Receiver/Amplifier/Tuner
#16
Posted 15 September 2006 - 03:40 PM
"How do you say 'Yum-o' in Swedish? Or is it Swiss? What do they speak in Switzerland?"- Rachel Ray
#17
Posted 15 September 2006 - 04:05 PM
Yeah, you lucky bum...just think how very young you are. That receiver can't be more than two or three years old.I still have my original reciever from high school (with a fuse that blows now and again) and the same glorious beat up but fab Philips speakers from the same era. The speakers in particular are great.
The real art of conversation is not only to say the right thing at the right place but to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment.
#18
Posted 15 September 2006 - 04:55 PM
I still have my original reciever from high school (with a fuse that blows now and again) and the same glorious beat up but fab Philips speakers from the same era. The speakers in particular are great.
Whichever side you're on, the other side doesn't just have bad ideas, they have to be bad people too.
People like her are always scared. It’s a lonely world when you’re just so damned right and everyone else is so stupid. That’s why God made cats.
He tended to date high-strung women — another symptom of his shyness. "Say what you want about them, psychotics tend to make the first move."
When you get over-confident, you get your ass kicked with your own shoes. (Fabio, Top Chef)
They probably drink corporate water.
'Happy Cuatro de Cinco!'
#19
Posted 15 September 2006 - 07:08 PM
NYC Neighborhood Tours
#20
Posted 15 September 2006 - 07:09 PM
NYC Neighborhood Tours
#21
Posted 16 September 2006 - 05:31 PM
Whaddaya mean "old-fashioned"??? It was state-of-the-art in 1979!The receiver even has a port to hook up a laserdisc player (the old-fashioned kind that played discs the size of an LP).
#22
Posted 20 October 2006 - 05:30 PM
#23
Posted 20 October 2006 - 06:24 PM
Long ago, when I had some money, I had a really top drawer 33-1/3 rpm turntable, with an excellent gimbaled tone arm carrying a first-rate stereo cartridge. The cartridge fed its signal into a pair of extraordinary vacuum-tube pre-amps and amplifiers, which in turn sent their signals into a pair of truly superior 4 ohm bass-reflex speakers. The graph of the sound spectrum was as close to flat as could be got in them days.
Then I had a hearing exam, which showed conclusively that I could only hear the middle bit of the sound that my speakers pumped out, not very much of the treble and the bass at all.
About then, the world of music reproduction changed. Vinyl started going obsolete and I stopped having extra disposable income. My pursuit of excellent sound stopped dead. I couldn't hear it anyway. So it ceased to matter. I only dredge this memory up because of what Orik said earlier.
Have your hearing checked. Maybe you too will be able to stop chasing sounds you can't hear, and be content with cheap, inferior music generation.
I thought you'd want to know.
#24
Posted 22 October 2006 - 06:46 AM
A valid point.Have your hearing checked. Maybe you too will be able to stop chasing sounds you can't hear, and be content with cheap, inferior music generation.
Most likely. However, if your receiver has just one tuner then it's probably being fed to all outputs simultaneously. Your receiver would be the main volume control for all rooms and each room could have it's own speaker volume control, but all playing the same music.Are there receivers with 3 or 4 separate outputs? I'd like to have one receiver that I can use to control speakers in 3 or 4 different rooms.
This scenario is also the least expensive.
Not from one receiver. If you want different stations or a mix of radio, CD's, etc., from one master receiver, then you're probably better-off having everything fed to a PC that's set up as an audio control station, taking separate inputs from independent components and streaming them via a home network to your inexpensive satellite PC's individually. It'd certainly be more complex than a radio station that streams one signal to thousands of listeners simultaneously... you'd be channelling several signals at once and I don't know what software would do that. It must be out there, I just don't know about it.Even better if I could have different music playing in each at the same time.
As if this system wouldn't be expensive enough, there's something being installed in luxury homes in which a plasma monitor and sound system is installed in several rooms with a touch-sensitive control panel, conveniently located of course, that resembles a PDA (or a control panel from Star Trek) whereby DVD's, music, whatever are stored in a server and sent to various locations throughout the home. Everyone can watch a different channel or movie and pause it to resume watching in another room. Even the control panels have playback capability. (I think that they were starting at about $50,000.
If you're only installing remote speakers, then no.Would I need a sub-woofer in each room?
#25
Posted 22 October 2006 - 04:10 PM
also re subwoofer: i'm not sure i understand the question. the subwoofer will only provide bass in the setup it is in, in the room it is in. you're not going to be able to run separate 5.1 setups to multiple rooms from the same receiver. not without spending gigantic amounts of money anyway.
purdah nahin jab koi khuda se, bandon se purdah karna kya?
~shaqeel badayuni
if it takes us seven years to prepare for a madness, how long shall it take us to run naked into the marketplace?
~yoruba proverb
facts are meaningless. you could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
~homer simpson
maybe it wasn't the best wording.
~nathan
#26
Posted 23 October 2006 - 04:41 PM
#27
Posted 23 October 2006 - 08:33 PM
Then I traded up to the MacIntosh and Crown pre-amp and amp, with new first generation Bose 901 speakers (which I still have and use.... 34 years old... equilizer long gone).
Now, my basic system is the Bose "even an idiot can use it" all inclusive no controls except volume 5.1 theater system. Eh.
Bring back the old stuff. It sounded better.
Or maybe I just listened better? Jeez, I'm getting old.
#28
Posted 23 October 2006 - 08:45 PM
I am so confused about this. Nothing sounds better to me than my old vinyl record albums. And the huge speakers of the 1960's "hi fi" sound systems and juke boxes were fabulous. The "depth" on the latest digitals simply can't compare to my ears. It's like trying to tell the young kids that most of 'em can't sing on key. They just get insulted.Bring back the old stuff. It sounded better.
Or maybe I just listened better? Jeez, I'm getting old.
#29
Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:31 PM
Once there were very good amplifiers, made with matched pairs of transistors, crazy good amplifiers made with tubes, and crap amplifiers/tuners/whatever made with hybrid chips. Then everything got sort of digital and muddled, everyone was offering amplifier/tuner units that could make your DVDs sound like "Jazz/Rock/Concert/Grandma on the cell phone" and play your video with 5712+1, but made no promises as to what THD is going to be, which sort of took the point out of the game and reduced the number of competitors from 50 to 2.
Traditionally Denon, Pioneer and Yamaha were best, but unless they let you look inside it's hard to say anything these days.
Ah well, there was also
Audio Research, and there still is
who will retube and update my SP10 preamp for $800
and Magnaplanar, who rewired my Tympani 1Ds for 800 plus freight,
and Oracle, who made a turntable, belt driven that played 33 1/34 and 45 rpm
and Mr. Sugano, an old Japanese man who went from making violins and kotos to making moving
coil cartridges called Koetsu. Black, Onxz and Gold, that reproduced the unheard farts of unborn babies in perfect pitch for the price of a Honda Civic,
And Mark Levinson, and Bryston, and Audio Research and Threshold of Nelson Pass, who made amps with enough power to drive your house across state lines,
and cable makers whose wire cost more than your components because they were wound according to an ancient feng shue pattern out of the chest hairs of nerwly born white gorillas from the Himalyas,
and
and
there is no end to it....
I stopped in 1975 except for retubing.
'How high can you stoop?"__Oscar Levant.
#30
Posted 24 October 2006 - 04:44 AM
How about Electrocompaniet?
If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities. (Voltaire)
One is often told that it is very wrong to attack religion because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told; I have not noticed it. (Bertrand Russell)
Believing there is no god gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jell-O, and all things I can prove and that make this life the best life I will ever have. (Penn Jillette)
CERES GALLERY












