Audible Nectar

When I got into KT88 amps (VRDs in particular) and decided they were "lifers", I went about he process of finding proper tubes for those amps. I tried just about every recent production tube out there, settling on two: The old Valve Art KT100, and the Penta Labs KT88. I have 20 VA KT100, all within a few percent, and 30ish Penta KT88, again, all within a few percent and in matched quads. Then a couple dozen Mullard and Philips Holland vintage rectifiers. I load a set of a given tube, and merrily use those until say, a tube goes south. Usually, those other three are still good tubes, so I set them all aside, IDing the one bad and three good, and store them for later. Then load a new quad. Repeat, then rematch and use the used good ones when reasonable to do so. I then waste less tubes and can use them with no fears. I do the same with 14 matched GEC KT66 for one set of my McIntosh MC30s. Use them with no fear of losing one. I'm prepared if this happens. I do this with much of my gears that I plan to keep - lots of Tele 12AX7 for my vintage Mac gears, Amperex and Siemens 6DJ8 family stuff....i just got batches of this stuff once I figured out what I liked and stocked up when the opportunities presented themselves. So that's how I deal with that issue. In your case, you might order another quad of the same tube, and from the same vendor with same new in box readings if you can. Use that quad, when the first one fails (hopefully many listening hours down the line) rematch your used ones and squeeze the useful life out of those (best four out of the remaining six) and so forth.

30's will offer the sweetest midrange of all the Macs (225 is also good in that department), the 240 will give a bit more bass "ooomph" and is a good sounding amp, just not quite as "holy" as the 30's midrange is (although it's still very good).

That's a pretty good list.....good enough for me[Y]

GREAT advice. Buying with ability to return or swap for another is pretty much a requirement.

And there lies the crux of it. Really this discussion, and any discussion about the merits of certain technologies, boils down to "reference" vs. "preference". "Good" is subjective, but "true" or "accurate" or "correct" is not. Objectively speaking, using the ISF calibration standards, there are a select few TVs that can actually achieve anything close to truly accurate reproduction (true 6500K colour temp, linear grayscale, minimum luminance levels, linear gamma curve, etc.). And all but one ( maybe two depending on your bias) of them are plasmas. The only TVs commercially available right now that can actually hit reference colour reproduction are the 9G Pioneer Kuro, and the Samsung D7000 and D8000 plasmas. And Samsung plasmas (and LCDs for that matter) historically have some of the best colour accuracy in the industry, so there is no way that your brother's television should be inferior to yours in terms of colour. Bottom line is that most people don't look for reference. They look for preference, and what they are used to. And there is nothing wrong with that. There is no TV that I can take out of the box and be completely happy with how it looks. The Vivid setting and dynamic contrast look terrible, and frame interpolation (aka 120/240 hz) gives me a headache because of all the image smearing and soap-opera effect. I also cannot stand flashlighting, blooming, clouding, and the poor viewing angles and near-black colour shift that all LCD/"LED" TVs have to varying degrees. But I also have a light controlled room with many seating positions that ruthlessly exposes all of these flaws...One possible reason the set looks so dull to you is that you are simply used to watching a TV that is WAY brighter than reference. And most plasmas do not look very good in a showroom because of how their lower perceived brightness affects the physical function of the eye when viewing a wall of TV's. It's also the reason why people seem to think that the movie settings on TV's look too red. It's because they're used to the too-blue-ness of vivid. And vise-versa with me, where everything looks way to blue in vivid because I'm used to watching reference 6500K colour temperature (vivid is often closer to 8000K)....Another reason may be that whoever calibrated your brother's set didn't account for ambient light and set the backlight too low. Rookie calibrators often forget that the true reference specification calls for a perfectly dark room, and don't compensate for a brighter environment... "Reference" is very difficult to achieve, and expensive. Add to that any room that isn't ideal for the display and you have even more difficulty in achieving "reference". What I have found researching these machines is that there isn't a huge market for "reference", it's all about 85-90% performance levels....at least that seems to be what manufacturers are catering to. No real surprise when one considers the economic malaise the world has been in the last few years....it seems manufacturers aren't trying for "top priced" sets, they are targeting the middle price points and less focus on the high end. Note the rarity of full line array with local dimming amongst newer LED offerings, for example. With limited exception, these manufacturers aren't really trying that hard to get perfection, it's a given level of performance at a certain price. It is very much "pick your preferences and flaws you can live with", unless you can 100% control the room and plan to spend the $$$ on the "near perfect" stuff. (Sharp Elite, Top end Samsung, Top end Panny, Sony XBR) Oh, and I'm not looking for any 55" OLED to be showing up for prices affordable by mortals anytime soon. When and if that technology can be scaled up, it would be a game changer, but particularly in the current world economy don't be so sure of it's dominance of large screen living rooms just yet.

That would be an ISF calibration, which is done using professional equipment. This will ensure your TV has proper color temperature (and yes, colors are measured in degrees Kelvin), white balance, gamma, and so forth. Most of these TVs have settings accessible (theoretically) by authorized service personnel only (in a service menu) and are "global" adjustments beyond the stock adjustments that are up front/user accessible. Trust me - unless you've had an ISF calibration done, you aren't seeing what your TV is really capable of. It's not cheap either - $300+ isn't uncommon, and takes several hours to do.....but it does make a world of difference.

The latest plasmas seem to "improve" regarding image retention after about 500 hours. It IS a good idea to be careful for the first few months, and vary the viewing material somewhat. The new plasmas are MUCH improved in the IR area, but not completely immune, either. Colter: Be careful before assuming LEDs can't give a smooth picture. MANY sets you see - both in random homes as well as in stores - are NOT adjusted properly. I was one who was told over and over that plasma was a superior technology for sports, but find I prefer the better Sony LEDs for that now. Things aren't as "cut and dried" as they used to be, even though I think you WILL appreciate some aspects of plasma. I think plasma shines for typical feature films in dimmer rooms. Cimema people can find issues with LEDs, especially in dim rooms, where more variations in the backlight systems become more evident (and to get this right costs more $$). And YES, GREAT DEALS abound on these machines. I found out very quick that stores really want your big screen business right now, and even being one not well known for "beating up salespeople for prices" was getting lower prices without even asking. I'm not one who worries too much about the detailed price specifics until I figure out which machines I really want, but wowsers it's a buyer's market right now......

There are MANY considerations when looking at flat screen TVs, and your personal preferences and "way of seeing" will influence your decision. I spent a good six weeks combing through all of the potential factors and machines. There isn't a clear cut winner, bt most people will find that they prefer one type vs. the other, especially once shown all of the variables. PLASMA: - Tend to work best in dimmer or light controllable rooms. - Has a distinct advantage in screen uniformity. From corner to corner and across the screen, the screen will appear uniform, with no variances in brightness or focus. Also applies for off angle viewing - Has a "filmlike" quality to it, which will attract people who love the cinema. - Motion is a mixed bag. While plasmas run at a higher rate for motion processing, the phosphor trailing (dots trailing off of the back of an image in motion, which negates much of the benefit of the higher rate) can be a problem. Also complicating matters is the issue of color gradient, which is the set's ability to show varying shades of a given color. This is particularly prevalent when showing a spherical image, or color panels which show a varying shade of a given color across wide areas of the screen....and also during motion. A primer on color gradient (which is also related to another issue called "posterization") is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_banding - Plasma sets can appear "dim" to the viewer in certain environments, and can have a "flicker" that some people are sensitive to. Whites and contrast usually are "turned up" in a calibration to make them appear brighter and with better contrast. - Plasmas do consume more power, and usually consume even a bit more once calibrated. A 55" will often consume 300 watts when calibrated in 2D mode, and even more in 3D. A 60" can consume up to 500 watts calibrated and in 3D (a set will use the most power with high brightness and in 3D). - Can be prone to image retention, althoiugh they are all said to be better on this in recent years. Still an issue, but not a much as it used to be. LED (which is nothing more than an LCD with LED backlight)...... - Are much brighter, and recommended in rooms with varying light conditions or in brighter rooms - Use less power. A 55" uses 125-150 watts in typical use when calibrated, and maybe 170 with 3D - max. On a plasma, a typical user or calibrator will turn UP the brightness (again, uses more power), on an LED you will find that turning it down is more common (which will take an already power miserly device and make it even more miserly). - Can have screen uniformity issues.....a HOST of them. The "men" get separated from the "boys" within LED models via how these issues are addressed. Some of the uniformity issues are very evident - like some sets that are visibly "off" in the corners for various reasons, or problems with the backlight shining through the blacks (called "blooming" when found within the screen, "flashlighting" when seen from the screen edges due to backlighting issues). As a corollary, the backlight setups in LEDs do vary, and will affect how good the set is. One of the current "top dogs" in LED is the Sony HX929, which boasts what is known as "full line array with local dimming". The backlight system runs all along the set in rows, dividing the set into 100+ "zones" which can be independently brightened or dimmed to allow for best performance in scenes which have lots of blacks and whites....or a dark scene that is backlit. The next "step down" are sets that are "edge lit" LED arrays with "regionalized" dimming systems, which usually do well but can be observed "blooming/flashlighting" in certain situations. - Off angle viewing can be an issue......but it's not always as bad as some reviews or AVS posters claim. - Motion handling varies set by set. Some are good, some not so good.....but don't think LEDs cannot do sports (Sonys do sports very well, especially the better sets). Also be aware that most sets have adjustments for motion, so you will want to play with those before ruling out a machine. - LEDs can be prone to what is called "soap opera effect", a "skin-like glow" of the image that can look good in some situations, like cinema, but can look bad when not desired (and is bad on sports, for sure). Many of the better sets aren't so much an issue, lower cost sets can definitely exhibit the problem. Gamers will deal with the issue of input lag, no matter what set (plasma or LED) they buy. I must say that there are no "clear winners", just situational bests that can vary by room and user. In plasma, I like the Panasonic ST (great bargain), GT and VT (great set) series best, the upper end Samsung plasmas look good but do run very warm. In LED, I much prefer the Sonys, especially any set that offers the "X Reality Pro" chip (HX729, 820 and 929), as well as the top end Samsungs. I bought the Sony HX729 as my own choice, and don't regret it a bit. It took me six plus weeks of combing through all of the issues that concerned me, and looking at sets in various stores. I spent many evenings sitting in front of TVs, and getting the settings on these machines out of "torch mode" (which is how TVs are usually set up in showrooms) and into something watchable (and often with recommended settings from AVS). I found that AVS forum was another valuable resource, and while they are definitely over obsessive, they will expose every problem ever seen on these TVs and help weed out the choices. Every major model has been sliced, diced, and fricaseed obsessively so it is a good education. Understand, though that often the problems they state are not as bad or as frequent as that board makes it seem - it's always the "problem sets" and the obsessive posters that suck up the oxygen that can make them seem more frequent or worse. Great place to research online.

Emphasis on Bill's comment here. I found much benefit to using dual sub cabs.....and they are the JBL 4638 cabinets (each with dual 15s). I absolutely have no need for 4 15" JBL professional use woofers in my 14x24 space, but the EFFORTLESSNESS and symmetry seems to serve my install very well. It took two whole days with test tones and mics very busy to get them "right", but these beasts properly EQ'd and set up yields a scale that sounds much bigger than 14x24. I was the luckiest SOB on the planet when I was able to do this for my HT for under $800 via a JBL "tent sale" some years ago. I couldn't believe that average joe me figured out how to run a parametric EQ from reading forum posts, but I did and the rewards have been worth multiples of that $800. These subs have a lifetime "Sunday walk in the park", relative to what they are built to do (the pair will get me to the high 120's down to 25 hz and mid 120's at 20) and they never see that volume. Mostly they provide reinforcement to the system at more modest levels, sonically invisible and an extension of the Cornwalls that they "reinforce". So absolutely no argument about adding another sub..... more woofers to spread the energy can be a good thing, if integrated properly....

It's events like this that make me glad I didn't have kids, because this is one more slice of proof to the following: The "institution" - be it bank, university, government, religious, or other corporation is more important than you or your kid - and protecting the institution over the interests of you or your kid is paramount. In reality, all of these categories are "corporations", and in the current zeitgeist it's "corporations above all", and will be defended and protected at any and all costs. But one thing makes this crime (buggery) unique: Unlike the bankers or gov (who wash thier crimes in complexity), they can never make this crime legal.

I guess basketball is a full contact sport.

This is another "benefit" I got from buying Cornwalls.....Klipsch made the "Cornwall II" in the 60's/early 70's that has the horns flipped vertically, which makes it well suited to laying it on it's side......and voila, instant center channel speaker. A forum member from years back (HornEd) used to cut into the motorboards and realign the drivers on a 6 KLF30 Legend theater, and got similar mind blowing results. Whatevah ya godda do.......

The Eagle has landed. The ramifications will be immense.

This is NOT insane - it is the proper and expected enthusiast approach to doing a home theater properly. As much as 75% of your HT sound comes through the center channel, so it stands to reason that your center channel should be the most robust - just as a 2 channel listener would want those two speakers to be as robust as possible. Specially manufactured "small" center channel speakers are COMPROMISES, and should only be used when your significant other threatens you with death[]. With the advent of wall mountable flat screens, there are NO MORE EXCUSES to avoid the third main as center. If people reading think I am beating the drum for this approach and encouraging everyone here to do the same, they would be correct. Listen to me now, and believe me later[8-|]

[H][H][H]"APPLAUSE"[H][H][H] For the gallery reading out there, full sized third mains as center channel are the way to go. If one is serious about home theater and wants the best results, it starts right here.....every move made should be towards the goal of a trio of mains across your front soundstage. Nice work!

The methodology might be seen by forum members as "The Completion Backward Principle".

Many films have the bass track playing at 10db too high, especially on certain processors (and it's obvious when this is the case), so I just turn the bass/LFE level down accordingly. My "BIG" improvement in bass response, though, was using an EQ on the bass to cut the peaks down in the response. I used a mic setup and Behringer Feedback Destroyer as a parametric EQ (you can use others) over a two day tweak session to get those peaks in the response "cut down". Before the EQ was installed on my two JBL 4638 cabs (each with 2 15" JBL pro theater woofers) they sounded like uncontrollable beasts, overdone and not so clean....but once EQ'd my theater now gives bass that is fast and accurate, with a depth and effortlessness that sounds like there is no additions at all. You can't "hear" the subs, you hear a seamless SYSTEM, and when done properleh, the "scale" of the performance is INCREDIBLE. A newer preamp with the "Audessy" function (very nice EQ/room analyzer feature on newer pre-pros) can also be a huge help too, or so I understand, but haven't used one in my system here at home. The bottom line though is that a good sub setup should sound seamless, where a listener who didn't see the subs would think all the bass is coming from your mains. Improperly balanced subs "stick out" sonically, where good subs blend in while adding scale to the performance.

I have a 14W x 17L (with more extended room in back) x 8H room that works great for Cornwalls. Would work well for Klipschorns, too, except I can't seal the corners, so 2 JBL 4638 woofer cabs added make up for it. If I were building a custom room, I would shoot for an approximation of "The Golden Ratio", roughly 1 to 1.3 to 1.6 ratio of room dimensions.

Yes, the wiring and caulk is aftermarket (you can tell the prior owner reads here), and they look very good. Only change I would make is a recap of the crossover networks.....and even then you might listen to the ones in the speakers for a while before you renew those. My favorite era of Heritage.

Even more exciting that that..... (JubeCube graphic) Cornwall Golden Ratio.

It's the other way around. Klipsch occupies US.

He's also not a man unless he consumes lots of cheap, watered down lagers and avoids fanny packs (the TV told me so). That might assist him in getting the guts to hammer said machine into submission.......

I'm in the same boat as you... and when it comes to video, I've been reading the exact same thing with respect to it's scaling. I've been putting it off, but it does seem to be the facto in blu-ray players at the moment... have you been looking at any others? And as far as I know, the difference with the 95 are the upgrades to the analog audio side of things ... ROb I have not been looking TOO seriously at many others.....possibly the new Pioneer higher end machines, but again as they are new there's not much out there yet on them. There's all kinds of $200 and under stuff, but I want a serious machine that's going to make the best of my display and titles.

I am also considering the Oppo 93 ($500ish), and am wondering if there is a better BR machine choice in that price area. Not so much a concern regarding analog, but want the best video performance for both BR and 480 DVD. I like the fact that the 93 seems to play just about every disc format out there, and it seems to garner very good reviews on the video (especially WRT scaling).

Ahhhhhh.....the smell of new can be a bit overwhelming[:S] But once dissipated, the work can commence.