Klipschfoot

http://www.idealsound.ca earlier: http://www.dub-beautiful.org/radio/oem (Oh, equipment: Mac G3, Altec ACS295, ITunes)

My pet HT/two-channel project is in the basement. We have block walls between our townhouses. In the finishing, I used doubled 1/2" sheets of sheetrock on top of studs turned on their flat side against a common block wall. Between the turned studs I put foam sheeting 1 1/2" thick. That makes a total of 2.5" of sound absorption on the shared wall. I also insulated between the 1st floor joists. My neighbor claims he cannot hear my system at all. However, now my problem is that I need sound absorption on the walls to deaden the room. I painted with a semi gloss, which hardened the surfaces making the room very live. If you leave the sheetrock unpainted, it makes for better sound absorption. But it is ugly. If you want to really go goofy, check out www.quietsolution.com. This stuff is fun isn't it?

A couple of days ago, I saw that there were actually two auctions for Cornwalls from the same seller. The mistake must have been pointed out or caught. I wondered about the probability of two sets from the same seller. Though someone may have made an off-eBay offer OR the seller wised up and decided to keep them as an investment. It could be that he just said "to hell with WAF." (I still wonder, at times, if I mistakenly sold my old Polk SDAs. Even my wife said that they looked nice as I was carrying them to the car. Geez, I wish she had said that before I sold them.)

Have you considered a coffee table subwoofer? Do a google search. They exist. Secondly, are your rears on the rear wall or on the sides? The sides work better for surround. Lastly, I agree with others that your fronts and your receiver may not fit your need for thwack (thud!, whack!). Also check around the forums for demo tracks to test your system's effectiveness. Thirdly, your sub setting/placement may be interfering with your main's sound waves. (http://www.sonicdesign.se/subplace.html) That is my $0.02.

the finer things in life when one already owns them. Well, okay, I don't own this manic collection of gear. But if you look at these galleries and the accompanying comments, you would think there is nothing else in life. For some, that may be true. But there are some nice inspirations for comparison. (WAF, anyone?)

I guess he is too busy making personal appearances.

---------------- Oh and try hooked on phonics ...it worked for me. ---------------- U wer luky.

And HNY to all! Just got back from seeing LOTR-ROTK at the Senator with old friends and our families and then a toast to the new year. The Senator is using a special printing of the movie for the huge screen. I have never seen a film that clean and so detailed. BTW, side and rear channels are all Heresys.

I don't think comparing age-adjusted cost is the greater point. Handel was just pointing out the quality sound from some of these older receivers. Could it be that a good amp simply had to have higher build quality to reproduce good analog sound whereas new equipment is depending a lot on the inherent dynamic range of the CD format? Gary is right about the cost of electronics lowering all the time. The proliferation of cheaper parts and PCBs have made everything cheaper and lighter. And "bass" from resonating speaker enclosures is cheaper than moving a large air mass with huge voice coils and wide diaphrams. The digital format has made audio (not video) cheaper but not always better.

---------------- SPL ios not a primary objective! ---------------- I remember an album, maybe James Gang - Rides Again?, that had "made loud to be played loud" inscribed either in the inner blank groove or, perhaps, it was on the album spine. So, there CAN be an invitation to crank it from the artist. Just ask The Nuge!

One of the nicest assets of these old receivers is the quality of the tuner. Many manufacturers don't care at all about listening to the "radio" anymore. ---------------- But I cant wait to get the Scott and give the RF-7's a kick in the old jewels and see what they can produce ---------------- Could you put that a different way? Some of us have other connotations to "jewels." Happy New Year.

I would outbid you but it is too small to land my plane: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26428&item=2449915906

I have a 4270 that did service in the master's boudoir for a while. Nothing comes close to the Marantz look and sound. These SS receivers were the envy of all who could only afford a Pioneer. Maybe it is the button layout, the meters, build-quality, and the distinguished nomenclature that set these apart from the rest. These are great vintage pieces that pair well with any sensitive speaker. Everyone should own one just to remind them of where their money goes on new av receivers - CIRCUITRY! Get one of these if you can. They still look great.

Just got back from the lakeshore of MI. Checked Goodwill. No luck. (I sent you a PM telling you I would look.)

Khorns. VOT. Diff'rent chokes for different folks. If you have either, you have better speakers than most who have even heard the names Klipsch and Altec, both respected names in loudspeakers.

Speakers? Those are plant stands, not speakers. It's all marketing.

---------------- I want VOT's actually. I'd rather have a speaker with a veratile placement its just the way I am. ---------------- VOT=versatile placement? You live in a musuem? You were kidding, right? Jazzman, what supplants the Khorns? We need another speaker to covet.

---------------- I have a buddy that works at Ultimate Electronics and gets 60% off MSRP on any Klipsch product. The RF-7's retail for $991 each and he gets 60% off that and im buying it through him and giving him a little kick back for it. ---------------- This is, obviously, in accordance with the Profit-Blowing Out-The-Backdoor-But-We-Don't-Care-Because-We-Are-Too-Busy Watching-The-Front-Door company policy? That reminds me, Pirates of the Carribbean is a great family movie if you haven't already seen it.

Chain yanked. Good job, GF. Set 'em up, knock 'em down. I guess your shopping is all done.

---------------- What is a Russound SB-3? ---------------- It's an older two-source, three-speaker switcher. I use one. It's handy.

Dual sources are better if you like your movie setup left the same. And you can still listen to music when you are switching components on your listening rig. Movies can sound good on two channel, but when you are in the U-571 German sub and depth charges are blasting discreetly on the left and right of your head, well, no two channel can reproduce that effect. I think George would like to have his cake and eat it too. An old Russound SB-3 will do the trick.

I merely suggested that Scott is not the end-all solution to one who wishes to wade into tube waters. Get the best for your budget and be loyal to nobody. That is not BS.

Sorry. Glass half empty predisposition. My bad. Clever. or See Lever? It IS late, isn't it?

---------------- GODISNOWHERE ---------------- You found that out on your own? I suggest you look ELSEWHERE.

Nobody "bashed" HH Scott. Aren't we being a little sensitive? NOSevalves provides a great service, but to throw you hat in to the Scott camp without considering alternatives is limiting, don't you think? My rig is dual so that I can play with other amps/preamps/speakers. It is, afterall, a hobby, isn't it?