mattsk8

A. Where does the bible tell me to kill people? B. Then answer the question... what is morality and who defines / defined it? Also, if you don't mind me asking... what religion were you raised?

The Elacs are amazing for the money, you wouldn't regret it. They're actually not black, they have what looks like a dark, brushed metal finish. Obviously they're a plastic veneer over wood, but that's what it looks like. As far how a flat frequency response doesn't dictate good sound quality... I'm not entirely sure but I have some guesses. First, a "flat response" is never a ruler flat response, there are always ~2 db bumps and dips here or there. So it could just be a matter of where those bumps or dips are, even though they both appear to be [relatively] "flat responses". Other factors would be a speaker's transient response, it's acoustic phase (which is a huge can of worms, not to be confused with absolute phase), etc. For example... I'm currently designing a crossover for this build. This uses a 7" paper cone Wavecor woofer, with a Wavecor tweeter. Everything about the drivers (the Wavecor woofer and tweeter) measured insanely good, very flat. But when I import those measurements into PCD (the passive crossover designer software), it wasn't easy to do for some reason. I did eventually end up getting a nice, relatively flat response in the simulated response in my program, so I mocked up the xover in reality and listened to the speakers. They sounded... pathetic. What I was hearing was mildly lean bass, and a mild shoutiness in the upper midrange. So I changed my inductor in my tweeter's xover for a smaller one; that fixed the shoutiness in the upper mids. Then I padded my tweeter a little more with a bigger resistor; that pulled the volume of the tweeter down and enhanced the lower mids and drew more bass out of it. Then I shortened my port, which made the bass more punchy and defined. So in the end, I actually started with a relatively flat response that if anyone looked at, wouldn't have thought bad of it. But in reality, a few +/- 2 db tweeks here and there was the difference between crap and amazing. Also, a crazy response that isn't very flat also doesn't mean it sounds bad. Humans here peaks in a frequency response, but our brains won't necessarily catch a dip in the response. If you look at the B&W Nautilus speaker's frequency response, they aren't very flat at all. But, those speakers sell and they aren't cheap by any standard ($17k/pair IIRC). I'm not saying they're my favorite speakers at all, I thought they were too bright and harsh. Just saying, obviously a lot of people enjoy them.

I mean this sincerely... you are actually fun to debate with because you do think it through. That said... it is a slippery slope. I believe homosexuality is a... wait for it... here it comes... sin. Now, I have no idea where you stand as far as your belief in God or gods or whether you're atheist, so you would need to clarify that before this conversation would go any further. If you claim to believe the bible, then this would be a different conversation if you still tried to maintain that homosexuality isn't a sin. If you don't believe the bible, then debating sin is a moot point. FTR, I can't explain how I feel any better than Francis Chan, I agree with him completely. I would also ask... what dictates morality? I do find it curious that "morality" is a still noun, not an adjective. mo·ral·i·ty məˈralədē/ noun noun: morality principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior

I agree with what you said, and especially the last part here^^... but a flat response isn't always an indication of sound quality. If 2 speakers measure similarly and both are relatively flat... it's definitely still possible for one to sound bad and one to sound good. Obviously the aim is a flat response when you're designing a speaker, but getting that (relatively) flat response does not guarantee a home run in sound quality.

I'll bite... Obviously XX does NOT guarantee that a man is attracted to XY girl, your genetic code doesn't dictate your physical attractions (or more specifically, your lusts), at least not that anyone can find yet.

I agree with Mike that "sound quality" is totally subjective, it's like tasting food. You can't even rely on measurements because some people actually don't prefer a flat frequency response. For example, some want to see a BBC dip in a speaker's frequency response, while others prefer a razor flat response, and most people prefer more bass than the original recording (or the artist) actually intended. Another thing Olive found is that most people will pick the speaker with the most bass as their favorite (to a degree), which is also interesting. But I agree Fudge, blind tests are a lot of fun and a learning experience. But, just like you said, why discount the fact that speakers that look better are automatically perceived as better sounding? IMO, people are willing to pay insane money for art, which does nothing. I think of speakers as art that actually sings to you. Everyone listens to speakers differently. I do listen to my music really loud quite a bit, so if a speaker can't manage higher volumes it's a total fail IMO. But I know guys that absolutely love speakers that can't manage volume at all because they never get hot on the volume knob. I'm not wrong and they aren't wrong, it's totally subjective. If I'm honest, I'm not sure if it was the sound quality of those $262k MBL speakers, or the crazy, beautiful looks of them, or the fact that they would go INSANELY loud without breaking up, or all of the above that got my attention and moved me to pick them as a favorite. Either way, they won me over.

Sex isn't the only one, It all deals with a mental component. You're either a man or you're a woman, DNA can verify that. You're either African American, Caucasian, Native American, Asian... etc... DNA can also verify that (as well as physically verifiable characteristics). So... what you stated is entirely inconsequential and actually goes to prove the points we've been making. You can't wake up and decide what you are, you have reality to deal with. I'm not being mean, I'm being honest. And I absolutely agree 100% that "transgender is a lie, a confusion of the mind". There is no better way to word it.

Wasn't trying to be an ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD, I think I did miss your point. I agree that home audio is filled with snake oil and BS to sell to really gullible people with too much money. My only point was this... when I read your initial statement, which did follow my comment about the (very expensive) Sony SSAR1 speakers, I assumed you were referring to those speakers. But to be honest, I'm not entirely sure where the line of diminishing returns is, I think it's blurry. And sometimes people (myself included) will assume something is either snake oil or overpriced junk, when in reality it actually works. Agree. I'm all about blind tests, I think they're fun. But I honestly have a lot of faith in my ability to remove my perception of looks and price when I listen to a loudspeaker, I don't let it control my perception of what sounds good. We actually do blind tests quite a bit, and you'd be surprised at the results. People argue that all capacitors sound the same, that's actually not true. Foil inductors sound different than coil inductors that have the same values. Resistors all seem to sound the same, and so far I think speaker wire all sounds the same; or if it doesn't, it certainly isn't worth the ridiculous money some of it costs.

Well... I guess the disconnect here is that I consider a person who shares the same views as the current democratic party, as well one who votes democrat... a democrat. I guess there's a new definition now, and maybe you think I'm discriminating against people that aren't sure if they're democrat or republican... regardless of what reality would dictate?? Help me understand.

I'm not saying that hifi isn't inundated with BS, and there is a line of diminishing returns. My only point was that I didn't simply enjoy the Sony speakers because I knew how much they were. I think the Martin Logan Neoliths aren't very good at all and those are $80k for a pair. The Sonys are very well engineered. Even though there's a total of $2100 worth of drivers in them and maybe another (total guess) ~$700 in xover components... I know they spent 2 years engineering those, and there's more to a good sounding loudspeaker than just the drivers you choose (crossover and cabinet design). Are they worth $27k? Not to me. But if I had $27k to spend on speakers they would be. And regarding the Conrad Johnson... I said the opposite. As far as me and my perception of sound quality goes, price has nothing to do with it, you're the one that keeps trying to make that statement. I would actually say that holds more truth on your end; you seem to be turned off if something does have a large price tag, therefore your perception of what sounds good or bad is influenced by the price.

So... forget the fence you seem to be riding... where do you stand on the issue? And would you consider yourself a democrat or a republican? Because I would bet some serious money that while a small percentage of republicans might not care, the greater majority of the population pushing this crap fall under the umbrella of democrat. That doesn't make me small minded, that's just some common sense. But I do agree and I apologize. I have friends that are very much democrats, so using the term "libtard" probably isn't all that nice. Unfortunately I'm not sure what to call someone that doesn't see an issue with any of the points I've brought up.

Transgender issues are not the same as race issues. If I decide I identify with African American and native American... even though I'm obviously caucasion... do I now get the college money? Can I open a casino?

There wasn't a law, it was common courtesy and knowledge up until now. Here's a shocker... I used a women's restroom at a gas station in GA about 2 weeks ago because the men's room was being used and no one was in need of the women's bathroom. I didn't get arrested, and I actually don't think I did anything socially unacceptable. But (and this where you liberals seem to really struggle with common logic)... even though I'm not a rapist or a pedophile, if there was a little girl or even a grown woman in there, out of respect and decency I would've waited for the men's room. I understand that my reason for making that decision seems to elude you guys, but try to wrap your mind around it.

This^^ is the issue. The problem isn't "transgendered" people... the problem is that now all the libtards are trying to make it socially acceptable to wander into whatever public restroom you want to... regardless of who is in there. I really don't care what you liberal buffoons think is acceptable behavior, if a man goes into a gym locker room where my wife is and I'm around, I'm hauling him out and beating his a$$. And if my daughter is using a restroom and a grown man starts to wander in there, he's getting stopped by me, regardless of who's feelings get hurt. The thing about this that is so mind blowing to me, is that you people that are for this BS want to rearrange the bathrooms across the country, or do away with societal rules regarding bathroom use, all so you don't hurt the feelings of what is LESS than 0.3% of the entire population (and that 0.3% is actually not legitimate "transgendered people, that number is substantially lower). How about the MANY, MANY, MANY times more than that who aren't on board with this? What about all the parents that aren't comfortable with a strange man in the bathroom with their daughters? What about the women that don't want to shower with other men, regardless of whatever they identify with? Why doesn't that matter? I agree that we can't have doors that only open after DNA tests are conclusive on bathrooms. I also agree that this whole argument is pretty fricking dumb. But it's never going to be acceptable to me for a naked human with a dick to be naked in the same room with my daughter or my wife; and I really couldn't care less who's offended by that comment. If you don't understand why, you have some VERY serious issues in your head. Also... do you really think which bathroom to use is really the main hurdle that a person who can't figure out their gender has to overcome? Give me a break.

As far as lines of diminishing returns go... IMO the best bang for your buck speakers are these Elacs, these are unbelievable for their price. HUGE sound in a small cabinet, and for $500/pair... Elac UB5. I haven't heard anything that sounds close to those at double... triple (or more) money.

I agree on the cables, and to a degree the amps (but amps and preamps do have a large effect on the sound of a system). There was someone pushing these magnets that assure you have a "1 way signal" in your speaker wires. They were also selling these things that plugged into the spare outlets in your house's circuits. You could've easily spent over $10k on a bunch of snake oil BS in there. He stopped just shy of telling everyone these could cure world hunger. Don't remember the manufacturer. Pretty funny crap on this site... Coconut Audio

While I agree that there are points of diminishing returns as far as price / performance in speakers goes... I don't agree with your statement. I'm sure for many people that does apply, but I've been around enough to know what good sound is and regardless of the price, those Sony speakers sound incredible. I'd put them as my 2nd favorite in the building and they were by far and away not the 2nd most expensive in the building. I prefer them over the $60k Wilsons, the $80k YG Acoustics, the $70k Sonus Fabers... etc. My friends at Vapor had speakers there that were about $10k/pair IIRC, and those were close but not better than the Sony speakers... although I would take them over the $70k Sonus Fabers that were at the show. PSB speakers run about $8k for the pair (I think Crutchfield sells them), and those sound great... but not as good as the Sony speakers. Psychoacoustics is a fun subject IMO. More than price... looks will have the biggest effect on your perception of what sounds better. In listening tests, people almost always choose the better looking speaker as the one that sounds better; but then they do the same group of speakers in a blind test, and those opinions almost always change. Price doesn't have as much of an effect. Look into Sean Olive's research, a lot of interesting stuff. FTR, all the drivers in the Sony SSAR1 speakers are readily available to the public, they're all Scanspeak drivers. I actually have the larger version of the midrange they used in the Sonys in my own speakers, and I did that after I heard the Sonys 2 years ago. These are the drivers in the Sony speakers... Tweeter: Scanspeak Illuminator 6600 Midrange: Scanspeak Revelator 15W Woofer: Scanspeak Revelator 22W

Sony does something like that ($27k pair of speakers) to sell their regular product. But, I will say those are some of the best speakers I've ever heard.

I could ramble about Axpona for a while but I'll try to keep it short and sweet. Show was awesome, hard to beat going from room to room listening to $500k systems all day long. And they're getting a lot better with the music too, this time every room wasn't playing Nora Jones or some variation of crap like that. Nothing against Nora Jones, but small doses. Sorry for the picture quality, I used my cell phone. My favorite room was the MBL room. I think this room had close to $1,000,000.00 in equipment. Just the crazy looking pair of speakers were $262k, then there were 6 subs, 4 amplifiers that were each about 4 ft deep, and all kinds of other crazy equipment. These things absolutely cranked, the sound coming from them literally pressurized the whole room. So sexy. If I ever win the lotto, I'll have these in my living room. It's not just the sound from them, it's the crazy design. each of those big aluminum domes is a midrange, then there are 2 tweeters under that, that are the same design. 2nd favorites are the Sony SSAR1. Absolutely amazing sounding, but they should be at $27k for the pair... 3rd would be these Volti speakers. I love the "off the beaten path" design, they sound amazing, and the go insanely loud... One more "wow" moment were these little white speakers. I actually know the designer, Jim Salk, he's a super sharp and down to earth guy. These are active, so they have their own internal amplifier and DAC. These sounded amazing, so good I had to think about which I liked more between them and the big floor standers next them... Aside from all those^^, honorable mentions would be the Focals, those sounded very good. They weren't the gigantic ones, I'm actually not a fan of those. These had a pair of 7" woofers, a 7" mid, and tweeter... ATC's active speakers were really good... Tidal speakers were amazing (not to be confused with the Tidal music app, totally different)... Raidho speakers were incredible... and the list goes on.

That is sharp. I'm holding out for a Hamilton Aviation someday. Similar looks. I picked up a Tissot Le Locle automatic. Not bashing this one because I do like it, but I actually think I like my quartz Tissot PRC 200 more.

Makes perfect sense. And since God is love, and love is blind... then Stevie Wonder is God. Vote for Stevie!!

Actually I'd reword that^^ and say "Sanders has more Marxist principals than Obama, or at least Sanders will admit what he's really trying to do. And that's my issue with the bailouts and I stated that earlier here; zero culpability for their actions. Kevin, the fact that you ask such dumb questions and pose such dumb examples is exactly why you, and all the other blind followers with your back-asswards views are what's wrong with this country. Do you really believe Sanders is a practicing Jew (do you even know the difference)? He's as much a practicing Jew as I'm an African American woman... although, in your world it doesn't matter what reality says, so maybe I am an African American woman.

You pretty much nailed it, except you left out the bailouts. And while your points are (obviously) valid and sensible, they are debatable. All I have is what has happened in this country while he (Obama) has been in office. Which is why I said he has Marxist principals, as opposed to saying "he is a Marxist". Lets get real, Sanders has Marxist principals too (or at least Sanders will admit to what he's really trying to do).

Yes I'm joking; I'm playing the same political game they were. I can come up with video clips and manipulate them just the same. But I wasn't joking when I said that I don't think saying Obama is a Marxist is super far from reality. I'm not saying I think he's trying to be a total dictator, but I do think he has Marxist principals.

I don't know that saying there is a possibility that Obama is a Marxist is super far from reality (but I'd also venture a guess that you have no clue what Marxism actually is). I do know that what they were spewing towards the end of that video is BS, saying all that crap about how Cruz trying to introduce "Christian jihad" is absolutely BS. I'm curious... Obama made the statement towards the end of the pledge video clips that "we have been, and always will be one nation under God"... what did Obama mean by this? Which God? Because I know Obama isn't a Christian. What exactly was he saying? Is Obama trying to introduce jihad now? Help me understand these things please!! I need progressive guidance!!