laurenc319

The answer is simple. Because men are genitically programmed to enjoy and equipped to have p***ing contests and we can't, for the most part, help ourselves. Larry

That's because they don't know about tubes. Larry

great amp, enjoy it ! Larry

hi, I have a pair of Forte I's paired with a Cary SLI-80 kt-88 pp amp. It's a very satisfying combination, particularly in the triode mode. The system can seduce you with its warmth and charm, or overwhelm you with its power and dynamics, take your pick, it can do both. I have a pair of Wright Mono 3.5s paired with 1979 Cornwalls . I have never used them with the Fortes, but I would guess the sound would be much alike. The SETs are much different. Less bass impact for sure. More midrange and treble transparency for sure. A more delicate sound and in some ways with some types of music, more lifelike. Larry

Hi, from a thread on Audiogon "01-19-06: Audiokinesis I agree with the posts pointing out that a high efficiency system usually has better dynamic contrast than a low efficiency system. Let me try to explain why. It's a nasty little secret almost nobody talks about. Theoretically, a loudspeaker's output will increase by 3 dB for a doubling of input power. In practice, this is ALMOST NEVER true. The reason is power compression (also often called thermal compression), and its primary cause is voice coil heating. As you increase the power going into a voice coil, it heats up. As it heats up, its resistance increases. As its resistance increases, more of the power going into it goes into overcoming that resistance (heating it up still more) and less goes into actually producing sound. Let me give a few numbers as an example (drawing on measurements posted by Bill Roberts on Audio Asylum). At normal volume levels, the typical 86 dB efficient speaker may well only give you an average of 2.5 dB increase in loudness for a doubling of input power. So let's say you have an 86 dB efficient speaker playing at 80 dB average volume level, and along comes a +20 dB peak (quite common). This speaker will compress the peak and you'll only get about +17 dB. On the other hand, a high-efficiency system (say 96 dB efficient or higher) usually has negligible power compression at normal listening levels, and will more than likely give you the full +20 dB that the peak calls for. Once again, this is a generalization - I'm sure there are exceptions, but unfortunately this is something nobody measures and includes in their specifications. Differences in the power compression characteristics of the various drivers within a speaker often cause the tonal balance to change with volume level, with woofers typically suffering from more power compression than tweeters and therefor many multiway systems sound dull at low volume levels and bright at high volume levels as they've been optimized to sound right at medium to medium-high volume levels. On another note, bass reflex loading only increases efficiency in the region of the port tuning. It does nothing for midband efficiency. The reason why bass reflex speakers are usually more efficient than sealed box speakers is that the driver parameters most suitable for reflex loading include a more powerful magnet system, which is what raises the midband efficiency. Hope this helps some. Duke" seems to make sense to me Larry

This comes along with it for an additional $65,000.00

only for those with 13 million dollar ears,

hic, I tink it was a typo eror

hi, Some other things not to do while drunk 1. propose to someone 2. get married 3. lend someone money 3a. borrow money 4. buy something 5. try and teach the town bully a lesson 6. read something written by Henry Miller 7. eat something you cooked while snockered 8. try and make sense out of this froum feel free to add Larry

hi, a dog has a memory which is based on sensory input and not words. The input can be sight, sound , touch or so on. Bring the dog into the room again with the speakers playing, if it walks out .... bad memories Larry

hi, I'm using Wright Mono 3.5s with Sophia Electric 2.5 volt 300b tubes and nos RCA dual plate 2A3s with my Cornwalls. Both are very involving and musical combinations. The 300b tube is a bit warmer, the 2A3 tube a bit more detailed. With Khorns it can only get better. Larry

found here http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/cjdiaries.htm Larry

no joke, the longer it plays... the bigger the caps and transformers , more stored current to work with transients I sure the techi types will slay this, it's just an observation I've made over many years. kind of like how much it weighs

this may be simplistic, but I turn the amp off and see how long it still plays. The longer the better. Larry

I want two, no I don't, yes I do, yes I do Larry

hi, with my Wright Mono 3.5s and the Cornwall Is listening mostly to jazz measured 10 feet from the speakers with a Radio Shack digital meter max levels fast recording late night soft 65 db late night loud 70 to 72 db daytime soft 70 to 75 db daytime loud 80 to 85 db so most of the time the Wrights are well within their parameters rocking real loud at a party with the Forte Is and Cary SLI-80 - rock not jazz and not often 95 to 105 db good listening Larry

Yes but 2.4 % is nonproductive, it's going around in circles supporting the tort system, not the economy. It's late here in PA. I'm going to watch the game and go to bed. You can have the last word. A good debate. Thanks for being civil. good listening Larry

Cyotee, Does the Niles enable you to switch between amps without turning the amp not in use off ? I thought it was a bad idea to keep a tube amp on without a speaker load attached to it. Larry

I don't think it's incorrect reasoning. For example. We all pay for liability insurance, auto, homeowners, and if we own a business or are a professional for corporate insurance or professional malpractice insurance. The higher premiums means less disposable income to spend on goods or services and less money to stimulate the economy. In the case of a small business less money to distribute to the employees as income or benefits or less employees. The rising insurance rates corporations are experiencing are passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. Goods and services cost more, demand is decreased when prices are high and therefore less goods and services are produced. Corporations don't grow as fast and less jobs are produced. Corporations become less competitive compared to foreign corporations, which don't incur these nonproductive costs, and thus sell less on the world markets .... less growth & fewer jobs. Insurance does not cover all of corporate liability and reserves are set aside to cover the cost. Less money therefore for R&D and product innovation and less growth. Less money for dividend distributions to shareholders. Less money to stimulate the economy. A corporation which experiences a large class action settlement or threat of one ( take the drug company Merk as an example ) usually experiences a decline in stock values. 50% of Americans own stocks. Again a loss of income and less disposable income to stimulate the economy. Lower stock prices for a company means the company has a diminished ability to raise capital for growth or R&D. Less corporate growth and fewer jobs. BTW Texas is ahead 16 to 7. I'm with you on this one. Larry

"Golly! You mean 2.4% of our GDP is just sucked right out of the economy" The short answer to that is yes. Everyone pays the price. For the economy it's a negative feedback system. It doesn't matter if it's me or some who won a judgement against me who has and spends the money. The dollars are fed into the economy and the economy is paying a 2.4% premimum to run. The price paid is 1000 dollars a person. An average family of 4 with an average income of 68000 dollars with 75% (51000 dollars) of that as disposable after all taxes are paid pays $ 4000 more for the same good and services then if the tort system was nonexistant. That's 8% of their disposable income. That's too much, Larry

lots if interesting info in these charts, particularly the one entitled " Where's the Money " http://www.forbes.com/archive/forbes/2002/0513/090chart.html 58% of torts dollars go to someone other then the tort victim It seems to me the system is broke and needs fixing. Larry

Tort lawyers don't create wealth, they just redistribute it. I becomes a cost to the rest of us that pay for it by paying higher prices for goods and services as the cost of litigation is passed on. The amount of wealth that seems in our country compared to the rest of the world, excessive. The cost of torts is project to be 2.4 percent of our GDP in 2005. That's more then 1000 per person per year. The injured in our society deserve to be compensated. It's up to all of us through our legislative system to determine if we as a society want to continue to keep paying at this level. I for one think the cost is too high. Larry

Hi, Guess the average cost per person per year in the US of Tort litigation 10 dollars 50 dollars 100 dollars 250 dollars 500 dollars 1000 dollars 2500 dollars The answer is here http://www.ncpa.org/iss/leg/2002/pd050802g.html and here http://www.forbes.com/archive/forbes/2002/0513/090.html;jsessionid=i7iF446GN6ddVlzx?token=NCBKYW4gMjAwNiAyMTo0ODo0NyArMDAwMA%3D%3D Now tell me tort litigation is not a drag on our economy Larry

Hi, Sophia Electric 2.5 volt 300b mesh plates are a wonderful tube. Best mids I've heard so far with my Wright Mono 3.5s. The RCA dual plates are my other favorites. Larry Citro

hi, Just 5 that's difficult, some that have not been mentioned yet Bill Evans : The Bill Evans Trio at the Village Vanguard 1961 original trio with bassist Scott LaFaro Miles Davis: 'Round About Midnight 1955 1956 . Miles, Coltrane, Red Garland, Paul Chambers and Philly Joe Jones John Coltrane: A Love Supreme 1964 Coltrane, McCoy Tynor, Jimmy Garrsion and Elvin Jones Monk: The Complete Prestige Recordings, cd# 3, Monk, Davis, Milt Jackson, Percy Heath & Kenny Clarke Terrance Blanchard: Flow Blanchard, Brice winston, Lionel Loueke, Herbie Hancock, Derrick Hodge, Kendrick Scott, Gretchen Parlato & Howard Drossin That's my picks for today, they probably will change tomorrow good listening Larry