• 06-19-2009, 04:45 AM
    Feanor
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pixelthis
    Spoken like a true audio snob who uses gear to justify his neurosis.
    If you have a Hubble telescope or just a backyard model it doesnt really matter if the planet you're looking for doesnt exist.
    Due to the law of deminishing returns there is only going to be a few percent
    (if that) difference between a "receiver" and high end gear.
    That extra few percent is what you're paying for.
    This is typical, a webpage full of explanation of why what you are "hearing" is more between your ears than in your ears, why what you are claiming doesnt exist ,
    and you shoot the messenger.
    DOESNT MATTER, I know enough about the falibility of a human witness that I KNOW
    that an "audiophile" talking about "air", etc IS FULL OF IT as a general rule.:1:

    Pix, I agree! ... well, except the part about the "air". :thumbsup:
  • 06-19-2009, 11:43 AM
    hifitommy
    Hubble telescope or just a backyard model
    with the backyard model, there will be planets you dont know exist, even when they are in plain sight with a better telescope. when i went from a vivitar camera to a canon sure shot (the first one and it wasnt that expensive), i couldnt believe the clarity and detail differences between the two cameras!

    granted, there ARE receivers that will elucidate the differences of detail, dynamics, and imaging but they arent denons or marantz. they are rotel, and B&K. the higher end of marantz or integra may also suffice.

    it has nothing to do with neurosis, just discovery. once you hear the better sound, you are anxious to move toward that. the AIR that feanor mentions is part of the improved definition of better electronics. like a better lens as in the canon/vivitar difference. the clearly defined space (and whats in those spaces) of either the camera or electronics.

    and it REALLY doesnt have to be costly-the nad 3020 was a perfect example, high end for cheeeeep. better electronics have better internal components and power supplies, hence better performance heard.

    if what you have is 'good enough' then stop there but dont ask everyone to agree that its as good as it gets.
  • 06-19-2009, 11:51 AM
    Auricauricle
    And I think that at this point, there should be a discussion on the "passion" versus "rational" oriented issues of audiophilism. I subscribe to the point of view that while there is a level of excellence to aspire to, decisions made as to equipment used ultimately strikes a visceral chord. Call it performance or sentiment, the effect is the same and that is where the apple falls, my dear Newton!

    I am sure my recent additions will not deliver the same delivery of performance, spec-wise, as current gear. On the other hand, I anticipate being quite thrilled with them nevertheless.

    The rest is just gravy.
  • 06-19-2009, 01:40 PM
    drmorgan
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Auricauricle
    And I think that at this point, there should be a discussion on the "passion" versus "rational" oriented issues of audiophilism. I subscribe to the point of view that while there is a level of excellence to aspire to, decisions made as to equipment used ultimately strikes a visceral chord. Call it performance or sentiment, the effect is the same and that is where the apple falls, my dear Newton!

    I am sure my recent additions will not deliver the same delivery of performance, spec-wise, as current gear. On the other hand, I anticipate being quite thrilled with them nevertheless.

    The rest is just gravy.

    Yes, that's the divide. Were we to have our gear behind a black curtain I suspect we'd save a bundle on stuff we can't actually hear.

    Were we to purchase only on line without placing trust in the car, loan or real estate salespersons (currently working on commission) who said yes to each of our questions and offered endless assurances before the write up.

    If they avoided suggesting insuring our satisfaction by purchase of any one of a dozen little 'special' packages proclaiming perfection if you'll just open me and connect.

    Alas we have many goals when we shop for gear and the makers shape the experience as much as an EQ does the sound.

    So, not having that block to the gear, or isolation from the sales 'experience' we create elaborate rationalization upon rationalization why this or that device is the be all or end all in the quest, this day, week or month.

    Alas the '70's to '80's were, from my experience when the best of the best had been invented and introduced. Since then it more about spin than sound reproduction. Tubes were left behind for a reason (the wear, unlike solid state).

    Perfection remains to be revealed.

    Close your eyes and when settings are flat. Ask yourself: is what you hear transporting you to the real event? Verify this with the wife or one of the kids. They probably can hear better anyway.

    If not, is it the space or can you compensate with a tweak or two on the EQ?

    Audit this on another system until you find that closed eye experience. Once this happens you stop the quest and enjoy the music.

    Some variations between vocal, jazz or classical may be presented by some speakers better, but you can have three sets or a good EQ.

    The rest is bliss... '
  • 06-19-2009, 05:32 PM
    Mr Peabody
    You know I find some of the comments here insulting. Especially the ones that incenuate that people are so inadequate that we would buy whatever some one tells us is good. That's the largest load of crap you all dish out. Either you've never heard any true high end gear or you just like talking out of your rear. I've heard a lot of high end gear I would not own, like the current high dollar Classe' or much of the current ARC. Sorry if that offends any owners but it's my taste. The sales people were not short on praise of this gear. In fact, I brought home some ARC separates to try before buying my current CJ gear. The CJ was bought with out audition with the agreement it could be returned as no one in my area sells it. The ARC did not impress me, the CJ was like, just what the doc ordered. So don't go saying we will buy based on whatever sales people feed us.

    Manufacturers abandoned tubes because they smelled money, just like when the IC was introduced. i don't think any one with audio knowledge would praise the sound quality attributes of IC's. I do have to hand it to ARC for keeping the tube technology going. Tube gear vary in sound and performance the same way solid state does.
  • 06-19-2009, 05:36 PM
    JoeE SP9
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Auricauricle
    And I think that at this point, there should be a discussion on the "passion" versus "rational" oriented issues of audiophilism. I subscribe to the point of view that while there is a level of excellence to aspire to, decisions made as to equipment used ultimately strikes a visceral chord. Call it performance or sentiment, the effect is the same and that is where the apple falls, my dear Newton!

    I am sure my recent additions will not deliver the same delivery of performance, spec-wise, as current gear. On the other hand, I anticipate being quite thrilled with them nevertheless.

    The rest is just gravy.

    Auric;
    The T-101 was bought in 1982 for $200. It's definitely vintage. I was just trying to say that I don't look down on vintage gear.

    That said:
    You won't hear me saying that the pinnacle of audio design was the 60's, 70's, or 80's. To suggest that the design and manufacture of audio equipment has not improved since then is like saying that designers and engineers such as Nelson Pass, Jim Bongiorno, Dan D'Agostino and Bob Carver are deceiving the buyer. That's a flat out insult to them and anyone who purchases and uses any of their products.
  • 06-20-2009, 05:43 AM
    E-Stat
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drmorgan
    Alas the '70's to '80's were, from my experience when the best of the best had been invented and introduced. Since then it more about spin than sound reproduction. Tubes were left behind for a reason (the wear, unlike solid state).

    Interesting. Even the folks at McIntosh admit their product from that era was lacking. Stuff like the C28/2105 was pretty insipid. The C2300 and MC2301 are far better.

    rw
  • 06-20-2009, 07:10 AM
    Mr Peabody
    I'd like to mention one other thing in case I gave the wrong impression on ARC. Years back an ARC system driving Martin Logan speakers was one of the best auditions I've ever heard, not the, best, but one of those I'll never forget. It's that audition that eventually led me to tubes. It wasn't the accuracy of the system, that's what I thought I wanted at the time, but it was the most hauntingly real presentation I've ever heard. A friend of mine said it best when he described it as "putting the flesh on the bone". Parts of the presentation you knew weren't that accurate but I felt the singer was right there, I could reach out and touch them. So although I found the units I auditioned not to my liking I know some components by ARC are very good.

    To me solid state and tubes can both be very accurate but each in a different dimension or aspect of a performance. Face it, no matter how much of a tube fan you are they just aren't going to deliver the transient response and control of drums and other instruments like a Krell, Levinson or Pass, amps of that nature. However, these amps to my experience cannot deliver the organic aspect of the same instruments. It's like SS gets the shape edges and definition while tubes gives more of the body or resonance of the instrument. Vocals may be a better example, SS may have the performance accurate but it doesn't allow the image to come off the paper so to speak, tubes gives more life into the performer, easier to close your eyes and feel that performer in the room. There are trade offs of each and a person has to decide which is important to them. Can any one who has experienced both SS and tube high end systems relate, or agree/disagree?

    I also think what keeps some audiophiles on a continual search or the "upgrade merry-go-round" we aren't sure what we want or looking for until we hear it. It was like that for me. I thought i wanted accuracy and kept upgrading, switching etc. Then I began to switch in some tube gear and liked where it was going. When I hooked up my current Conrad Johnson I knew I had found what I was looking for. I think the urge to experiment or hear other products will always be there to some extent but for now the CJ has me content.
  • 06-20-2009, 08:59 AM
    Auricauricle
    I would like to think that most of the "regulars" here are canny enough not to be swayed by sales gimmicks and other ploys to make decisions as to their preferences and purchases (per post 80). Such comments are either made in jest or to address that population of consumers (not audiophiles) who don't spend much time in rationally and logically oriented forums like this one.

    At the same time, if I ever insinuated that an era represented the pinnacle of achievement for certain equipment, such an announcement was based on sentiment, not as a statement as fact. I do acknowledge and am cognizant to know that advances in high-fidelity are continuous. I also maintain the seemingly contradictory point of view, which avers that sometimes this progression proceeds in fits and starts, making progress linear, but not perfectly so.

    The argument that the "upgrade merry-go-round" is based on the lack of awareness of what one is looking for is an interesting one. On the surface, this may be true: the music listening experience does have an intangible quality, and the essence of that quality is as elusive as quicksilver. At the same time, there is a "knowing" that is deeper, and strikes us at our core of cores. Fortunately, with experience and having discussions like this one with people who share our perplexity, the search can bear fruit. Whether it is found in tubes, SS, CJ or SACD or whatever, the fruit is real, and it is so sweet is it not?
  • 06-20-2009, 10:19 AM
    Mr Peabody
    Not knowing what we want is not a slam, it's more we can't know what everything sounds like, we are limited by what's distributed in our area, the internet has helped with that, budget constraints and other factors. We find something we think we like but the satisfaction dissipates so we want to try something else. So we are on a search, journey. Of course, I guess all of this stems on what motivates one to pursue or even purchase an audio system. If it's just a person who buys for prestige or just because they think they should have one, none of this would apply.
  • 06-20-2009, 03:07 PM
    Auricauricle
    And it was not perceived as a slam. It hearkens to that intangible thing that makes the quest worthy, eh?

    Of course, after awhile, the madness must desist.

    Yeah....Right!
  • 06-20-2009, 07:23 PM
    JoeE SP9
    Auric, you are not the one who thinks 70's and 80's gear is the pinnacle of audio design. That said, I must admit there is some pretty good vintage stuff out there. It's just that the highest of the "Fi" is higher than it was in the 70's or 80's and there is no question about that.
  • 06-21-2009, 09:23 PM
    drmorgan
    From the old man in a cave
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
    Auric, you are not the one who thinks 70's and 80's gear is the pinnacle of audio design. That said, I must admit there is some pretty good vintage stuff out there. It's just that the highest of the "Fi" is higher than it was in the 70's or 80's and there is no question about that.

    I have been auditing new and improved fairly regularly and drove 80 miles to hear speakers that I'd not found as good as a long time back. Klipsch's LaScallas driven by high end McIntosh stuff. The other system in the family room were Bozak B310ís that had been acquired on Craigs list, but driven by new design McIntosh stuff.

    The Klipsch's were everything I'd expect from a great speaker and more. The CD was awesome and brought back memories from long ago when we'd heard the artist in a jazz club in NYC. That kind of thing remains in you mind. The Bozaks were not doing it with the same CD on a slightly older player. I suggested he change to the old 300 per channel amps just put in the garage. Got a call Monday stating that the Bozaks (built in 1960 something and biamp'd at some point) are as good or better than his Klipsch's. Those amps are the old designs like the Dead still have (Iíve visited and seen them locally, but hooked up to JBLís also old designs).

    I think one reason that people have to do all sorts of protection with AC and speaker cable has to do with the designs today being about low costs and light weights to save shipping and manufacturing costs. In addition these new units seem to be rather similar inside as if someone is licensing from a source and they turn them out in China and assemble here in different names.

    Looking back to Klipsch's site I see they're still building the high end as they did and others are as well. Thus the technology for speakers remains pretty much the same. I looked a Genesis in Seattle a while back and they're building like the good stuff in late Ď69s and early '70s from what I can see. The new stuff is pricey. Seems to make it they had to do an end around (analog to digital, to analog and the result is vulnerable to noise the dog hears and we have to protect it from as it comes back in as distortion or such.

    The only reason I have stuck with the antiques has been the ability to reproduce being there. In the seventies a host of outfits came along with supposed new ideas and you wont find them now. The stuff died they were acquired and if the name lives it is held along with ten others in a holding company (thinking of Harmon for example and earlier, Superscope) ... I think these new and improved methods won't stand up as long as the monsters of old.

    Technically they deliver, but they also deliver for the add on and after market repair folks. How is that helpful? A personal factor is they donít seem to take me to the venue as the old stuff can given quality speakers.

    These articles touch on the methods and the results:

    http://www.audioholics.com/education...s-d-amplifiers
    http://www.audioholics.com/education...one-amplifiers
    http://www.audioholics.com/education...ital-amplifier
  • 06-21-2009, 11:42 PM
    pixelthis
    ALL I am saying is that if you spend all of your treasure and effort chasing
    Unicorns instead of Deer your family is going to starve.
    Money you waste on cables that are spec'ed to clean room standards,
    "power cords" with more copper than Arizona, etc, could be better spent on
    the quality gear you espouse.
    My receiver is mid to higher end BTW, and drives my old speakers quite well.
    And while I am moving towards a huge investment this year, they are few and far between,
    I need to save my cash for retirement, so I can get the Alpo instead of the stuff
    walmart sells from the rendering plant.
    So I am not inclined to waste money chasing rainbows that, having some electronics education, I know doesnt exist.
    I would rather spend my money on amps, prepros, etc, instead of the cables made out of fairy dust.
    ESPECIALLY POWER CABLES!!!
    You can argue at least that impedance and resistance can cause some slight effect in
    audio cables, but power cables are a total crock.
    A total crock squared:1:
  • 06-22-2009, 05:25 AM
    Mr Peabody
    Pix, we all know what an asset your electronics training has been. Keep up the good work.
  • 06-22-2009, 07:50 AM
    CanMex
    Welcome to the forum Rudy!

    I think by now you have read enough to either enlighten or confuse both your mind and senses and come to realize that your question leads to a plethora of answers and advice. What would really be of help is to better understand a few things if you have the time to answer a few simple questions:

    1) General music selection?
    2) Can you describe in your own words the type of sound you are looking for? (I realize this is subjective but try to use your best terminology)
    3) Budget? This will help a lot in making some suggestion.
    4) Size and type of room?
    5) "Wife" factor? Decor, size, volume of sound...I think you get the picture!
    6) Complicity? I prefer the simple approach but many are looking to fill a room with components.
    7) Source preference? Vinyl? CD? etc
    8) How will you be listening to the system?

    If you can take the time to answer these questions as best you can I will be happy to make some recomendations based on my past and current experiences as I have been obsessed with this for the past 24 years and have run the gambit of manufacturers.
  • 06-22-2009, 09:05 AM
    E-Stat
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drmorgan
    Looking back to Klipsch's site I see they're still building the high end as they did and others are as well. Thus the technology for speakers remains pretty much the same.

    Their technology remains the same.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drmorgan
    I think these new and improved methods won't stand up as long as the monsters of old.

    A new guard of literally dozens of speaker companies have been around for decades that have established higher levels of resolution and performance. Perhaps your memory is jaded as to the limitations of the Concert Grands. Seen the review and measurements in Stereophile? As the review indicates, they have their strong points, but are severely outclassed by current speakers. There's no top octave. Have you ever heard of companies like Magnepan, Nola, Wilson, Avant Garde, Quad, Sound Lab, Revel, Avalon, VMPS, Martin-Logan, etc., etc.? Which ribbon or electrostatic speakers have you heard?

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drmorgan
    These articles touch on the methods and the results:

    I agree regarding switching amps - which have been around since the 70s. I suspect you are not aware of companies like Pass Labs whose designer has been crafting leading edge amplifiers for over thirty years. Most of his designs are Class A.

    rw
  • 06-22-2009, 09:14 AM
    E-Stat
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pixelthis
    ESPECIALLY POWER CABLES!!!
    You can argue at least that impedance and resistance can cause some slight effect in
    audio cables, but power cables are a total crock.

    In the spirit of your many pictorial commentaries, here's my contribution illustrating your attitude:

    http://publicintellectual.files.word...07/ostrich.jpg

    There was a case in the UK when a "customer" complained to their advertising bureau about claims made for some power cables.

    1. ... because he believed the PowerKord cable would have little effect on conducted electromagnetic interference;

    2. ... because he believed the Signature PowerKord cable would have little effect on measurable distortion in hi-fi equipment, and

    3. ...because he believed the advertised spike-protecting devices would have little effect on the noise floor in hi-fi equipment. "

    I confess that I don't understand the attitude of those who base their strong convictions entirely on speculation. Experience-free. The case was closed when those "beliefs" were proven incorrect. Read this.

    rw
  • 06-22-2009, 09:37 AM
    Rudy Gireyev
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanMex
    Welcome to the forum Rudy!

    Ola CanMex. :) Sorry couldn't resist. :) Thank you, I truly feel like I've been welcomed to the forum with all the responses in this thread.
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanMex
    I think by now you have read enough to either enlighten or confuse both your mind and senses and come to realize that your question leads to a plethora of answers and advice.

    So far nothing confusing has come up, to me personally. In this particular thread some folks seem to have caught on to what I'm after and others, well, not so much. Most likely I've not phrased myself in a way that is clear enough for everyone to perceive as to what I'm after. Less likely, although somewhat possible is that my previous posts have not been read, or not read fully. No matter. I'll try again, see below.
    In this thread all the discussions have been beneficial, and even the "cables" discussion started out really well, however, half way through it, lost the informative aspects and had simply turned into an arm wrestling match. Seeing how folks on both sides are intelligent and adult, I'm hoping someone will realize that by not replying to that particular "thread" within a "thread" the sleeping dogs will be allowed to fall back asleep. :wink5: :confused: :thumbsup:
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanMex
    What would really be of help is to better understand a few things if you have the time to answer a few simple questions:

    1) General music selection?
    2) Can you describe in your own words the type of sound you are looking for? (I realize this is subjective but try to use your best terminology)
    3) Budget? This will help a lot in making some suggestion.
    4) Size and type of room?
    5) "Wife" factor? Decor, size, volume of sound...I think you get the picture!
    6) Complicity? I prefer the simple approach but many are looking to fill a room with components.
    7) Source preference? Vinyl? CD? etc
    8) How will you be listening to the system?

    If you can take the time to answer these questions as best you can I will be happy to make some recomendations based on my past and current experiences as I have been obsessed with this for the past 24 years and have run the gambit of manufacturers.

    I can most certainly answer all of the questions you have posed above, however, seeing those questions leads me to believe that we are not in synch as far as what I am after with this thread. This is not really another one of those "Put my system together for me" threads, or even "Help me put together my system". In fact if you look at the very title of this thread it says "...... Put together your audiophile system". Notice I've stressed the word your system as opposed to mine.
    What I'm looking for from this thread is to benefit from other peoples experience of auditioning audiophile gear over the years. Of course, the only way other peoples experience (i.e. opinion/review) of audiophile gear is going to be useful to me is if I know:
    1. What their musical tastes are like.
    2. What are their tendencies/prejudices
    3. Of the gear they tested what won and what lost and why.

    Now I realize that I'm asking for a lot, and I totally understand why some of the regulars have chosen not to post. As I can literally see a post taking a few days to put together, not necessarily due to its length, but rather due to its depth and openness.
    In asking for this I feel I can benefit much more than simply seeing a list of recommended components, having no background and framework to see where they come from, and where they fit.
    Your 24 years sound quite "delicious" to me and I'm quite looking forward to your post, and anyone else's that has not posted yet.

    Lastly, lest I forget, :) Auric thanks for your post above.

    Rudy
  • 06-22-2009, 10:08 AM
    Feanor
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by E-Stat
    In the spirit of your many pictorial commentaries, here's my contribution illustrating your attitude:

    http://publicintellectual.files.word...07/ostrich.jpg

    There was a case in the UK when a "customer" complained to their advertising bureau about claims made for some power cables.

    1. ... because he believed the PowerKord cable would have little effect on conducted electromagnetic interference;

    2. ... because he believed the Signature PowerKord cable would have little effect on measurable distortion in hi-fi equipment, and

    3. ...because he believed the advertised spike-protecting devices would have little effect on the noise floor in hi-fi equipment. "

    I confess that I don't understand the attitude of those who base their strong convictions entirely on speculation. Experience-free. The case was closed when those "beliefs" were proven incorrect. Read this.

    rw

    E-Stat, please don't misconstrue that I am one who believes that cable differences can't exist. But since you ask why people do this, I will tell that it is because they hold the basic skeptics' position that:
    • The burden of proof lies with those who believe what has not demostrated with verifiable evidence or testable theory, and
    • Anecdotes and subjective impressions are, ipso facto, not verifibable evidence.
    And maybe you aren't right in supposing that these people have no personal experience. Rather perhaps they are as good as their principles and just don't "trusted their own ears". Personally I have often stated that I though I heard a small difference but that I couldn't be certain.
  • 06-22-2009, 10:35 AM
    E-Stat
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Feanor
    Rather perhaps they are as good as their principles and just not "trusted their own ears". Personally I have often stated that I though I heard a small difference but that I couldn't be certain.

    To each his own. I am innately skeptical as well. Between magic dots, rocks, telephone teleportation devices, etc. there's a bunch of well creative products out there. Hopefully, those who form strong opinions, however, will have those based that upon multiple instances of exposure. Or view empirical data like my attachment. I first heard Kimber Palladians over at JWCs a number of years ago. Power cord make an audible difference? What? He later lent me his set to hear in my system for a week. It was only after that experience that I found the value in them. Not all are created equally and the results are highly system dependent depending upon a number of factors.

    rw
  • 06-22-2009, 02:38 PM
    CanMex
    "To each his own..."
    Rudy,

    I am out of time today bit will do my best to post my reply tomorrow..as you said it will not be easy but will try to make it as simple and to the point as possible.

    Saludos
  • 06-22-2009, 04:48 PM
    JoeE SP9
    drmorgan:
    If you believe what the people at audioholics believe about cables amps and gear in general well, that's your choice. I'm not all that surprised you consider them the fount of knowledge. You have preconceived ideas and their writings fit with your beliefs.
    There's no point trying to discuss anything with someone who thinks the art and science of audio has not advanced in the last 20 years. I certainly hope that as I get older my mind will not close itself to new or alternative ideas.
    Did you bother to clip a scope probe to the DC supply rails of an amp and turn the AC on and off? The scope traces would be very illuminating. Since you obviously haven't we'll just agree to disagree about AC noise among other things.
    As long as you're happy with your system that's all that really matters. Please don't suggest that your "Luddite" attitude is in any way congruent with mainstream thought. My audio buddies, both ex-wives, lots of posters here and many others believe in and hear differences in wires, cables and even amplifiers. But then, we also believe that time did not stop in the 80's.
    You can continue to believe your "vintage" Bozak's and equally vintage "Mac" gear is as good as today's current state of the art gear. The sad truth is you're wrong about speakers, electronics and wires/cables. No amount of referring to audioholics will
    change that.
    Most of us who hear differences in wires didn't want to and didn't believe in it. Only when hearing it for ourselves did we believe. You can continue to live in the past. It is your choice. The rest of us will step lightly into the future. Along the way we will steadily improve our systems. Your system which is the "ultimate expression" of audio will stay the same. After all, nothing better has been made since the 80's.
  • 06-22-2009, 05:57 PM
    hifitommy
    yeah, if you hear it, its real for you
    i do, although i havent explored power cabling yet as most of my equipment has captive cords.

    i guess that when i go upscale frome where iam now, i will borrow some and if i hear the diffs like i do in interconnests and speaker wire, i will invest frugally. that is-used or CHEEEEP.

    it amuses me when people denigrate us for our choices when they dont even have equipment that can elucidate the diffs between CD players (something that a friend waved at me until i proved him wrong). he had the equipment but had made up his mind and then POOOF, he had to get a separate d/a with tubes.

    point and laugh if you will at us but it is you that is missing out like that bird ralph displayed.
  • 06-22-2009, 06:45 PM
    Mr Peabody
    Thanks for that link E-stat. That's the first thing I've seen in print to support our position. Then again, it's not that hard just to try for one's self.

    DrMorgan's views remind me of another older gent who was here for awhile. Some one help me out here, what was his name? DM seems to take things in stride though where this other guy got every one on his case but he was totally in the past about everything from cars to watches to clothes to actors and people.