All components by Naim ?

I have an idea of what Vuk is talking about.

When I was in school and building my first hi-fi and record collection, I spent a great deal of time at Myer-Emco (locals will know the place - reputable in its day but now its an upscale Circuit City). The Happy Days were when the new No-Fi releases came in. My friend and I would *each* buy one even tho we shared records and lived two doors away.

We were clueless about music, enjoyed the hi-fi hobby thing, and were content to let No-Fi (or whoever) dictate what we should be listening to.

And I'm not trying to get into a debate about whether Mo-Fi makes good records or has good taste in music. I still have many of these and *do* enjoy them from time to time (especially the Reiner Also Sprauch Zarathustra with the Chicago Symphony).

Its the mindset I was in at the time of purchase that is disturbing and that the catalogues, as Vuk mentions, play to this mindset in their manner of listing.

Oh, the 180 gm/45RPM thing is about the weight of the record (heavier=more vinyl=better?) and the speed. 45 RPM records allow more groove travel for a given interval of time in the music and can sound fabulous when made with care. Seem more dynamic to me

- GregB
Freedom is not in finding the Holy Grail but in stopping the search for it

Boy band? From someone who's racked up 42 years on this earth Vuk -thanks for the compliment!

If you care to Email me I'll explain why I am incognito.

Regards P.- man of mystery and suspense

Just a wild guess but you wouldn't be related to the Peter Taylor who was barred from the forum for constant inflamatory and abusive postings would you?

Matthew

Vuk:

I beg to disagree with your continued assumptions. IMO, Vuk, the manufacturers of these LPs are undoubtedly fully aware that people who buy these records are usually informed collectors who are already aware of what they are buying and the music contained on the LP. All of these records are quite well known amongst collectors of LPs. RCA releases from the 60's and DECCA from the same period are all very well known to informed collectors. That is why the originals cost so much. They are NOT selling to the general public - only 500 copies are actually pressed - but to collectors who either wish to purchase a highly regarded release (which it seems you were unaware of) at 45 RPM, which as David Devers said above is the best way to realize dynamics on a vinyl LP.

Vuk, how do you know who buys these records and for what reason? To accuse those who buy these records as being ignorant is perhaps unjustified. When I purchase these LPs I can assure you that I know exactly which pieces are being performed. If not I would look it up. I certainly wouldn't start making unwarranted assumptions about anyone's ignorance nor that they read Stereophile to determine their choices.

You also do not need to stoop to vulgarisms to make your point. It doesn't add anything to your argument.

Paul

Vuk, Have you heard any Celibidache?

Regards.

Phil

Unfortunately I do not have the financial resources to be a collector of deep groove Blue Notes, but the couple I have are amazing sounding, and even audiophile reissues do not come close. I think the same is true of many of the classical audiophile favorites.

I would say I have a lot more sympathy for record collecting than equipment collecting (though I do think anyone with a substantial investment in records should have a stereo of at least Rega or Thorens/NAD/Rotel level and it pains me how many don't).

As to these audiophile reissues, many are sold to relatively uninformed newbies. Many others are sold to people with serious music credentials. I am on the phonogram list, and every time a Shaded Dog or Mercury comes up, there are often quite critical assessments of the quality of performance AND sound, and nearly always give a rundown of favorite performances. Recently there have been postings of favorite DGs, favorite Decca Phase Fours, favorite Columbia Masterworks--so all audiophiles do not focus on audiophile labels. So don't be so quick to stereotype, Vuk. These guys are just as serious about music as you or I.

--Eric

You may well be right that the listings are directed at "audiophiles", hence the listings by label. However, I don't think that these records are exclusively audiophile in the sense that they are only important for their sonics. There are many excellent performances among them that are worthy in that respect alone.

The three principle labels of the 50's/60's were RCA, Decca and EMI. These three recorded most of the big name artists and orchestras of that period. RCA had contracts with several US orchestras and some of the finest artists of that period includng Heitetz, Reiner, Munch, the Chicago SO, and the Boston SO. Decca and EMI, especially the latter had contracts with many major orchestras and artists living in Europe. These included the various London orchestras, and included Vienna - there have been reissues of the Vienna PO. (The Berlin PO was under contract to DG although there have been a few reissues of the Berlin PO by Speakers Corner.) It cannot be questioned IMO that many of these recordings are of truly great orchestras and peformers, who were often at the peak of their skills. For this reason alone these records should continue to be available to the public. However, perhaps due to the infancy of stereo at that time, microphone techniques were simple as well. This changed by the 70's when multi-microphone techniques began to prevail. Many who hear these early stereo recordings, including myself, regard these records as among the finest of the art of recording. It may just have been pure luck. IMO performances, particularly in the late 70's, are less distinguished by both performance and recording. The introduction of digital was the death-knell of this era of recording.

Your admiration for Furtwangler - which is fully justified IMO - is perhaps in part for the individuality of his performances. Recordings of the 70's onward have less of that incredible individuality that Furtwangler brought to his interpretations. Who is the equal of Furtwangler today?

Original Furtwangler recordings sell for astronomical prices for this reason alone - not for sonics. You might even agree that many modern-day performances have a "sameness" about them that contrasts sharply with those with Furtwangler. Only the introduction of period instruments has offset this somewhat.

It is my feeling that readers of this forum who wish to discover these recordings in a vinyl format should be encouraged to do so through these "audiophile" reissues - not discouraged. They are relatively cheap compared to the originals which sell for sometimes ridiculous prices (actually prices of rare labels such as Urania sometimes sell for far more than RCA/Decca/EMI). Companies such as Classic, Speakers Corner, and Testament should be praised, not criticized, for providing the opportunity to discover what some consider to be one of the finest periods of the recording arts (and in the original format - LP) in reissues which are equal in most respects and sometimes surpassing the original.

PS My apologies for going on so long about matters with which you may be completely familiar.

Paul

Have you ever heard originals of some of the audiophile favorites? Shaded Dogs, Mercuries, Deccas, and EMIs from the fifties/sixties? Sometimes there are problems, but nonetheless the few I've heard mostly sound terrific. Perhaps you should join phonogram, and before long instead of fashioning racks you'll be in the trenches (garage sales) looking for 1s/1s Indy stampers of LSC-2490.

--Eric

You are quite right that I may have missed quite a few releases on CD only. However I made the decision a few years back that I really don't need a CD player. I have over 5000 classical LPs with recordings from the 1920's to the 1980's - more than enough variety I feel (plus there is my Jazz/Rock collection which totals nearly another 2000 LPs - my son even introduced me to Photek and Massive Attack which is great stuff (in small doses) and I even have that on vinyl. I still buy several hundred LPs a year, mostly used. Yes, I am missing out on new releases and there is very little classical in my collection from post 1980.

Until I heard the CDS2, I had not heard any CD player that I felt could bring the same level of satisfaction as my LP12. If I had to start again though, I am sure a CDS2 would be my first purchase and I would probably not bother with vinyl. But presently, with so many records, I don't feel a pressing need to start collecting CDs too.

Thanks for the invite. Next time I am out to Toronto perhaps I can get over to London, too. I think that we may actually have very similar tastes in music and beliefs in what hifi should do - I certainly agree with your stand on source first - ALWAYS!!! (Besides I would like to hear your Mana tables as I have yet to see/hear Mana and that could be my next upgrade.)

Paul

I think it is archaic nowadays to claim that a
turntable outperforms a CD player in every aspect.
I think this claim is more emotional then anything else.

As I see many members here are emotional about equipment so such a claim is possible here.

Arie

Barely acceptable ! It's bloody fantastic...

I agree with the Vinyl camp but you just can't say that.

Darren Miller

quote:

---

BTW--Tony Lonorgan also prefers the P9 to an LP12 and tends to share your pessamistic view (and Paul's) of CD playback. Once again, the common feature is that none of you own what I would consider an acceptable player (mine just barely is).

---

Regarding Vuk's comment as to what is an acceptable player, I may choose not to own a really expensive player, but I have heard a good few CDSIIs etc in familiar and high quality systems, so I understand exactly where the state of this particular art currently lies. I simply choose not to pay anything like the asking price (a new CDSII costs more than I paid for my whole system). A second hand one is currently still too expensive in my opinion - both the CDSII or CDX need to depreciate much more before I will buy (I am very patient!). I would prefer to live with mine and the change!

Things have changed a lot in the CD scene over the past couple of years. The current crop of CDs and careful re-masters of old material have made to my ears more difference than that between a good 1K player and one costing 5K. As ever front end first! Improvements in software technology make more difference. A decently mastered recent CD on my humble, but Mana'd CD17KI very much more than acceptable. It has become very apparent to me that most of what I hated about CD in the past was actually present in the software itself.

I do prefer a P9 to a LP12, and think it offers massively greater value, though I am certainly not the LP12 hater that some may imagine - it is an excellent deck, and one of the very best. The LP12, with a decent arm and PSU, is IMHO very overpriced new for what it delivers, but an absolute bargain second hand.

Tony.

quote:

---

Similarly, when Joe Petrik would play his favourite records at my place, they would typically sound worse than at his.

---

Vuk,

That's because my system is optimized to play "Rumours of Glory" from Bruce Cockburn's Humans.

Joe

1. First of all, you are an example for someone who doesn't use a system based on Naim only -
and that is the reason for this forum (all componenents by Naim ?) so please tell why did you choose the components you are using.

2.

quote:

---

A turntable may be an older technology than CD, but that does not make it worse.

---

I care nothing about technology and about the "age" of a technology while talking about stereo systems. It is not because I don't understand technology. When I was younger (many years ago...) I eas a technician in the Israely air force. On the early 70's we had a reciever/transmiter that transmited in short waves and it modulated the voice to a digital data
exactly the same way the CD players did 10 years later. This transmiter was in use in the US forces 20 years befire we had it.... Using this old transmiter at the time, you coudn't identify whom you are talking with, but you could hear him clear and with no disturbances no metter what were the weather conditions at the moment.

The first CD players gave me the same feeling and so I didn't run to throw my records and my turntable.

Now, after I realized (about 20 years ago) that there is no link at all between technology data and stereo equipment quality - I realy don't care if a technology used on a piece of equipment is an old technology or a newer one. All I care about is how great is the level of enjoyment I get
while listening to it. (I keep saying it many times here...). Naim's CD players have the ability to give great enjoyable to the listener
and therefore I think that it is a very good idea to have one beside a turntable. Sometimes I feel I want to listen to the CD player and another time to the turntable. I don't think there is a
"war" between these two componenets - they are completing each other - each with it's weaknesses and with it's superiority.

Arie