"mick" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:53:41 +0100, Nick Gorham wrote:

I think valves and vinyl are better than CD and SS, thats just my
thought,
doesn't mean anything much, certainly doesn't mean anyone else is wrong,
and doesn't mean my "better" is better (or even the same) than someone
else "better". So I think that objecting to the use of the term better
doesn't work anymore than saying its ok to have a preference.

Can't we just agree to differ, I know, silly idea....


Nicely said, Nick.


Agreed.


I like valves cos they light up - and, for me, its more fun to build valve
amps than s/s. Sitting here, I have a NAD 3020, a pair of Crimson 530
monoblocks, a Quad 33/303 system and a home-built SE triode-connected 6L6
"power" amp (must be almost 2 watts out of its cheap "music-centre"
OPTs...) and at the moment I prefer the latter! My musical appreciation is
probably distorted by the fact that I built it. ;-)


*Never*.....!!?? ;-)


Sometimes I prefer CD as the source - its more convenient -
and sometimes I prefer vinyl for the sound (my vinyl source is better than
my CD player). There is definitely room for both.


Agreed.


Personally, I don't mind whether my amp has a flat response etc so long as
it sounds ok to me... :-)


Agreed.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:53:41 +0100, Nick Gorham
wrote:

Keith G wrote:
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Is because I ****ING SAY SO!


(huge Snip)

Keith! Have you been at the cooking sherry again? :-=))))



Nope (I'm totally tea, azittapens) it's called a 'wake up call'....!!! ;-)






Maybe I am missing something here, but there seems to be two camps, both
trying to claim ownership of the word better (well three at least, as
valve and vinyl are not together for all). But the problem seems to be
no one has talked about what they are better AT.

We have one group of people, who tend (understandably, to be from the
pro audio world) who argue that the better amplifier is one that has the
least effect on the signal, other than making it bigger (or changing it
from a voltage to a current source, anyway). And its easy to see why
this is a good thing, especially for use in monitoring situations. And
they argue (with merit) that they think this should also be the goal for
home use as well. I don't think that anyone on the NG would argue that
its unlikely for a valve amplifier to measure as well as a SS one.

The same goes for CD, it can be shown that the format is more than
adequate for audio reproduction, and the bandwidth and resolution is
more than good enough to produce on their outputs a analogue of what
went into the production of the CD.

Then we have the other group, that argue, that the better amplifier is
the one, that allows the ear/mind to recreate the illusion of the
original performance (cos thats all it is a illusion, there is no
performer there, its just a few things moving, and so moving the air).
In this group (And I place myself in there as well), the use of valves,
in some way (and Andy has expressed this better than I can) allows this
illusion to be much more convincing.

And again the same can be said for vinyl, I much prefer listening to
vinyl, and think (as others such as Keith do), that the resultant sound
is more engaging, and produces a stronger effect of "being there". but I
don't for one minute think that in absolute terms the incredibly crude
process of playing vinyl will provide anywhere as electrically accurate
reproduction of the originally signal.

I think valves and vinyl are better than CD and SS, thats just my
thought, doesn't mean anything much, certainly doesn't mean anyone else
is wrong, and doesn't mean my "better" is better (or even the same) than
someone else "better". So I think that objecting to the use of the term
better doesn't work anymore than saying its ok to have a preference.

Can't we just agree to differ, I know, silly idea....

Anyway, I should stop reading this group and go and listen to my nice
new Kontrapunct cartridge, through my work in progress 211 SET, (Yes
Keith you win, I did give in and change from the GM70's).

Nicely argued, although we do seem to have a few oddballs from the
pro-audio world who like valves! :-)

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

And again the same can be said for vinyl, I much prefer listening to
vinyl, and think (as others such as Keith do), that the resultant sound
is more engaging, and produces a stronger effect of "being there". but I
don't for one minute think that in absolute terms the incredibly crude
process of playing vinyl will provide anywhere as electrically accurate
reproduction of the originally signal.

I agree with this, I find that if I put a CD on after a while I tend to
wander off and potter about while still listening. With vinyl I stay put
until the music stops, something keeps me there that I don't get from a
CD (and I do own some albums on both vinyl and CD).
I'm getting a valve amp soon but that doesn't mean that I'm getting rid
of my SS amp as I can see myself switching between the two for different
types of music.

Phil

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:04:04 +0100, Phil North
wrote:


And again the same can be said for vinyl, I much prefer listening to
vinyl, and think (as others such as Keith do), that the resultant sound
is more engaging, and produces a stronger effect of "being there". but I
don't for one minute think that in absolute terms the incredibly crude
process of playing vinyl will provide anywhere as electrically accurate
reproduction of the originally signal.

I agree with this, I find that if I put a CD on after a while I tend to
wander off and potter about while still listening. With vinyl I stay put
until the music stops, something keeps me there that I don't get from a
CD (and I do own some albums on both vinyl and CD).
I'm getting a valve amp soon but that doesn't mean that I'm getting rid
of my SS amp as I can see myself switching between the two for different
types of music.

Phil

I'm just the same with vinyl, but I do know why. When I put on a disc
I am physically very involved with it. I don't want to lift the needle
off part way through, because I'm worried I will put yet another tick
into the record. Likewise when it reaches the end I don't want to
leave the stylus scraping around the lead-out groove. It is a very
nervy sort of experience.

And of course a side doesn't last terribly long, so I tend not to
worry about hanging around.

A CD by contrast is a very much more relaxing experience, and I am
quite happy to let it get on with things by itself. If that means that
I wander off for a while, then fine.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Phil North" wrote in message
...

And again the same can be said for vinyl, I much prefer listening to
vinyl, and think (as others such as Keith do), that the resultant sound
is more engaging, and produces a stronger effect of "being there". but I
don't for one minute think that in absolute terms the incredibly crude
process of playing vinyl will provide anywhere as electrically accurate
reproduction of the originally signal.

I agree with this, I find that if I put a CD on after a while I tend to
wander off and potter about while still listening. With vinyl I stay put
until the music stops, something keeps me there that I don't get from a CD
(and I do own some albums on both vinyl and CD).
I'm getting a valve amp soon but that doesn't mean that I'm getting rid of
my SS amp as I can see myself switching between the two for different
types of music.



Phil, by your own admission, you know bugger-all about music or audio kit -
how TF do you manage to post more common sense in the above than 90% of the
crap shovelled into this ng???

I will be in touch 'direct' later (quite a bit later, at this rate) about
our awaited amps - expect nothing to arrive before Mon/Tue next week. Have
you been asked to email Proelektra with your postal address? If not, do so
immediately.....

Later.....

Phil North wrote:

I agree with this, I find that if I put a CD on after a while I tend to
wander off and potter about while still listening. With vinyl I stay put
until the music stops,

CDs play longer.

In article ,
Phil North wrote:
I agree with this, I find that if I put a CD on after a while I tend to
wander off and potter about while still listening. With vinyl I stay put
until the music stops, something keeps me there that I don't get from a
CD (and I do own some albums on both vinyl and CD).

Well, yes. Given the way vinyl deteriorates with use, you'd be best to
treasure every minute.

--
*Learn from your parents' mistakes - use birth control

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Nick Gorham" wrote


Maybe I am missing something here, but there seems to be two camps, both
trying to claim ownership of the word better (well three at least, as
valve and vinyl are not together for all). But the problem seems to be no
one has talked about what they are better AT.


Makes sense - 'better' is a moveable feast according to your requirements.


snip interesting stuff


And again the same can be said for vinyl, I much prefer listening to
vinyl, and think (as others such as Keith do), that the resultant sound is
more engaging, and produces a stronger effect of "being there". but I
don't for one minute think that in absolute terms the incredibly crude
process of playing vinyl will provide anywhere as electrically accurate
reproduction of the originally signal.


Agreed - and not a requirement for me. See other posts about my own
requirements from my own audio kit.


I think valves and vinyl are better than CD and SS, thats just my thought,
doesn't mean anything much, certainly doesn't mean anyone else is wrong,
and doesn't mean my "better" is better (or even the same) than someone
else "better". So I think that objecting to the use of the term better
doesn't work anymore than saying its ok to have a preference.

Can't we just agree to differ, I know, silly idea....


I don't think we even need to do that, it would make a nice change in here
if a few people recognised that posters here are all supposed to be audio
(and music) enthusaists. The trouble comes when one or two people don't
feel constrained to behave with good manners and show respect to others
here. (Working off hidden agendas of their own?)


Anyway, I should stop reading this group and go and listen to my nice new
Kontrapunct cartridge, through my work in progress 211 SET, (Yes Keith you
win, I did give in and change from the GM70's).


:-)

OK, you know who said this don't you: "When the blokey designed the original
Ongaku, he had a blank cheque, an open brief, all the time he needed and
every single valve in the world was available to him - he chose the 211...."

;-)

(More offlist, later on....)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:57:08 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

OK, you know who said this don't you: "When the blokey designed the original
Ongaku, he had a blank cheque, an open brief, all the time he needed and
every single valve in the world was available to him - he chose the 211...."

Which did not of course imply that he knew what he was doing!

The 845 is superior - if you *must* use valves.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:19:46 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
Is because I ****ING SAY SO!

(huge Snip)

Keith! Have you been at the cooking sherry again? :-=))))


Nope (I'm totally tea, azittapens) it's called a 'wake up call'....!!! ;-)

Aaaaaah. None so vicious as a reformed alkie! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering