Suggestion for Improving the Naim Forum
Posted by: Unstoppable on 30 July 2007
Why not rename the Home Theatre Forum ? Calling it simply 'Visual Arts', as they do in other forums. As it is, the title suggest people crawling around on all fours trying to figure out the cables on their 5.1 systems.
The Visual Arts thing would open up discussions to old TV programs, historic material or even an occasional thread on the paintings sculpture ect. The result: more people posting , getting into their movie/DVD collections and (therefor) more viable customers for Naim's Home Theatre gear. No bad thing I would suppose for Naim Inc.
As it is the topic is somewhat moribund with few bothering to post.
Just an idea.
The Visual Arts thing would open up discussions to old TV programs, historic material or even an occasional thread on the paintings sculpture ect. The result: more people posting , getting into their movie/DVD collections and (therefor) more viable customers for Naim's Home Theatre gear. No bad thing I would suppose for Naim Inc.
As it is the topic is somewhat moribund with few bothering to post.
Just an idea.
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Derek!
As one who admires the 300 above any other Naim power amp, I am always happy that someone can enjoy the 500 in front of it!
It is helpful to realise that we all have different ears and listen differently!
I am not one to rain on someone else's parade! And in any case if anyone preferes this or that piece, then for them it really is better...
ATB from George.
As one who admires the 300 above any other Naim power amp, I am always happy that someone can enjoy the 500 in front of it!
It is helpful to realise that we all have different ears and listen differently!
I am not one to rain on someone else's parade! And in any case if anyone preferes this or that piece, then for them it really is better...
ATB from George.
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:then for them it really is better...
Not necessarily.
Some people are simply deaf prats, and couldn't detect an obvious improvement even if was rammed down their time-expired ears by Beethoven himself.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
Are your the arbiter in these matters? If so, what set should I have?
ATB from George
Are your the arbiter in these matters? If so, what set should I have?
ATB from George
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:Are your the arbiter in these matters? If so, what set should I have?
Anything short of the live event is a compromise.
The full 500 series is a good compromise.
Substitute a 300 for the 500 and its a bit more of a compromise, but slightly more affordable.
Keep working down the range until you hear something you ENJOY and a price you can afford.
That is what YOU should buy.
But don't tell us that that anything in the Naim range less than a full 500 set is BETTER, cause it ain't.
And you don't want to be classified as a deaf prat, do you.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Derek Wright
RockingD - I got a result for you <g>
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
You obviously only skim read, or perhaps your reading spectacles need a new prescription!
I clearly made an effort to place the 72 with Hi-cap onto 140 into its potential quality ranking with regard to the new series, within the last 48 hours! Interestingly another contributor reckoned I was rating the old kit too low in the new hierachy!
I can quite easily point out the quote, but will let you hunt through. It is a pleasant read apparently - going on the number of readings!
I have had nice opportunities to sample the very top Naim line and mightily impressive it is too. Only one component within it however would find its way into my dream set: The 552 pre-amp! Budget unlimited of course!
...
The posibility of divergence of opinion on replay is based on how our ears function, and what we want from replay in musical terms. However if you would rather think I was deaf, then I could hardly care less!
ATB from George
PS: It strikes me that you are confusing opinion for fact. I always state my preference, without a value judgement on which is better!!
You obviously only skim read, or perhaps your reading spectacles need a new prescription!
I clearly made an effort to place the 72 with Hi-cap onto 140 into its potential quality ranking with regard to the new series, within the last 48 hours! Interestingly another contributor reckoned I was rating the old kit too low in the new hierachy!
I can quite easily point out the quote, but will let you hunt through. It is a pleasant read apparently - going on the number of readings!
I have had nice opportunities to sample the very top Naim line and mightily impressive it is too. Only one component within it however would find its way into my dream set: The 552 pre-amp! Budget unlimited of course!
...
The posibility of divergence of opinion on replay is based on how our ears function, and what we want from replay in musical terms. However if you would rather think I was deaf, then I could hardly care less!
ATB from George
PS: It strikes me that you are confusing opinion for fact. I always state my preference, without a value judgement on which is better!!
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:You obviously only skim read, or perhaps your reading spectacles need a new prescription![quote]
George, you obviously jump to (eroneous) conclusions. A common fault. Difficult to overcome unless you really try hard - which you should.
[quote]PS: It strikes me that you are confusing opinion for fact. I always state my preference, without a value judgement on which is better!!
Not so. YOU are confusing BETTER, in terms of Naim's heirarchy which is absolutely factual, with ENJOYMENT, which is purley a matter of individual preference.
If you ENJOY the 300 more than the 500 say so.
To claim that the 300 is BETTER than the 500 simply puts you in the deaf prat camp.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
I always couch my comments in terms of "I prefer ...," or "I find the music better served by ...," and so forth, when describing individual gramophone pieces in a comparitive setting.
As I do not sit on the throne of objective truth - and of course no such "throne" exists - I would never presume to state what piece is better. The very fact that there is some degree of difference in our favourite pieces is the justification for my absolute and oft stated recomendation that people should definately audition what they are planning to buy! Perhaps the best pieces from an objective stand-point are those that measure the best! [Where would that leave Naim?] I think we probably can agree that the issue has a huge degree of subjectivity to it in any case. The only objective factual way of assessing technical quality is by measuring as the result is repeatable. All else is merely a personal response. But as we know musical response is entirely personal...
I think you may be protesting too much actually. Perhaps you think people believe what I write more than what you write. That is quite possibly true, but it makes me all the more careful to put my views as opinion, and then recomend a good listen!
Don't worry Don, as it is you who will have to flog out for a 500 to get similar pleasure to me with a 300. No doubt that is poetic justice! But you will have the amp you prefer, and I also. Seems fair enough to me!
ATB from George
PS: With the search engine I tried to find a single instance of a post where I stated categorically that the 300 is better than the 500, and nothing shows up. Perhaps you could help me here?
I always couch my comments in terms of "I prefer ...," or "I find the music better served by ...," and so forth, when describing individual gramophone pieces in a comparitive setting.
As I do not sit on the throne of objective truth - and of course no such "throne" exists - I would never presume to state what piece is better. The very fact that there is some degree of difference in our favourite pieces is the justification for my absolute and oft stated recomendation that people should definately audition what they are planning to buy! Perhaps the best pieces from an objective stand-point are those that measure the best! [Where would that leave Naim?] I think we probably can agree that the issue has a huge degree of subjectivity to it in any case. The only objective factual way of assessing technical quality is by measuring as the result is repeatable. All else is merely a personal response. But as we know musical response is entirely personal...
I think you may be protesting too much actually. Perhaps you think people believe what I write more than what you write. That is quite possibly true, but it makes me all the more careful to put my views as opinion, and then recomend a good listen!
Don't worry Don, as it is you who will have to flog out for a 500 to get similar pleasure to me with a 300. No doubt that is poetic justice! But you will have the amp you prefer, and I also. Seems fair enough to me!
ATB from George
PS: With the search engine I tried to find a single instance of a post where I stated categorically that the 300 is better than the 500, and nothing shows up. Perhaps you could help me here?
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
A few posts ago, it was suggested that the Forum is dying on its feet. I tend to agree, but feel it could continue on its life-support machine for a few years yet.
A quick glance now and then, during the past three or four months, had shown me that there seem to be far fewer posts and far fewer topics alive at any one time. Many topics lie dormant for days or even weeks, before falling off the current page. For some reason the subject matter seems pretty dull. (The only recent one that inspired me at all, was Dr Woodhouse' one about wind-turbines).
I agree with JonR and one or two others that the lack of aggressive posts has contributed to this sorry state of affairs. We have all become far too polite. Perhaps we need to be far more robust in expressing our views about issues.
OTOH, some of the abusive posts from the "good old days" were simply disgraceful slagging matches hurling personal insults across the ether. These could hardly have been a welcoming sight for new members, nor (I would imagine) would they have been an image that Naim wanted to be associated with. I personally wouldn't wish to return to that sort of good old day.
However, where do we draw the line? The Hifi section and AV section to be polite, but robust, whilst the Padded Cell to have a health-warning for new-commers?
Is it acceptable to classify someone as a "deaf prat" or suggest they require new spectacles? Does the context make words acceptable on some occasions but not on others? Do we want this superb forum to evaporate due to genteel politeness, or are we prepared to loose to occasional fragile member who resigns in disgust?
FWIW, I think that a robust argument in one or two threads draws the crowds in to look, even if they don't want to participate. Once inside the shop (so to speak) they contribute to other debates and topics, and the Forum continues to live.
I personally think Adam could soon become redundant if we don't liven things up, and IMHO that would be a major disaster.
Cheers
Don
A quick glance now and then, during the past three or four months, had shown me that there seem to be far fewer posts and far fewer topics alive at any one time. Many topics lie dormant for days or even weeks, before falling off the current page. For some reason the subject matter seems pretty dull. (The only recent one that inspired me at all, was Dr Woodhouse' one about wind-turbines).
I agree with JonR and one or two others that the lack of aggressive posts has contributed to this sorry state of affairs. We have all become far too polite. Perhaps we need to be far more robust in expressing our views about issues.
OTOH, some of the abusive posts from the "good old days" were simply disgraceful slagging matches hurling personal insults across the ether. These could hardly have been a welcoming sight for new members, nor (I would imagine) would they have been an image that Naim wanted to be associated with. I personally wouldn't wish to return to that sort of good old day.
However, where do we draw the line? The Hifi section and AV section to be polite, but robust, whilst the Padded Cell to have a health-warning for new-commers?
Is it acceptable to classify someone as a "deaf prat" or suggest they require new spectacles? Does the context make words acceptable on some occasions but not on others? Do we want this superb forum to evaporate due to genteel politeness, or are we prepared to loose to occasional fragile member who resigns in disgust?
FWIW, I think that a robust argument in one or two threads draws the crowds in to look, even if they don't want to participate. Once inside the shop (so to speak) they contribute to other debates and topics, and the Forum continues to live.
I personally think Adam could soon become redundant if we don't liven things up, and IMHO that would be a major disaster.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by JWM
quote:Suggestion for Improving the Naim Forum
When reading any particular post or thread, to always bear in mind that the person who wrote the mad thing you've just read has possibly recently consumed 1/2 bottle of whiskey/gin/vodka, a bottle of wine, and a couple of beers for good measure.
Then you can see how the mad thing you've just read could, conceivably, make sense to someone, even if it's total trivel, or very rude, or both...
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by JWM
PS Also to bear in mind that for a good number of Forum members English is not their first language, and make allowances.
For me, one of the joys of the Forum is its international flavour.
I have noticed cases sometimes of an overseas member not quite getting their head correctly round some English idiom, and it comes out all wrong, and then someone else really going off on one...
For me, one of the joys of the Forum is its international flavour.
I have noticed cases sometimes of an overseas member not quite getting their head correctly round some English idiom, and it comes out all wrong, and then someone else really going off on one...
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:recently consumed 1/2 bottle of whiskey/gin/vodka, a bottle of wine, and a couple of beers for good measure.
you obviously had a good night out tonight JMW. and I'm pleased you didn't get stopped by the Plod whilst driving home..........
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
Are you suggesting that I abuse and insult you here? Well, beyond suggesting that you may have defective reading glasses? [Note to self: Why assume Don wears glasses?].
I am afraid that there are people here whom I would happily abuse if it were not exactly to lower myself to their pathetic level. In your case, whilst I do not agree with all that much of what you write, I do not think I could bring myself to even want to to be insulting to you, even if you do think I am a deaf p**t!
ATB from George
Are you suggesting that I abuse and insult you here? Well, beyond suggesting that you may have defective reading glasses? [Note to self: Why assume Don wears glasses?].
I am afraid that there are people here whom I would happily abuse if it were not exactly to lower myself to their pathetic level. In your case, whilst I do not agree with all that much of what you write, I do not think I could bring myself to even want to to be insulting to you, even if you do think I am a deaf p**t!
ATB from George
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:You obviously only skim read, or perhaps your reading spectacles need a new prescription!
It was far more hurtful and insulting than mearly suggesting I need new specs. The skim reading insult was completely out of order (and inaccurate!).
I do not THINK you are a deaf prat (I never mentioned bastard and you can't prove that I did). You either are or you aren't depending on your ability or otherwise to discern which is the BETTER power amp in a 500 system - the 500 (correct answer) or the 300 (wrong answer).
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
I had already altered my post to P**t, before your new one appeared. I will not suggest that you are doubting my parentage!
But clearly with your references today [on the Hearing loss with age] to the 72/140 set you seem to have entirely missed out not just my referencing the old pieces in relation to the new series [where I am highly complimentary about the recent developements], but the several mentions of the new series through the threads on it. I still maintain that eihter you skim read, or selectively post on the basis of what you have read. Probably selecting evidence is actually more serious!
Perhaps the Forum needs more little debates like this, but I stil refuse to actually drop to level of play-ground name calling!
I apologise for leaving ba*****d in my post for a short while before adjusting it however. Exageration is deplorable. None of us is a saint though, I suspect. Sorry for that!
I still maintain I get more pleasure out of muy modest set than some here out of much more exalted arrangements! If I were deaf this surely would not be possible. That is as close as I am going to get to trying to needle you, though of course it may well be that you are among the ranks of those less musically satisfied with your replay set than me!
ATB from George
I had already altered my post to P**t, before your new one appeared. I will not suggest that you are doubting my parentage!
But clearly with your references today [on the Hearing loss with age] to the 72/140 set you seem to have entirely missed out not just my referencing the old pieces in relation to the new series [where I am highly complimentary about the recent developements], but the several mentions of the new series through the threads on it. I still maintain that eihter you skim read, or selectively post on the basis of what you have read. Probably selecting evidence is actually more serious!
Perhaps the Forum needs more little debates like this, but I stil refuse to actually drop to level of play-ground name calling!
I apologise for leaving ba*****d in my post for a short while before adjusting it however. Exageration is deplorable. None of us is a saint though, I suspect. Sorry for that!
I still maintain I get more pleasure out of muy modest set than some here out of much more exalted arrangements! If I were deaf this surely would not be possible. That is as close as I am going to get to trying to needle you, though of course it may well be that you are among the ranks of those less musically satisfied with your replay set than me!
ATB from George
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:Where is Mick & Acad
That would secure Adam's job for ever....
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:I still maintain I get more pleasure out of muy modest set than some here out of much more exalted arrangements!
I have never doubted this for one moment.
quote:If I were deaf this surely would not be possible.
I simply don't see the logic in this at all.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
If I were deaf. I would not use a gramophone! I would simply read scores!
If you are making the point that I might get more pleasure from a better set, then that might be true on some days! On most days I hardly take account of the set at all. In fact I am describing a sort of minimum acceptable quality for me which what I have exceeds, but even a Tivoli radio can transport me perfectly!
Obviously I enjoy the chance to listen to very fine sets, and no doubt that they are finer than mine in many cases!
ATB from George
If I were deaf. I would not use a gramophone! I would simply read scores!
If you are making the point that I might get more pleasure from a better set, then that might be true on some days! On most days I hardly take account of the set at all. In fact I am describing a sort of minimum acceptable quality for me which what I have exceeds, but even a Tivoli radio can transport me perfectly!
Obviously I enjoy the chance to listen to very fine sets, and no doubt that they are finer than mine in many cases!
ATB from George
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
George,
I think you are getting confused.
If you were deaf, you would be a prat for buying any sort of hifi set to listen to.
I repeat, I don't doubt that YOU (and many others) get more ENJOYMENT from your 72/140 sets than many people get from their full 500 systems.
But if you suggest that a 500 system is better than a 72/140 or a 300 is better than a 500, then you are a candidate for that group which I have named as "deaf prats"
Cheers
Don
I think you are getting confused.
If you were deaf, you would be a prat for buying any sort of hifi set to listen to.
I repeat, I don't doubt that YOU (and many others) get more ENJOYMENT from your 72/140 sets than many people get from their full 500 systems.
But if you suggest that a 500 system is better than a 72/140 or a 300 is better than a 500, then you are a candidate for that group which I have named as "deaf prats"
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 03 October 2007 by u5227470736789439
Dear Don,
I may be confused, even some people actually think I am a prat! Obviously I would be if I used a gramophone as a deaf man!
I have absolutely no doubt that the 552/500 is a king of a set compared to 72/140. No arguments there from me. BUT and this is where it gets more interesting, there are things about the 300 which I prefer to the 500, and which would casue me to buy one in preference, however much money I had.
Let's put it this way, the 500 is clearly more dynamic, clearly more impressive, has better measurements in terms of frequency extension, power delivery and so on. Yes indisputably the better amp, technically, and in practice musically as well for many peoples' taste than the 300. However, I have found on many occasions that this very strength is in fact an issue! I end up boggled by the sound! I end up thinking, "Chrisake, I can hear the bloody tube train under the Kingsway Hall beneath the double basses!" Not such a happy listening experience for me! I have never encountered this with the 300! I find that just like my little old set, I sit down and am enveloped in music from the first note. It has happened so many times. I have been lucky to have heard both amps often enough for the experience to have repeated consistently enough to realise it is not a fluke for me!
I don't know if you ever read what I wrote about the 300 in 2003, but I was absolutely right in what I wrote about how the amp allowed the music through in my subsequent experiences of it. I never found that with the 500. So I stick to my line that my dream set would be active SL2s or SBLs with 300s, 552, and CDS3! Plus NAT 01 of course!!
No amount of money would buy me a set I would enjoy more!
As not everyone would necessarily agree, all I say is please audition as they may share my taste, or indeed not! It is not a quality judgement, but only a personal musical response.
Likewise I prefer the 200 to the 250.2! I don't really think it is "pratish" to honestly say what I think, and that is no comment on the actual quality of the pieces, so much as the voicing of them. The 300 is gentler than the 500, and the CDS3 is gentler than the 555! I like replay to stay just a notch back from maximum impact. This may be why I so enjoy the 72/140, even after having had more expensive pieces. I am not saying the 72/140 is technically better, but that I am fully able to enjoy without any reservation these lesser pieces! I can equally say that without force of circumstances I would have kept the old big set and eventually got a 300 to go between the 52 and SBLs!
I am off to bed now. Job interview tomorrow!
ATB, good night, and bless, from George
I may be confused, even some people actually think I am a prat! Obviously I would be if I used a gramophone as a deaf man!
I have absolutely no doubt that the 552/500 is a king of a set compared to 72/140. No arguments there from me. BUT and this is where it gets more interesting, there are things about the 300 which I prefer to the 500, and which would casue me to buy one in preference, however much money I had.
Let's put it this way, the 500 is clearly more dynamic, clearly more impressive, has better measurements in terms of frequency extension, power delivery and so on. Yes indisputably the better amp, technically, and in practice musically as well for many peoples' taste than the 300. However, I have found on many occasions that this very strength is in fact an issue! I end up boggled by the sound! I end up thinking, "Chrisake, I can hear the bloody tube train under the Kingsway Hall beneath the double basses!" Not such a happy listening experience for me! I have never encountered this with the 300! I find that just like my little old set, I sit down and am enveloped in music from the first note. It has happened so many times. I have been lucky to have heard both amps often enough for the experience to have repeated consistently enough to realise it is not a fluke for me!
I don't know if you ever read what I wrote about the 300 in 2003, but I was absolutely right in what I wrote about how the amp allowed the music through in my subsequent experiences of it. I never found that with the 500. So I stick to my line that my dream set would be active SL2s or SBLs with 300s, 552, and CDS3! Plus NAT 01 of course!!
No amount of money would buy me a set I would enjoy more!
As not everyone would necessarily agree, all I say is please audition as they may share my taste, or indeed not! It is not a quality judgement, but only a personal musical response.
Likewise I prefer the 200 to the 250.2! I don't really think it is "pratish" to honestly say what I think, and that is no comment on the actual quality of the pieces, so much as the voicing of them. The 300 is gentler than the 500, and the CDS3 is gentler than the 555! I like replay to stay just a notch back from maximum impact. This may be why I so enjoy the 72/140, even after having had more expensive pieces. I am not saying the 72/140 is technically better, but that I am fully able to enjoy without any reservation these lesser pieces! I can equally say that without force of circumstances I would have kept the old big set and eventually got a 300 to go between the 52 and SBLs!
I am off to bed now. Job interview tomorrow!
ATB, good night, and bless, from George
Posted on: 04 October 2007 by Jay
quote:Originally posted by Don Atkinson:
To claim that the 300 is BETTER than the 500 simply puts you in the deaf prat camp.
Wouldn't that depend on your (the posters) definition of better?
In the example of the 300 vs 500, if better is "more enjoyment" then the original poster is surely justified to state so?
There have been quite a few instances, in the history of the forum, where the less accomplised piece of equipment has been deemed to be "better" than a regularly accepted "better" piece. I can understand why that could be so in particular situations.
Posted on: 04 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
Munch,
Every rule has its exceptions.
I trust that you are not saying that ALL profoundly deaf people can and do hear better that all normal people.
I trust that you are not claiming that the majority of profoundly deaf people can and do hear better than the majority of hifi enthusiasts on this forum.
On these assumptions, I reject your statement that I am so very very wrong.
Cheers
Don
Every rule has its exceptions.
I trust that you are not saying that ALL profoundly deaf people can and do hear better that all normal people.
I trust that you are not claiming that the majority of profoundly deaf people can and do hear better than the majority of hifi enthusiasts on this forum.
On these assumptions, I reject your statement that I am so very very wrong.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 04 October 2007 by Don Atkinson
quote:Wouldn't that depend on your (the posters) definition of better?
Yes. I came into this thread on the basis of BETTER being a comparison with live music (see top of Page 5). That was clearly stated.
quote:In the example of the 300 vs 500, if better is "more enjoyment" then the original poster is surely justified to state so?
"More enjoyment" doesn't equal "better". Some people enjoy the sound of a lesser product and there is nothing wrong with this. More often, they enjoy a peculiarly specific aspect of a lesser product or don't feel the better product justifies the addition purchase price. I have consistently tried to use the word "enjoyment" over the past 6 months or so to avoid contoversy over what is "better" or "worse".
In the context in which I introduced this subject, the 500 is better than the 300.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 04 October 2007 by Jay
quote:Originally posted by Don Atkinson:
Yes. I came into this thread on the basis of BETTER being a comparison with live music (see top of Page 5). That was clearly stated.
Sorry Don. Missed that post.
quote:"More enjoyment" doesn't equal "better". Some people enjoy the sound of a lesser product and there is nothing wrong with this. More often, they enjoy a peculiarly specific aspect of a lesser product or don't feel the better product justifies the addition purchase price. I have consistently tried to use the word "enjoyment" over the past 6 months or so to avoid contoversy over what is "better" or "worse".
In the context in which I introduced this subject, the 500 is better than the 300.
Cheers
Don
We're on the same screen/page. I think you're enforcing your ultimate defn onto someone else's post/meaning/intentions. A little dogmatic IMV but your posts and opinions are your own!