murky_est wrote:


Hello,

I currently have a 9 year old Arcam Delta 290 amplifier and Arcam
Alpha 6 CD player which both have reliability problems. I'm looking at
the possibility of upgrading instead of getting them repaired. I've
visited several dealers and they all suggest that I should upgrade CD
first, then amp, then speakers.

Has anyone any recommondations for an amp and CD player that would be
a significant improvement on what I've already got ? I've heard a few
systems at dealers but nothing has really sounded a big enough
improvement to make me part with my cash.

I'm in the UK and I'm looking for either new or used kit. I'd prefer
an integrated amp. A headphone socket and/or a phono stage would be
good as well.

Thanks








I can't make specific product/model recommendations, but I'll, FWIW, share my
".02 worth" with you.

First, I respectfully have to disagree with your dealer in his recommendations
of upgrade priorities, or more specifically, the order of change. If you have
already received an estimate of repair costs for your CD player, this might or
might not warrant repairing it. That said, I would, all other things being
approximately equal, put greatest emphasis on upgrading your speakers. While
you don't specify what they currently are, unless you feel you've reached
Nirvana - a subjective judgment - differences in sound quality for your system,
are, IMHO, much more likely to take place after a speaker upgrade. As for CD
players and amplifiers, I think you may rather quickly reach a point of
diminishing returns.

Since you mention perhaps getting an integrated amplifier with a phono stage,
can we assume you don't currently have a vinyl source but would consider adding
one? I'm admittedly biased (pun intended since I like tubes), but in the UK,
Regas are, I assume, very reasonably priced an popular (or a little higher up
the scale, there are a number of Nottingham turntables with excellent
reputations). I would suggest, that with a little planning, the cost of a
phono stage plus turntable could very easily be less then the cost of a new CD
player.

Since you've expressed a willingness to consider the used market, how about
some Quad electronics, if you desire to make a change. Reasonably priced
(compared to Chord and some other English brands) and generally considered
competent and durable. And some of the Quad preamplifiers have built in phono
stages that are decent.

I confess to a particular bias for Quad products since I had a Quad system for
many years with Quad ESL:-57 speakers.
(And if you could find a pair of these babies in rebuilt/refurbished condition
with good working panels, you might be amazed at what a classic speaker such as
these electrostatics can do - or if possible, a pair of ESL-63's which are also
quite nice, with more modern electronics and overall better sound at both ends
of the frequency spectrum).

In summation, my order of upgrade recommendations:

(1) Speakers
(2) Integrated amplifier with phono stage and/or preamp with phono
stage/repaired or used amplifier
(3) CD player

YMMV.

Cheers (from a tubed DAC user).





Bruce J. Richman

(Bruce J. Richman) wrote in
:

murky_est wrote:


Hello,

I currently have a 9 year old Arcam Delta 290 amplifier and Arcam
Alpha 6 CD player which both have reliability problems. I'm looking at
the possibility of upgrading instead of getting them repaired. I've
visited several dealers and they all suggest that I should upgrade CD
first, then amp, then speakers.

Has anyone any recommondations for an amp and CD player that would be
a significant improvement on what I've already got ? I've heard a few
systems at dealers but nothing has really sounded a big enough
improvement to make me part with my cash.

I'm in the UK and I'm looking for either new or used kit. I'd prefer
an integrated amp. A headphone socket and/or a phono stage would be
good as well.

Thanks








I can't make specific product/model recommendations, but I'll, FWIW,
share my ".02 worth" with you.

First, I respectfully have to disagree with your dealer in his
recommendations of upgrade priorities, or more specifically, the order
of change. If you have already received an estimate of repair costs for
your CD player, this might or might not warrant repairing it. That
said, I would, all other things being approximately equal, put greatest
emphasis on upgrading your speakers. While you don't specify what they
currently are, unless you feel you've reached Nirvana - a subjective
judgment - differences in sound quality for your system, are, IMHO, much
more likely to take place after a speaker upgrade. As for CD players
and amplifiers, I think you may rather quickly reach a point of
diminishing returns.

Since you mention perhaps getting an integrated amplifier with a phono
stage, can we assume you don't currently have a vinyl source but would
consider adding one? I'm admittedly biased (pun intended since I like
tubes), but in the UK, Regas are, I assume, very reasonably priced an
popular (or a little higher up the scale, there are a number of
Nottingham turntables with excellent reputations). I would suggest,
that with a little planning, the cost of a phono stage plus turntable
could very easily be less then the cost of a new CD player.

Since you've expressed a willingness to consider the used market, how
about some Quad electronics, if you desire to make a change. Reasonably
priced (compared to Chord and some other English brands) and generally
considered competent and durable. And some of the Quad preamplifiers
have built in phono stages that are decent.

I confess to a particular bias for Quad products since I had a Quad
system for many years with Quad ESL:-57 speakers.
(And if you could find a pair of these babies in rebuilt/refurbished
condition with good working panels, you might be amazed at what a
classic speaker such as these electrostatics can do - or if possible, a
pair of ESL-63's which are also quite nice, with more modern electronics
and overall better sound at both ends of the frequency spectrum).

In summation, my order of upgrade recommendations:

(1) Speakers
(2) Integrated amplifier with phono stage and/or preamp with phono
stage/repaired or used amplifier
(3) CD player

YMMV.

Cheers (from a tubed DAC user).





Bruce J. Richman




I agree with Bruce. Get the most expensive speakers you can afford and
work on the rest later. How can you determine what size amp you need if
you don't know what speakers you are going to buy? Sort of like buying
tires for a new car when you don't know what car you are going to get.

After the speakers and amp, then worry about a CD player.

r


--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

"murky" wrote in message
om
Hello,

I currently have a 9 year old Arcam Delta 290 amplifier and Arcam
Alpha 6 CD player which both have reliability problems.


Please describe the reliability problems in more detail.

In article ,
(murky) wrote:

Hello,

I currently have a 9 year old Arcam Delta 290 amplifier and Arcam
Alpha 6 CD player which both have reliability problems.

Then what you do depends on the nature of the problems.

The chain of audio reproduction is as weak as the weakest link, and
likewise the usability of your system is the usability of your worst
component. Bother with upgrading speakers when your CD player reliably
plays, lets yoou change out CDs, etc., and the amp reliably receives
input, switches inputs (?), and amplifies the speakers.

Has anyone any recommondations for an amp and CD player that would be
a significant improvement on what I've already got ?

In the age of digital audio interconnects, the CD player's involvement
is a matter of usability and reliability, rather than audio quality. If
your CD and amp are both having serious problems, I'd say you should
upgrade the CD player to the cheapest one that has about the features
(programming, etc.) you want, and then worry about the rest of the
components.

Buying the cheapest CD player now gives you more room elsewhere, and
reduces the lost investment later if it fails. Presumably, at that
future point, you won't have other major problems, and you can more
seriously consider what the most reliable, usable, and capacious CD
player you want is.

--
Matthew Weigel
the email address is real
the contents of the post are not

"Matthew Weigel" wrote in message
...
In the age of digital audio interconnects, the CD player's
involvement
is a matter of usability and reliability, rather than audio quality.
If
your CD and amp are both having serious problems, I'd say you should
upgrade the CD player to the cheapest one that has about the
features
(programming, etc.) you want, and then worry about the rest of the
components.

Buying the cheapest CD player now gives you more room elsewhere, and
reduces the lost investment later if it fails. Presumably, at that
future point, you won't have other major problems, and you can more
seriously consider what the most reliable, usable, and capacious CD
player you want is.

True, and you'd be surprised how much you can save on the CD player.
For instance, tomorrow I'm going to buy a brand new CD player for
$9.99 + tax. This is the cheapest player I've ever come across, and I
intend to test it, then take it apart and do a factory cost analysis.
My guess is that nobody will be able to tell the difference between
this $10 player and the $800 player it will be competing with.

Norm Strong

In article ,
(murky) wrote:

Well after prolonged use the CD player becomes distorted and then a
few seconds after that stops playback. I thought this may be due to
overheating but Arcam support suggest the laser may be on the way out.

Then upgrading the amp, speakers, or anything else will lead to a
system, not too far down the road, that would sound great if it could
just read CDs?

Replace the CD player first.

--
Matthew Weigel
the email address is real
the contents of the post are not

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote

As for CD players and amplifiers, I think you may rather
quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.

You'll never know about the benefits of high end
CD sound quality using a Delta Transport & Alpha
DAC as your bellwether, Bruce. Seems a bit of a
paradox to me. You take the time to encourage
others to invest in a quality vinyl playback system,
which is good. But you pooh-pooh the same notion
for yourself concerning CD. And I know it can’t be
the money. Aren’t you clinging to the same close-
minded thinking Arny has toward record players?

"Powell" wrote in message

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote

As for CD players and amplifiers, I think you may rather
quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.

You'll never know about the benefits of high end
CD sound quality using a Delta Transport & Alpha
DAC as your bellwether, Bruce.

I'm hoping that Bruce avoids being taken in by much of the audio hysteria
that you seem to live by, Powell.

Seems a bit of a paradox to me. You take the time to encourage
others to invest in a quality vinyl playback system,
which is good.

Let's put it this way - if you have a big collection of media in a certain
format, it's kinda stupid to not have at least a credible player for that
format. One of the problems with legacy formats is the fact that the market
for the players is relieved of the normal competitive pressures. and even an
average player ends up costing far more than a very good or excellent player
for a more modern format. My vinyl player is hardly SOTA but I've got about
three times as much invested in it as I do in my primary digital player.

But you pooh-pooh the same notion
for yourself concerning CD. And I know it can't be
the money. Aren't you clinging to the same close-
minded thinking Arny has toward record players?

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously. Note that even though I have about $800 tied up in
my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:32:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously. Note that even though I have about $800 tied up in
my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.

Just out of curiosity, what's the breakdown of the other $550 (give or
take a few bucks)?

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 2:32 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Powell" wrote in message

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote

As for CD players and amplifiers, I think you may rather
quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.

You'll never know about the benefits of high end
CD sound quality using a Delta Transport & Alpha
DAC as your bellwether, Bruce.

I'm hoping that Bruce avoids being taken in by much of the audio hysteria
that you seem to live by, Powell.

Seems a bit of a paradox to me. You take the time to encourage
others to invest in a quality vinyl playback system,
which is good.

Let's put it this way - if you have a big collection of media in a certain
format, it's kinda stupid to not have at least a credible player for that
format. One of the problems with legacy formats is the fact that the market
for the players is relieved of the normal competitive pressures.

There is plenty of competition for turntable, pickup arm and cartridge
manufacturers.


and even an
average player ends up costing far more than a very good or excellent player
for a more modern format.

That has everything to do with the technology and nothing to do with a lack of
competition.

My vinyl player is hardly SOTA but I've got about
three times as much invested in it as I do in my primary digital player.

And you think the price is high due to lack of competition?



But you pooh-pooh the same notion
for yourself concerning CD. And I know it can't be
the money. Aren't you clinging to the same close-
minded thinking Arny has toward record players?

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously.


????



Note that even though I have about $800 tied up in
my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.


So do I. You can do better for less these days.

Powell wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote

As for CD players and amplifiers, I think you may rather
quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.

You'll never know about the benefits of high end
CD sound quality using a Delta Transport & Alpha
DAC as your bellwether, Bruce. Seems a bit of a
paradox to me. You take the time to encourage
others to invest in a quality vinyl playback system,
which is good. But you pooh-pooh the same notion
for yourself concerning CD. And I know it cant be
the money. Arent you clinging to the same close-
minded thinking Arny has toward record players?












No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any* playback medium
out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying. Nor do I assume that my CD
transport/DAC combination is the last word in CD playback or even super
refined. That said, the build quality is excellent in both units, which may
not be the case with some other options. Also, about 90% of my listening is
done with vinyl, so my priorities re. investing a lot of money in digital
playback equipment at this time are relatively low. Also, I'm not convinced
that the high resolution formats are not going to succeed, so I'm sort of
waiting to see what develops with them. At this point, I'm not optimistic, but
perhaps if the cost of "universal" players becomes more appealing to the masses
(whatever the hell that is), who is to say that the various labels won't start
producing more software? I think the jury is still out, at least until the
major manufacturers besides Sony and Phillps decide whether or not they want to
try and make universal players that a large segment of the market will buy. In
the meantime, I'm quite content with what I have.


Bruce J. Richman

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:32:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously. Note that even though I have about $800
tied up in my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.

Just out of curiosity, what's the breakdown of the other $550 (give or
take a few bucks)?

Preamps, cartridges, and other acessories.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 2:32 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Powell" wrote in message

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote

As for CD players and amplifiers, I think you may rather
quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.

You'll never know about the benefits of high end
CD sound quality using a Delta Transport & Alpha
DAC as your bellwether, Bruce.

I'm hoping that Bruce avoids being taken in by much of the audio
hysteria that you seem to live by, Powell.

Seems a bit of a paradox to me. You take the time to encourage
others to invest in a quality vinyl playback system,
which is good.

Let's put it this way - if you have a big collection of media in a
certain format, it's kinda stupid to not have at least a credible
player for that format. One of the problems with legacy formats is
the fact that the market for the players is relieved of the normal
competitive pressures.

There is plenty of competition for turntable, pickup arm and cartridge
manufacturers.

It's not the same.

and even an
average player ends up costing far more than a very good or
excellent player for a more modern format.

That has everything to do with the technology and nothing to do with
a lack of competition.

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive. I can't think of one technical innovation in the
production or playing of LPs that actually performed better, in the past 20
years.

My vinyl player is hardly SOTA but I've got about
three times as much invested in it as I do in my primary digital
player.

And you think the price is high due to lack of competition?

One reason. That, and its basically a backwards technology that has not been
advanced in a meaningful way.

But you pooh-pooh the same notion
for yourself concerning CD. And I know it can't be
the money. Aren't you clinging to the same close-
minded thinking Arny has toward record players?

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously.

????

OK, so you have selective vision, S888wheel.

Note that even though I have about $800 tied up in
my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.

So do I.

Really?

You can do better for less these days.

You must have gotten some wonderful deals.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any* playback
medium out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying.

Richman, why don't you name that medium that you think I've dismissed out of
hand?

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:51:21 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:32:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously. Note that even though I have about $800
tied up in my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.

Just out of curiosity, what's the breakdown of the other $550 (give or
take a few bucks)?

Preamps, cartridges, and other acessories.

Could you be specific?

I'm just curious. This isn't a loaded question. I know that you've
mentioned a cartiridge or two in the past. What are the "other
accessories"? And the preamp?

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 2:55 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 2:32 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Powell" wrote in message

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote

As for CD players and amplifiers, I think you may rather
quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.

You'll never know about the benefits of high end
CD sound quality using a Delta Transport & Alpha
DAC as your bellwether, Bruce.

I'm hoping that Bruce avoids being taken in by much of the audio
hysteria that you seem to live by, Powell.

Seems a bit of a paradox to me. You take the time to encourage
others to invest in a quality vinyl playback system,
which is good.

Let's put it this way - if you have a big collection of media in a
certain format, it's kinda stupid to not have at least a credible
player for that format. One of the problems with legacy formats is
the fact that the market for the players is relieved of the normal
competitive pressures.

There is plenty of competition for turntable, pickup arm and cartridge
manufacturers.

It's not the same.

Not the same as what? There is plenty of competition at just about every price
and performance level. The preasures are quite normal for a free market.




and even an
average player ends up costing far more than a very good or
excellent player for a more modern format.

That has everything to do with the technology and nothing to do with
a lack of competition.

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive.

Nonsnense. The technology is hardly backward. It works amazingly well in fact.
I suppose the space shuttle was so expensive due to the backward basic
technology. The only thing that is backwards here is your logic. You satart
with your conclusion and work form there. Backwards.

I can't think of one technical innovation in the
production or playing of LPs that actually performed better, in the past 20
years.

Yeah, it's a mature technology that is gaining in quality through refinements
rather than major inovations. There have been some pretty brilliant inovations
in the last 20 years. I can't say that any of them have lead to SOTA
performance though. That seems to have mostly come from substantial refinements
on existing technology.



My vinyl player is hardly SOTA but I've got about
three times as much invested in it as I do in my primary digital
player.

And you think the price is high due to lack of competition?

One reason. That, and its basically a backwards technology that has not been
advanced in a meaningful way.


Neither has anything to do with it. It is about cost of making the table.


But you pooh-pooh the same notion
for yourself concerning CD. And I know it can't be
the money. Aren't you clinging to the same close-
minded thinking Arny has toward record players?

Typical of Powell to resort to name-calling and personal attacks when
completely gratuitously.

????

OK, so you have selective vision, S888wheel.

No. Your sentence is incomplete and I failed to decipher it. You could have
corrected your mistake and communicated your idea. Instead you decided to get
snotty. I still don't know what you were trying to say.



Note that even though I have about $800 tied up in
my LP playback system, Powell bad-mouths it.

So do I.

Really?


Really. Have you forgotten?


You can do better for less these days.

You must have gotten some wonderful deals.


I have but that is irrelevant to my point. There are better tables to be had
for less money than yours. I wasn't speaking about my table specifically. It
was a wonderful deal but it cost a lot more than 800 bucks.

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any* playback
medium out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying.

Richman, why don't you name that medium that you think I've dismissed out of
hand?










Krueger, as recently as today, you said "scrap vinyl!". Your views on vinyl
playback are well known to all who read this NG. More often than not, whenever
the subject of vinyl playback comes up, you make derogatory comments about the
equipment, the software, etc.









Bruce J. Richman

"Paul Dormer" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive.

Only if you have a meagre income.

Dormer, if you actually knew what "inordinately" means, you'd know that my
income has much to do with it.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any*
playback medium out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying.

Richman, why don't you name that medium that you think I've
dismissed out of hand?

Krueger, as recently as today, you said "scrap vinyl!".

Apparent inability to properly quote the context of my statement, noted.

Your views
on vinyl playback are well known to all who read this NG.

Apparent inability to properly perceive the context of the presentation of
my views, noted.

More often
than not, whenever the subject of vinyl playback comes up, you make
derogatory comments about the equipment, the software, etc.

Richman, how does the fact that I've invested about $800 on vinyl playback
equipment in the past few years relate to your claim that I've dismissed it
out of hand?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

"Paul Dormer" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive.

Only if you have a meagre income.

Dormer, if you actually knew what "inordinately" means, you'd know
that my income has much to do with it.

Correction:

Dormer, if you actually knew what "inordinately" means, you'd know
that my income doesn't have much to do with it.

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any*
playback medium out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying.

Richman, why don't you name that medium that you think I've
dismissed out of hand?

Krueger, as recently as today, you said "scrap vinyl!".

Apparent inability to properly quote the context of my statement, noted.


Apparent reversion to "debating trade" games by asking question about my
comment - OUT OF CONTEXT - noted. Elimination of my response in proper context
by omitting rest of post noted.


Your views
on vinyl playback are well known to all who read this NG.

Apparent inability to properly perceive the context of the presentation of
my views, noted.


Misinterpretation and attempt to rationalize anti-vinyl bias noted. Long
history of attacks on those possessint vinyl playback gear noted.


More often
than not, whenever the subject of vinyl playback comes up, you make
derogatory comments about the equipment, the software, etc.

Richman, how does the fact that I've invested about $800 on vinyl playback
equipment in the past few years relate to your claim that I've dismissed it
out of hand?




Krueger, is it not true that the only reason you have for possessing vinyl
playback equipment at all is so that you can "transcribe" (convert) analogue
recordings to digital media?

This discussion is ended, since you will obviously keep claiming various things
"noted", when, in reality, your arguments concerning vinyl playback are a
matter of Google record. And the context of your views is perfectly clear to
all.

Most of us are content to let people enjoy whatever type of media playback
equipment and softwear they happen to enjoy. Most of us don't initate attacks
agsinst those who enjoy vinyl playback *or* digital playback.



Bruce J. Richman

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 5:50 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Paul Dormer" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive.

Only if you have a meagre income.

Dormer, if you actually knew what "inordinately" means, you'd know that my
income has much to do with it.









Feel free to explain to us what makes the technology backwards. And feel free
to tell us how the cost of vinyl hardware is inordinately expensive.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 5:50 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Paul Dormer" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive.

Only if you have a meagre income.

Dormer, if you actually knew what "inordinately" means, you'd know
that my income has much to do with it.

Feel free to explain to us what makes the technology backwards.

Asked and answered.

And feel free to tell us how the cost of vinyl hardware is inordinately
expensive.

You admitted it, yourself.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any*
playback medium out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying.

Richman, why don't you name that medium that you think I've
dismissed out of hand?

Krueger, as recently as today, you said "scrap vinyl!".

Apparent inability to properly quote the context of my statement,
noted.

Apparent reversion to "debating trade" games by asking question about
my comment - OUT OF CONTEXT - noted.

It's simple Richman, I asked you to stand behind what you said, and you're
running away from me.

Elimination of my response in
proper context by omitting rest of post noted.

I quoted your entire post, Richman. Delusional behavior noted.

Your views
on vinyl playback are well known to all who read this NG.

Apparent inability to properly perceive the context of the
presentation of my views, noted.

Misinterpretation and attempt to rationalize anti-vinyl bias noted.

This isn't about my biases Richman, its about your distortion of my post.

Long history of attacks on those possessint vinyl playback gear noted.

It's simple Richman, I asked you to stand behind what you said, and you're
running away from me.

More often
than not, whenever the subject of vinyl playback comes up, you make
derogatory comments about the equipment, the software, etc.

Richman, how does the fact that I've invested about $800 on vinyl
playback equipment in the past few years relate to your claim that
I've dismissed it out of hand?

Krueger, is it not true that the only reason you have for possessing
vinyl playback equipment at all is so that you can "transcribe"
(convert) analogue recordings to digital media?

Nope, but even were that true, possession of said equipment is absolute
proof that I have not dismissed vinyl as a medium.

This discussion is ended, since you will obviously keep claiming
various things "noted", when, in reality, your arguments concerning
vinyl playback are a matter of Google record. And the context of
your views is perfectly clear to all.

Most of us are content to let people enjoy whatever type of media
playback equipment and softwear they happen to enjoy. Most of us
don't initate attacks agsinst those who enjoy vinyl playback *or*
digital playback.



Bruce J. Richman

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/22/2004 2:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 6/21/2004 5:50 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Paul Dormer" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

It's true that due to the backward basic technology, LP hardware is
inordinately expensive.

Only if you have a meagre income.

Dormer, if you actually knew what "inordinately" means, you'd know
that my income has much to do with it.

Feel free to explain to us what makes the technology backwards.

Asked and answered.

Wrong. Inability to explain assertion noted.



And feel free to tell us how the cost of vinyl hardware is inordinately
expensive.

You admitted it, yourself.


Wrong again. I admitted it is expensive. I did not admit nor do I believe it is
inordinately so. Good luck on getting anything right in the next round.

"Paul Dormer" wrote in message
...
"normanstrong" emitted :

In the age of digital audio interconnects, the CD player's
involvement
is a matter of usability and reliability, rather than audio quality.
If
your CD and amp are both having serious problems, I'd say you should
upgrade the CD player to the cheapest one that has about the
features
(programming, etc.) you want, and then worry about the rest of the
components.

Buying the cheapest CD player now gives you more room elsewhere, and
reduces the lost investment later if it fails. Presumably, at that
future point, you won't have other major problems, and you can more
seriously consider what the most reliable, usable, and capacious CD
player you want is.

True, and you'd be surprised how much you can save on the CD player.
For instance, tomorrow I'm going to buy a brand new CD player for
$9.99 + tax. This is the cheapest player I've ever come across, and I
intend to test it, then take it apart and do a factory cost analysis.
My guess is that nobody will be able to tell the difference between
this $10 player and the $800 player it will be competing with.

Hahaha ;-)


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

10 dollar player
what a ripoff
i got a DVD that plays mp3, jpeg and who knows what else, has coax and
optical digital out, RGB and s-video, and 6 channel analog audio, does all
the subtitles, both pal and ntsc, all regions and even included all the
cables for 19.95 including remote it's a Polaroid DVP-550. Available on ebay
brand new in the box. It even works which was a surprise to me...
:}
Carl

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


No, I don't think so. Unlike Krueger, I don't dismiss *any*
playback medium out of hand as inferior or not worth enjoying.

Richman, why don't you name that medium that you think I've
dismissed out of hand?

Krueger, as recently as today, you said "scrap vinyl!".

Apparent inability to properly quote the context of my statement,
noted.

Apparent reversion to "debating trade" games by asking question about
my comment - OUT OF CONTEXT - noted.

It's simple Richman, I asked you to stand behind what you said, and you're
running away from me.

Elimination of my response in
proper context by omitting rest of post noted.

I quoted your entire post, Richman. Delusional behavior noted.

Your views
on vinyl playback are well known to all who read this NG.

Apparent inability to properly perceive the context of the
presentation of my views, noted.

Misinterpretation and attempt to rationalize anti-vinyl bias noted.

This isn't about my biases Richman, its about your distortion of my post.

Long history of attacks on those possessint vinyl playback gear noted.

It's simple Richman, I asked you to stand behind what you said, and you're
running away from me.

More often
than not, whenever the subject of vinyl playback comes up, you make
derogatory comments about the equipment, the software, etc.

Richman, how does the fact that I've invested about $800 on vinyl
playback equipment in the past few years relate to your claim that
I've dismissed it out of hand?

Krueger, is it not true that the only reason you have for possessing
vinyl playback equipment at all is so that you can "transcribe"
(convert) analogue recordings to digital media?

Nope, but even were that true, possession of said equipment is absolute
proof that I have not dismissed vinyl as a medium.

This discussion is ended, since you will obviously keep claiming
various things "noted", when, in reality, your arguments concerning
vinyl playback are a matter of Google record. And the context of
your views is perfectly clear to all.

Most of us are content to let people enjoy whatever type of media
playback equipment and softwear they happen to enjoy. Most of us
don't initate attacks agsinst those who enjoy vinyl playback *or*
digital playback.



Bruce J. Richman



I'm sure that you realize that transcribing vinyl to CD is illegal unless
you do it with a *consumer* SCMS enabled stand alone CD audio recorder using
CD "Music" blanks.
I'm sure that you are aware of the fact that recording LP to computer is a
copyright violation. Since you have previously stated that the only logical
recording device today is a computer, that you must mean that you in fact do
not transcribe LP vinyl to CDR or CDRW.
Thus you must mean that you listen to LP playback? Or do you mean that you
operate without regard to RIAA and copyright?

Carl

"Carl Valle" wrote in message


I'm sure that you realize that transcribing vinyl to CD is illegal
unless you do it with a *consumer* SCMS enabled stand alone CD audio
recorder using CD "Music" blanks.

Two words: "Fair use".

I'm sure that you are aware of the fact that recording LP to computer
is a copyright violation.

Two words: "Fair use".

Since you have previously stated that the
only logical recording device today is a computer, that you must mean
that you in fact do not transcribe LP vinyl to CDR or CDRW.

Or plain old wave file.

Thus you must mean that you listen to LP playback? Or do you mean
that you operate without regard to RIAA and copyright?

Two words: "Fair use".

I bought a license to listen to this music, and that's what I do.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Carl Valle" wrote in message


I'm sure that you realize that transcribing vinyl to CD is illegal
unless you do it with a *consumer* SCMS enabled stand alone CD audio
recorder using CD "Music" blanks.

Two words: "Fair use".

I'm sure that you are aware of the fact that recording LP to computer
is a copyright violation.

Two words: "Fair use".

Since you have previously stated that the
only logical recording device today is a computer, that you must mean
that you in fact do not transcribe LP vinyl to CDR or CDRW.

Or plain old wave file.

Thus you must mean that you listen to LP playback? Or do you mean
that you operate without regard to RIAA and copyright?

Two words: "Fair use".

I bought a license to listen to this music, and that's what I do.





Making digital copies of LP's does not qualify as 'Fair Use.'
Making a digital copy of an LP is allowed under the provisions agreed to by
RIAA if the royalty payments are made on the media used (audio CD, MD, and
DAT) and the recorder manufacturer paid the royalty and installed SCMS.
Making a CD copy and 'Listening' are not defined under the provisions of the
copyright agreement you have on LP as equivalent.
Making an analog copy on cassette or open reel and even VCR HiFi is
considered legal under the home taping act because the copy is not a
'clone.'
I didn't make this up, I have done extensive research on copyright.
All this information is available at the library of congress website.

Carl

"Carl Valle" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Carl Valle" wrote in message


I'm sure that you realize that transcribing vinyl to CD is illegal
unless you do it with a *consumer* SCMS enabled stand alone CD audio
recorder using CD "Music" blanks.

Two words: "Fair use".

I'm sure that you are aware of the fact that recording LP to
computer is a copyright violation.

Two words: "Fair use".

Since you have previously stated that the
only logical recording device today is a computer, that you must
mean that you in fact do not transcribe LP vinyl to CDR or CDRW.

Or plain old wave file.

Thus you must mean that you listen to LP playback? Or do you mean
that you operate without regard to RIAA and copyright?

Two words: "Fair use".

I bought a license to listen to this music, and that's what I do.

Making digital copies of LP's does not qualify as 'Fair Use.'

So you're now a lawyer, Valle?

Making a digital copy of an LP is allowed under the provisions agreed
to by RIAA if the royalty payments are made on the media used (audio
CD, MD, and DAT) and the recorder manufacturer paid the royalty and
installed SCMS. Making a CD copy and 'Listening' are not defined
under the provisions of the copyright agreement you have on LP as
equivalent. Making an analog copy on cassette or open reel and even
VCR HiFi is considered legal under the home taping act because the
copy is not a 'clone.'

Prove it.

I didn't make this up, I have done extensive research on copyright.
All this information is available at the library of congress website.

Oh I get it, you're too dumb to quote it, eh Valle?