lynnm

???? Don't let yourself be run off. We all get hassled from time to time. FWIW I once made the mistake of suggesting that a problem posted by a new member might not really be a problem after all and the next thing I knew the doofus responded with a diatribe about my character and personal habits. To paraphrase Lincoln: You can p*ss off all of the people some of the time and you can p*ss off some of the people all of the time but you can't p*ss off all of the people all of the time. Hang in there bud you would be missed!

Congratulations to you both!

I suspect the death toll in New Orleans will be a damned sight higher than what is suggested by that article and also, ( thankfully ) , much lower than had been predicted in earlier reports. The main point however is that no disaster should be assessed purely or mainly on the basis of the body count.Whether the ultimate death toll be 50 or 50 times that,there has and will continue to be human suffering on a massive scale. Sadly,we cannot help the dead but we can help the survivors - Firstly by providing immediate aid and - Secondly and as importantly by taking heed of the conditions, ( controllable or not ) which led to the outcome. Government and private relief agencies need to examine ways to mitigate the consequences of such events in the future and wherever possible improve the infrastructure to be able to react more rapidly and effectively to aid the survivors. Many reports suggest that the Army Corps of Engineers failed the people of New Orleans by not reinforcing the levees in the past but there is ample evidence to suggest that the Corps was effectively prevented from doing so by budget restraints. Other reports suggest that FEMA failed to act effectively to assist survivors once the disaster had ocurred. There is likely a lot of truth to those complaints but ultimately I place greater importance upon learning from this disaster and how to better deal with similar episodes to come. Certainly if there was incompetent leadership and poor planning and faulty implementation of relief efforts those whose responsiblity it was to do the planning and implementation need to be called to account but that is less important than using the lessons of Katherine and Rita to improve our response in future.

The notion that Tube Amps are by definition better or worse than Solid State Amps is pure nonsense. A poor tube amp sounds every bit as bad as a its solid state equivalent. The same can be said for good tube amps vs. good solid state amps. In the final analysis there are only three kinds of amps: Good,Bad and Indifferent. I use a tube amp not because I dislike solid state amps but simply because the amp that sounded best to me for the re$ource$ I had available the last time I went amp shopping was a tube amp. Had I heard better for the same or fewer dollars in a solid state amplifier I would have purchased a solid state amp. In my opinion the only important issue when evaluating an amp is "How does it sound<to me> with my speakers?"

The pic didn't show unfortunately. IIRC artto is an architect. Edit: I'll be damned it did finally show up. What a nice looking bit of kit!

YIPE!!

It is so hard to lose a beloved pet. A year ago this last Easter we had to have our 17 year old "Baby" put down do to Cancer of the jaw. Baby was a feral kitten who showed up at our place and was taken care of by our other cats. Our place was something of a neighbourhood hangout for the felines around us. We often referred to her as"The Baby" and over time the name stuck. Neither my wife or I were able to go to work the next day. We were devastated. I understand your pain.

You could very well be right. I tried finding some Russian audio (old or new ) gear via Google and came up empty handed.

Malcolm I am curious about your assumption that most audiophile gear used in Russia would be of American,European or Asian origin.From what I have read Russia has always had an active electronics industry. I have seen numerous old Russian table model radios that were very good quality indeed. I admit to not knowng about Russian audio equipment but would not be very suprised to learn that the Russians have produced some decent equipment.

Welcome Home!! I have a lovely old Ariston RD80sl which is the equivalent of the first LP12 with an Grace 707 tonearm and a Shure V15 III. It is one great sounding combo!! I recently replaced the Sovtech EL34s in my already superb Antique Sound Lab AQ1003dt with ElectroHarmonics 6CA7s. The improvement was NOT subtle---particularly in the bass and midrange. I look forward to your contributions to our little audiophile funny farm. Stick around and you will find yourself awash in audio expertise.

While I disagree with some of what Artto has written,he is bang on the money when he states: Another misunderstood aspect of noise and vinyl is that noise is related to the LP being dirty. Yes, thats true, but excessive noise can also be the result of improper setup/alignment of the pickup/tonearm. VTA (vertical tracking angle) in particular can make a huge difference in the amount of noise you hear even if everything else is aligned correctly. ( My addendum: AMEN to that!! Proper tonearm and cartridge setup works wonders)! It is with regard to the use of alcohol and detergents in cleaning fluid that we are in disagreement-particularly with reference to using Smirnoff vodka as a cleaning agent. Firstly the primary cleaning/whoopying agent in vodka is of course grain alcohol which is not especially different in its cleaning action from Isopropyl alcohol.Both act to dissolve certain contaminants which mix with the water in the cleaner and can then be washed/wiped or vacuumed away. Smirnoff is by far the better and safer drink than Isopropyl alcohol ( Isopropyl alcohol really can kill in the shorter term - It is plainly poisonous ).Isopropyl however when used in a cleaning solution is a far better source of solvent action than Smirnoff ---if for no other reason than the Smirnoff contains a 40-50% concentration of alcohol as opposed to Isopropyl which is 99% alcohol by volume. They are equally effective solvents and Isopropyl being far more volatile stays on the disk surface for a much shorter time. Bear in mind however that Isopropyl Alcohol and Rubbing Alcohol are NOT one in the same. Rubbing Alcohol typically contains a mixture of 70% Isopropyl Alcohol....The rest being water with emoliants,...( lubricating oils )... added.Given that the oils added to rubbing alcohol are designed to not be broken down by the alcohol ( but rather to remain in suspension--as in oil in water ), it is reasonable to assume that those lubricants in large part will be left behind on the vinyl once the alcohol has evaporated where they will potentially have at least four highly undesirable effects: (I) Those leftover oils will tend to form a thin but nonetheless ever-present film on the groove of the record which could result in subtle changes in the intended sound. Note re: Groove Glide: FWIW ... This the same reason I distrust products such as Groove Glide but in fairness I have to admit never having tried the product... so my reservations re: Groove Glide are most definitely not based on personal experience.It may well be that this product does quieten groove noise as advertised without deleterious effect. (II) Whatever oils are released and not washed away will by definition tend to gum up your stylus. (III) Those oils will over time become sticky thereby dramatically increasing the tendency for airborne dust fragments to stick to the surface and groove of your vinyl and thence be transferred to your stylus. (IV) One of the frequently stated arguments against the use of alcohol in record cleaning fluids is that the alcohol has a tendency to leech plasticising chemicals from the viny and can result in the groove becoming brittle and therefore noisier/more easily damaged. I take this claim with a large grain of salt but that said a certain amount of alcohol can be trapped between the oil film and the vinyl if rubbing alcohol is used thereby exposing the vinyl to a more prolonged exposure to that potential effect. Turning now to the question of the use of detergents in a cleaning solution: Detergents are a man-made chemical and this makes them fair game for a sideways glare when compared to naturally occurring agents. I for one tend to prefer natural agents over their manufactured counterparts but...not in this case. Detergents were invented in WWII by scientists in Nazi Germany, ( I am not implying that those scientists were Nazis BTW....some might have been but I don't know one way or the other ), in reaction to the serious shortage of laundry soap that existed in wartime Germany. It was assumed that once hostilities ended and good old reliable soap was once again available the need for detergents in domestic settings would disappear. Much to the suprise of many in the industry when laundry/dishwashing soap again became readily available the sales of detergents continued to climb while the sales of soaps designed for those purposes continued to go to hell in a handbasket. This was simply because the detergents worked one Scheize of a lot better! For our purposes Detergents work very well in record cleaning because of the basic molecular structure and behaviour of those detergent molecules.Simply put the detergent molecule has two receptors.When either of those receptors binds to a molecule of anything ..... the other becomes unavailable to bind to anything else ( The scientific whys and wherefores of that fact must be left to others more versed in that area than I....In other words I do not know why!!) . The now bound molecule then simply floats about in its carrier fluid until such time as it gets wiped away/floats away or gets sucked away by the vacuum action of a record cleaning device. Soaps work very differently from detergents. Soaps clean by combining water and animal/vegetable fats and lye into a caustic solution that dissolves and incorporates dirt particles into itself and thence into the water solution which then can easily be flushed away. In addition contaminants that are not easily dissolved/absorbed into the soap solution become lubricated and are relatively easily rinsed away. Unfortunately the soap residues are nonetheless very difficult to totally wash away. The degree of solubility can be demonstrated ---Try licking the back of your hand 10 minutes after a normal handwashing.In most cases you will be able to smell/taste the soap that clings to your skin. I use a cheap device known as the Spin Clean Record Washer System with excellent results. It is available from Garage-a-records.com for about U$60.00.As a bonus the cleaning fluid supplied does not contain alcohol and is safe for cleaning shellac based disks. A final note: Never under any circumstances use a cleaning fluid which includes alcohol on 78 RPM records as virtually all of those produced prior to 1950 were shellac based and alcohol of whatever variety will destroy them.Some late 78s were pressed on vinyl but my rule is that if it is a 78 ASSUME THAT ALCOHOL WILL DESTROY IT! Some ( But not the majority ) of very early 33 1/3 RPM LPs from the period 1948-1950 were not pressed in vinyl but are in fact shellac based. If in doubt err on the side of caution and use NO alcohol in cleaning them.

FWIW I had and loved KLF30s and now have Klipschorns. Both are superb speakers and either are capable of reproducing virtually any music that they might be presented with. The KLFs are often referred to as the ultimate in rock speakers and I agree. They present a more obvious bass slam than the Khorns and while using them never had a sense that they were in any way inaccurate. That said,my Klipschorns while a little lacking of the slam factor as compared to the KLFs present a somewhat more coherent sound across the audio spectrum.In other words with the 30s I was constantly amazed at their sound...The bass is so powerful..the midrange so dynamic...the tweeters as sweet as a songbird. With the Khorn however I find myself less drawn to the power/sweetness of the speaker's presentation and more able to allow the speaker to disappear and simply hear the music. That said, If I ever had to surrender my horns for some reason it would be a pair of Cornwalls or KLF 30s or failing that a pair of RF7s that I would be prowling for. Any of those are damned good second choice.

Actually Reference speakers may or not require oiling to look their best depending upon the finish they were given at the factory or by subsequent owners. If they were not a lacquered finish but were instead a raw finish then they need to be oiled. On the other hand if they were a raw finish and were subsequently stained and given a lacquer finish then oiling is unnecessary.

May you soon return and find decent employment prospects and a pair of Khorns at a fire sale price![]

Damn!! I am so obtuse! I obviously misunderstood the original question.Instead of being a poll about forum graphics I failed to understand that the post was intended to serve as a soapbox for various views on the foreign policy of the USA. AKA I suggest that 2 channel is hardly the place to air opinions of this sort. If someone feels an overwhelming need to air their politics please do it elsewhere.There are umpteen websites devoted to the discussion of politics,religion,race,optimum stool size/ratio of floaters to sinkers etc.They range all the way from moderate to the extremes of right and/or left.Interestingly, I have yet to see a discussion of American policy on one of those sites get derailed by a rant about the relative merits of a brand of speaker. Obviously those folks lack direction and imagination. If faced with an overwhelming need to pull a hijacking please look for a truckload of unhappy pit bulls!

" WOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOO! Got an extremely brief call, Mom is alive and well. No details since she was on a borrowed cell phone. But she has the basic necessities and is at a friends house that survived the storm. Thanks All for the support! " YAHOO !!

Consider yourself fortunate to bear a resemblance to PWK. In addition to everything else he was a good looking man!

Just plain gorgeous!! Nice Job!!

Parrot The quality of the speakers in a system is of course extremely important but that said,the quality of the signal presented to the speakers ultimately determines the final sound. Garbage In = Garbage Out! In any event given that we both own Klipschorns I suspect we are on the same page more or less.

"will a good CD player make a huge difference?" YES!! but...... A good CD player will definitely improve the sound quality of CDs. It will of course have no impact on MP3s etc. In addition: While the source material ( ie. The recording ) component is the primary determinator of the potential sound quality, there are other factors to consider. By this I mean that the ultimate sound quality depends first on the quality of the source material,then upon the quality of the player,thence upon the quality of the amplifier and finally upon the quality of the speakers. I have no experience with your receiver ( although most of the Denon product is well regarded ). Conventional wisdom suggests that, assuming that the source material is decent , one will derive the greatest benefit from upgrading the player. Generally speaking the maker of an all-in-one receiver has to balance cost ( and therefore final retail pricing ) and features against the competition. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that compromises will need to occur in the final product. When one pays perhaps $800.00 for a receiver which includes a CD player it is reasonable to assume that CD subsystem included within that unit is as good as could reasonably included at that price point but that it will be unlikely to be nearly as good as what would be found in a $500.00 + standalone CDP.

No major difference except that when I tried with Ie the reply function seemed to function fractionally faster than with Firefox. That said the difference was so small that the slight speed advantage may well have had more to do with web traffic than with the server or the browser under test. I timed this and the difference was a matter of about 1/2 to 3/4 of a second which I see as being inconsequential and as noted above is likely more a function of internet traffic than the browser being used. I am on a cable connection via a wireless link. Other configurations may yield different results.

I'm using Firefox and the reply function seems normal. I try it with IE and see if I see any difference.

Oops!! Don't feel badly Joe. I thought I had made a mistake back in 1980 but it turned out I was wrong!

As usual with your projects that amp is a Tour de Force in aesthetics and from what I have read at Audiokarma I am sure that the electronics are every bit as elegantly constructed. Audio art!

Welcome Aboard!! This is definitely a great place to hang out and learn not only about Klipsch but High Fidelity sound in general!