Jump to content

lynnm

Regulars
  • Posts

    3278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by lynnm

  1. ????

    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!

  2. 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.

  3. 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?"

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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!

  11. "

    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!Big Smile [<img src='https://community.klipsch.com/uploads/emoticons/default_biggrin.png' alt=':D'>]Big Smile [<img src='https://community.klipsch.com/uploads/emoticons/default_biggrin.png' alt=':D'>]Big Smile [<img src='https://community.klipsch.com/uploads/emoticons/default_biggrin.png' alt=':D'>] "

    YAHOO !!


  12. "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.

  13. 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.

×
×
  • Create New...