Theft

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Have you ever listended to Quad electrostatic speakers? Have you ever
listened to any electrostatic speakers?

i have, although it was long ago. i don't remember who made them.

i do remember a high end speaker that required a liquid nitrogen
capsule to cool it, which had to be replaced every so often. what a
ridiculous design.

it's amazing how much money audiophiles will spend for things that have
no audible difference.

On 2021-02-13 19:27, nospam wrote:

it's amazing how much money audiofools will spend for things that have
no audible difference.

ftfy.

--
"...there are many humorous things in this world; among them the white
man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages."
-Samuel Clemens

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:27, nospam wrote:
it's amazing how much money audiofools will spend for things that have
no audible difference.

ftfy.

change accepted.

On 14 Feb 2021 at 00:16:10 GMT, "Alan Browne"
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:03, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:26:56 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-12 18:23, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:18:44 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-10 18:46, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:33:41 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-08 17:35, Savageduck wrote:

San Francisco has a bad reputation for car robbery, usually from
parked cars with valuables visible. The rule of thumb in SF is not to
leave any valuables, hidden, or visible in a parked car.

SF is not unique for that... why you usually buy (negotiate in) the
privacy cover if you buy a hatchback.

Years ago I had a pair of speakers stolen which the police later found
had been sold for $45 for the pair in a local pub. It cost the
insurance company $12,000 to replace them.

The insurance company paid about $800 to replace them because they know
you could never tell the difference in an ABx test.

They were Quad ESL63 electrostatics

http://loudspeaker-repair-service.re...le_example.JPG
and I bought them for the insurance company from a dealer in England.
They were several thousand dollars cheaper than anything locally.

You could get equivalent (or better) sound quality with some $100
drivers and some well chosen material, properly prepped.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEh0...echIngredients

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKIy...echIngredients

(And other speaker builds from the same guy... and other things not
speaker from him as well ...).

Have you ever listended to Quad electrostatic speakers? Have you ever
listened to any electrostatic speakers?

Quad? Maybe.
Electrostatic? Sure - and they were reputedly very "good" since the
price was very "high".

Not really, IME. There's certainly no certain correlation between price and
'goodness' - taking good to mean accurate. And speakers (like most hifi - most
things in fact) have astonishing demising returns in terms of price and
performance.

I found Quads to be pretty good. Limited bass. I ruled them out because of
space requirements. They're not only huge, but require a lot of space around
them. And the (otherwise excellent) imaging shifted significantly with just a
small tilt of the head.


And back when I had hearing good enough to discern pretty high
frequencies amongst the rest of the symphony.

But even then I wouldn't presume to say "That is better!". Only "That
is 'different'".

You're like a lot of people - and I'm getting that way nowadays. Quite happy
with a bluetooth portable or a Sonos wireless speaker having been quite
involved with (mainly low end) hifi most of my life.

--
Cheers, Rob

On Sunday, February 14, 2021 at 2:13:17 AM UTC-5, RJH wrote:
On 14 Feb 2021 at 00:16:10 GMT, "Alan Browne"
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:03, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:26:56 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-12 18:23, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:18:44 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-10 18:46, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:33:41 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-08 17:35, Savageduck wrote:

San Francisco has a bad reputation for car robbery, usually from
parked cars with valuables visible. The rule of thumb in SF is not to
leave any valuables, hidden, or visible in a parked car.

SF is not unique for that... why you usually buy (negotiate in) the
privacy cover if you buy a hatchback.

Years ago I had a pair of speakers stolen which the police later found
had been sold for $45 for the pair in a local pub. It cost the
insurance company $12,000 to replace them.

The insurance company paid about $800 to replace them because they know
you could never tell the difference in an ABx test.

They were Quad ESL63 electrostatics

http://loudspeaker-repair-service.re...le_example.JPG
and I bought them for the insurance company from a dealer in England..
They were several thousand dollars cheaper than anything locally.

You could get equivalent (or better) sound quality with some $100
drivers and some well chosen material, properly prepped.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEh0...echIngredients

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKIy...echIngredients

(And other speaker builds from the same guy... and other things not
speaker from him as well ...).

Have you ever listended to Quad electrostatic speakers? Have you ever
listened to any electrostatic speakers?

Quad? Maybe.
Electrostatic? Sure - and they were reputedly very "good" since the
price was very "high".
Not really, IME. There's certainly no certain correlation between price and
'goodness' - taking good to mean accurate. And speakers (like most hifi - most
things in fact) have astonishing demising returns in terms of price and
performance.

I found Quads to be pretty good. Limited bass. I ruled them out because of
space requirements. They're not only huge, but require a lot of space around
them. And the (otherwise excellent) imaging shifted significantly with just a
small tilt of the head.

A friend had that type of system ... and he ran a blind test demo for me and
not only could I hear the difference, but was quite impressed by its ability to
separate individual instruments in an orchestra. As such, you won’t hear me
arguing the “a difference doesn’t exist� bit.

And back when I had hearing good enough to discern pretty high
frequencies amongst the rest of the symphony.

But even then I wouldn't presume to say "That is better!". Only "That
is 'different'".

You're like a lot of people - and I'm getting that way nowadays. Quite happy
with a bluetooth portable or a Sonos wireless speaker having been quite
involved with (mainly low end) hifi most of my life.

It is that there’s a huge difference between casual listening and hearing
a great live performance...with many gradations on the scale between.
Just how good is good enough varies by the individual...which includes
even where the extreme ends of this scale reside.

Case in point, heard Southside Johnny perform last year, in a venue whose
acoustics were so weird that Johnny made fun of them..and then started to
creatively have fun with them. Ain’t never going to experience that on an album.

-hh

On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 19:12:17 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:01, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 18:59:33 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Years ago I had a pair of speakers stolen which the police later found
had been sold for $45 for the pair in a local pub. It cost the
insurance company $12,000 to replace them.

The insurance company paid about $800 to replace them because they know
you could never tell the difference in an ABx test.

They were Quad ESL63 electrostatics

it doesn't matter what they were.

I expect even you could not avoid hearing the difference (although I
don't expect you would admit it).

I doubt very much there is a qualitative difference worth the money.

BTW: hearing a difference between speakers is normal.

Hearing one is "better" than another is the domain of about 0.01 .. 0.1%
of humans, most of whom are also less than 30 years of age.

If you haven't heard good electrostatics then you don't know what I'm
talking about.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 19:16:10 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:03, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:26:56 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-12 18:23, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:18:44 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-10 18:46, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:33:41 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-08 17:35, Savageduck wrote:

San Francisco has a bad reputation for car robbery, usually from parked cars with valuables visible. The rule of thumb in SF is not to leave any valuables, hidden, or visible in a parked car.

SF is not unique for that... why you usually buy (negotiate in) the
privacy cover if you buy a hatchback.

Years ago I had a pair of speakers stolen which the police later found
had been sold for $45 for the pair in a local pub. It cost the
insurance company $12,000 to replace them.

The insurance company paid about $800 to replace them because they know
you could never tell the difference in an ABx test.

They were Quad ESL63 electrostatics
http://loudspeaker-repair-service.re...le_example.JPG
and I bought them for the insurance company from a dealer in England.
They were several thousand dollars cheaper than anything locally.

You could get equivalent (or better) sound quality with some $100
drivers and some well chosen material, properly prepped.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEh0...echIngredients

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKIy...echIngredients

(And other speaker builds from the same guy... and other things not
speaker from him as well ...).

Have you ever listended to Quad electrostatic speakers? Have you ever
listened to any electrostatic speakers?

Quad? Maybe.
Electrostatic? Sure - and they were reputedly very "good" since the
price was very "high".
And back when I had hearing good enough to discern pretty high
frequencies amongst the rest of the symphony.

There is more to it than just frequency range.

But even then I wouldn't presume to say "That is better!". Only "That
is 'different'".
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 07:13:10 +0000 (UTC), RJH
wrote:

On 14 Feb 2021 at 00:16:10 GMT, "Alan Browne"
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:03, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:26:56 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-12 18:23, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:18:44 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-10 18:46, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:33:41 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-08 17:35, Savageduck wrote:

San Francisco has a bad reputation for car robbery, usually from
parked cars with valuables visible. The rule of thumb in SF is not to
leave any valuables, hidden, or visible in a parked car.

SF is not unique for that... why you usually buy (negotiate in) the
privacy cover if you buy a hatchback.

Years ago I had a pair of speakers stolen which the police later found
had been sold for $45 for the pair in a local pub. It cost the
insurance company $12,000 to replace them.

The insurance company paid about $800 to replace them because they know
you could never tell the difference in an ABx test.

They were Quad ESL63 electrostatics

http://loudspeaker-repair-service.re...le_example.JPG
and I bought them for the insurance company from a dealer in England.
They were several thousand dollars cheaper than anything locally.

You could get equivalent (or better) sound quality with some $100
drivers and some well chosen material, properly prepped.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEh0...echIngredients

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKIy...echIngredients

(And other speaker builds from the same guy... and other things not
speaker from him as well ...).

Have you ever listended to Quad electrostatic speakers? Have you ever
listened to any electrostatic speakers?

Quad? Maybe.
Electrostatic? Sure - and they were reputedly very "good" since the
price was very "high".

Not really, IME. There's certainly no certain correlation between price and
'goodness' - taking good to mean accurate. And speakers (like most hifi - most
things in fact) have astonishing demising returns in terms of price and
performance.

I found Quads to be pretty good. Limited bass. I ruled them out because of
space requirements. They're not only huge, but require a lot of space around
them. And the (otherwise excellent) imaging shifted significantly with just a
small tilt of the head.

Agreed - but still. Until recently the only non-electrostatic speaker
I could find that might match them were some KEF speakers with a
ribbon tweeter. Alas these proved vey fragile (I never owned any). I
now have Quad Z4 speakers with a ribbon tweeter but they still lack
something compared with the electrostatics.


And back when I had hearing good enough to discern pretty high
frequencies amongst the rest of the symphony.

But even then I wouldn't presume to say "That is better!". Only "That
is 'different'".

You're like a lot of people - and I'm getting that way nowadays. Quite happy
with a bluetooth portable or a Sonos wireless speaker having been quite
involved with (mainly low end) hifi most of my life.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2021-02-14 21:25, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 19:12:17 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2021-02-13 19:01, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 18:59:33 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Years ago I had a pair of speakers stolen which the police later found
had been sold for $45 for the pair in a local pub. It cost the
insurance company $12,000 to replace them.

The insurance company paid about $800 to replace them because they know
you could never tell the difference in an ABx test.

They were Quad ESL63 electrostatics

it doesn't matter what they were.

I expect even you could not avoid hearing the difference (although I
don't expect you would admit it).

I doubt very much there is a qualitative difference worth the money.

BTW: hearing a difference between speakers is normal.

Hearing one is "better" than another is the domain of about 0.01 .. 0.1%
of humans, most of whom are also less than 30 years of age.

If you haven't heard good electrostatics then you don't know what I'm
talking about.

I have. Long ago. And very nice. So were my friend's KEF's.

But frankly, take people room to room, and few will do better than
flipping a coin using music that they are not familiar with.

That includes you when you were young most likely and certainly includes
you at your ripe age...


--
"...there are many humorous things in this world; among them the white
man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages."
-Samuel Clemens

On 2021-02-14 21:27, Eric Stevens wrote:

There is more to it than just frequency range.

Of course. The point is I (and you) have lost a lot of the finer end of
the range and likely have gain holes between 4 and 15K.

IOW, no need for hyper expensive speakers. You're not getting anything
beyond bragging rights out of them.



--
"...there are many humorous things in this world; among them the white
man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages."
-Samuel Clemens