Almost off-topic, but interesting -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMFQ3YvR3Eo
This is an edition of Linus Tech Tips on Youtube, in which they test a
very expensive ethernet switch that appears almost identical to a much cheaper ethernet switch made by the same company, and which is
supposed to improve the sound quality when it is used in a home music
server system.
We expect this sort of nonsense from "the usual suspects", usually
with regard to analogue audio but I was surprised to see a respected manufacturer of network equipment effectively claiming that exactly
the same digits that had simply gone via two different routes could
result in different sound quality when decoded.
The only differences appeared to be that the expensive device had a
sticker on top, and they'd glued the screws in, and once Linus had got
inside the box (using a drill!) we could see they'd covered components
in opaque glue and sandpapered the numbers off some of them.
Rod.
The only differences appeared to be that the expensive device had a
sticker on top, and they'd glued the screws in, and once Linus had got
inside the box (using a drill!) we could see they'd covered components
in opaque glue and sandpapered the numbers off some of them.
In article <msptlh19iktqpe20inrpo71af8q583b0un@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart ><rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
The only differences appeared to be that the expensive device had a
sticker on top, and they'd glued the screws in, and once Linus had got
inside the box (using a drill!) we could see they'd covered components
in opaque glue and sandpapered the numbers off some of them.
SOP for the Magic Mushroom Market.
Almost off-topic, but interesting -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMFQ3YvR3Eo
This is an edition of Linus Tech Tips on Youtube, in which they test a
very expensive ethernet switch that appears almost identical to a much cheaper ethernet switch made by the same company, and which is
supposed to improve the sound quality when it is used in a home music
server system.
We expect this sort of nonsense from "the usual suspects", usually
with regard to analogue audio but I was surprised to see a respected manufacturer of network equipment effectively claiming that exactly
the same digits that had simply gone via two different routes could
result in different sound quality when decoded.
The only differences appeared to be that the expensive device had a
sticker on top, and they'd glued the screws in, and once Linus had got inside the box (using a drill!) we could see they'd covered components
in opaque glue and sandpapered the numbers off some of them.
Rod.
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 21:23:44 UTC, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Almost off-topic, but interesting -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMFQ3YvR3Eo
This is an edition of Linus Tech Tips on Youtube, in which they test a
very expensive ethernet switch that appears almost identical to a much cheaper ethernet switch made by the same company, and which is
supposed to improve the sound quality when it is used in a home music server system.
We expect this sort of nonsense from "the usual suspects", usually
with regard to analogue audio but I was surprised to see a respected manufacturer of network equipment effectively claiming that exactly
the same digits that had simply gone via two different routes could
result in different sound quality when decoded.
The only differences appeared to be that the expensive device had a
sticker on top, and they'd glued the screws in, and once Linus had got inside the box (using a drill!) we could see they'd covered components
in opaque glue and sandpapered the numbers off some of them.
Rod.
Well a faster [e.g. Gigabit] ethernet switch would reduce latency, and
might improve reliability of transmission, but I doubt this makes any difference to audio where it will be buffered ahead anyway.
Silliest [What?] Hi_Fi article I ever read compared different mains
cables, including a silver one, and even claimed to be able to hear a difference! Never bought that journal again!
Almost off-topic, but interesting -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMFQ3YvR3Eo
This is an edition of Linus Tech Tips on Youtube, in which they
test a very expensive ethernet switch that appears almost identical
to a much cheaper ethernet switch made by the same company, and
which is supposed to improve the sound quality when it is used in a
home music server system.
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 10:05:18 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
In article <msptlh19iktqpe20inrpo71af8q583b0un@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
The only differences appeared to be that the expensive device had a
sticker on top, and they'd glued the screws in, and once Linus had
got inside the box (using a drill!) we could see they'd covered
components in opaque glue and sandpapered the numbers off some of
them.
SOP for the Magic Mushroom Market.
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images
were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
In article <98fd34c5-99d7-40d9...@googlegroups.com>, R.SNIP
Mark Clayton <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
Silliest [What?] Hi_Fi article I ever read compared different mainsI found this whena "Gold plated mains plug" improved stereo separation.
cables, including a silver ŁŁŁ one, and even claimed to be able to hear a
difference! Never bought that journal again!
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:47:23 GMT, nos...@please.invalid (AnthonyL)
wrote:
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images
were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
For some reason this reminds me of another bit of half-baked nonsense
from some of the viewers of another Youtube channel.
Northridge Fix is a small computer repair company in California,
specialising in microsurgery on surface mount circuit boards, which
sometimes requires the use of something called "solder mask", a type
of green laquer to hold delicate repairs in place, and which is
hardened in a few seconds by blasting it with UV light. Apparently
some viewers have expressed concern at the UV curing lamp being shone
towards the camera by way of demonstration, on the grounds that the UV
light from their screens would damage their eyes. Sometimes it's hard
to tell if a person is really stupid enough to believe something or
clever enough to joke about it, but there seem to be plenty of both.
Rod.
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:47:23 GMT, nospam@please.invalid (AnthonyL)
wrote:
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images
were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
For some reason this reminds me of another bit of half-baked nonsense
from some of the viewers of another Youtube channel.
Northridge Fix is a small computer repair company in California,
specialising in microsurgery on surface mount circuit boards, which
sometimes requires the use of something called "solder mask", a type
of green laquer to hold delicate repairs in place, and which is
hardened in a few seconds by blasting it with UV light. Apparently
some viewers have expressed concern at the UV curing lamp being shone
towards the camera by way of demonstration, on the grounds that the UV
light from their screens would damage their eyes. Sometimes it's hard
to tell if a person is really stupid enough to believe something or
clever enough to joke about it, but there seem to be plenty of both.
Rod.
If TCP/IP wasn't 100% then
the modern world wouldn't work at all.
something called "solder mask", a type
of green laquer to hold delicate repairs in place
I've yet to find a hi-fi emporium that is perfect and my (not so local) dealer is fine in most regards. He does however like I'm sure all
others, try to sell any snake oil he can. In truth, I honestly think he believes what he says, he's not lying or he should get an Oscar.
In article <5a4070830cbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
I've yet to find a hi-fi emporium that is perfect and my (not so local)
dealer is fine in most regards. He does however like I'm sure all
others, try to sell any snake oil he can. In truth, I honestly think he
believes what he says, he's not lying or he should get an Oscar.
FWIW I have some sympathy with retailers who sell products that are
probably 'snake oil'. These products often have a good mark-up and 'sell themselves'. i.e. The customer comes in being certain they want one, and is happy to pay for it.
Arguing with the customer risks them being offended, and losing any sales
of anything - then or at ay later time. So it may keep them happy to sell, which in turn means they are more likely to come back when they want something else and not go to so other dealer who sells happily.
The middle path is to suggest that it may not 'work for you' and/or offer a test listen. But it may be easier to smile and tap yer foot when the
client hears music using the dooflanger, then take the money.
Honesty may not always be the best policy for a retailer, alas. And of course, some retailers will believe in what they sell, and at times, be
right to do so.
The people who *should* test critically and challenge are 'reviewers' and others who write in magazines. But here again, the mag may only review what makers submit for review. And readers may want mag reviews of the newest
and most 'impressive' items, not just reliable workhorses that have been known OK for years.
Although it contains many honest enthusiasts, for decades now it is
dominated by business, not amateur enthusiasts who can wave a soldering
iron and understand the basics of electronics, etc. Indeed, magazine
editore tend to now feel that such 'tech' simply puts off readers.
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or even more!)
can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern 128K mp3 player or
phone that most of them use. I can across the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out I've had them since 1993!!
On 01/11/2022 16:28, Woody wrote:
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or even
more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern 128K mp3
player or phone that most of them use. I can across the paperwork for
my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out I've had them since 1993!!
Perhaps we should buy a new amp. The volume control is a little dodgy at really low levels. I know when we bought it - it was the cashed in
trivial pension when /she/ quit work when our eldest was born. In the 80s.
Sadly the weak point in the system these days is my ears :(
On Tue 01/11/2022 11:00, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article <5a4070830cbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
I've yet to find a hi-fi emporium that is perfect and my (not so
local) dealer is fine in most regards. He does however like I'm sure
all others, try to sell any snake oil he can. In truth, I honestly
think he believes what he says, he's not lying or he should get an
Oscar.
FWIW I have some sympathy with retailers who sell products that are probably 'snake oil'. These products often have a good mark-up and
'sell themselves'. i.e. The customer comes in being certain they want
one, and is happy to pay for it.
Arguing with the customer risks them being offended, and losing any
sales of anything - then or at ay later time. So it may keep them happy
to sell, which in turn means they are more likely to come back when
they want something else and not go to so other dealer who sells
happily.
The middle path is to suggest that it may not 'work for you' and/or
offer a test listen. But it may be easier to smile and tap yer foot
when the client hears music using the dooflanger, then take the money.
Honesty may not always be the best policy for a retailer, alas. And of course, some retailers will believe in what they sell, and at times, be right to do so.
The people who *should* test critically and challenge are 'reviewers'
and others who write in magazines. But here again, the mag may only
review what makers submit for review. And readers may want mag reviews
of the newest and most 'impressive' items, not just reliable workhorses that have been known OK for years.
Although it contains many honest enthusiasts, for decades now it is dominated by business, not amateur enthusiasts who can wave a soldering iron and understand the basics of electronics, etc. Indeed, magazine editore tend to now feel that such 'tech' simply puts off readers.
As I have said before, how many people today have ever heard music
reproduced on a decent hi-fi system let alone been to a concert?
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or even more!)
can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern 128K mp3 player or
phone that most of them use. I can across the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out I've had them since 1993!!
Almost off-topic, but interesting -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMFQ3YvR3Eo
This is an edition of Linus Tech Tips on Youtube, in which they test a
very expensive ethernet switch that appears almost identical to a much cheaper ethernet switch made by the same company, and which is
supposed to improve the sound quality when it is used in a home music
server system.
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern 128K mp3 player or
phone that most of them use. I can across the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in 1990.
In article <tjrhei$qfm9$1@dont-email.me>, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> >wrote:
On Tue 01/11/2022 11:00, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article <5a4070830cbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
I've yet to find a hi-fi emporium that is perfect and my (not so
local) dealer is fine in most regards. He does however like I'm sure
all others, try to sell any snake oil he can. In truth, I honestly
think he believes what he says, he's not lying or he should get an
Oscar.
FWIW I have some sympathy with retailers who sell products that are
probably 'snake oil'. These products often have a good mark-up and
'sell themselves'. i.e. The customer comes in being certain they want
one, and is happy to pay for it.
Arguing with the customer risks them being offended, and losing any
sales of anything - then or at ay later time. So it may keep them happy
to sell, which in turn means they are more likely to come back when
they want something else and not go to so other dealer who sells
happily.
The middle path is to suggest that it may not 'work for you' and/or
offer a test listen. But it may be easier to smile and tap yer foot
when the client hears music using the dooflanger, then take the money.
Honesty may not always be the best policy for a retailer, alas. And of
course, some retailers will believe in what they sell, and at times, be
right to do so.
The people who *should* test critically and challenge are 'reviewers'
and others who write in magazines. But here again, the mag may only
review what makers submit for review. And readers may want mag reviews
of the newest and most 'impressive' items, not just reliable workhorses
that have been known OK for years.
Although it contains many honest enthusiasts, for decades now it is
dominated by business, not amateur enthusiasts who can wave a soldering
iron and understand the basics of electronics, etc. Indeed, magazine
editore tend to now feel that such 'tech' simply puts off readers.
As I have said before, how many people today have ever heard music
reproduced on a decent hi-fi system let alone been to a concert?
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or even more!)
can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern 128K mp3 player or
phone that most of them use. I can across the paperwork for my KEF Q55
speakers the other day - turns out I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when I was >working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in 1990.
On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 10:45:55 UTC, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:47:23 GMT, nos...@please.invalid (AnthonyL)
wrote:
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images
were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
They might be - I remember when you were lucky if you got a 256 colour palette on a graphics card, and jiggling what the colours were affected what the image loked like.
charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or
even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern
128K mp3 player or phone that most of them use. I can across
the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out
I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when
I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in
1990.
I bought my Tannoy Berkeley speakers back in the late 1970s, and
they're very expensive if you want to buy a pair now!
sounds like the stuff my dentist uses to repair my teeth, I am provided
with dark glasses.
In article <oKc8L.3299$BaF9.2909@fx39.iad>,
the dog from that film you saw <dsb@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com>
wrote:
i often wonder how these audiophiles get the cash for these
expensive devices when they are clearly so very daft.
Turn afford it you need to be a high earner. High earners are usually
people who've been through higher education in universities etc..
Generally I've noticed such people are very self confident and in
their field very competent and knowledgeable. However, outside their
field they often seem amazingly clueless and have no common sense at
all.
Bob.
i often wonder how these audiophiles get the cash for these
expensive devices when they are clearly so very daft.
I know a public sector worker with a six-figure salary who cannot follow a satnav.Turn afford it you need to be a high earner. High earners are usually people who've been through higher education in universities etc..
Generally I've noticed such people are very self confident and in
their field very competent and knowledgeable. However, outside their
field they often seem amazingly clueless and have no common sense at
all.
Bob.
You can be a very high earning lawyer (for example) and be clueless about technology.
OTOH connections that need to be repeatedly made and remade DO benefit
from gold plate, so you find most comm's cable connectors (e.g. RJ45)
and many inside your PC are gold plated, but this adds little to the
cost - you can still buy a five port ethernet swtich (so 40 gold plated contacts) for under a fiver.
In article <e084748b-442b-4025-9a57-88dbc8c804dfn@googlegroups.com>, R.
Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
OTOH connections that need to be repeatedly made and remade DO benefit
from gold plate, so you find most comm's cable connectors (e.g. RJ45)
and many inside your PC are gold plated, but this adds little to the
cost - you can still buy a five port ethernet swtich (so 40 gold plated
contacts) for under a fiver.
Yes, the gold layer is likely to be pretty thin, so low in terms of how
much is needed.
Important that the 'gold' has underlayers, etc, of other metals that help
it stay in place and make Ohmic contact with the rest of the plug/lead
metal. Simply gold flashing may look nice but abrade off if just flashed on to something.
IIRC some other metals (Rhodium? Can't recall!) also give a good
non-tarnish contact and don't 'wear off' so easily when repeatedly connected/disconnected. But don't look as impressive as gold.
Jim
On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 21:10:53 UTC, Tweed wrote:
You can be a very high earning lawyer (for example) and be
clueless about technology.
I know a public sector worker with a six-figure salary who cannot
follow a satnav.
In article <oKc8L.3299$BaF9.2909@fx39.iad>,
the dog from that film you saw <dsb@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com>
wrote:
i often wonder how these audiophiles get the cash for these
expensive devices when they are clearly so very daft.
Turn afford it you need to be a high earner. High earners are usually
people who've been through higher education in universities etc..
Generally I've noticed such people are very self confident and in
their field very competent and knowledgeable. However, outside their
field they often seem amazingly clueless and have no common sense at
all.
On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 10:45:55 UTC, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:47:23 GMT, nos...@please.invalid (AnthonyL)
wrote:
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images
were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
They might be - I remember when you were lucky if you got a 256 colour palette on a graphics card, and jiggling what the colours were affected what the image loked like.
In article <jc383j-s1j.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu>,
Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
I bought my Tannoy Berkeley speakers back in the late 1970s, andIMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or
even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern
128K mp3 player or phone that most of them use. I can across
the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out
I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when
I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in
1990.
they're very expensive if you want to buy a pair now!
I purchased my KEF Reference 105 Mk1 Friday 1st September 1978. I've replaced the reversible electrolytic capacitors a couple of times and
had stands made for them. I still love them and it wouldn't be home
without them.
On 01/11/2022 21:00, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <oKc8L.3299$BaF9...@fx39.iad>,
the dog from that film you saw <d...@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com>
wrote:
i often wonder how these audiophiles get the cash for these
expensive devices when they are clearly so very daft.
Turn afford it you need to be a high earner. High earners are usually people who've been through higher education in universities etc.. Generally I've noticed such people are very self confident and inDoesn't that only apply to academia? Other knowledgeable people live in
their field very competent and knowledgeable. However, outside their
field they often seem amazingly clueless and have no common sense at
all.
the real world and do real jobs :)
Even when you buy something from a high street store the highly trained sales droid will try and sell you the extra snake oil product.
--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk
Bob Latham <b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
In article <oKc8L.3299$BaF9...@fx39.iad>,
the dog from that film you saw <d...@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com>
wrote:
i often wonder how these audiophiles get the cash for these
expensive devices when they are clearly so very daft.
Turn afford it you need to be a high earner. High earners are usually people who've been through higher education in universities etc..
Generally I've noticed such people are very self confident and in
their field very competent and knowledgeable. However, outside their
field they often seem amazingly clueless and have no common sense at
all.
Bob.
You can be a very high earning lawyer (for example) and be clueless about technology.
On 01/11/2022 11:58, R. Mark Clayton wrote:Standard Definition
On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 10:45:55 UTC, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:47:23 GMT, nos...@please.invalid (AnthonyL)
wrote:
Recently there was a poster on a camera forum asking if JPG images
were better from an expensive SD card compared to a budget one.
They might be - I remember when you were lucky if you got a 256 colour palette on a graphics card, and jiggling what the colours were affected what the image looked like.The PP referred an SD (i.e. memory) card, not a
graphics card.
--
Max Demian
If we're talking about old speakers, I am still using my Goodmans
Mezzo SLs bought for around 80 in 1976 from Lasky's, Brent Cross.
(No fixes needed.)
On 01/11/2022 20:49, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <jc383j-s1j.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu>,
Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
I bought my Tannoy Berkeley speakers back in the late 1970s, andIMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or
even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern
128K mp3 player or phone that most of them use. I can across
the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out
I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when
I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in
1990.
they're very expensive if you want to buy a pair now!
I purchased my KEF Reference 105 Mk1 Friday 1st September 1978. I've
replaced the reversible electrolytic capacitors a couple of times and
had stands made for them. I still love them and it wouldn't be home
without them.
If we're talking about old speakers, I am still using my Goodmans Mezzo
SLs bought for around £80 in 1976 from Lasky's, Brent Cross. (No fixes needed.)
On 01/11/2022 21:00, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <oKc8L.3299$BaF9.2909@fx39.iad>,
the dog from that film you saw <dsb@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com>
wrote:
i often wonder how these audiophiles get the cash for these
expensive devices when they are clearly so very daft.
Turn afford it you need to be a high earner. High earners are usually
people who've been through higher education in universities etc..
Generally I've noticed such people are very self confident and in
their field very competent and knowledgeable. However, outside their
field they often seem amazingly clueless and have no common sense at
all.
Doesn't that only apply to academia? Other knowledgeable people live in
the real world and do real jobs :)
Even when you buy something from a high street store the highly trained
sales droid will try and sell you the extra snake oil product.
If anyone is interested in a pair of 1974 home built folded horn corner speakers (12" bass, 5" mid and 1" tweeter plus hand built heavy duty cross-over circuit) which would shake a house before any distortion set
in, let me know. New SWMBO will not permit them where they need to be
to perform :(
Perhaps we should buy a new amp. The volume control is a little dodgy at really low levels. I know when we bought it - it was the cashed in
trivial pension when /she/ quit work when our eldest was born. In the
80s.
Sadly the weak point in the system these days is my ears :(
In article <tjrhei$qfm9$1...@dont-email.me>, Woody <harro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Tue 01/11/2022 11:00, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article <5a4070...@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham <b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
I've yet to find a hi-fi emporium that is perfect and my (not so
local) dealer is fine in most regards. He does however like I'm sure
all others, try to sell any snake oil he can. In truth, I honestly
think he believes what he says, he's not lying or he should get an
Oscar.
FWIW I have some sympathy with retailers who sell products that are probably 'snake oil'. These products often have a good mark-up and
'sell themselves'. i.e. The customer comes in being certain they want one, and is happy to pay for it.
Arguing with the customer risks them being offended, and losing any sales of anything - then or at ay later time. So it may keep them happy to sell, which in turn means they are more likely to come back when
they want something else and not go to so other dealer who sells happily.
The middle path is to suggest that it may not 'work for you' and/or offer a test listen. But it may be easier to smile and tap yer foot
when the client hears music using the dooflanger, then take the money.
Honesty may not always be the best policy for a retailer, alas. And of course, some retailers will believe in what they sell, and at times, be right to do so.
The people who *should* test critically and challenge are 'reviewers' and others who write in magazines. But here again, the mag may only review what makers submit for review. And readers may want mag reviews of the newest and most 'impressive' items, not just reliable workhorses that have been known OK for years.
Although it contains many honest enthusiasts, for decades now it is dominated by business, not amateur enthusiasts who can wave a soldering iron and understand the basics of electronics, etc. Indeed, magazine editore tend to now feel that such 'tech' simply puts off readers.
The speakers you saw in my living room, Charles, were made by me using KEF drivers and crossovers, in 1977. They are still excellent.As I have said before, how many people today have ever heard music reproduced on a decent hi-fi system let alone been to a concert?
IMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern 128K mp3 player orMy present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in 1990.
phone that most of them use. I can across the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out I've had them since 1993!!
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
On Wed 02/11/2022 11:43, Max Demian wrote:
On 01/11/2022 20:49, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <jc383j-s1j.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu>,
Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
I bought my Tannoy Berkeley speakers back in the late 1970s, andIMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or
even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern
128K mp3 player or phone that most of them use. I can across
the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out
I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when
I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in
1990.
they're very expensive if you want to buy a pair now!
I purchased my KEF Reference 105 Mk1 Friday 1st September 1978. I've
replaced the reversible electrolytic capacitors a couple of times and
had stands made for them. I still love them and it wouldn't be home
without them.
If we're talking about old speakers, I am still using my Goodmans Mezzo
SLs bought for around 80 in 1976 from Lasky's, Brent Cross. (No fixes
needed.)
I'll beat you and raise you. One pair Wharfedale Dentons bought just
after we got married the year before. Still in pristine condition and as
I sit here they are playing music off my PC via a 20Wpc Class D amp.
Best computer speakers I ever had!
Education does nothing helpful for common sense.
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
In article <vf27mhh0326frj41een29cn153r7thvidc@4ax.com>,
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
I suppose it depends to some extent what you mean by "clear" but I
can tell you for a certainty. no moving coil speaker build in the 70s
or 80s sounds anything like as uncoloured as a modern speaker of the
same *relative* price. That statement includes my R105s which I still
think do incredible stereo images.
Modern drive unit materials are so superior these days, they control resonance and linearity far better than drive units from the last
century.
I was fortunate in 2016 to get to borrow a pair of KEF Blades for a
week. Even though they didn't suit my room the sound was the finest
I've ever heard and my beloved R105s sounded so coloured for some
days afterwards.
Things have really moved on and I'm sure anyone thinking their 70s
speakers sound as good as modern ones at the same relative price is
in for a big shock should they venture into a hi-fi shop these days.
The only exception is electrostatic speakers as they were already low coloration as I'm sure Jim L would agree but that is their strength,
they have other weaknesses.
alan_m wrote:
After 30/40/50 years will not any rubber in the cones be degrading ?
I can only speak for mine which don't have any visible signs of
degrading, the cones are bextrene.
After 30/40/50 years will not any rubber in the cones be degrading ?
On 03/11/2022 15:03, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <vf27mhh0326frj41een29cn153r7thvidc@4ax.com>,
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
I suppose it depends to some extent what you mean by "clear" but I
can tell you for a certainty. no moving coil speaker build in the 70s
or 80s sounds anything like as uncoloured as a modern speaker of the
same *relative* price. That statement includes my R105s which I still
think do incredible stereo images.
Modern drive unit materials are so superior these days, they control resonance and linearity far better than drive units from the last
century.
I was fortunate in 2016 to get to borrow a pair of KEF Blades for a
week. Even though they didn't suit my room the sound was the finest
I've ever heard and my beloved R105s sounded so coloured for some
days afterwards.
Things have really moved on and I'm sure anyone thinking their 70s
speakers sound as good as modern ones at the same relative price is
in for a big shock should they venture into a hi-fi shop these days.
The only exception is electrostatic speakers as they were already low coloration as I'm sure Jim L would agree but that is their strength,
they have other weaknesses.
After 30/40/50 years will not any rubber in the cones be degrading ?
On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 14:17:31 +0000, Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
On Wed 02/11/2022 11:43, Max Demian wrote:
On 01/11/2022 20:49, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <jc383j-s1j.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu>,
Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
I bought my Tannoy Berkeley speakers back in the late 1970s, andIMO pretty well any hifi component built in this century (or
even more!) can reproduce sound vastly better than any modern
128K mp3 player or phone that most of them use. I can across
the paperwork for my KEF Q55 speakers the other day - turns out
I've had them since 1993!!
My present speakers are older than taht since I bought them when
I was working in Regent Street. We moved premises from there in
1990.
they're very expensive if you want to buy a pair now!
I purchased my KEF Reference 105 Mk1 Friday 1st September 1978. I've >>>> replaced the reversible electrolytic capacitors a couple of times and
had stands made for them. I still love them and it wouldn't be home
without them.
If we're talking about old speakers, I am still using my Goodmans Mezzo
SLs bought for around £80 in 1976 from Lasky's, Brent Cross. (No fixes
needed.)
I'll beat you and raise you. One pair Wharfedale Dentons bought just
after we got married the year before. Still in pristine condition and as
I sit here they are playing music off my PC via a 20Wpc Class D amp.
Best computer speakers I ever had!
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
On 03/11/2022 15:03, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <vf27mhh0326frj41een29cn153r7thvidc@4ax.com>,
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
I suppose it depends to some extent what you mean by "clear" but I
can tell you for a certainty. no moving coil speaker build in the 70s
or 80s sounds anything like as uncoloured as a modern speaker of the
same *relative* price. That statement includes my R105s which I still
think do incredible stereo images.
Modern drive unit materials are so superior these days, they control
resonance and linearity far better than drive units from the last
century.
I was fortunate in 2016 to get to borrow a pair of KEF Blades for a
week. Even though they didn't suit my room the sound was the finest
I've ever heard and my beloved R105s sounded so coloured for some
days afterwards.
Things have really moved on and I'm sure anyone thinking their 70s
speakers sound as good as modern ones at the same relative price is
in for a big shock should they venture into a hi-fi shop these days.
The only exception is electrostatic speakers as they were already low
coloration as I'm sure Jim L would agree but that is their strength,
they have other weaknesses.
After 30/40/50 years will not any rubber in the cones be degrading ?
I have both some Warfdale and Mission speakers of perhaps 40 year
vintage still in use but loud concerts and attending drag racing without adequate ear plugs in my younger days means that I probably cannot tell
if the sound quality from them is worse than when new.
In article <vf27mhh0326frj41een29cn153r7thvidc@4ax.com>,
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
I suppose it depends to some extent what you mean by "clear" but I
can tell you for a certainty. no moving coil speaker build in the 70s
or 80s sounds anything like as uncoloured as a modern speaker of the
same *relative* price. That statement includes my R105s which I still
think do incredible stereo images.
Modern drive unit materials are so superior these days, they control resonance and linearity far better than drive units from the last
century.
I was fortunate in 2016 to get to borrow a pair of KEF Blades for a
week. Even though they didn't suit my room the sound was the finest
I've ever heard and my beloved R105s sounded so coloured for some
days afterwards.
Things have really moved on and I'm sure anyone thinking their 70s
speakers sound as good as modern ones at the same relative price is
in for a big shock should they venture into a hi-fi shop these days.
The only exception is electrostatic speakers as they were already low coloration as I'm sure Jim L would agree but that is their strength,
they have other weaknesses.
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
I suppose it depends to some extent what you mean by "clear" but I
can tell you for a certainty. no moving coil speaker build in the 70s
or 80s sounds anything like as uncoloured as a modern speaker of the
same *relative* price. That statement includes my R105s which I still
think do incredible stereo imagees.
The only exception is electrostatic speakers as they were already low coloration as I'm sure Jim L would agree but that is their strength,
they have other weaknesses.
Yes it's a form of compression, and yes I know that's a dirty word to
some audiophiles, but this one really does seem to do its particular job
very well. The update arrived in time for me to try it out on the last episode of that very noisy BBC series about the SAS, and I didn't feel
that any of the drama was lost on account of it.
On Thu, 03 Nov 2022 15:03:52 +0000 (GMT), Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
Bowers & Wilkins DM2s, bought in 1971, looking a bit battered and
discoloured after many house or flat moves, but still sounding as
clear as anything today.
I suppose it depends to some extent what you mean by "clear" but I
can tell you for a certainty. no moving coil speaker build in the
70s or 80s sounds anything like as uncoloured as a modern speaker
of the same *relative* price. That statement includes my R105s
which I still think do incredible stereo imagees.
What I mean by "clear" is that when following a drama using the B&W
speakers I can understand the words at much lower volume levels
than listening on anything else, and they don't have that peculiar
"metallic" sound that a lot of modern speakers seem to have.
That's provided the dialogue is discernible at all of course, but
even today there are still some actors who know how to speak
clearly, some sound recordists who still know how to place
microphones, and some directors who haven't forgotten that the
viewers at home don't have copies of the script.
I'm not exactly sure what sort of objective measurement would
explain the "low volume clarity" effect, but maybe it's do do with
a very flat frequency response, because if the various meaningful
components of the dialogue were at very different volume levels,
reducing the overall volume could leave only some of them properly
audible, but if all components are properly represented than the
volume can be reduced without losing some of them. Whatever it is,
it works.
If you don't live in a castle with 6ft thick walls and you
sometimes like to watch movies late at night, then it's useful to
be able to listen at low volume without the character of the sound
being completely destroyed, so good quality speakers can make a
difference. Users of the Nvidia Shield TV streaming box may have
noticed the "night viewing" feature that was added in the most
recent software update, which is another way of not annoying the
neighbours. Yes it's a form of compression, and yes I know that's a
dirty word to some audiophiles, but this one really does seem to do
its particular job very well. The update arrived in time for me to
try it out on the last episode of that very noisy BBC series about
the SAS, and I didn't feel that any of the drama was lost on
account of it.
In the above post your "very flat frequency response" point bothers
me for several reasons. The vast majority of speakers from that era
were designed for free field conditions in an anechoic chamber. As
soon as you place them in an ordinary room that "flat response" is
history.
You can mitigate this to some extent by placing the speakers well
away from walls, floor, and ceiling and especially corners. I'd be
surprised if you have your speakers on stands and well away from room >boundary walls. You may have but that would make you quite unusual.
In short I very much doubt your "very flat frequency response" is
anything like as flat as you think it is.
All that is before we consider that "flat" in the 70s was the best they
could do with materials they had at the time and the chosen "voicing"
they were designed for. Interestingly, I recall that during that period
B&W speakers were much warmer than KEF but that difference is much less
these days, I've no idea why.
FWIW a very significant factor that magazine reviews, etc,
generally ignore is the radiation pattern of a speaker. In normal
rooms that has a BIG impact on both the sound balance (tonally) and
the stereo imaging.
Again, the ESL63 and its 'children' are VERY different in this
respect to most Hi-Fi speakers. Their pattern vs frequency that is
very controlled compared with the usual.
What I mean by "clear" is that when following a drama using the B&W
speakers I can understand the words at much lower volume levels than listening on anything else, and they don't have that peculiar
"metallic" sound that a lot of modern speakers seem to have.
I don't dispute how good the ESL63 is/was. I remember reading about the "rings" and thinking the idea was brilliant. However, I also remember expecting them to be bass light but at my first quick listen I found
them treble light. I was surprised by that.
They were never right for me, I would have destroyed them in days
probably with them on fire. :-) I needed something that could handle
more energy and I can tell you that in over 40 years I've not managed to
even blow a fuse in the R105.
In article <1c0ecd7c-bbb7-491c-83cc-7ca22c3e882fn@googlegroups.com>,
wrightsaerials@aol.com <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 21:10:53 UTC, Tweed wrote:
You can be a very high earning lawyer (for example) and be clueless
about technology.
I know a public sector worker with a six-figure salary who cannot
follow a satnav.
It has always been so. I was watching an interesting video yesterday..
Apparently in the 1400s, in Cologne university an entire faculty signed
the preface to the Malleus Maleficarum (The Hammer of Witches).
Later at the 1690 Salem witch trials in the USA, all the judges had a
Havard degree.
Education does nothing helpful for common sense.
Bob.
Some years ago "Shark" brand stereo coax was sensibly priced and pretty
well made. (e.g. lots of copper, low capacitance and resistance) and easy
to add connectors to it). But more recently when I looked their prices had skyrocketed! I guess someone realised that people would pay a lot more per metre, so jacked up the proce to find the profit peak. Relieved that I
bought some when I did!
Jim
On Wed, 02 Nov 2022 09:39:52 +0000, Bob Latham wrote:
In article <1c0ecd7c-bbb7-491c...@googlegroups.com>,
wrights...@aol.com <wrights...@f2s.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 21:10:53 UTC, Tweed wrote:
You can be a very high earning lawyer (for example) and be clueless
about technology.
I know a public sector worker with a six-figure salary who cannot
follow a satnav.
It has always been so. I was watching an interesting video yesterday..
Apparently in the 1400s, in Cologne university an entire faculty signed
the preface to the Malleus Maleficarum (The Hammer of Witches).
Later at the 1690 Salem witch trials in the USA, all the judges had a Havard degree.
Education does nothing helpful for common sense.
Bob.
I think Doctors of Divinity use snake oil.
But the jury did not.
Didn't they rely heavily on a Noddy Guide to English Law that was issued
to all judges and magistrated in England and the Colonies? I think the Pendle Witch cases was quoted in it about allowing evidence from a child.
There is a very good BBC Four programme about the Pendle 'Witches' that
gets shown occasionally.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 08:58:39 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Files: | 12,213 |
| Messages: | 5,336,262 |
