Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums

frankmarsi

Members
  • Content count

    910
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About frankmarsi

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

8,154 profile views
  1. frankmarsi

    Calling Frank Marsi

    7-27-18 A-hoy, who goes there……. Don’t shoot, it is I……… David it is I. I’ve been busy getting back into my music collection and haven’t been spending too much time on the web. Those LST 2’s would easily fit into a room in the late sixties or early 70’s but are just too out of place these days unless your room is ‘retro’. And, it is very true that my main passion and attraction is only for 12 inch woofer equipped speakers. Although, I’ve lately been getting back into playing my bass guitar again, I first had to have my Bassman amp refurbished. It has two 15 inch speakers and still puts out well enough. I also find it amazing how playing guitar has been elevated to new heights by the newer generations and styles of playing, especially for me to see since I use to play 45 years ago. The amplifier was slightly modified from 50 watts to 70 and seems to put-out a touch more. In the guitar amp-world, tubes have their place however, replacing tubes is costly, as I shelled-out recently but, I always knew this is the cost of admission. Using two 15 inch speakers directly as in using a musical instrument amplifier still reinforces my long held beliefs about using 12 inch woofers as the ultimate size woofers for home stereo use. I find for home stereo use, 10 inch woofers try to satisfy but, just don’t have the where with-all, 8 inch woofers are simply inadequate, and 15 inch woofers just too lumbering and slow. Other than that, my system is still impressing me every time I listen to it, and using my newly acquired vintage tone-arms has been very satisfying all around as I’m glad for the choices I’ve made. My latest favorites are the two “Dynavector DV-505” arms I waited to find in mint condition. What befuddles me is so many folks here are so into their vintage AR speakers but, insist that CD (a relatively more modern ‘input-source’) is the way to go. I feel, if you’re going to be a stickler about vintage speakers what the heck are you doing with CD’s or silly downloads? Clearly the counter-part of vintage speakers is using LP’s. My only exception, is using high-end modern phono-cartridges as the older cartridges simply cannot compare to the new designed cartridges that I use. And, it can’t be realized until one focuses on the vinyl front-end and makes the change to upgrade to better that input-source in order to ultimately realize how wonderfully cared for vinyl records and an upgraded table, tonearm and cartridge make. It’s odd how folks here insist on using old and on their last legs speakers and yet feed them CDs. To me, that’s not a complete dedication to the vintage realm but, is only going half way. Not using vinyl is missing out on a whole lot of fun. A quality and well set-up vinyl rig is certainly more complete and affords more musical satisfaction over-all.
  2. frankmarsi

    What type of load is the AR10Pi ?

    Thanks for the clarification gene. I sort of knew the answer but, it's not good to answer a question when one is not fully sure of the answer. I'm sure DavidR will work it out. FM
  3. frankmarsi

    What type of load is the AR10Pi ?

    I felt it was useful information on a few different levels and I spent the time searching for it as common courtesy but, so what, the culture has changed, rite? AFAIK common AR knowledge says that AR included ferro-fluid with their AR-9 and no doubt also with the AR-11 and 10Pi in the new series. I run AR-LST's with an even bigger transformer in the X-over along with nine multiple drivers in each cabinet and never experienced any grief because of it while using transistors. Tubes may not be that different. I don't recall ever hearing folks complaining of difficulties as many folks were still using tubes when the AR-11 variant was released. I believe if you're using a fuse as you should, a blown fuse or 'open' would create problems for tubes. A good web-search with time will probably offer more info to you.
  4. frankmarsi

    What type of load is the AR10Pi ?

    This might be helpful: http://sanderssoundsystems.com/technical-white-papers/52-esl-amp-white-paper
  5. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    Diseases can spread easily especially a nasty one.
  6. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    der, and what do you mean? Pete B., DavidR, tysontom and I have all been discussing audio here. Maybe not your audio but, audio just the same. Snarky or 'drive-by' divisive incendiary comments as it were with one sentence remarks is not discussing audio either and make no clear point. Flippant shouts from the bleacher seats are not constructive and add nothing to the dialog here which iincidentally originated about a box with the possibility of a turntable in it. Not about audio complete;y but, about a device that is used to make an audio signal. FM
  7. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    'as little to do with audio as one could possibly imagine'. What do you mean? Regarding Joni, I have many disks she's recorded, on vinyl, of course. I consider her one of the more unique and creative female singer/song writers around and have been a fan since mid 1968. Sadly, a few months ago it was reported that she wasn't doing too well. I never heard the follow-up. She's an extraordinary songstress and multi-talented. FM
  8. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    5-26-18 Regarding my choice of turntables: All I did was clean them up well, removing the skeevy germs of their previous owners and install better tonearms. Then level their position by using appropriate density vibration absorbing feet. Henceforth, it leads to better sound quality for me and I can touch them and the vinyl with-out getting decades old greasy and snotty germs on them. Since I purchased my first SL-120mk1’s in 2005, they’ve for all intents doubled in price as did the tone arms that I love and use. The same with my SL-1100’s as they’ve also doubled and further increased in price and it seems many folks are once again appreciating both of these old-birds now and more than they did in years. This is obviously, due to their inherent high quality and the resurgence and new popularity of vinyl. For true dyed in the wool vinyl puffs like me, CD’s are passe and lack so much. Regarding these tables, the aficionado’s opinion is that they’re simply a speed accurate table that’s stood the test of time, like the last 46 years in fact. Folks simply buy a different arm board and mount an S.M.E., or Jelco or other fine tonearm. These tables have great specs and are extremely quiet, and they’re built like tanks. With certain equipment, like speakers, turntables and arms and head-shells, I like to ‘standardize’ and with this method of uniformity, I know what is going with the system at all times as I’ve reduced the number of variables. This leaves me able to enjoy the music and not fuss around with stuff as the concentrated effort is solely on the music. The only items I change would be new and better phono cartridges and their dedicated cables and types of music that I enjoy. I’ve already assembled the speakers, tone arms, preamplifier and amp combination, and turntables that I’ve always wanted since the 1970’s. So, all I do is buy new and used records, clean them up and sit back and enjoy. There’s no guessing if there is something amiss or not tuned properly. I did all of that stuff in the ‘60s and ‘70s in my learning and discovery years. I don’t entertain constantly changing components like some folks do as I feel I have reached a point where I’m beyond that as I’m not just starting out in this field and it has been a life-long hobby. That maybe be fun to an extent but, it takes away from listening time. Besides, like I just said, I now have the system I’ve always wanted for what I consider an ultimate system and life long dream of ownership. I’m enjoying the ride! So, you see, it’s easy-peasy to please me. FM
  9. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    6-25-18 Hi pete B, and thank you for your complement about my tonearm and table combination. Actually, in 1970 the Technics SL-1000 was introduced first, then the SP10 then the SL-1100, then the SL-120mk1. All with-in the time span of two years (’70-’72). All of them each have a different outward appearance but, the motors are basically the same and interchangeable. I’ve never handled the SP-10 but, it’s the TOTL of that original series. The SL-120mk1, has a servo controlled motor as does the first SP-10 and SL-1100. By 1977-8, the SL-120mk1 morphed the into the SL-1200mk2, with quartz control also and continued later with the mk3, 4, 5, 6 and in 2010 was discontinued oddly enough in the midst of the vinyl resurgence. It utilized a quartz-controlled speed motor also. Recently the SL-1200G and GR re-emerged and is casting aside many top-flight and big dollar audiophile tables. Some in the ‘hi-end’ community embraces the whole deal and have been buying and bragging on forums while others remain with lowered jaws. Getting back to your question. The SP 10 as time passed became the SP-10mk2 & mk3 simply by also employing a quart-controlled motor also. The latest version is considered the cream of crop and price wise the most costly with its more advanced speed circuitry and special platter which employs a brass layer to it and is said to improve its sound quality. The latest SP-10R iteration’s price is five figures. It’s considered the turntable all others aspire to be in terms of speed accuracy and large degree of build quality. Google them, and Technics' show it being manufactured. Are you considering purchasing new or used? Which ever way you chose, you’ll be glad you did and will never feel the need to change. As did the original line, the newer ones will support most any quality tonearm. The older ones that I use simply add to my policy of using components that get out of the way of the music. If I were to redo and switch to new, they'd be mine but, at this point in time I'm total vintage. FM. P.S. I can understand why your friend has only worked on two of these. They rarely, if ever need repair. They're seemingly designed and built to last many years. Depending on use, one to 2 small drops of light oil on the motor shaft and that's it.
  10. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    At least this offering shows the contents quite clearly and is hiding nothing. The AR-XA offering has no explanation as common sense doesn’t seem to be in the mind of seller. However, no worry as here’s a much better in every way offering and in contrast a potential buyer can be assured that he can see what he’s buying. Certainly, the price is different but, that’s for obvious reasons as this table exudes quality and effortless performance and is miles above the AR-XA table. I employ two of these tables along with two Dynavector 505 arms in system #2. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Technics-SL-1100a-Boxed-Turntable-with-Shure-SME-3009-AKG-Tonearm-Rare-Vintage/132672305090?hash=item1ee3e2b7c2:g:V-QAAOSwirFa7hEd In the box.... Out of the box... ..
  11. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    Hi Tom, interesting viewpoint check this out. http://loudwire.com/vinyl-to-the-rescue-physical-albums-outsell-digital-sales-in-2017/ Beyond the cliche, "We agree to disagree" line, I differ with you on a number of items you mentioned and attempt to respond to a couple. Granted I respect your opinion and I also realize that you may be one of the few surviving souls from AR's past but I haven't started formulating my opinions last year or even ten years ago. I go way back as I constantly mention in any one of my rants. "CDs don’t gradually wear out over time": I can show and play for you vinyl disks that I played in the early seventies using a Shure Type III and the records show no visible wear, more importantly don't sound worn either. "Dynamic range": I'm sure spec-sheets, white papers and such will show a CD has better specs but, again that's on paper. However, in my personal experience few CDs can offer the ending harmonic trail ends or 'over-tones' to notes fading as vivid sounding as a quality pressed vinyl disk. In my experience CD's will typically fade notes away quickly and won't offer the time of trailing tones as vinyl does. Though looking at the guts of an TD125 one is hard pressed to even imagine the AR-XA coming close to it in quality of construction and design and most importantly quality of sound. Even if it is many moons since I used my AR-XA, I can honestly assure you that an XA can't hold a candle to the TD125 even if by my memory alone. "wear out over time": As I stated above I have disks that have been played numerous times and do not exhibit any signs of wear due to use. In fact these last few years I've been using high quality moving coil cartridges and although I'm not using a microscope or making recordings of said disks to compare, I detect no noticeable wear even from my Ortofon Cadenza Blue MC cartridge that I track with at 2.52 gm. "Don’t have record noise, scratches, pops and clicks"': After a good cleaning using a ultrasonic bath I can play disks for you that exhibit no noise, 'tics' or pops providing the pressing is a good quality one. Using any of these disks I will sit there and from a stark black back ground the music will emerge and start to play. "don’t require a lot of personal intervention to start and stop": I'll not respond to this because vinyl wasn't born into a 'push-button' culture as the CD was and does require arm and stylus placement onto and off of a disk. Besides, for a vinyl person 'approaching the turntable, lifting the the arm, then placing it on the disk is a holy ritual steeped in tradition and purpose'. I'll give ya "personal intervention". "CDs have much wider bandwidth": actually, that is governed by the recording engineers at the time of recording so for me, it's a variable that can't really be compared. Again, on paper I too would imagine a CD does have a broader bandwidth but, is it heard as the initial recording process will determine that aspect. " CDs have more accurate, lower-distortion reproduction": My ears do not have d'arsonval meter movements so I can't document or measure distortion per-se but, again during listening I can not detect any distortion whatsoever unless, there might be 'groove-damage' or the phono cartridge was improperly set-up(weight, azimuth, VTA/SRA or the recording tech was riding the controls and inadvertently introduced some tiny speck of distortion. Again, I am human and sadly do not have any robotic abilities or sensitivities to record tiny electrical impulses with. In a minor defense of an LP. Esthetics: Vinyl can present a 'tactile' experience in feeling and warmth with its conveyance of sound. One can almost sense the rosin on a bow, the slap of the strings against the neck of a double acoustic bass when plucked, the hiss of swirling brushes on a snare drum. Sadly, maybe 9 out of 10 people are already tainted with misconceptions and false and wrong experiences with vinyl. Let's face it, who in their lifetime hasn't had less than positive or favorable experiences with vinyl records. I mean everybody and his uncle has abused, mis-used or partially destroyed a vinyl disk through mishandling, uncaring and just plain unknowing how to properly play and handle a vinyl disk. Yes, the masses have been using vinyl since the creation of it for public consumption, when just after Edison started turning cylinders and selling them. Point is, we all have had our share of incorrect use of the oh-so delicate vinyl disk. Now, granted I realize that here you are the "Anointed One, The All Knowing, The Grand Exalted Ruler" here and justifiably so, and I have the utmost of respect for your status in the electronic/speaker industry and certainly of your opinions. In so many words, you must have already forgotten technically, knowledge that I'm not even aware of. Or, as they expression goes, 'you've already forgotten more than I know', or will ever know in this related field. But, don't you or anyone else wonder how a lowly bare bones XA table can be compared to a Thorens TD124 which by the way as you know is of a completely different design than the AR-XA. And, although I'm aware about the Brits flooding the market with reviews, loads of advertising and such when all along the LP-12 came after the AR-XA, as the LP-12 was responsible for doing the same kind of crap to the Thorens TD125 which again borrowed so much from the AR-XA, it's still very hard to compare the two and think the XA is better. I my memory bank, I can't for the life of me ever recall back when I used an AR-XA to ever approach the sound quality of my Thorens TD125 tables. And certainly never approach the sound of my first iteration Technics SL-120 mk1, certainly not my Technics SL-1100. In the press, it has been mentioned that "Doug Sax" used to use a SL-120mk1 and a V15 Type III to test listen. Whether or not that is true is beyond my scope of information. I'm unlike many here who defend what they already own nor do I follow the herd, especially this new brazen group of newbies here in the last few years who spew their newbie misconceived perceptions as if they've been listening for decades to AR products as many here have notions and attempt to speak as if they are experts. If I'm not mistaken, one of these 'boot-campers' even attempted to go 'toe-to-toe' with you a few weeks ago. Sacrilege and heretical, in the Book of AR! I worked up to my knowledge base by listening, observing and using, and pitting one component against the other to draw my conclusions as to which table is better than the other over the course of many decades. So, in my world, no matter how I may respectfully uphold your vast knowledge and scope of experience, time-in and mind-set/opinion that an AR-XA table could even approach much less match or equal the two afore Technics mentioned tables that I have so precisely set-up, we'd be at odds with one another. Not in any measurement or actually 'user' (me, in this case) experience or perception is there of any comparison, much less 'sound-better' than. So, in these here-in contained words we've exchanged, I'm left with no other recourse or conclusion. We'd both have to sit in the same room and hear what I have assembled, give you a chance to absorb the music played, give you a chance to see-thru each component and then ask if you really can find any sort of a comparison or justification to believe that the AR-XA table can even remotely compare to my assemblage of what I believe will be an opinion changer for you. Of course, would this moment that I'm proposing ever come to fruition is another question. I, can say with enough of a notice before hand would gladly have you over here to my modest and humble abode for a few solid-blocks of listening sessions. I can unequivocally assure you that your keenly honed ears and mind will be at ease when you hear how clear and transparent my system is allowing you to hear-thru each component/transducer in its own audible space. That is to say, the cartridge will carry the music through the tonearm, through the table and cables thru the pre and power amps all the way to the AR-LST's with-out any of each mentioned component in the signal path impeding the other. The use and choice of each inline component that I use will allow you to fully embrace if not fully agree with my point regarding CD versus Lp and better quality than AR-XA turntables. It has been my utmost pleasure to speak with you and certainly an honor that you have responded to my opinions/assertions in the 'one on one' manner that we have found ourselves posting on in this forum. Be well, and good evening, FM
  12. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    David, Tom Cat sounds like 'The Crusaders" from 1978, are you familiar with them? Except for few of the ones you've mention, this is more recent jazz, I'm finding that I like 1950's to early 1960's, some late 40's but, thanks for the names, I'll look into more of them as I'm still learning and discovering. FM.
  13. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    David, I enjoy your candor and also fully agree with you re: cd's. I only have one Gary Moore vinyl disk from 1991 and I think it sounds fine. I also agree regarding the 'jazz' music. I've immersed myself into loads of it lately. Vinyl is the only way to listen correctly and is period correct. SACD would be the only area I would scale up to from CD and honestly with all that I've put into my system in these last few years, that won't be likely. I've read about a new medium similar to CD only much better is being spoken of at hifi shows and in the press. Do I care? Maybe, a little. I'm curious about what you prefer in jazz as I must admit, I'm still learning though let me drop a few names for ya. Bill Evans, Art Blakey, Oscar Peterson, Chet Baker, Basie, Ornette Coleman, Ahmad, Ray Brown, Lee Morgan, Coltrane, Hank Mobley, Cannon Ball and Nate Adderley, Louie Bellson, Miles, Brubeck, to mention a scant few, vocals, my girl Ella, Etter, Kitt, etc. Male: Joe Williams, etc. though not many around. I'm at a loss for names rite now. I find I'm liking 'Bop' more than the earlier jazz circa 1920-30's. Late '40's, and '50s seem to be where I dwell at the moment. I will add that much of the stuff I'm buying is on original Verve and labels from back then along with many as of late re-prints. Also, I wouldn't be able to become so hog-wild in my enjoyment and collecting unless I had the ultrasonic' cleaning regiment that I delved into head first about a year ago. A lot of what I find especially in older jazz has been mis-handled and abused many years ago. Sometimes I'm forced to do some 'mercy-listening' just for the music's experience to say, I have. It's because much of this stuff is almost un-obtainable any longer and certainly not available on CD. I'm anxious to hear about your favorites also. Oh, I'm sorry I'm not speaking about cabinet sanding, pot scrubbing, 'caps', grill clothe types and low power amps and improper speaker placement. That seems to be lacking in my dialog here, forgive me. I'm not new to the world of AR speakers, in fact I may be a dinosaur? But, at least I've been fossilized with high-power and LST's. Speaking of music, hasn't been cast aside, and it seems to be neglected. The saw dust from sanding and oxidation from those 'pots' must've altered my thinking. FM
  14. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    Tom, answer if you please or simply avoid but, what to you listen to mostly vinyl, or CD? I'm just curious. I use CDs while vacuuming, writing out checks for bills, using the keyboard and whenever I don't intend to be moved by the music or simply want background music or just feeling lazy as vinyl takes some effort just like anything else that is worth while to mount a vinyl disk. Regardless of your answer, please don't fear that I may sway away from vinyl as I am committed to it since back in the early seventies when I became an AR speaker owner and even more so when the resurgence re-started the wonderful world of vinyl all over again. Though, I started as a young teener with vinyl in the early '60s, and have continued all the way to the present. In 1961, I bought my first vinyl record and still have it. "Walk-Don't Run" by the Ventures. Being sort of a tinker-er was not why I decided to spend literally thousands and thousands on my multiple vintage tonearms, expensive MC cartridges and loads on second cleaning equipment to prove that vinyl is better. Purchasing the 7000 records I own and buying more every month is not the way to save for retirement either. As a dedicated listener of many decades I too bought into the 'new' tech. and back in 1990, I bought into CD, I even own decent machines, 5 cd players in fact that were considered excellent though not high-end and still I was not satisfied with the sound quality although 28 years ago, it was good fun and a pleasure to use. But, even then in 1990, almost 8 years since it's first introduction to the masses, I felt my ears weren't lying to me, something was missing when listening to CD as compared to vinyl. I set-up my present main system with 3 turntables, 2 tape decks and two CD players and an FM tuner and all inputs are selectable at the turn of a knob. So, switching back and forth to any of the mentioned input sources is available for A/B companions which I have done enough times to necessitate shutting the CD player off and quickly switching back to phono. I even have had listening guests ask me to do the same as they felt the vinyl was so much more invitingly warm and satisfying 'real' sounding to their ears. A few newer vinyl discs that I purchased were cut from CD originals and not master-tapes, and this is very noticeable in play-back. On a system that is as resolving and revealing as mine is, it's noticeable and again, even during casual listening, a guest or two, who some real listening experience can also pick it out the differences. With CD one simply pops a plastic disc into a flimsy plastic draw and then hopes for the best. The sound emanating out of any CD player was made to sound just like the designer who designed it to their own tastes and this is after the recording engineers and mastering folks have already done their jobs with the chosen medium. The listener has no say in the actual sound quality because the designer and mechanical CD player is deciding for the listener whereas with vinyl, you tailor the sound quality as you prefer. With vinyl, one can vary the sound with their choice of cartridge, tonearms, and turntable. Sound can also be adjusted by changing phono cables, platter mats, stylus tracking weight, and VTA. With all of these parameters and flexibility, the listener decides what quality they enjoy best suited to their liking, whereas with CD, you take what you get, and cannot do any choosing on your behalf. Whatever 'chip' your CD player has is what you're stuck with. So, go ahead, pop in another CD and listen to someone else's, (designer's) perception of sound that you would be listening to according to their tastes. Or, don't be lazy like you can be with a CD and custom arrange, set-up and enjoy the quality and sort of sound that you like best and that's easily adjustable and afforded with vinyl. Otherwise, like I said, pop-in another disc and hope that you might like it. Remember, it was promised that CD was perfect and will last forever with perfect sound and that kind of talk was with-in the first few years. So, let's see 1982 was basically when CD came out, two years ago the Hi-Fi press was saying CD is on the way out and for the last 10 years vinyl is living a insurgence with record sales higher than in the last 25 years. I'm left scratching my head. In the last year or so, I've gotten into' jazz more than ever before, over 75% or more of what I bought is not, I repeat is not available on CD. And, many jazz re-releases are not being offered on CD. Go figure. Compounded by a major high-quality producer of CDs and SACDs is going out of business should confirm the rumors of its demise. If you're an appreciator of a great system and quality reproduction of sound as I am, and as I learn from the best systems out there just like I always have done, you might surf the web looking to see and hear/read what the 'other-side' enjoys. Those who can afford the very best listening systems in creation use vinyl mostly. So, for me, it is immensely satisfying to see the lion's share of better systems that are using and are centered around vinyl usage. One word of caution; the best vinyl reproduction will not come while using an AR-XA table in its original form regardless of what the fans may think, feel, or believe as up-grades are required to do so. I know many here are content with it though and that's all right too of course but, is not the best one can do by any stretch. For casual, not really critical listening it's fine to a degree however, critical listening as is generally done with higher quality systems are using vinyl as the chosen medium. Memory has it in my world, that I wrestled with my new XA for two years in 1972, gave-up and never looked back except in memory saying to myself; "gee, remember when you thought that was the best there is?". In actuality, it's just too 'bare-bones' in its construction and simplistic design just as Ed Villchur intended it to be in its design and low cost. Back in 1972 it pushed many lower quality tables aside and even put mid-stream turntables to shame and rightly so though, it wasn't able to match the upper echelon of better tables either as that wasn't its intended purpose so, please let's stop pretending that it is, that's 46 years ago in my experience and it won't change by will-power or fondness for it. Even though the tables I use are vintage and ranged in costs back then in 1972 from $260. to $360. w/o tonearms, at the time the XA was costing $78. so there is no comparison. Again, go figure, it's easy to see. Economical items are built to a certain price point and rest assured in most every case with a cheaper product one can only approach the more costly and better made items for their better sound quality. And finally, please stay on topic, as advised (sarcasm to poster above). * Note: All that was required in this post is as I already said in my first two opening sentences when I started this post. * And DavidR, thanks for being 'real' in your comment. At least with a vinyl disk, if it's a poor or crappy pressing or damaged, you can read the liner notes in normal daylight with-out reading glasses. You could also return it claiming it's warped or scratched and get a refund. FM
  15. frankmarsi

    AR-XA in box?

    6-23-18 Before the ‘Granny- Aunt’, or ‘holy-than-thou’ viewpoints and non-cognoscenti opinions start flying from those less better equipped, and before the defensiveness of their equipment begins. Let me first just say yes, one could be happy with whatever they may have. However, undeniably, there will always be something better out there. It’s easy to understand. Or perhaps it’s like I mentioned above: “”somewhat closed mind due to low-budget-mindedness perceptions, I dismissed it.””. But, I don’t begrudge anyone for wanting to stay at a certain level. That’s a personal decision and the same as I did though not my choice to stay at that entry or beginner’s level as I strived for more to enjoy in my HI-Fi expereince. My goal and viewpoint was to better my listening experience as I have had a small number of lesser pieces early in my hi-fi experience and learned from them. So, I learned and moved up the ladder of quality and to a better listening experience over-all as is my choice. I’ve frequented many listening salons and stores and did much personal evaluation and spoke to many who knew much more than I did and certainly had more experience. I’ve read countless articles and have read countless test-reports going back close to 50 years worth of ‘time-in’ this hobby/field. Most of all, I’ve been listening with a self-trained ‘critical-ear’ and have taught myself and learned through experience, much monetary expense and time what ‘better’ really means in the hi-fi world of music reproduction. Not in the last 5 or 6 years, or even the last 10 or 25 years but, many years more than that, since I was 15 or 16. I’m sure others have also though, some chose to stay at a certain level and not better or increase their listening pleasures. I chose to always strive for better than what I already had at the time. Anyone can spend tons of money on a hi-fi system and still not know how to listen or even know what they’re listening to. I’ve read about folks often on ‘audiogon’ who have to find a dealer to install a cartridge or tonearm, some don’t know how to hook-up components or what the next best piece of old or new music is. Just like I didn’t buy “XAM speakers”, a E.J. Korvettes house brand when I went looking to buy AR-3a speakers back in late 1971 early 1972. I didn’t chose KLH or Advent, or even JBL among numerous others. I choose AR as being the better speaker as many who occupy these pages would concur. I was targeting Wharfdale A60 & 70, AR 2AX's and AR5's, but I held out until I could find at a discounted price AR 3a’s. So, before what’s his face comes out again and says “ As long as you’re happy, that’s all that matters” stop and ask him why did he buy AR speakers in the first place? Would he/she, have been happy with brand X speakers or brand Z? If he did and came to this site and preached that, what would the majority of members say to him or her? I can easily guess something like: ”Yes but, AR speakers sound so much better.” So, living in a free society we can achieve, do, and have almost anything we care to, as long as it doesn't hurt or harm anyone else followed by the fact that we must all observe a certain code of ethics and obey written laws. FM P.S. This is where I started listening in the late 1950’s, early '60s. My dear father had this since before I was born and my older sisters and he enjoyed 78 RPM records on, some of which I still have and they’re dated from the 1930’s in my dad’s collection. Sadly, my ‘rock and roller’ sister’s collection from the early 1950’s till 1959 were wrongly destroyed by her off-spring. Anyway, this web-swipe below is the closest I could find to post here and it in my recollection is the correct model. On the inside’s top lift-up door it read: “RCA Victrola”. It had, as I recall at least 5 or 6+ radio bands, most of which were ‘short-wave’ and we could hear Europe, South American and so on. Its speaker was a 12 inch electromagnetic-controlled type. And, its metal felt coated turntable platter could only played 78’s with an actual ‘needle’. Actually, it was more of a roofing-nail because the stylus/steel needle could easily be driven into a sheet-rock wall or roofing shingles, maybe even concrete. My father and I as an observer were always changing tubes to keep it alive until one day…….I came home from the beach and he was down the basement destroying it with a hammer and small pry-bar claiming that the new- (in 1960))Magnavox consolette he had bought us was better and he couldn’t afford or find the new tubes it so desperately needed. Fondly, I’ll never forget the big sounding bass output it had. That bass led me to AR-3as. In fact, this unit made me a ‘bass-hound’’ and to this day I remain the same sort of bass concerned person. And in response to another trending post here: There ain’t nothing like a 12 inch or15 inch speaker if you are having a conversation about realistic- sounding bass. As a side note: Two weeks ago I had my bought new in spring of 1968 Fender Bassman amplifier repaired. It wasn't broken, just that I hadn't played it or even turned it on in 45 years.This time I wasn't taking any chances concerning 'cap' replacing. I did have the 6 power-supply caps and a few others replaced in the pre-stage board and replaced also its two huge 6L6 tubes because one had become microphonic, re-biased and good to go. In 1972 I replaced the two original 12 inch Jensen speakers it had from the factory with two 15 inch 'Ovation' speakers but, I didn't have the information/formula as to how much bigger I was supposed to increase the reflex-port size to accommodate the bigger speakers so, they may be suffering a bit as they sit. When I brought the amp home and plugged it into the speakers, it sounded fine for my purposes as I'm not gigging any longer. Long live BASS! FM
×