YTSEJAM Digest 5744
Today's Topics:
1) Re: Audio experts: (especially bose experts)
by Mustaine Fan <mustainefan@yahoo.com>
2) Re: YTSEJAM digest 5743
by "Ivan Navarro" <inavarro@mdo.net>
3) All about Bose
by "Nick Bogovich" <bogie@schliz.com>
4) Re: YTSEJAM digest 5743
by Ryan Veety <ryan@ryanspc.com>
5) Re: Audio experts: (especially bose experts)
by "Metzger, Mark" <mmetzger@comversens.com>
6) all apologies
by "Dale Newberry" <fat_tire@hotmail.com>
7) Re: vanishing points-little DTC
by MTeiper@aol.com
8) Van Halen
by "Mike and Susan Verstraete" <homewks@sound.net>
9) Re: in a giving mood
by Chris Oates <aspect-lists@tinagh.org>
10) Re: Van Halen
by Eric George <edgeorge@geneva.edu>
11) RE: in a giving mood
by "Todd O. Klindt, MCSE" <todd@klindt.org>
12) RE: in a giving mood
by Chris Oates <aspect-lists@tinagh.org>
13) Re: in a giving mood
by "Dan McCormack" <demccor@CLEMSON.EDU>
14) Sherinian with Toto
by "Awake ." <awake@buffymail.com>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 07:26:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Mustaine Fan <mustainefan@yahoo.com>
To: ytsejam@torchsong.com
Subject: Re: Audio experts: (especially bose experts)
Message-ID: <20010123152642.6259.qmail@web903.mail.yahoo.com>
--- Andrew Coutermarsh <a_couter@mail.plymouth.edu> wrote:
>
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, [iso-8859-1] Mauricio Mart=EDnez
wrote:
i dont get this......i dont own a bose system, but i
heard one, and
sounded pretty good to my ears. anybody can explain me
why bose is
often trashed here?
Bose generally uses unique technology, such as putting
bass in their mini-stereos, and speakers for pools and
such. All of their stuff is VERY expensive, and is really
not cost effective for home theater systems. Bose systems
aren't any better in Home Theater applications and you'll
also get more for your money.
Have cool, Will Travel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:14:11 -0500
From: "Ivan Navarro" <inavarro@mdo.net>
To: <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: Re: YTSEJAM digest 5743
Message-ID: <001f01c0855f$e7f8bf40$76035a8c@noaa.gov.nws>
I agree with what AC says and just to add my two cents about "Blose" here is
a speaker designer point of view as to why they don't sound "real":
First - The cube covers a limited frequency range constrained by the
frequency responce capabilities of the 3-inch or so driver it contains.
This frequency response is limited in upper frequency range and in off-axis
response (beams). That's why good speakers have these things called
tweeters! The limited response means that it can't reach the real high
frequencies needed to accurately reproduce some instruments and especially
the human voice and as the frequency gets up into its highest treble range
it will beam(good off-axis response is critical to make music sound real -
this is why you often see two of them stacked and pointed at angles to one
another). Strike 1!
Second - The cube produces less output as it enters the bass region again
contrained by its size. Q: How much low frequency can a 3-inch speaker put
out? A: Not much! Now the so-called subwoofer (I'll get to the 'so-called'
part next), because it is a band pass design, is also limited in frequency
response to a narrow range. This range does not extend up in frequency high
enough to blend with the decreasing output of the cube (cross-over region).
The result is a suck-out in the upper bass region. - Strike 2!
Third - The so called subwoofer is not a SUB woofer at all, since it doesn't
produce any real low bass (i.e., below 40-50Hz). It is really just a plain
old SMALL woofer placed in a bandpass box to increase its output (read
operate more efficiently) over a limited frequency range. As a result it
does not output any real low bass or high bass, and, to make matters worse,
it over emphasizes its tuned frequency. While this makes it appear (to the
untrained ear) to produce prodigous bass, it actually makes it sound (to the
musical ear) like a "one-note" speaker"! - And that my friends is STRIKE 3!
Conclusion - Bose blows!
Now I understand that not all people like BIG honkin' speakers dominating
their living space (read my wife). If your in a situation where you must buy
that type or nothing else, in that case I would recommend a similar system
at a lower price like Cambridge soundworks - same thing just cheaper. But
the best thing to do is get the small satellite-sub combos like the Energy
Take Five or similar systems from B7W etc.
I-Man
> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:23:08 -0500 (EST)
> From: Andrew Coutermarsh <a_couter@mail.plymouth.edu>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
> Subject: Re: Audio experts: (especially bose experts)
> Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0101222220350.12107-100000@oz.plymouth.edu>
>
>
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, [iso-8859-1] Mauricio Mart=EDnez wrote:
>
> > > The third most important bit is to avoid Bose. :-) Get these three
> > > right, and you'll do OK.
> >=20
> > i dont get this......i dont own a bose system, but i heard one, and
> > sounded pretty good to my ears. anybody can explain me why bose is
> > often trashed here?
>
> The thing is that most people who don't own high-end systems can't hear
> the difference between Bose and anything higher-end because you haven't
> actually HEARD higher-end stuff.
>
> Let's put it this way: Bose manages to get decent sound out of their
> system by adding a subwoofer. Without the subwoofer all you hear is high
> frequencies and upper-middle frequencies. It is physically IMPOSSIBLE to
> get decent frequency response in such a small cube. If you were to listen
> to a high fidelity system and then listen immediately afterward to a Bose
> system, you would hear an enormous difference.
>
> Also, Bose charges incredibly high amounts of money for their systems. =20
> With the same amount of money, you could buy a MUCH higher quality system
> without the name-brand oomph that Bose carries.
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Andrew Coutermarsh
> a_couter@mail.plymouth.edu
> http://cout.dhs.org/
> -------------------------------------------------
> Procrastinators UNITE... tomorrow.
> -------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:19:57 -0500
From: "Nick Bogovich" <bogie@schliz.com>
To: <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: All about Bose
Message-ID: <D42A162CC83A7F40AD63994DE54129C61F36@arcadia.schliz.com>
The thing is, if you were to do psychoacoustic testing, most people
wouldn't be able to distinguish between most mid-range priced audio
equipment. If you had someone listen to 10 different systems, after
a while they all sound the same. (I'm not including high-end systems
in this statement.) A lot of your enjoyment comes from a preconceived
notion that "I'm listening to system xyz, so it must be great." Hell,
these types of studies even work on beers. At Christmas, my cousin,
who is a die-hard Bud fan, wasn't even able to pick Bud out of 10 beers
in a taste test. He got it down to the last 3, but in the end he
ended up picking Miller Lite -- a big let-down to him.=20
Anyway, I know a lot about Bose and his acoustic studies because I took=20
"Acoustics" with Professor Bose at MIT. Pretty generic title I know,
but=20
it was by far the best class I ever took in college. And I got to take
an
in-depth tour of the Bose factory and know a lot of the motivation
behind Bose's products.
The reason why Bose can have such small speakers is because they=20
separate the mid-to-high-end frequencies from the low frequencies.
The low frequencies are driven from the sub-woofer which is
significantly
larger than the other speakers. Like Andrew said, it is impossible to=20
get low frequencies out of small speakers. Without getting too=20
technical, the general rule of thumb is that speakers with larger=20
cabinets can output lower frequencies. I don't remember offhand how=20
large a 20Hz sound wave is but you certainly couldn't squeeze one out of
one of the AcousticMass speakers. =20
About why Bose equipment is so expensive...you're not just paying for
a decent mid-range system. You are paying for style. Bitch all you
want about "Oh, Bose systems look stupid blah blah blah", the fact of
the matter remains, Bose was the innovator of tiny systems. All his
research was done to prove a point -- that bigger doesn't necessarily
imply better. Many doubted his work saying that he was wasting his
time,
but through all his doctorate and post-doctorate work, Dr. Bose was=20
able to come up with technologies to shrink speaker casings down to=20
incredible sizes. He separated the lows from the highs and came up
with something that works for people who don't want to waste precious
space in their homes or apartments on a huge system. You get a lot out
of virtually no space, and naturally, you're going to have to pay a
price for that tradeoff.
-bogie
-.---.----..-.---.----..-.---.----..-.---.----..-.---.----..-.--
nick bogovich
http://www.schliz.com/
you have been schlizzed
-.---.----..-.---.----..-.---.----..-.---.----..-.---.----..-.--
-----Original Message-----
]From: Andrew Coutermarsh [mailto:a_couter@mail.plymouth.edu]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:31 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: Audio experts: (especially bose experts)
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, [iso-8859-1] Mauricio Mart=3DEDnez wrote:
> > The third most important bit is to avoid Bose. :-) Get these three
> > right, and you'll do OK.
>=3D20
> i dont get this......i dont own a bose system, but i heard one, and
> sounded pretty good to my ears. anybody can explain me why bose is
> often trashed here?
The thing is that most people who don't own high-end systems can't hear
the difference between Bose and anything higher-end because you haven't
actually HEARD higher-end stuff.
Let's put it this way: Bose manages to get decent sound out of their
system by adding a subwoofer. Without the subwoofer all you hear is
high
frequencies and upper-middle frequencies. It is physically IMPOSSIBLE
to
get decent frequency response in such a small cube. If you were to
listen
to a high fidelity system and then listen immediately afterward to a
Bose
system, you would hear an enormous difference.
Also, Bose charges incredibly high amounts of money for their systems.
=3D20
With the same amount of money, you could buy a MUCH higher quality
system
without the name-brand oomph that Bose carries.
-------------------------------------------------
Andrew Coutermarsh
a_couter@mail.plymouth.edu
http://cout.dhs.org/
-------------------------------------------------
Procrastinators UNITE... tomorrow.
-------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:18:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Ryan Veety <ryan@ryanspc.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: Re: YTSEJAM digest 5743
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0101231302390.23021-100000@RyansPC.com>
Rock on man. I love my Energy Take 5's. I did lots of research
beforehand and with limited funds this was the best speaker package I
could afford (for movies of course, these are not the best music speakers
but I don't generally listen to music on my home theater).
I must confess, before my ears were "trained", I used to think the bose
setup in the store sounded good. The sales person always plays the bose
demo CD that is EQ'd to sound good and stress the speaker's good points
and ignore everything else. After I bought my Energys and got used to
having good sound for movies, I went to Circuit City and listened to the
$2000 bose speakers in the listening room. I pretended to sound
interested, they claimed they are the greatest speakers on earth. They
put in a DVD and I almost busted out laughing. Compared to my $600
speaker package they sounded horrible. Explosions had no BOOM, highs
almost hurt, and the voices sounded like the internal speaker on the TV.
There was a huge gap in the mid to low-mid range.
As for space concern, the Take 5s are quite small, about 6"x5"x5" and they
have a woofer and a tweeter. The 8" sub nicely covers the low range from
29-100Hz. If anyone is in the market for speakers listen to as many as
you can before blowing your money on something the salesperson says is
wonderful.
Ryan
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Ivan Navarro wrote:
>
> Conclusion - Bose blows!
>
> Now I understand that not all people like BIG honkin' speakers dominating
> their living space (read my wife). If your in a situation where you must buy
> that type or nothing else, in that case I would recommend a similar system
> at a lower price like Cambridge soundworks - same thing just cheaper. But
> the best thing to do is get the small satellite-sub combos like the Energy
> Take Five or similar systems from B7W etc.
>
> I-Man
>
__________________________________________________________
.' Ryan Veety <ryan@ryanspc.com> - http://www.ryanspc.com `.
| PGP Key: http://www.ryanspc.com/pgp.txt |
`----------------------------------------------------------'
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 15:54:28 -0500
From: "Metzger, Mark" <mmetzger@comversens.com>
To: "'(ytsejam)'" <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: Re: Audio experts: (especially bose experts)
Message-ID: <35A7D40B978CD311AF05002048404D34024B2646@wm2.btrd.bostontechnology.com>
>> i dont get this......i dont own a bose system, but i heard one,
>> and sounded pretty good to my ears. anybody can explain me
>> why bose is often trashed here?
Well, I haven't been following Bose speakers for quite some time but as of a
long time ago, they were mainly functioning with full-range drivers.
Assuming that they still do (with the exception of the subwoofer I just read
about), read on.
Think of it. A speaker is generating sound by pumping air into your
environment by moving their drivers. It is really hard to accurately
produce the subtleties of very high frequency sounds at the same time you
are reproducing the massive lower frequencies. For what it is worth, Bose
speakers traditionally are wicked efficient, so they crank. But in terms of
sonic accuracy, that is where they fail. These failings are less noticeable
in Rock music than in Jazz or Classical but they are indeed there.
This leads into the potentially heated argument comparing speakers with many
drivers e.g., 4-way speakers with fewer drivers such as 2-way speakers.
(With X drivers you are essentially dividing the audio spectrum into X
distinct bands, each audio band served by the different drivers.) A large
number of drivers sounds nice in principle but 4-way speakers, for example,
have more electronic crossovers required to split the sound into four bands
(3) than the 2-way which only requires one crossover to split the sound into
the two drivers. The more crossover circuits you have, the more opportunity
you have to add sound coloration there.
This can easily digress into a political war of wits seen only with the
likes of comparing chili recipes or the rules to the card game Pitch .....
Mark Metzger
mmetzger@comversens.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 16:44:24 -0600
From: "Dale Newberry" <fat_tire@hotmail.com>
To: ytsejam@torchsong.com
Subject: all apologies
Message-ID: <F8BGTuAyHsjCGvseE4D0000220b@hotmail.com>
Hehe, sorry about that HTML. I don't know what the hell happened there.
Netscape and Explorer both ahve been acting up real bad here lately.
Anyway, the info I have said a 3 hour set, but it wouldn't surprise me if it
goes longer :).
Also, for anyone that might be interested, Stryper is playing a reunion show
on the main stage there. I laughed when i read that, but it would be
interesting to see :).
Dale R. Newberry
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 19:52:13 EST
From: MTeiper@aol.com
To: ytsejam@torchsong.com
Subject: Re: vanishing points-little DTC
Message-ID: <cf.1686b16.279f813d@aol.com>
In a message dated 01/23/2001 1:00:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ytsejam@torchsong.com writes:
<< Who cares how much it weighs on the prog scale? Just because they don't
change tempos 520 times per song doesn't mean it's not a good "prog" album.
A good album is a good album and Tangled in Dreams has become one of my most
played CDs in recent history (bought from CDNow after downloading a few
songs off Napster, for those keeping track :)) >>
Man, you said it... this CD is AWESOME! Like you, I got the CD last week
after a friend of mine sent me a couple of MP3's he got from Napster. I
can't stop playing the damn thing! :-) Let's hope they get a chance to
tour the States sometime soon... I've GOT to see these guys live!
Later... Matt T.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 19:42:01 -0600
From: "Mike and Susan Verstraete" <homewks@sound.net>
To: "ytsejam" <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: Van Halen
Message-ID: <001501c085a6$d9ec9600$215099d1@homewks>
KYYS 99.7 in Kansas City this morning reported that a recent interview with
Michael Anthony it was stated that Van Halen has completed a new album and
that Anthony would not confirm or deny that the new CD will feature David
Lee Roth on vocals. Anthony only said the new CD was going back to their
early roots and the fans would love the CD......Now I know that we've been
let down before when this rumor was passed around, but maybe this time it's
true.
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:50:47 -0800
From: Chris Oates <aspect-lists@tinagh.org>
To: ytsejam@torchsong.com
Subject: Re: in a giving mood
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010123174931.02c22ee8@pop.tinagh.org>
At 03:37 PM 1/19/2001, you wrote:
> "You, sir, are an ambisexual walnut."
>
>The first to identify the source wins something, maybe a CD, or a sweater
>knitted from a year's worth of belly button lint (hint!)......
Given the hint, I'd make a guess of the immortal robot from (I think) the
third book of Hitchhiker's guide who decided his purpose in life was to
insult every intelligent organism that ever lived.
~Chris
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 21:26:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Eric George <edgeorge@geneva.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: Re: Van Halen
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1010123212318.20538B-100000@sparcy.geneva.edu>
man, i don't know what you're talking about when it comes to being "let
down". over david lee roth??? come on. IMHO, hagar was the best thing
to ever happen to that band, both vocally & musically. here the flames
come.........
but seriously, that band has had more rumor, speculation, & indecision
surround them when it comes to who's gonna' be the next singer. there was
talk including people from david coverdale to (get this one)....carly
simon????? that would have been interesting.
oh well, my 2 cents worth....
-ryften
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Mike and Susan Verstraete wrote:
>
> KYYS 99.7 in Kansas City this morning reported that a recent interview with
> Michael Anthony it was stated that Van Halen has completed a new album and
> that Anthony would not confirm or deny that the new CD will feature David
> Lee Roth on vocals. Anthony only said the new CD was going back to their
> early roots and the fans would love the CD......Now I know that we've been
> let down before when this rumor was passed around, but maybe this time it's
> true.
>
> Mike
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:43:09 -0600
From: "Todd O. Klindt, MCSE" <todd@klindt.org>
To: <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: RE: in a giving mood
Message-ID: <002001c085c8$88845060$3464a8c0@klindt.org>
Bloom County.
Chris, you were thinking of Marvin the paranoid android.
tk
Todd O. Klindt, MCSE
todd@klindt.org
"Remember, the government doesn't create one dollar.
When you get a dollar, that means the government
took it from someone else."
-Governor Jesse Ventura
-----Original Message-----
]From: ytsejam@torchsong.com [mailto:ytsejam@torchsong.com]On Behalf Of
Chris Oates
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 8:28 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: in a giving mood
At 03:37 PM 1/19/2001, you wrote:
> "You, sir, are an ambisexual walnut."
>
>The first to identify the source wins something, maybe a CD, or a sweater
>knitted from a year's worth of belly button lint (hint!)......
Given the hint, I'd make a guess of the immortal robot from (I think) the
third book of Hitchhiker's guide who decided his purpose in life was to
insult every intelligent organism that ever lived.
~Chris
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:28:15 -0800
From: Chris Oates <aspect-lists@tinagh.org>
To: ytsejam@torchsong.com
Subject: RE: in a giving mood
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010123231642.03b56848@pop.tinagh.org>
At 09:51 PM 1/23/2001, you wrote:
>Bloom County.
>
>Chris, you were thinking of Marvin the paranoid android.
I will defer to your answer, since that rings more true in my old brain
than my guess. But, I wasn't thinking of Marvin, I'd remember his
name. In the third (or maybe fourth) book, there is a robot (I'm pretty
sure it's a robot) who is immortal and decides that the only way to pass
the time is to insult every living thing, so he travels in his ship
throughout space and time to do just that. I can't remember much more than
that since it's been a few years, and I gave away my old ratty paperback
copies of those books and haven't yet replaced them.
I think I got confused with the lint comment due to the sheer importance of
lint (or "fluff" as it was called) in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
game by Infocom all those years ago...
~Chris
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 02:45:40 -0500
From: "Dan McCormack" <demccor@CLEMSON.EDU>
To: <ytsejam@torchsong.com>
Subject: Re: in a giving mood
Message-ID: <014701c085d9$acefd490$702010ac@clemson.edu>
]From: "Chris Oates" <aspect-lists@tinagh.org>
Subject: RE: in a giving mood
> I will defer to your answer, since that rings more true in my old brain
> than my guess. But, I wasn't thinking of Marvin, I'd remember his
> name. In the third (or maybe fourth) book, there is a robot (I'm pretty
> sure it's a robot) who is immortal and decides that the only way to pass
nope, it's an alien. i dont have my book here so i cant give you a quote but
im pretty sure.
> I think I got confused with the lint comment due to the sheer importance
of
> lint (or "fluff" as it was called) in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
> game by Infocom all those years ago...
i also guessed HHGttG, but for a slightly different reason - i never played
the game, but yes, it seemed that belly button lint was important in one of
the books, and also, the insult just sounded like something Adams would
write :) but alas, we were both wrong. moo.
--Dan McCormack ( demccor@clemson.edu ** http://wsbf.net/cowgod/ ) Binary Rock - http://www.binrock.net/ WSBF 88.1 - http://www.wsbf.net/
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 2001 09:54:42 -0000 From: "Awake ." <awake@buffymail.com> To: ytsejam@torchsong.com Subject: Sherinian with Toto Message-ID: <20010124095442.18126.qmail@musone.chek.com>
<mikael.hagstrom@bracke.mail.telia.com> >Subject: Re: Sherinian with Toto and Ibanez/Korn
>>and I think they could bring a nice feel to Derek's >>stuff. > >What I hope is that Si will control Derek's need to use >these horribly programmed synth stuff (if they took in >Steve Porcaro to program it I could live with it tho). >Organ and piano he does really well IMO. >Toto is one of my favorites as well, excelent skill >(best guys around, prog scene don't have the all the top >notch players, far from it!) and they know when to use >it and not, unlike some other bands...
I said it before (and got flamed for it) and will re-iterate: I think that there's a lot of Toto influence in DT, CERTAINLY in the Sherinian era. If you listen to what Derek plays (and his orchestration) and compare it to what David Paich plays, they're hardly lightyears apart. Except Derek plays solos, and very well in my opinion, on a good day. LITS and "Girl, Goodbye"? Same riff, innit?
I read an interview with Luke recently, and he reckons that Toto still have at least one album in them. The problem is just one of scheduling, since these are busy people. Still, I'm waiting. For the Sherinian disk, too! :)
~S
Sign-up for free Buffy the Vampire Slayer e-mail at http://www.buffymail.com
------------------------------
End of YTSEJAM Digest 5744 **************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 19:10:50 EST