: "I don't know kid. There's so many places they can hide."

13. My wife made me join a bridge club. I jump off next Tuesday.

14. I'm so ugly ... I worked in a pet shop and people kept asking how big I'd get.

15. I went to see my doctor. "Doctor, every morning when I get up and I look in the mirror ... I feel like throwing up. What's wrong with me?" He said: "I don't know but your eyesight is perfect."

16. I went to the doctor because I'd swallowed a bottle of sleeping pills. My doctor told me to have a few drinks and get some rest.

17. With my old man I got no respect. I asked him: "How can I get my kite in the air?" He told me to run off a cliff.

18. Some dog I got. We call him Egypt because in every room he leaves a pyramid. His favorite bone is in my arm. Last night he went on the paper four times - three of those times I was reading it.

19. One year they wanted to make me poster boy for birth control.

20. My uncle's dying wish was to have me sitting in his lap - he was in the electric chair.

21. I'm so ugly, when I was born the doctor slapped my mother!
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 540
Registered: Dec-03
22. My wife's cooking is so bad I fed it to my dog. He ran over to his corner and started licking his a-s-s to get the taste out of his mouth.

Thank you Rodney, the "OD's" will miss you........
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 788
Registered: Aug-04
Rick

Re post before last: Don't worry, I can't find my glasses anyway. :-)

Cheers guys - I'm going to try for some sleep!
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 541
Registered: Dec-03
Nite nite Rantz.................LOL!
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Use the jammies with the footsies.



 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2227
Registered: Dec-03
The best line for weeks is Rick's "Well Mrs. Barnes finally got around to asking why the Spendors are on the living room floor. I gave her a brief explanantion, and she gave me the cow watching a passing train expression".

Been there, done that. But Mrs B's behaviour is prefereble to that of Flanders and Swann's hifi widow, who evetually took to low fidelity at high frequency.
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 542
Registered: Dec-03
Thank you John. I have gotten that look many times over the years................LOL!

I think what I like best about The "Old Dogs" is our ability to laugh at ourselves, and with each other.

Cheers!
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 791
Registered: Aug-04
Okay, everyone out of the pool and back to the serious stuff!

"this was great news for those among us who have noticed how much richer DVD-Audio discs based on high-resolution transfers from analogue masters sound when compared to discs based on digital source recordings."

This is an exerpt from the review of Steely Dan's 'Going Out Of Business' DVD-a in Highfidelityreview.com. I have wondered about this descrepency on the occassional recording and now I have the answer. Anyone else notice this - besides Jan :-)

BTW - Two Against Nature and the above DVD-A are excellent hi-rez recordings. Both in 2 and Multi channel. Of course, the latter just pipping it!

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/reviews/review.asp?reviewnumber=13143569
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 792
Registered: Aug-04
Rick,

Meant to say I concur re your view of what you like best about the Old Dogs. No a bad bunch of old flea bags (and bagette) if I do say so myself.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1599
Registered: Dec-03
yo rantz gaucho and too shabby either!

 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 793
Registered: Aug-04
Kegger

I've been looking out for it. Have you got the DVD-A or SACD version?
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1600
Registered: Dec-03
sacd
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 794
Registered: Aug-04
Okay thanks!
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2229
Registered: Dec-03
Great stuff, Old Dogs. Brief notice that my e-mail ISP home.se seems to have pulled the plug without notice or warning. Very serious for Mrs A who uses nothing else.

I have successfully burned a hi-res DVD-V, the obscure one. The DTS format is good enough to illustrate my point about musical value of multichannel sound, done properly. Will try the DVD-A side later today. Will report back. If it works I will gladly send a copy to friends, with details of original. I am sure this will increase, not decrease, their sales. Well it will if it could be bought in shops at all; I have seen it in only one. How not to do business.

My isp has another 24 hours before I change my contact e-mail on this forum (yet again, and for same reason) and will notify any who might have sent me e-mail recently; apologies if I have not replied, it is because I have received no e-mails for 36 hours approx. In civil societies it is illegal to obstruct delivery of mail.

My NAd dealer has that e-mail address to report back on the EMI DVD-A and the NAD "firmware upgrade".

In my irritation I have come round to the view that copy protection is immoral and it should be defeated wherever possible. We need a Bill of RIghts for all digital information, making it an offence to claim ownership of public propery. Music is a "commons". I am happy with ownership of the medium; it cost someone something to produce. But not with ownership of content, unless the performers themselves, surely the only "owners" of the music, wish to restrict access to their performance. The industry wants it the other way: to own the content, not the medium. This has no basis in common sense or morality, in my view. You might as well encrypt fresh air in charge people by the breath.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1601
Registered: Dec-03
well john i am sorry about your isp and email.
that truly sucks.

but you know my stance on copy protection.
i just happen to disagree with you on almost every point.

but as we have said many times. everyone is entitled to their oppinion.


yours just happens to be wrong! ooohhh! ouch! sting! (just kidding)
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 795
Registered: Aug-04
Well John,

I am of the belief that if the musician's works are not protected then soon the only way we'll be able to have our music is by paying for a poor quality MP3 copy until choices run dry. Authors works are copyrighted, inventions are patented, and so on. All for good reason.

You keep on about this and everyone reports back with their same views and round and round it goes. In the near future a copy of all music will be playable on a standard player. If not, then you'll soon be able to complain to the player's manufacturer. Commercial pirating is rife, especiallly in SE Asia (I don't know about your part of the world) and something has to be done about it. Come up with an alternate answer, the dogs can put in some dough, we can become partners and all of us make a mill or two:-)

What is immoral is pirating. We don't buy the music, we buy the right to play it on the the purchased medium. Yeah, yeah, the record companies are the ones making all the money. The workers chant the same thing - the business owners make all the money. Well, who are the one taking all the risks? Who are the ones putting profits back into business to expand and employ more workers - take on more artists and so on. I know, they aren't all such altruists, but perfection will never be.

We either have free enterprise or not. If so, we must protect it. At all costs. Until we find Utopia.

 

Marc C
Unregistered guest
"This food's so bad, it still has marks from where the jockey was hittin' it!"

R.I.P. Rodney - thanks for making movies (especially Caddyshack!) we can watch over and over. 82 - not bad at all...

Finally - some respect.
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 411
Registered: Apr-04
MR wrote:

Yeah, yeah, the record companies are the ones making all the money. The workers chant the same thing - the business owners make all the money. Well, who are the one taking all the risks?

While this may be true in most business models, the music industry is not an example. Exactly what risks do the record companies take? They don't assume the risk of creating music. Musicians do. They don't assume the risk of recording the music. Musicians do. They don't assume the risk of performing the music. Musicians do. The only risk the record companies assume is the manufacturing and marketing processes. The ultimate risk the musician takes is having the fruits of their labor owned by the record companies.

Having said that, I believe in copyright protections. I just think the wrong people are being protected by them.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2230
Registered: Dec-03
Sorry to open this old copyright debate again; views well expressed, as before. I am with Ghia on this.

As I speak I have successfully made a DVD-A disc image, and my office computer seems to be burning a disc OK. My computer will not play DVD-A discs, of course, so I'll have to take the burned disc home to check at the weekend. Will report back.

I am feeling a bit better after visiting my dealer to enquire about their investigations with the NAD T533 and EMI Mahler 5 DVD-A. I got a good and knowlegable guy who reports that the disc will not play on any of the T533s in their stock, and that their own firmware fix does not solve the problem. He wants to get to the bottom of this, and has e-mailed NAD himself. He asked to hold on to the disc for another week to try other players, pending a reply from NAD, and also to be able to see if anything can fix it. I said "great, go ahead". He also said that after that they will either get it to play, and/or give me full credit on return of the player for another make, if that's what I want. That's not bad, these days. He asked what I thought of Denon, for example....

So who knows, I might be able to join the "universal" gang before too long; you will all be spared all my paranoid ramblings about DSD; and I'll be buying an SACD or two. I still like the T533. Totally amazing sound quality, considering its price. One gets attached to things.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1602
Registered: Dec-03
souds good john come on over to the dark side.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1603
Registered: Dec-03
and i'm sorry i feel the opposite of ghia also and side mr. rantz.

the artist's take no risk!

they make the album, get paid by the record company then
the record company makes the masters, produces all the music then
makes the media and tries to sell it.

if it doesn't sell or they get ripped off from copying, the music
company is out for backing the band.

so in my oppinion the record company takes all the risks!

if they put up the money to get the music out there and it
doesn't sell the record companies are out.
so they take the chance on the artist being successful.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Guy decides he likes making sausage.
Guy decides he can make sausage that is unlike any other sausage on the market.
Guy struggles along making sausage for local consumption.
Everyone tells the Guy they love the sausage he makes.
Guy invests his time, talent and money in making sausage his way.
Guy is approached by a food company about his sausage.
Guy takes his recipe for sausage to the food company.
Since guy is small time guy, food company gets to control the recipe, the distribution, the marketing and residuals in perpetuity.
Guy figures this is the best deal he can get, he wants to make sausage.
Guy sees his sausage sold with his picture on the label but the recipe has changed because the food company thought it would sell better their way.
Guy gets 15 cents for every $15 of sausage sold.
Guy sees the new recipe for sausage fail.
Food company blaims Guy for lousy sausage recipe.
Food company blows out remaining stock at below market price still making profit above manufacturing cost.
Guy is blackballed for making lousy sausage.
Food company signs another guy with another sausage recipe to a contract.
Cycle repeats itself over several times before some Guy makes it big in the sausage business.
Now that Guy is signing contracts with other little Guys.
Original Guy dies heartbroken that he couldn't make sausage.
There is a market for his original sausage recipe.
Food company reintroduces the Guy's sausage and makes money since they control the product.


Who got screwed?


Now substitute the word music for the word sausage.

Copyrights are good things. How they are applied is not always a good thing.



 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


"This has no basis in common sense or morality, in my view. You might as well encrypt fresh air [and] charge people by the breath."


There you go again!

John, in your field of work I would think you would know we are being charged by the breath. And getting less for our money.

One of the most aggravating commercials running right now, among the ads for weight loss, hair restoration, cleaning products and mortgage loans, is the ad run by the "clean" coal folks.


An American Bald Eagle flies through a dicolored sky, coughing as he (the commercial provides a gruff male voice) lands, commenting, "Not a good day to fly."
The voice over states "Thanks to clean coal technology the skies have been getting cleaner since 1970." Yada, Yada, Yada.
The commercial ends with the Eagle soaring through bright blue skies declaring, "Yeah, that's nice."

This is while the E.P.A. in the U.S.A. is letting polluters write the laws governing their actions. This is while the E.P.A. in the U.S.A. is turning their back on the polluters and not challenging the suits that were brought during am earlier administration. American administration policy, right or wrong, is pro business.

It doesn't seem too difficult to see that when left to govern themselves most indutries will make profitable choices not moral choices.



 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Folks, I have had my fill of Mr. FryGuy.ca. He is of the I am right; you are wrong school. He believes that because he can measure something he is better equiped to tell someone on this forum they are stupid. I find his attitude offensive and am currently doing battle with him here;

https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/104519.html

My position has been I don't care what he can measure or what he can hear. He has no right to insult anyone on this forum because he disagrees with their perception of their system.

Anyone who cares to join in is more than welcome at the above address.



 

Silver Member
Username: Arnold_layne

MadridSpain

Post Number: 164
Registered: Jun-04
Cool story, Jan. Just to add the young wannabe who appears in the sausage ads and the girlies queueing to get a glimpse of the sausage (oops, sorry). It has become a big hit. Thrifty entrepreneurs flock to grab a piece of the cake. And then one day sausage factory PR manager sees no alternative but to stand up and scream: "P*I*R*A*C*Y"!!!

A few years later society had adapted to this modern form of crime. At first, there was just a special tax on the skin used for making sausage at home. But soon emerged the practice that all sausage - homemade or not - should be produced in a few normalized formats. These standards got more and more complicated by time. And since they were intelectual propriety, prices rised up and up. Eventually only Big Sausage Ltd. could afford the necessary investments.

Meanwhile, our sausage-loving hero had started to suspect something really had gone wrong. He finally made it public that his sausages actually had been based on a traditional recipe. His parents Winston and Julia once upon a time had a jolly good sausage business goin'on back in pre-war Vienna.

The court partially gave him right, such fraudulent behaviour deserved to be punished by his prolonged staying in folsom prision. Big Sausage Ltd on the other hand was freed of all charges, of course: these kind of stories seldom have a happy ending.

 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1604
Registered: Dec-03
jan agreed on your sausage thingy.

but if the sausage was not altered the company that backed the sausage
guy is taking a chance and putting up all the money to fund the project.

so any way you slice it you can put a spin in your flavor!

 

Classical 1
Unregistered guest
John A. - you wrote, several messages back: "totally amazing sound quality, considering its price." Well, I've got to relay what happened to me last night. (no it's not about "that.")
Went over to a friend's house, where he said he had a new DVD/SACD player that I simply had to see and hear. Plus, he serves good Scotch!
Got there, and in his living room he had his Sony 27" TV - but there was a cardboard box on a low table, with wires running from it to the TV. Hmmm. . . closet terrorist?
He said he wanted to "surprise" me with what I was about to hear and see. But first, some Scotch. OK!
He put on an Indiana Jones DVD - wham-oh sound and picture that was super-clear. OK - so? Same with an opera DVD - La Traviata. Very, very good!
Then, he put on several SACDs - some jazz, some classical. I was amazed at the quality of reproduction - but he still wouldn't say anything about his new toy.
"Whadda you think?" he asked. I explained that I was duly impressed - and guessed that he had a new Denon or Marantz. Not so.
when he took the box off the player I couldn't believe my eyes. It was - yep - a Toshiba, he said model 4960, brand new. Well, I didn't know Toshiba had that kind of picture/sound to offer, and said so. But when he told me that he paid $119 for it (yes - $119.00) I just shook my head.
Now - I've heard and read on many forums how audiophiles had fallen in love with the Toshiba 3960 - DVD and CD, but no SACD. I had not played with one, but had seen it in one man's home, and frankly, it looked rather cheap.
Well, Toshiba has upped the exterior quality a bit - and obviously has a price/performance ratio that will please a LOT of people.
Don't ask me about Burr-Brown or other technical stuff, because I'm not good with those things.
I'd be interested to hear if anyone on this forum has tried out this "el cheapo" unit? Maybe John A. could pick one up to replace his irritable NAD? Well. . .
Snow here - and my sister is eager to have me move out so she can move in. I leave this weekend for a three-state business trip, then on to Sarasota for the winter.
Will probably be "off-line" for a week or so, so happy discussing!
More later. . .
 

Silver Member
Username: Arnold_layne

MadridSpain

Post Number: 165
Registered: Jun-04
John, are you really travelling around in my home country? May I ask why and where? (Just approximately). I am so sorry to hear you be treaded unrightfully by local ISP. Member of the international TELECOsa Nostra, I suppose.

Halsningar
AL
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 543
Registered: Dec-03
Jan,

I have been following the "debate" with FryGuy.ca.
I have also been biting a big hole in my lip with some of his posts. Your last post pretty much said it all, so no need for me to jump in at this time, Big Dog. I will be following with keen interest however.

Cheers!

PS New conepoints on the way. Hope to have the stands up and running by Thursday of next week. Will let you know. I'm cutting down the stands to 10". Should be interesting.
 

Silver Member
Username: Arnold_layne

MadridSpain

Post Number: 166
Registered: Jun-04
Classical1, I'm not surprised that odd brands (at least in the context) make such breakthrough. For 10$ you can buy a DAC chip that one year ago was high-end audiophile only. By now, I think learning curve and economy of scale is outbalancing R&D costs.

Still, we have to be ware of where the odd-brands cut their costs: power source, shielding, analouge circuits, mechanical parts, digital interconnects etc. Let's hope they realize that increased quality in digital processing makes it easier for us to spot shortcomings in other parts.

Hasta pronto
AL
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


RICK -STOP!!!!!!!!

Before you cut anything you must know the only acceptable saw for such a purpose is a 32 tooth per inch Japanese pull saw. They are available for about $175. If you use anything else you will destroy the ambiance of the speakers' soundfield. Just a word to the wise.

Classical 1 - Prices have come down on quality in many areas. My first SACD player was a $129 Sony. I was amamzed at the quality it could produce. Until I am more convinced that one format is going to be around and that I need that format I will hestitate before spending much more. I'll see if I can find the Toshiba to listen to.



 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 544
Registered: Dec-03
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOh! The old Japanese pull saw. Yes, that's the 32 tooth per inch stainless bushido blade, isn't it? I wouldn't consider using anything else...........
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 796
Registered: Aug-04
"Guy figures this is the best deal he can get"

Guy has no business sense.
Guy should have taken contract to lawyer.
Guy should have patented his recipe.
Guy wanted to get rich quick and let someone else put up all the money and do the work.

Company who took on Guy's sausage was built up from nothing over many, many years, employs hundreds of workers. Company execs have to consider the shareholders when investing in new sausage recipes.

Guy should have thought of something else instead of a product that has already achieved market saturation.

Guy learnt valuable business lesson. Guy made new recipe, patented it, went to new company, got the lawyers together and worked on fair contract. Recipe a huge success. Company expands, puts on fifty more workers.

Guy is now happy and wealthy :-)
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Rick - Thank God you knew of the danger. Proceed.

Rantz - When was the last time you saw an "artist" that had business sense? I forgot to add this was artistically made sausage. How artistic sausage is made, you don't want to know.


 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 797
Registered: Aug-04
Ghia

Ah they must do things different in the good ol' US of A.

Here the musician writes his music - costs nothing.

If musician has talent, get signed by agent - costs nothing.

Agent does deal with record company - costs musician nothing.

Record company pays for recording, studio muso's, promotion, advertising etc etc. Costs musician nothing.

Record is successful - musician makes money

Musician signs contract for live performance tours. Promotors assume the risks.

or

Record bombs out - record company loses money. Musician is unhappy finds new agent and tries again.

or tries busking :-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 798
Registered: Aug-04
Jan,

"I forgot to add this was artistically made sausage"

Well shoot! That explains everything.
 

Silver Member
Username: Arnold_layne

MadridSpain

Post Number: 169
Registered: Jun-04
Brilliant.

Jan, should we now substitute the word "Guy" for some former-berserk-now-a-lord to complete the story and resolve the riddle?
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2232
Registered: Dec-03
Home.se now working again. Someone must have thumped the side of a Unix server somewhere. Tack sa mycket, AL, not to mention d'accord, hasta pronto and ciao.

Yes, if someone was getting praise for his sausages he could have just increased the asking price, and been a happy sausage himself, without a middle man. The food company probably threatened to stop the butcher supplying him with the right pork. Adam Smith had seen all these tricks in 1750.

I saw new DVD player in a local electronics hobby shop for about $60 equiv. It had 5.1 analogue out. I could not read the spec. Wonder if it played DVD-A.

The DVD-R disc burned OK. The disc image had the suffix .cdr. The same hardware and software would not make an Audio CD image, however, so I left it burning Shostakovich from 44 kHz 16 bit aiff files, imported into iTunes. It said "not enought disc space" so I left out String Qt. no 13, which is short. Will see how it looks and sounds on Monday.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


"I forgot to add this was artistically made sausage"

"Well shoot! That explains everything."














Heeheee!


 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 271
Registered: Mar-04
John A. wrote:

quote:

So who knows, I might be able to join the "universal" gang before too long; you will all be spared all my paranoid ramblings about DSD; and I'll be buying an SACD or two.



Just close your eyes and sleep, but for a moment, and you will become.
Pods, pods, pods, look at all the damn pods.... :-)
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1607
Registered: Dec-03
jan just curious to your thoughts, i'm sure i'll find the culprit.
"probably tonight"

but the second st-70 that originally had the loudest humm.
I've replaced the can cap and all caps on the input board.
but i still get a prety good humm. it lessons quite a bit as
the systems on but after about 2 hours it still humms.
just much much less then it did.
have not tried new output tubes yet but have tried all others.

seems to be mainly in 1 channel.
have switched inputs from left to right with same results.
"stays in the same channel"

have looked over system quite well and find no loose wires or bad solder.

all wiring looks in very good shape,no smells and no transformers
heating up per say.

all tubes luminate well and bias adjusts fine.

no crackling or pops and no hissing through the speakers just a humm.

amp sounds great without a hint of issue except the humm.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Kegger - Your amp hums? Maybe it doesn't know the words! HAW, HAW, HAW. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Tubes themselves have never caused a hum in my experience. They crackle and spit and pop but not hum unless there is a bad connection inside the tube. Not impossible, but unlikely. And the simple answer there is to swap tubes channel to channel.
Where you will almost always find a hum source is obviously 60 cycles present somewhere in the circuit. The first place to look is the power supply. This is the best place to start when hum is present in both channels to any degree. Even if you have replaced the can cap there are, if I remember correctly, smaller caps in series with that cap before the voltage is sent to the rest of the amp. I would start there. That it lessens as the amp warms up is often the sign of a bad joint somewhere that is expanding with heat. Make certain of all your solder joints, particularly on the can cap you replaced. After those two areas I would try to isolate the problem by moving the internal wires one by one to see if you can affect the hum. Be careful of the voltages in there. Carefully check your solder joints on the AC cord itself.
If you can't seem to get rid of the hum after you have checked the caps and wiring then the next place is physical connections. Hum in tube amps is often caused by the tube pins not making contact with the sockets. Either the sockets/pins are dirty or the sockets need to be adjusted for tightness. That it decreases after awhile is also a sign of this problem. The metal expands from the heat and makes a better connection but never a great connection. If you haven't thoroughly cleaned everything on this amp that's where I would start, Kegger. Then after that is a certainty you can proceed to the other areas. Hope that helps.



 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest



There is the possibilty of a bad power transformer. If all else fails to solve the problem that is one of the few remaining possiblities. They are 40 years old.



 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 412
Registered: Apr-04
MR,

From my political/socio/economic perspective, I'm inclined to trust the musician more than The Man. That's my problem not the USA and, in fact, is probably contrary to the leanings of most American Capitalists. Apparently, things in Aussieland are quite similar to USA, after all.

you wrote:

Record company pays for recording, studio muso's, promotion, advertising etc etc. Costs musician nothing.

Record is successful - musician makes money

Musician signs contract for live performance tours. Promotors assume the risks.

or

Record bombs out - record company loses money. Musician is unhappy finds new agent and tries again.


I believe there are several misconceptions in the above statements. Record companies usually just "front" the studio costs and get it back on the sale of the record. This is a debt for many musicians if the record sales don't cover the costs. Musicians, except for the biggest superstars, make very little money from the sale of their records and, for most (excepting the biggest superstars) do not tour to make money but to promote themselves in hopes of reaping future rewards. Fair statement that promoters take a risk.

Sometimes when the record bombs, the musician's career is put on hold because they are still under contract to The Man but The Man doesn't have any interest in them anymore. In the case of AM (and I suspect she isn't only one this has happened to), she sat in limbo for 5 years because she couldn't get out of her contract yet The Man wouldn't allow her to record new songs either. She had to sit out the duration of her contract. Could a good lawyer have made a difference? Unlikely, since this is Standard Operating Procedure and few artists (excepting the superstars) have the power to change it.

A couple of years ago, I read an eye opening article about how the industry really works. Will see if I can find it and post it, if you are interested.
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 413
Registered: Apr-04
Apparently, things are done different in USA vs Australia per following excerpt from article (link below):

Last but not least, America is the only country I am aware of that pays no live performance royalties to songwriters. In Europe, Japan, Australia, when you finish a show, you turn your set list in to the promoter, who files it with the appropriate organization, and then pays a small royalty per song to the writer. It costs the singer nothing, the rates are based on venue size, and it ensures that writers whose songs no longer get airplay, but are still performed widely, can continue receiving the benefit from those songs.

For the full article - very interesting, but, admittedly from the perspective of an artist - here's the link:

THE INTERNET DEBACLE - AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW by Janis Ian
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 799
Registered: Aug-04
Ghia,

Thanks, but I do not really know how the music industry works. Mine is only an educated guess at best from reading, listening and so on. I do understand how many musicians fall into the traps set by the MAN. It happens way to often and usually when the musician goes rushing in agog with eyes open to all but the fine print.

My beef is only to assure that what the musicians do get paid at least doesn't detoriate any further because of pirating. And if our good friend John thinks that giving copies to friends or allowing people to copy cd's etc doesn't effect the bottom line for the musician, he only needs to talk to some in this country. Sure, it might cost the MAN more but it's still the music we want maintained. Unfortunately, the MAN will always be the MAN. Thanks for link will read it soon.
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 800
Registered: Aug-04
Kegger,

Strange thing happen. Yesterday we mentioned Steely Dan's Gaucho SACD. Today, it was sitting in the little box of assorted hi-rez goodies at the local JB's music store. It was $35au which is about $5 or $6au more than I've been paying for hi-rez. The fact that it's only around thirty eight minutes long made me cringe even more.

Now, if I knew how it sounded prior and they wanted twice the price, I would have handed over the money.

Brilliant multi-channel recording - absolutely one of the best yet. This one scores a lot of points for SACD.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1608
Registered: Dec-03
i'm glad you like it. i think it's great.

also i'm pretty sure when i gave my impresions of it first
a while back i mentioned how short it is.

to bad as it is a great recording.

steely dan just rocks!

 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 802
Registered: Aug-04
Sure do, thanks for the recommendation - it rocks alright - gutzy yet easy . Hope you sort out your humming amp.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1609
Registered: Dec-03
you know I think were kinda lucky I hear a lot of people complain
that theirs no hi rez material out there for them.
"not on this thread but others"

I don't know man i find all kinds of good sh!t!
rantz you seem yo have a musical taste simular to
myself do you feel lucky that some of your favorite bands are on hi rez?

at least 3 steely dan, that's awsome. i find something cool
everytime i go shopping.

maybe some of the people who produce this stuff happen to have the same taste!
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 803
Registered: Aug-04
Kegger

My tastes cover good old fashioned rock, good jazz, I'm big on contempory blues and little of the better swing like Royal Crown Revue.

I have been buying a bit of hi-rez on the net, but the store I mentioned, though I doesn't carry a lot, seems to have a few different titles in every week or two. It's gradually improving. And do I feel fortunate -

..... YEP! ......

I also feel for our friends who are missing this wonderful surround experience. It's much more than a gimmick.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1610
Registered: Dec-03
I prefer crown royal over royal crown!

yes my listening tastes are pretty wide myself but as i've said before
I find myself allways coming back to good old rock!

now if they could kick out some good old van halen!

 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2233
Registered: Dec-03
Mr Rantz wrote

Here the musician writes his music - costs nothing.

Not so. There is a huge investment behind that. And the musician (or another one) performs the music, which also costs.

One difference between a musician and a record company is that the musican puts his time and his talent, or lack of it, out for anyone to judge, and make up his/her mind whether they like the product or not. That requires courage, and risk. Record companies have no courage and have become averse to risk. Music for them has become a commodity for which the last thing they want is a free market, for people to be able to decide for themselves how much the commodity is worth. Not so the musician - he/she actually WANTS people to hear and decide.

I have never heard a musician say "this is my version and nobody else is allowed to have a different one".

There was a great quote by Ringo Starr about an entrepreneur (now famous, wealthy, and a proven crook) who booked the Beatles for a college gig, before they were famous.

"He's the kind of bloke who'd sell your p*ss if he could get it in bottles".
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 804
Registered: Aug-04
John A wrote

"Music for them has become a commodity for which the last thing they want is a free market"

Well yeah . . . .

And I don't think 100% of entrepeneurs are all marvellous stand-up citizens John. But most successful musicians would be nowhere without them. And without them, most of us would never experience the live performance of the musician.

It's not a perfect world John, but most of the time it's not bad - even for the musicians. Remember, they can always get a job if all else fails. And I believe there are many people in our communities that have far more courage than most wannabe musicians.



 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2234
Registered: Dec-03
Mr Rantz,

Let me just thank you for doing the right thing in the polling booth.

We should celebrate, and bury our differences, they are small.

Here's to the man of steel, and taxi drivers everywhere.

Cheers!

PS I wonder if Mr Howard plays the saxophone or anything, like Clinton.

Change of topic. Well, going back a few posts.

Both DVD-V and DVD-A versions are copied successfully. I have always looked at the time it took me to make a copy, review it to see if it is correct, etc., and I always concluded I'd rather buy the original, and have the "real thing" with presentation, artwork, supporting the musicians AND the record company.

But you are right, the real problem is commercial piracy. Digital copies, unlike analogues copies, are identical with the original; with digital, you do not have to mess around with recording levels etc. If I had the inclination, I could now churn out identical, same-as-the-original copies from the disc images on my office computer hard drive, even post the files if anyone felt like downloading 5 GB. Mrs A points out that I should not do that, because, then, the recording company (in this case, owned by the musicians themselves) would be encouraged to introduce copy protection.

There was an item on "CD Review" this morning about the record labels started by two UK classical orchestras. The musicians themselves are 100% behind it, and in fact one has enough technical types in it to have done the recordings themselves, at the beginning. I would expect they would be fanatics about microphone positioning and so on, as well. I should think they had a party when they got out of the clutches of commercial records labels with sound engineers who've wouldn't recognise a note of music and have never tapped their feet at anything. I'd buy the orchestras' discs instead of burning my own, any time.

We've said it before; the recording industry is in a state of flux. I think the prognosis is bad for useless middlemen, who naturally feel under threat, but good for people who provide added value, and good for music and musicians. In most cases, income from record sales is almost nothing for musicians. Recordings are promotional material, which they are proud of, and which enables people to decide whether they would like to pay to attend a concert. Concert ticket sales are where most musicians' real income is generated. It may not be the same for high profile rock stars, but good ones still go on performing and touring, even if they are megastars. Reaching an audience is part of why they do it. No-one ever sang a song or wrote a number just with an eye on sales returns. They want to reach people. If they go professional, they still want to reach people, if they are any good.

I still think record companies could start by thinking how they can manufacture, and sell for profit, an attractive product at a reasonable price, and then let the market decide if the whole product (content plus packaging) is any good. As before, that is what most other sorts of people have to do. In the sausage analogy, you don't let the sausage maker, and sausage eater, be held to ransom by people who make greaseproof paper and print labels. There is some skill in doing those things well, too, and people who are good at them could try the market to see what their product is worth, like everyone else. Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2235
Registered: Dec-03
Ghia,

Thanks for the link. Pull-quote:

"Silliest email: A songwriter who said he was going to download all my songs, burn them to CD's, and give them away to all his friends. Thank you!"
 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 273
Registered: Mar-04
My Rantz wrote:

quote:

My beef is only to assure that what the musicians do get paid at least doesn't detoriate any further because of pirating.



Isn't this the reason why performance rights organizations like ASCAP and BMI exist in the US at least?
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 415
Registered: Apr-04
I've noticed we are all getting fancy with quote formatting, lately. Italics, and now Sem's cool formatting. Makes it easier to read. Very nice.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


My questions go back a bit as I have been distracted on another thread. Sorry.

The idea that writing or performing music costs the artist nothing seems to discount not only the talent that a person has and develops but in most cases, and certainly any type of classical performance, the years and money spent refining that talent to a degree were it is marketable. Unlike the sausage Guy, Pavorotti did not get his recipe from his grandfather (genes, yes; talent, no), he got it through years of intense training and education. Having a Masters in Theatre I can tell you my debts after getting that degree were not inconsiderable. Not to mention the years when I could have been working in a business that paid me more than $25 a semester. The same applies to a musician or visual artist or dancer, etc. So please don't think that this "product" costs nothing and assumes no risk. The very fact that an artist has to put their talent and ego on the line every perfomance is, in my mind, very costly. Think about going on a job interview every day.


Also, if copying music affects the performer as well as the music company; how does it affect the artists who long ago surrendered their rights to the product? The CD brought about one of the largest influxes of money into the music industry that it has ever experienced. How did most of that money get made? By reintroducing music that was recorded long ago. How much profit do you think Herman's Hermits made on the redo of their catalog? Or, more importantly, how much money did the trumpet player for Gene Krupa make when his "product" was sold on CD?
I'm of the opinion that the Record Guys did better than the sausage Guy on these. And I just don't think the argument that the artist wasn't looking out for their own interests is valid here. The trumpet player couldn't have thought of the reissue when he let someone else sign the contract for the group back in 1946. The Record Guys took something that wasn't really theirs and that they had not developed as talent and made money off of it.
In that case is it OK if I rip a copy of those discs since I'll just be messing with the Record Guys?


 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2236
Registered: Dec-03
Right on, Jan. That's how it is.
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 416
Registered: Apr-04
Great points, Jan. Those echo some of the points Janis Ian made in her article too. In fact, she said she was asked to "lower" her royalty rates when CD's first came out because it was a new technology. So, the record companies not only had a huge backlog of music to put out on CD at little cost to them but they also expected artists under contract at that time to assume some of the risk of the CD technology.

MR, I still love ya! Just have to disagree with this defense of the record companies.

BTW, I hooked the surround system back up and have been listening to both systems today. Will post some thoughts later.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Ghia - How's Mr. Dual? Is he still losing to Mr. B.?



 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Contrary to the discussion I've had with an idiot, the longer I've left the 6200 on the better it has sounded. If you are turning your equipment off all the time I would suggest you leave it on for a few days and find out if stabilizing temperature and so forth is beneficial. Just a thought.



 

Classical 1
Unregistered guest
Turning lead into gold. Ahem - I hate to break the rhythm of royalty-talk, but I just have to share something with all of you.
In an earlier message of mine I referred to Walker "vivid" CD "enhancer," and that I'd gone out on a limb and ordered some. Well, the nice UPS fellow delivered it to my doorstep Friday afternoon - and here's what happened.
First, I opened the box and thoroughly read in the instructions. Pretty simple. Coated a couple of discs, then thought - well, it's pretty stupid to coat them without listening to them first, as a simple-minded comparison. Started doing that, and got so excited I had to invite a half-dozen people over for a "demonstration." And some popcorn, etc., Anyway. . .
We all plopped down in front of the 32-inch TV set and stereo, which I'd set up in the living room. (no TV there usually) Then we proceeded to listen to, coat, and listen again. Did a Beethoven symphony, some clarinet quintets, a bit of Oscar Peterson, and then went on to a couple of DVDs - Diana Krall "Live in Paris" and the Indiana Jones "Last Crusade." All invited turned down my offer of an opera - hmmm. . .
To make a complicated story simple - everybody in the room heard major improvements in the coated discs - some said the sound was fuller, warmer and more coherent, others said it was easier to pick out individual instruments.
Then - the video - rather amazing. The Krall DVD was crisper, with better color, and again you could more easily pick out the individual instrumentalists. The Indiana Jones DVD was the kicker - it about knocked everybody onto the floor. We all had to sit through the whole thing, and declared this stuff a Major Winner!
Well - I'm NOT a salesman - and I know I'm dealing with a lot of individualists on this forum, but if any of you decides to try Walker Vivid - I think you will feel it a worthwhile purchase. Not cheap - $45 to coat about 200 CDs. That's the end of my "sermon," but I'm definitely going to coat ALL of my CDs and DVDs in Florida.
How does the stuff work? Haven't a clue - though I'm sure that those of you who access the Walker Audio web site may figure it out. Maybe it fills in tiny pores in the CD surface? I'll leave that to you experts out there.
I'm about packed up - my sister gets here tomorrow, and I'll be on my way out. It's easier when I have two separate sets of clothes, all I have to do is pack a couple of suitcases and all of my video gear used in evaluations, and I'm out the door. Love the freedom that it brings me.
More later. . .
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 805
Registered: Aug-04
Guys

It's okay to pick out individual artists for this argument if you want. There will always be individual stories that are exceptions. And it's okay to suggest I'm on the side of the record companies if you want. The fact is I'm not. Never was. Never will be. I'm for private enterprise. I'm for those who take the risks and build something worthwhile.

And I just hope that the musicians who write music (okay it costs some money for pencil and paper) while taking the dole each weak, pay back the taxpayers when they finally become successful.

Anyone would think these people are gods. They are just people who, unlike most others, try to make a living from doing something they love.

Many musicians - NOT RECORD COMPANIES - in this country went on a public crusade to try and stamp out pirating - right down to Young Joe Cool in bedroom with his computer making discs for his mates.

So go ahead my friends, make your copies and do as will. I've had my final say on this matter.

THE MAN OF STEEL DOES IT AGAIN!

Yes, most of us don't feel old enough yet to take a chance on someone younger than ourselves running our country. And it's like the old saying: "If it ain't broke, why try and fix it?"

Johnnie may not be perfect, but he's a pretty switched on little fella :-)

John A

Do yourself a favour - toss the T533 - get a universal player. SACD is well worth it I assure you.

 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1611
Registered: Dec-03
Regardless of who is scamming who for money my position on copy protection
is still the same.

If their are no copy protection laws "imo" everyone looses.

as others have mentioned just look at other countries that have none.

the countries that don't support copy protection,
piracy runs rampent,nothing is sold,everything is ripped.

if this is left unatended no more sales will be made.

this stuff is copied because it can be not because people don't feal it's worthy.

so as i have said i don't like copy protection "give me free disks i'll take em"
but i understand the need for it.

your not going to stop all copying "good share some disks and spread the word"
but as long as their is some form of it and the laws to go with it.
then the mass market copying will be kept to a minumum.
and that should help everyone.

that is my stance. it is what i believe is the proper thing.
however someone may want to spin in a new direction.
I believe copy protection is healthy for the inudustry.

I don't think we need to beat a dead horse any longer,
some of us feal one way while others feal another.
trying to bring up different scinareos will not change anything.
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 806
Registered: Aug-04
Kegger

I'll only add:

.....YEP!.......


Ghia,

RE: The Janis Ian Article.

Free downloads and copying are two different stories are they not?. I am more concerned with the latter.
Thanks - interesting article. I was once a J Ian fan. Way back when . . .

 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 417
Registered: Apr-04
MR,

We clearly are on different sides of the fence in this debate. Even so, I'm at a loss to understand your last post. Perhaps this is ego speaking too loudly, but I felt much of it was probably directed at me along with some of the other posts in regards to Mac/surround etc.

At this point, there's not much more for me to say. Without going into any detail, my listening session today has reaffirmed the initial feeling the Mac sytem was an improved listening experience for me. I'll leave it at that.


 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 418
Registered: Apr-04
MR,

We crossed post. My last post was in response to your 4:23pm.
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 807
Registered: Aug-04
Ghia,

Sorry, I don't understand. Nothing I have stated or inferred has been directed at you. I have absolutely no problems to your music or audio listening/gear preferences. I am really pleased you like your Mac set up and if you prefer it over surrround or anything, that is your business and personal taste. I may have tossed around the odd jab at you Mac owners but it has been all in jest. I would have thought that was quite obvious. If I have offended thee then please forgive, for there was certainly not the slightest intent.
 

Marc C
Unregistered guest
"Kegger - Your amp hums? Maybe it doesn't know the words! HAW, HAW, HAW. Sorry, couldn't resist."

i burst out on that one....

John A,

What say you (or anyone for that matter) on the Kef 104/2? Seem to be a very good do-it-all speaker. And very nice looking for that matter...


My brother, a guitarist who used to work for Sony A&R, once commented on the number of tremendously talented guys out there, who never gained success because they just could not deal with the business end - and the basic shame of it. For what it's worth...



 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 419
Registered: Apr-04
MR,

Maybe I've misread it but the 4:23pm post seem pretty cynical to me. I'm the only person who has mentioned "individual stories" and my position has been solely in support of musicians - so, the comment about musicians being viewed as "god" (and apparently welfare recipients living off the backs of taxpayers at that) really seemed to be inference to my position.

True, most of the Mac references have been in jest - and I have gotten a kick out them - but there was one post in the stereo/surround debate's "tense" point that seemed to have some underlying tone to it. If I misinterpreted that, I'm sorry.

The Janis Ian article was meant to shed some light on some of the business tactics of the industry and how musicians are affected. I've always been under the impression that getting signed to a big label was a musician's ticket to stardom and riches. But, I've read too many stories in the last few years that dispel that misconception. Only a lucky few who fit into whatever the trendy mold is achieve those measures of success.

I have nothing against private enterprise. But, support of private enterprise doesn't include giving a free pass to those who use questionable ethics in their business practices and the record companies have decades of questionable business practices in their dealings with artists and consumers.

And, I have never endorsed mass copying and stated I'm in support of copyright protection. But, the record companies are not the ones who need it.
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 420
Registered: Apr-04
Jan,

Mr B is away this weekend and Dual is still waiting for attention. I've been occupied with the comparison of my two systems. So far, I've compared the NAD/Denon/MA against the Mac/NAD c541i/B&W. Both systems are setup in the living room so this is the first side-by-side comparison I've done. The difference is not subtle. The NAD/Denon/MA sounds really great and, if I hadn't heard anything else, I could be (and was) very happy with the listening experience. The Mac/NAD/B&W combo is special. The power, the clarity, and the realness of the sound is just incredible. Despite knowing for a month how much I like the Mac sound, this is still shocking to me. On India Arie's "Acoustic Soul", the opening notes of the acoustic guitar on "Back to the Middle" have a rich tone that seems to hang in the air longer than on the other system. On Johnny Cash's "American IV", the fragility of his voice is heartbreaking and so close you're tempted to reach out to hold him up.

I'm going to switch the Denon and NAD sources between the two systems and see how that works.


Jan,

Which Cowboy Junkies album were you listening to when breaking in the 6200? Tonight I picked up a used CD of their "Miles from Our Home" and it is fantastic. This might overtake "Trinity Sessions" as my favorite.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


"Trinity Sessions" is my choice for Cowboy Junkies. Good music, well performed and well recorded. I don't see how that could get better with multichannel.

I'm going to guess you will like what the Denon does for the Mac and B&W's. I'll incur the wrath of the NAD owners here but, even though I've sold and recommended NAD, it still leaves me with that sense of being slightly incomplete. Notes don't finish the way they do on the Mac and my limited experience with their newer CD players hasn't changed that impression much. Too much in the way of sins of omission. Usually a good thing for less expensive gear but the NAD sound has had too much competition from other companies of late. I would think the Denon will liven the mix without being bright. A slightly more upbeat sound than the NAD. I'm also going to guess a better soundstage and sense of musicians in space. Cash should sound quite good with more texture with the Denon. Let me know if I'm right as I have a friend looking for a new player and he's asked for a recommendation.

I spent last night till 2 A.M. listening to the 6200 and the 3/5a's. I don't want to keep on about this but the Mac integrated is so very listenable it makes me look for those pieces I haven't played in years. Listenable and impressive, not a combination you find often. The soundstage on a few pieces of classical and well recorded rock and jazz was phenomenal. Wide and deep beyond all reasonable expectations. And I'm looking for the recordings that aren't chosen for the sound but for the music. Joe Cocker, Linda Rhonstadt and classical that hasn't been played for awhile.
I helped a friend put together a system with Rotel and B&W this spring and when he was over last night he asked to hear the 6200. He was disappointed that what the system he paid a fair amount for "doesn't sound like that". I'm glad we could work out the deal and very glad you are enjoying your Mac.
We haven't heard much from Rick about his 6100 lately. How's it doing, Rick? Have you chosen a cabinet yet?


 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 421
Registered: Apr-04
Unless my ears are deceiving me, the difference is the amp. After switching the source units, the Mac/B&W system still sounded more powerful with more detail than NAD/MA. I then hooked both the Denon and the NAD CD to the Mac\B&W and the difference between them was very subtle. As I mentioned before, when they were paired by diffent amps, the difference was very apparent.

Then, I plugged both the B&W and the MA into the Mac. Again, there was a diffence in the speakers output but not nearly as obvious as when each set of speakers was driven by a different amp.

When I first bought the surround system, I distinctly remember my preferences as follows with the NAD T763:

- Monitor Audio GR10 over B&W CDM NT
- NAD c541 CD player over Denon 2200 CD player
- Denon SACD and DVD-A over NAD C541 CD player

Today's testing seems to have altered some perceptions:

- Paired with Mac, the difference between the NAD and Denon is more subtle and I would be happy with either as a player (for CD's)

- Paired with Mac and placed on floor instead of stands, the difference between B&W and MA is more subtle. In fact, I may now actually prefer the B&W.

I can understand your friend's disappointment. It occurred to me in the first tests with Mac/NAD/B&W vs NAD/Denon/MA, that I could have saved a few thousand dollars if I had realized what a used Mac could deliver and at a relatively low price. Now, I have to decide what to do. The original plan was to use the Mac in the bedroom. But, now the thought of having it in the living room is raging in my head. To do that, would mean selling the surround system.....

Yes, I'm glad the damaged amp ordeal worked out for everyone. You may have gotten the best end of the deal. lol. Are you planning on replacing the glass?
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 422
Registered: Apr-04
Many misspellings in the above post. Contacts had gotten a little dry affecting vision.

Rick,

The Spendor deal didn't work out. 2 of the 3 pairs had already sold. The third guy agreed to my price but wouldn't take Paypal. For this type of purchase, I will only use Paypal since there's some buyer protection built-in vs sending check or money order. So, I wait.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1612
Registered: Dec-03
ghia you know you don't have to have either or!

you can have your 2 channel within your surround setup.
that way you get both. that's what i'm doing.

either use the mac coming from preamp outs from the nad for your
front speakers.
or you could put a different amp on the front speaker outs of the nad
and put the mac back in the bedroom.

the point is get an amp on the front speakers you like the sound of.

that way you can have your cake and surround it also.
maybe you could even get a mac amp "not integrated"

also i agree about paypal. if they don't take it i don't buy!
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 423
Registered: Apr-04
Thanks, Kegger! I'm pretty tired right now and am probably not thinking clearly about what the options are. So, if I have the Mac coming from the NAD preamp outs, the front speakers would be connected to it? And this would work for surround too with the other speakers coming out of the NAD?

Hope you are doing well! How are your FF teams? I lost my first game last week. 3-1 has me tied for first in my division.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1613
Registered: Dec-03
to answer your first questions yes.

you use the nad as a preamp to hook to the mac "aux in" then the speakers
hook to the mac. this way you have no speakers on the front speaker
outputs from the nad but know on the mac. by using the front preouts
of the nad to the mac. any sound that would come out the front speakers
will not come out of the mac.

set the volume on the mac to about half way then the nad volume control
with make the volume go up and down. now you have remote too.
if this works out for you "which i hope it should"
then if you wanted you could get an amp "maybe mac"
put it on the preamp outs "front" then you can put your mac inegrated
back in the bedroom.

both my football teams are 2 and 2. but the league where overall
points "not head to head" is the winner i'm in second place!

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Facebook

Shop Related Deals

Directory

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us