glens

In the photos it appears as thought there is MDF that has "bloomed" around the screw heads. I've done floor covering for a living off and on through the years. It was a pretty good call on the age, huh? I'd bet that any seams in that "rug" are sewn and not glued together with hot-melt tape. And any pad under it that isn't powder now is likely stuck to the floor and rock-hard with need of scraping.

I did just that all the time before I went digital. Cheap ones of today ought to be able to inflict damage just as well. As I recall, even with the best-shaped styli of decades ago (which certainly aren't bettered today?), set up properly with a good tonearm, it was a complete mystery how the records survived even a single play. The contact area and tracking weight combine to well more than the PSI the vinyl is supposed to be able to withstand; like tons per square inch!

They're certainly not bottlenecks. They wouldn't restrict enough flow to impact anything even if they were 50' long at their gauge. And they don't pick up any interference that could possibly get by the diodes and filters in the power supply. However, they may cause interference in nearby low-level cables if those cables have inferior shielding. If that's the case and fancy power cables are cheaper than better low-level signal cables, then definitely take the cheaper route. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but seriously, do you really believe you'd hear a difference in a well-constructed A/B/X test? I'm being genuine.

Might as well add another 80 per and fabricate a foot-pedal-actuated set of casters to lift them up for rolling-around purposes instead. That way you can simply roll them onto the lift-gate of your truck when you need to take them somewhere. One-man operation.

What's two in the bush worth?

Suspended speaker wires should be enough of a clue... and those speakers look like transformers (as in the movies). Wonder what else they can shape-shift to? I came to the realization decades ago that good enough is good enough. Your ears will acclimatize to whatever you're otherwise content with. Violins sound like violins would sound, etc. and as has been pointed out elsewhere, it's all an illusion anyway. The only way you can truly reproduce a live event is if you're wearing binaural-recording headphones at some event and wearing them while listening to the recording you thus made. Even then... The clicks and pops are equivalent to folks talking, opening cough drops, etc. That's a gem.

Hell, the carpet looks that too! Seeing the images at full resolution, it looks like some moisture has seeped in around some of the screws over time...

Nothing to recommend in particular. NAD is a great match with anything in my experience. I've been using some kind of NAD since about 1980. Currently I'm using a C338 and absolutely love it, driving some Forte III.

NAD not available? My first choice always.

Early '70s wasn't yet into "hi" fi. Later '70s didn't need to have anyone cup their hands for me, heard it that way all on my own...

Just have to get creative with the asterisks when posting.

Down the urinal?

16 bits is a bit shallow in terms of capability these days, but in my experience and opinion it's entirely sufficient. Depending on what you plan to feed it, it should do well. You may have to run higher bit-depth stuff through audacity first unless that card will take care of that on its own. Can you find the maker's documentation?

Yeah, like I said in part, if the device ID has not yet been included in the library files, you can do that yourself and give a heads up to the maintainer(s), or you can just let them know and wait a day or two while they take care of it for you.

Not positive about all of this, but RMS is an average which is somewhat below the peaks of the waveforms. I'm thinking RMS x 1.4 = peak (it's been a while...). So you could express the peak power as 1.4 x the RMS power and be correct both ways. Dynamic power can be either representative of clean power before the less-regulated power supply gets dragged down, or it can be less-clean power; possibly both. The "standards" are being a little elusive tonight via web search...

That's not necessarily a fair comparison video. The towers have a higher output for the same power so they'll invariably sound "better" in a comparison like that where volume levels are not precisely matched. Evidently the RF III has a little less "shrill" upper-end quality than those in the video, so there's that, plus those RF towers in the video do not have stock crossovers, so there's that, too. That video actually helped to cement my decision for the Forte III, which I (happily) bought without any live auditions. Do be aware that the music you primarily enjoy typically has less-than-stellar recordings (in terms of audio quality) available, so speakers which make them more dynamic-sounding likely aren't as neutral as can be.

Okay, I looked at the product page. All they're saying re supported OS is that the device presents itself as an USB audio module. If that's true then no worries with your Ubuntu. Worst case would be you'd have to add a definition to a text file and recompile something. Very easy to do but quite unlikely in this case. Quite quite.

Different intermixed terminology.

I don't know but would be highly surprised if it didn't work better. Been using GNU/Linux, solely, for ~25 years. The other stuff is toy-like in comparison.

So that gal in the bottom right corner of the first image stepped out of the shower to tinkle? A bath, I could see...

I was downstairs reading a compiled Q&A with a developer when I was informed by the dogs it was time to eat. Now I'm enjoying a tobacco treat in the garage on my "phone." Not yet halfway through that article I'm "seeing" more than anything thus far what amounts to maybe some audio improvement but more as a side issue (that and more revenue streams for the music industry), the main being an ongoing licensing revenue. Lip service seems to be placed on audio quality falling due to lossy formats. However, anyone who's bought hard copies of music in the last several years can plainly "see" that the industry generally cares quite little about audio quality!

What I understand is that MQA encoding allows extra bit-depth to be delivered in whatever format (i.e. "container"). If the format is natively at that bit-depth then there's no need for it. What am I missing?

MQA-encoded files are offered by Tidal as one of several digital "formats" available for delivery. I could listen to lossy, lossless, or whatever if I were a Tidal subscriber. I understand what MQA is and what it purports to be. I don't think it's worth the extra cost, but I still don't have a dog in this fight.

More like the area of 2 x 8" dia. is larger than the area of 1 x 10" dia. but even though you're looking at ~1.3:1, the "1.3" is driven by two motor assemblies so should be better-controlled. "Faster" bass if that's truly possible... On the other hand, two nearby sources of the same information can have some drawbacks, too. Too bad you can't perform a double-blind test, hahaha!

That PDF consists of scanned images so no easy text searches are possible. A quick read-through uncovers no mention of the Klipsch name in any reference or capacity. Conversely, on page 7 it says "The original Aristrocrat, engineered by Electro-Voice almost three decades ago..." Also on that page are the placement suggestions: "the unit can be placed as far as 4 in. from the corner walls of the room. The minimum spacing that can be used is 1 in. with a nominal suggested value of 2 in." At any rate, the primary low-frequency driver interface with the room is obviously as that of a direct radiator. Nonetheless it's a cool project. Thanks for sharing.