terry j

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About terry j

  • Rank
    AV Forum Member
  • Birthday
  1. look forward to it. forgot to ask, if you went down the road of bryans system, and his is his own design I think?, you'd diy yours? You are pretty good with a soldering iron, how are you with the speaker building side. (depending on your answer I have a later question...oh heck, may as well ask now....how would you set the speakers up? By ear, or would you in that case use measurements . How did bryan do it on that question if you know)
  2. Well, thankyou for that admission kajak. I must admit it did surprise me, but I have to acknowledge you was big enough to admit it. Sounds like you'll be driving it over?! That woiuld cost a pretty penny! Anyway, if you are driving over I'll see you when you turn up on me doorstep eh? Yeah, that system certainly sounds like it is special!
  3. Sure, got it, sounded terrible for three days of the show. You DO get the point tho? What earthly relevance is there that PAUL SPENCER measured them? In what way (as you have continually tried to imply) did the act of PAUL SPENCER measuring them contribute to the poor sound? Enough of the games, the endless back and forth on this. The answer is that the mere act of measuring did nothing to cause the poor sound. It is just a rather sad way you have of trying to push your barrow. And naturally you are unable to concede the slightest possibilty it could have sounded worse prior to the measurement, always assuming that the measurement helped place the speakers to ameliorate any bass problems (about the limit available to them). Pity we won;t get the chance to meet, next time you visit steven maybe eh?
  4. So again, what did it sound like before he measured the system? What were the differences you detected? Is it poor? I suspect it is better than the written tbh. My 'what' is regarded? Did you leave a word out? Are you coming over to the syd hi fi show? If so, I'd come down and meet you, have a good old chinwag, I am confident that would be more productive than the written version. Also, it would be fun and educational to listen to a few systems with you, a better way to get a grasp of what you hear and like, maybe work out any differences in tastes. Or find common ground! Up for it?. yes, I owe you an apology for that, completely uncalled for.
  5. If you are making a joke, then yeah not too bad!! If you are serious (unfortunately not too far fetched??) then please explain what changed as a direct result of the measurement. I have faith in you, twas a humorous aside... Well there ya go, good questions to ask eh? I actually don't know the answers to either question. The point is, and I assume deep down you too have spotted it else why these particular questions, kajak has attempted to link the bad sound (in his 'eyes', others seemed complementary) with the measurement (by PAUL SPENCER no less). He has tried to make a cause and effect. Measure a system, you get bad sound. Hey, don't laugh at ME, tis not I making such idiotic assertions! YOU may have grasped my point. All PAUL SPENCER could have done is move the speakers. They were the same speakers in any case??? With exactly the same gear?? I thought so as well. Hence the measurement itself could not change anything (your joking aside). I suspect by using the measurements PAUL SPENCER may have been able to lessen any bass anomolies thru moving them. There is no eq or treatments involved. In that case, then yes, it is completely plausible that before measurement (and movement of the speakers) it did sound worse before. There are some of little brain who might not comprehend that, so let's not worry bout them ok? Excellent stuff, could you link to that youtube video that is the basis of your points? The one of PAUL SPENCER measuring and setting up the room at the show. I will be upfront and say I strongly suspect you have got it arse backwards as usual, but for now I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.. I like op amps? Where do you make this stuff up? Half the problem is that maybe your comprehension of english is as poor as your written expression of it. We simply don't know. All we have is your non sequitor inane postings to go by. That tends to suggest not much computing power upstairs. BUT, equally, for all we know you could be as sharp as a tack, and it is just your one line inanities which lead us astray. If you could at least hint to us if you are following the conversation that might help, in the mean time looking forward (as we all are I suspect) to the video you speak of. PAUL SPENCER's that is.
  6. Thought my point might go straight over your head. Seriously, are you at all willing to have an exchange about audio? Can you explain just how the mere act of measuring changes anything?? After all, whatever the speakers were and whatever the electronics were remained exactly the same after the measurement as before no? So then how, exactly, does it sounding bright and arttificial have anything at all to do with it being measured by Paul? Again, why the capitol letters when you wrote that? Are you able to answer questions directed towards you or not. If not, why are you here at all.
  7. What did you think of the system before Paul did whatever he did?? You may need more than one or two disjointed sentences tho... Umm no, forget it, the question no doubt will go straight over your head. The point is, you can't make some absolute judgement about 'what PAUL SPENCER did' (why the capitol letters???), there has to be a comparison of some sorts.Are you able to concede that it is possible that without his efforts it could have been worse sounding?? In other words, rather than your (thinly disguised) attack both on Paul and the 'measurement method'-with the accompanying 'validation' of the golden ear!-it could be that his efforts were worth a great deal?? (it's theoretical, so nothing lost to be honest here)
  8. well, if they tune, which way do they tune? are you told? up or down, hot or cold, musical or accurate. That it does not say, that it can then only be marketing speak says RUN. In big. bold. letters.
  9. Haha, good point Al! Funnily enough, aesthetics IS very important to me...when I do it. But equally am happy to have something sit and stay the way it is for a long time, but as soon as the job is undertaken then yeah, it has to be done properly. It is entirely possible that a) they look far better in the flesh than can be hoped for from pics, and secondly a lot of the ones that look truly atrocious are the clones and look alikes. To me the weirdest bit is the snail woofer section, looks very unbalanced and top heavy, likely to fall at any moment! I can understand the sentiment to make that a statement of sorts, and at the time it probably looked spacey and advanced. Maybe it is dated?? Like the worst of Dr Who in the sixties, cool at the time but never again? Of course we all have different ideas of what looks good, as you say. ciao
  10. There's sillier looking ones?? got a pic?
  11. the ugliest silliest looking speakers ever made??
  12. I have no desire to do a BT on cables. Have already done some. you simply cannot grasp it can you. there IS no message. you CANNOT get a message from what you call a BT. It was not a BT, it was not done with any degree of rigour, yet you continually try to play the scientific card. It was a debacle in the sense of getting worthwhile data. If you did your OWN research into what constitutes BT (rather than exhort us to give it to you, which you then blithely ignore) you would find out for yourself. you misunderstood me kajak. I did not mean clean up in the sense that they are messy (tho they are, what do you expect with a five way active??) I meant get 'proper' cables. I use speaker cable I found at bunnings, five bucks for ten metres was it??? (I bought every packet they had, it was a cleaning out sale so I grabbed the last of it) Send me a PM, but I may not answer. all of sept I will be in NZ with norpus at the RWC, have to come back early oct for some do at home. I guess that ken would be technologically connected enough I could catch emails whilst over there, so yeah at least give it a try and we can see what pans out.
  13. do you REALLY believe that? If so, then a statement like 'mp3 players cannot entertain people' would be false no?, even if it were completely true that 'mp3 players do not entertain me'. dunno if you can grasp that mario. since i am narrow minded terry j got any ideas why a dvd player sounds so bad as a transport on my system i have a technical explanation but others use it and dont find a problem? so what am i doing wrong after all its 1 and 0's. not knowing something like this is not necessarily an indication of narrow mindedness. But, I did realise later that going 'digital out' of the dvd player is not the answer to your earlier question, as you too would use digital out (external dac, ie killer dac). I DO have some theories, you may even guess what a few of them are....but hey, as I said many times, I do not care what a person uses, whatever gives them pleasure is great. I only object when they try and tell everybody else how it MUST be done. A little clue perhaps abut where my suspicions lie... I KNEW you would go into conniptive fits if I told you I had a dvd player. You did not let me down. See, I too have read that truism many times...'NEVER use a dvd player if you want good sound'...I cackle every time I read things like that. I guess I just like sticking things in peoples faces, and that could be a very strong reason why I refuse to clean up my cables, refuse to replace those 2 dollar interconnects that come with the dvd player (you know the ones I mean)...because maybe, just maybe, one day someone like you mario will hear it, and you may not even have to think it 'the best you'd ever heard' (which seems to be the level of awareness you operate in), but if you are honest you'd have to concede that my approach is a valid approach. Which currently you refuse with every post you make. All depends on the size of the being I guess. Ever met those who simply cannot ever be wrong?? It is not in their makeup.
  14. well, that was equally well said flemo. thought I'd call your bluff about the visit over east!! haha. Why is kajak copping so much?? Heck, I just admitted in a PM that I did not really have too much problem with the way he posts...as long as he can stand it back. I also admitted that I deliberately push him a bit...and so far my comment would be 'pass'. He would have been shot if he had whinged at copping the same treatment he dishes out no??!! I get that he is your mate, and he is the way he posts. I really have no problem with him being 'stubborn', 'sticking to his guns', or indeed being rude (god knows I have been too). The ONLY trouble is he is obviously led a sheltered life (audio wise) if he insists on the silly little narrow minded 'audiophile truisms' he espouses. They MAY be totally true in his experience, no problem with that. But he makes them universal...and could be in for a shock one day. when his audiophile 'wisdoms' come crashing down around him. Still, it is rude to talk about a person in the third person...kajak, talk for yourself mate.
  15. hi aaron, look, not for one second do I want to set up some sort of competition. I don't think that is where you are going, but it can get risky if you follow me. (besides, I have been looking after kajaks well being, adding a deqx on top of that all will likely give him a heart attack. After all, next down the pecking order of steven being his guru would be mike. and we know mike hates the deqx, ergo kajak hates the deqx. one of the drawbacks in being under the spell of others....no opinion of your own) But anyway, now that I look at your point again, yeah, that could very well be the start of a resolution here. Let's leave aside how good/bad the deqx is or is not, the dvd player simply exports a digital signal. Actually, thanks drizt. There ya go mario, a possible first start to answering your query....we bypass and ignore any DAC in the dvd player. it may not be the full answer, but surely is a small part of it. Ahh, OK, thanks, hello gordon..why the different name?? what was wrong with ozcal?? That reminds me while I am here, that is you alain is it not?? ): or whatever it is. If it is, hello, and I hear you have some focals now, how are they??? I will definitely look you up next time I am down, ok?? hi flemo, thanks. Gee, there could be a lot to say....like why is it that mario never looks out for himself, why is it that he needs a brigade to stand up for him?? Maybe he is completely illiterate, dunno. At times his posts give that feeling...but ****, if he was truly genuine he could make a tiny effort no?? Why does he need his acolytes to do it for him?? Honestly, it is simple bloody courtesy no? From someone like paul spencer we get the audio equivalent of shakespeare.... and in return from mario we get caveman. "ugg...me no think that..." every now and then he surprises us. So I would like to see more input and effort from mario, let HIM explain why he thinks the way he does, give us reasons to back up his attacks on others. anyway, atm it looks like a good rapport is building, let's hope it continues. Trust me, I do get it. However, even you will admit he does not quite state it as clearly, pleasantly and with as much humility as you just did?? I don't begrudge him his opinion, nor the strength of it, simply the way he comes across. AND, there is a truism in life. The character of a person can be judged by whether or not they react to valid criticism...do you think kajak has had his behaviour pointed out to him before?? or not. And how has he reacted. you catch more flies with honey and all that jazz. get it, and especially get the blunt bit. I have been sailing close to the wind on that one myself a few times. Guess what...I would agree with you completely. If I had to pick a weak point, it definitely would be THIS dvd player. It has a noise in it. It comes and goes TBH. Yet, when the music is playing you cannot hear it (tho it is entirely possible it would be better without the noise) I grant you completely all that. But, mario did NOT state the dvd player was a weak point. He stated that with a dvd player good sound s not possible. Can you (and hopefully mario reading this) see how very different those two statements are?? I know you can. So, given marios POV (jk), how is it that most people are stunned when they hear my system?? There must be some disconnect. I reckon it is in a rigid thought that good sound is impossible with a dvd player (for example...many others) I never took it personally, it is simply a stimulus-response thing with mario. Ring the bell, he salivates. (we all do that BTW, mention 'audiophile' to me and I rant and rave for an hour.) Now, it all comes down to how intellectually honest a person is. Some people define themselves on a forum.......so they have too much to lose to ever change their tune. (haha, to segue straight back into why we need blind tests...tho this will be lost on some) So, mario KNOWS there is a dvd player in my system, so he KNOWS it can never sound good...how will he react when he hears it?? Can we trust his opinion?? will it be a true opinion of the sound or simply a re-iteration of his preconceived ideas. (see why we might need blind tests??) After all, NO system set up by measurements can sound good can it, it has to be done by ear. That it uses ss amps too........... (see why we might need blind tests???) BUT, you raise an EXCELLENT point.... and if your system sounds really good now, just how much better it could be with a CDP modded and tuned to your system? This is the crux of the matter, for me of course. From the blind testing I have done,. I would not pay much money at all for any improvements a better cdp could bring. I might add, it did not necessarily need to be blind. Maybe I am more immune to autosuggestion than others?? Or, of course, my hearing may not be as good as others. A very real possibility. See, I could not actually do a blind test with my dvd player, beacause it is quite noisy at times I mean just sitting here now i can hear it making the noise. does nt bother me too much, but still it is there. But, in a test, the noise would probably give it away (there would be times of no music). But that is a far cry from there being a definite sonic improvement.. Yet, to get 'better sound' (as opposed to getting rid of the noise) I would be wary of spending much money at all. More than a hundred bucks or so and I would be gagging. Why? because on a few occasions I have tested differences between cdps (note that is using the dac as well, I don't even need that) and the difference is minimal. the cat is out of the bag. OK, who hosted kajak last year?? It seems to be suggested that these 'east coast systems' do not match the 'west coast systems'....which seems odd if steven valves (east coast) is the best system....urrgghh, I'm confused. maybe you should actually say what you want rather than hint? ahh, got it now. he went to mikes, and bought his lenehans. That is great!! dunno what has upset you particularly about the thread, but I for one am very glad you made the post you did, you raised some great points, thank you.