mattsk8

Debating with you is pointless because of your inability for rational thought. Ex-communication is the antithesis of punishing someone for leaving.

That's awesome. I need another stereo like I need another wiener, but I'd love to build a console like that using a vintage receiver and turntable.

Have you ever heard a tube amp like that? I honestly have no personal experience with tube amps, outside of hearing the ultra expensive ones at the stereo shows. I did hear one of my friend's, it might have been that one in the pic. But my thought on them is this... I know 15w/ch from a tube amp is a lot more than it would be in a solid state amp (not really sure why though). But do they really sound that much better than solid state? Because for $500 you could easily buy a used Adcom 555 or 5500 and have output and headroom in spades. That's not an argument, I'm honestly curious. I'd love to have some time with his tube amp, and be able to compare it to a solid state. Unfortunately he lives in IL and I'm in MI.

Well I'd say that's a pretty big leap of faith Kevin, especially since there's zero proof of it. And it doesn't really jive with this statement you made earlier... Obviously this^^ isn't true of you, you believe in more than just "things that are proven". I do have evidence of God's existence, you guy's just say that doesn't count because someone dreamed up a "factual theory" (whatever that really is) in an attempt to explain him away. My evidence for God is the fact that "since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made". Fair enough, and I think we've reached the end of this discussion because I've been here many times, at this point we're just going to talk in circles. But one more thing just to clarify... It wasn't a fear of death that brought me to surrender to God, it was being faced with the reality of having to give an account for my life once I did die, or rather... it was a fear of eternity and ultimately it was the fear of God (The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom). I had plenty of time running and rebelling prior to when I surrendered to God at 20 years old, fear of death was the last thing on my mind, I made a gigantic mess of my life. I'm not saying I'm living out perfect surrender to God, I still make mistakes; but I can say that I'm literally in an infinitely better place today than I was ~20 years ago, and that's only because of the grace of God.

Haha, yup. The gold was a nice touch.

You definitely know your DIY tube amps. He said... "Heres a 15 watt/channel EL84 push-pull amp I built a couple of years ago". He actually said he had about $500 in it. I'm going to attempt a pic from my phone, so hope this works...

I'm very familiar with Sagan's work. As to your question... there's no mention of nuclear power plants in any religions that I'm aware of either and I still believe, so as far as hypothetical aliens disproving the existence of God, I'm going to say no. Now one for you... if God came to the Earth in the form of a man and performed a bunch of miracles, would that prove His existence? I have another question... do you believe there is life on other planets?

I haven't seen it. Guessing it's based on Carl Sagan's The Cosmos, and I have read that.

I don't believe God works for evolution if that's what you're asking. If evolution is a reality, I believe it works for God (i.e. intelligent design). But, I don't believe in evolution as a whole. I believe bits and pieces of what they say (adaptation), but I don't believe Darwinism; there's way too many holes (as I explained in my earlier post). Throw some legos in a ziploc bag and shake it up 7,000,000 times and let me know how many of the pieces lock perfectly together. And this would be a well over a zillion times more possible than "evolution". If you read into it you'll see that even atheist scientists are starting to realize how many holes are in the theory of evolution, so their new claim is aliens. Either way, you're still going to end at who designed... in the beginning.

Right, that's the proof I needed... . Since you have such a wonderful grasp explain these things to me... A. If mutations are the driving force behind evolution... and the "theory of evolution" is a fact (as you say)... then explain how the [fact] that mutations never increase information, they only decrease it... could possibly apply to "evolution" (look up the definition for "evolution"). In every study they've done, they've never been able to replicate any of what you're saying is a "fact". Explain how this is true "science". B. Explain the total lack of examples (fossilized or living) of the millions of transitional forms required for evolution to be true. (This is a big one that's missing to actually substantiate your "fact".) C. Spontaneous generation does not coincide with biology. D. Another big one... the scientific method can only test existing data, it can't figure out origins. And I get "carbon dating"... but we discuss the flaws in that theoretical method too if you want. And that is where you have no understanding of what science actually is. I'd say if you claim to "believe in science", you should probably follow the rules behind it.

You say you believe in science, but you obviously have a very distorted interpretation of what science is. Every claim you made is baseless, you have no idea what you're talking about. Evolution is still a theory, explain to me how it's anything else or where they've proved this "fact". And before you tout more baseless things that you don't understand, you might want to study evolution vs adaptation; and once you do that you can try to come at me again with your "facts". And regardless, even if evolution was used in creation... it still doesn't explain God away, He did say He created man from the dust of the Earth.

Wish you could hear those Klipsch speakers I linked here earlier, I think they'd do what you're looking for and they're going to be tough to beat at ~$100 ish new (on eBay). I know you want to use your amps, but those are powered so you wouldn't need to. Just plug the 3.5 jack into your phone or into a BT receiver and you're off and running. Great clarity, and great bass at low volumes. And they're pretty tiny, the subwoofer is the biggest part and that's only 10"w x 10"t x 11"d. That guy texted me back, he doesn't have a pic with him but will get me one tonight. He said he has about $350 into his 15w/channel tube amp, plus the aluminum top plate and wood case.

I texted that friend of mine and asked for a pic of his DIY tube amps and how much they cost to build, I'll post when he responds. Referring to higher sensitivity speakers... I finished the crossovers for these last night. The tweeter to mid is a passive xover, and the woofer to mid is active using a DBX Driverack PA+. The tweeter/mid is about 97 db sensitive, and those subs are around 93 db. These things are STUPID LOUD, I had crystal clear clarity at 115 db playing Rodrigo Gabriela's acoustic guitar version of Stairway To Heaven, and wasn't close to max, plenty of room to go louder. It's a JBL compression tweeter inside the horn, with a 12" Eminence midrange, and an aluminum cone 15" Dayton subwoofer. I use my Carver TFM-55 amp to power the subs, and my Adcom 5500 for the tweeter/mid. After I got the xovers dialed in, I was playing them and got a text from my neighbors asking me to lay off the volume because I was rattling the windows in their house.

You should really look for a place near you that sells those Elac 3 ways and go listen to them, tons of bang for buck. Those also have a concentric mid/tweeter. Out of curiosity... why are you looking for high sensitivity? That Pioneer has plenty of power for the average speaker.

First off, I honestly think that you and I would get along if we met... as long as we didn't kill each other because we're both obviously obstinate pricks. That said... undo any preconceived notions, I love music and I love stereos... period. Believe me, I've had arguments with the "audiophile" goons over stupid stuff like me saying that I loved the sound of these huge Tannoy speakers.... Was nothing but... "Those aren't accurate... the frequency response is blah blah blah". Who cares? They sound amazing. So I definitely get it. FTR, those Tannoys are high sensitivity speakers at 96 db. PSB makes incredible speakers. I've met the designer, Paul Barton a couple times. Tube amps are expensive. I have a friend who builds lower powered tube amps (like 15w/ch) that sound insanely good, but they're still spendy. I can get more info if you want, but you'll need to know how to solder, plus I'm not sure what he uses for the amplifier's chassis.

Technically there is no "home theater" speaker, they all do the same thing. These are listed as "computer speakers", but these will do exactly what you're looking for. You don't need anything, you could just plug your iPod or whatever into them and use that as your source... Klipsch ProMedia 2.1. I have those for my computer speakers and they really do sound good.

Something like this is what he was referring to... Fostex BK-12m Folded Horn Here are the issues with those^^... A. It's a 4" woofer, so you won't get any volume out of it, as soon as you turn it up at all the woofer will pop. B. Even though it looks impressive because it's different, the f3 (f3 is where bass starts to roll off) is fairly high at 65 Hz, so they really don't play much bass (hoffman's iron law, plus it's a 4" woofer). C. That kit is $330. For less than $330 there are DIY speaker kits that will easily rival that in terms of bass extension and output, and be WAY easier to build. Something like this for example... Overnight Sensations MTM... or this if you want more output, but I'm about to revise this one with a different tweeter and it'll actually be a little cheaper, and sound better... Blues MTM And technically speaking, that Fostex kit isn't "high sensitivity", it's 93 db sensitive. I'm not sure where the line for "high sensitivity" gets drawn, but I'd say somewhere at 95 db+.

First, you have me pegged wrong. I'm not an audiophile douche, I do enjoy music, and therefor I enjoy good systems. And aside from wondering if I can afford a pair of speakers I really enjoyed the sound of, I couldn't care less about cost. I didn't go "on and on about dollar amounts", I mentioned the speakers that I enjoyed and then mentioned what they cost, because inevitably if anyone cares they always ask, "how much are they?". That was where you came in with your... "For fvcks sakes... prices... stereophile... blah blah blah. My first "DIY speaker build" (not counting a boom box I tried to modify) was a 3 way in cardboard box at 11 years old, driven by a Magnavox shelf system. Even though it sounded like absolute crap, it was one of my favorite stereos because that's where it all started for me. But I went from there trying to learn why it sounded like crap. I don't buy new crap just to impress, my systems are pretty mutted together using a lot of used equipment. This is the front end for my garage stereo. Does this honestly look like a system someone put together just to impress the masses with dollar amounts?... As far as dollar amounts, I only bring them up the way people here post pics of Ferraris and Zondas, not because I own a pair. I honestly can't tell if you're just bent on having a d!ck waiving contest, or what your deal is... but yes, you said... I never said you said they weren't important; I just tried to figure out WTF you meant and WTF there is to argue about as far as capacitance goes.

Without thinking long and hard about it... I think I agree with you completely. The gray areas are definitely where things get dicey. "Restrict their freedom" can be a little far fetched too.

I'm not sure where you stand on belief in God Mike, but I would say the same to you whether you're atheist, agnostic, etc.

I've read the bible many, many times. I can find verses too, like when God commanded Saul to slaughter all the men, women and children of the Amalekites; then God got mad at him when he didn't. But, these aren't verses telling me to kill anyone; and you really need to brush up on your comprehension skills if that's what they're telling you. Next we can argue about the order of creation and question how God created light before he created the sun. Or maybe then go on about how breeding animals in front of sticks doesn't seem to work for us to make them striped or spotted the way it did for Jacob. Let me spare you the time. I already know where you stand, you think... "The Word of the Lord is foolishness". But I think "Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him." So... we already know where this is going to end up. There's plenty in the Bible that I don't understand, I can admit that. But I don't need to understand how and why, and I can promise you that while you may think you might, you don't have any understanding of existence and creation either. The difference between you and I is that I trust God, and I believe the Bible is "the Word of God". When I read something that doesn't make sense to me, I... "Trust in the Lord with all my heart, and lean not on my own understanding"; rather than dream up excuses for how and why.

Those verses are telling you and me to kill people? IMO, if you were in church until you were 19 and that's what you took from it, you should try a different church. Don't you think it's ironic that you stated the only reason we should "legislate morality" is when it involves hurting or stealing from someone; then you said cheating doesn't fall under that category? I think I'd rather have someone relieve me of all my possessions than walk in on my wife and best friend. So based on that, why is cheating ok and stealing isn't? When is cheating not OK? Is it OK to cheat your way through college? What about lying? Where does the line between what is acceptable, and what's unacceptable get drawn and who decides?

Yes I design my own crossovers. I have a very thorough understanding of speaker design as well as measuring equipment (I don't just wing it), I've been doing it for years. But I don't understand why you said... What's there to argue? Are you saying capacitance in xovers doesn't matter? That's one of the key ingredients in a xover, the value of the capacitor (as well as the inductor or resistor values) is what tells the xover when, how and where to roll off. So if you're saying capacitance doesn't matter in a xover, you couldn't be further from the truth. If you meant you want to argue "brands of capacitors", then I've heard that argument plenty. Like whether or not it's worth the money for something like a Mundorf Silver Oil cap vs a Erse Pulse X cap. For example... a 6.7 uF Mundorf is around $300, whereas a 6.7 uF Erse is around $7. And electrolytic caps are substantially less than the Erse. I would never spend $300 on the Mundorf, but I have paid $40 for a Clarity cap before... and you can hear a difference from one brand to another, even though both measure identically the same. Next we can argue about foil inductors vs litz inductors vs iron core inductors vs air core vs... silver vs copper... etc. And just like anything else in life, the line of diminishing returns is where it gets subjective; yes. But, the same rule applies to everything. My wife would never buy a BMW M5, she thinks it's a monumental waist of money. But, that doesn't mean a M5 isn't worth the money just because you can buy a Toyota Corolla for 1/4 the price. And I'm not just a speaker guy, I'm a amp / CD player / preamp / etc guy; I love stereos and I have great amps, preamps, CD players... not just speakers. I can tell you from experience that more money generally gets you better equipment. That's not to say there isn't good equipment for less money, Adcom made some killer amps for cheap, but a Bryston, or PS Audio, or Boulder, or D'Agostino, etc. are better than the Adcom, and you'll pay for that quality. I'm just not a speaker wire guy because aside from looks, the speaker wires are going to have the absolute most negligible effect on the sound of your system. RCAs would be next, except they're a little more important because of interference. Digital cables... buy the cheapest one they make. Now regarding orchestral music... Go listen to a pair of Kaiser Kawero Classics, those come pretty close. Yes, they can't pressurize a room like a live orchestra can, but they're accurate throughout the frequency range. And if you've been to a live orchestra, you probably noticed that the upper level is... amplified PA speakers (unless it's a small venue). Just FYI... the piano is one of the hardest instruments to reproduce the sound of with a speaker, and it's because of the resonant frequencies from the piano's key strikes. But listen to a pair of YG Acoustics Sonja speakers, and it'll start to make sense as to why those cost $107k per pair. But there again, the line of diminishing returns kicks in, and unless I had lottery money to play with I'd never buy them. And I've never said "all expensive speakers sound great". I have heard junk that cost $10k and up. Magico speakers don't do much for me and those can be $100k. Wharfedale makes some killer sounding speakers for reasonable money. Revel makes some great sounding speakers for reasonable money. I'm actually curious if you've ever heard them. The problem with that^^ statement is... are you referring to horn loaded subs?... I haven't heard one sound good, I've heard them make lots of bass, but always WAY too boomy and muddy, and in a cabinet the size of a refrigerator. Or are you referring to compression tweeters in horns? If yes, I agree but compression tweeters aren't cheap at all. The price of entry before you start getting decent sounding ones is about $50 and still need the horn, and just like everything else the sky is the limit on how much you can pay for compression tweeters. But I agree that that's what it's all about, and that's how and why I got into speaker building (caviar taste on a pizza budget). I never made the statement that someone can't enjoy a sound system if they didn't spend at least $XXXX.XX, just saying that there's a LOT of engineering in something like the $78k pair of TAD speakers, it isn't just a huge price tag and smoke and mirrors. The guy that designed the TAD Reference One (Andrew Jones, I've met him a few times and he's a great guy) has his master's in physics, and he studied physics so he could understand speaker design better. Coincidentally, he's also the same guy that designed those $500 Elac speakers. Sorry for the long post, but I want to reiterate that you don't need to spend exorbitant amounts of cash to enjoy your sound system. I got into speaker building because I couldn't afford $5k+ speakers but wanted that sound quality, so I learned how they did it. And just like everything else, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and some people don't care. But I'd bet a lot that in a blind listening test, 100% of the guys here would going to pick the $27k Sony SSAR1 speakers over the $1k Elac floor standers as the better sounding speakers. And that's not because the Sonys are more expensive, it's because they sound better. They're more expensive because they have better drivers, more inert cabinets, better xover components, and they spent 2 years with a team of sound engineers designing them. I've been around stereos enough, it wouldn't matter if they finished the cabinets with manure, I'd still pick them as my favorite sounding speakers.

Nice looking watch for sure... but all I think of when I see one is... "you don't know $hit from shinola"

Generically, using higher quality drivers usually does mean an easier to design xover than if you used lesser quality ones, but not always. The software doesn't ever really "give us a design". The way PCD software works is... you take measurements of the individual drivers in your loudspeaker design. When I was designing the xover in the speakers in the pic I posted (and this is after I used the woofer's T/S parameters to design the cabinet) I measured the woofer's frequency response, then the tweeter's frequency response (using a speaker measurement mic plugged into my PC where the measurement mic's software is... while playing a sine wave), as well as the impedance response (impedance response of a speaker is what they use to come up with "nominal impedance", generally either 4 or 8 ohms). Then I'll import those measurements into the PCD program, and that program will simulate what is going to happen to the driver's frequency response when you add parts to a xover, and also what happens when you manipulate the values of the parts in the xover. But, using good driver's definitely doesn't guarantee good sound. The heart of the speakers is the xover, and you can definitely make good speakers sound bad with a bad xover design. Those Wavecors are actually pretty good drivers. But sometimes you get lucky and things just fall into place when you first put it together, and sometimes you have to play some more. What I went thru with that Wavecor design is actually fairly par for the course, I just used it as an example of how much minor tweaks in the frequency response of a speaker can have a major effect on the sound of the speaker. I'm not sure what you're so worked up about, I didn't think anyone (except you) was arguing about anything. I've said many times that sound quality is subjective, but it's not as subjective as you're trying to make it. Really crappy speakers generally sound crappy to almost everyone that hears them, and really good speakers generally sound good to everyone that hears them. The subjectivity comes when you get 4 different pairs of really good speakers, people choose differently as to which is their favorite. And you're correct, there is no dollar amount. But you're delusional if you think the majority of speakers costing $300 are going to compete with speakers that cost $5k+. Just like anything else, when you're buying new speakers more money generally gets you a better product. You don't have a clue and you need to listen to more speakers if you disagree with that. The only question is where the line of diminishing returns is, and that's going to be individual preference. That same rule doesn't apply to wires, there's TONS of snake oil in the wire department. Now regarding your recording studio argument... no matter what, it's still mastered to sound a certain way, and regardless of what the artist decided to do with the EQ when they were mastering their album, the point of a speaker is to "accurately" reproduce that sound. Whether its a Yes album, a Depeche Mode album, a Slayer album, or it's a recording of Tchaikovsky's Dance of the Sugar Plumb Fairy... a good speaker should "accurately" reproduce whatever sound that recording artist was going for. The problem is (just like I already stated) there's no such thing as a ruler flat frequency response in any speaker, every speaker has +/- ~2 db (or more, or less) dips and peaks, and where those dips and peaks fall throughout the frequency range is what makes a speaker sound the way it does. And we can discuss capacitance if you want, but I'm not a cable guy; I don't spend stupid money on wires because I know how this stuff works.