Sistem pics 2003

Posted by: Steve Toy on 14 January 2003

Here are a few crappy pics. I've got some of Stallion's rig too, but I await his permission to post them.

I need to get the file size down. I see that we now get 50k Smile

Regards,

Steve.

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on TUESDAY 14 January 2003 at 18:06.]
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Alco
quote:
All I am going to say is it looks very cute.

Thanx Herm.
quote:
And the lower shelf is crying out for a s/h XPS.

Haha, yeah... I know what ya mean Roll Eyes
I don't like empty shelves in a/my system support either...
It's just that I'm pretty satisfied with my CDX as it is, at the moment.
(and imho s/h XPS's are still too expensive)

regards,
Alco
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by domfjbrown
quote:
Originally posted by Geoff P:



I don't mean to be rude, but why spend so much money on the AV bits (including plasma) if you're not going to have the things set up properly (ie, with the centre speaker under the display, and the display central between the speakers)?

My friend has a very low end AV system and he has his set up similarly - trying to watch a film on it is VERY hard work since none of the audio matches the images...

Just curious really?

__________________________
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Geoff P
quote:
Steve:
I once had a rack by Optimum that was a dead ringer for yours


Thanks for the advice. I just recently "free'd up" a shelf on the rack so I will try the move up 1 floor.
By the way in the grander scheme of things what sort of job do you recall the Optimum rack doing (mine is a from a belgium company BTW)?.
I have been thinking about a new rack, to some extent as a result of the emotion shown here on the topic. However it is terribly difficult to predict the result until you get it home so are the likes of Hutter, Quadraspire or Isoblue going to be an improvement?
Don't mention FRAIM I cannot afford it, all the money has gone into the kit for now.

quote:
Ludwig:
does your neck hurt from staring up at the screen? How high is it?


The bottom of the plasma (42") is just over 5 feet up. It is actually just right for viewing when I am relaxed on my "listening sofa"with my feet up, which is about 12 feet away from the screen. I know it may sound illogical but when you go to the cinema you tend to be seated looking "up" at a shallow angle to the screen and I found duplicating this in the home works well (no neck crick at least for me)

quote:
Dom:
I don't mean to be rude, but why spend so much money on the AV bits (including plasma) if you're not going to have the things set up properly (ie, with the centre speaker under the display, and the display central between the speakers)?



In principle you are right.
There are a few reasons. One is the location of the window precludes a central position, but I needed a sturdy outside brick wall to hang the Plasma on (I did'nt fancy it coming loose from plaster board in the middle of the night). Also putting the Plasma on a stand defeated my desire on viewing angle as expressed above.
I have limited alternate choices of location because it is a relatively small room. The advantage of the small room though is that the surround sound is more enveloping and so not sensitive to absolute position. Since There is less of a directional impression to the sounds than would be the case in a larger room I have found absolute location not an issue.

In all honesty living with the setup as shown I have found little problem with the different locations of sound and vision, after all there is sound coming at you from all directions. In fact because the A/V can operate with a "phantom" center channel and usually sounds better that way, the "center" speaker is not used for music at all and often adds little in movies either (trial and error testing).

Maybe my hearing has been pre-programmed from earlier times when our domestic TV was angled into the room in one corner, to provide the maximum family viewing angle, and the stereo kit was firing from a totally different room lacation.

regards
GEOFFP
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Steve Toy
quote:
By the way in the grander scheme of things what sort of job do you recall the Optimum rack doing (mine is a from a belgium company BTW)?.
I have been thinking about a new rack, to some extent as a result of the emotion shown here on the topic. However it is terribly difficult to predict the result until you get it home so are the likes of Hutter, Quadraspire or Isoblue going to be an improvement?


The Optimum uses the same rods and glass as yours but without the extensions on the top. Tap one of the rods with a key or some other sharpish metal instrument - you'll hear it ringing. Sonically it smears transients as a result and messes with tune and timing.

The Quadraspire Reference I have in its place doesn't look as pretty but it raises the bar musically. If you went down this route the ordering of components on the rack would change though - the top shelf is designated to the CD player due to its extra decoupling to enhance the source.



Regards,

Steve.
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Mekon
Here's a swivel arm mounting for plasma screens, so that you could swing it out into a central position for watching movies, and then tuck it away. Expensive tho'.

Posted on: 04 November 2003 by u5227470736789524
Alex S

No choice really, for several reasons .... and I am pleased at how great it sounds, even though flying in the face of convention. Further description, if interested, on the "Wood for the trees" thread.

Jeff A
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Derek Wright
Geoff P

Having the screen above the horizon is an advantage if you have varifocus lenses as typically the upper part of the lenses support distance vision (unless you have special lenses to see high level instrumentation as in a plane cockpit)

Low level screens become tiring to watch as one tries to peer out of the top of the glasses by looking downwards.

Derek

<< >>
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Geoff P
Steve

I tried the "key" test. Mine just goes clunk it does'nt ring, which I feel is a good sign.
The construction is that the pipe spacers rest on hard plastic inserts above and below the glass shelves. It is all tightened up by long threaded rods running from top to bottom inside the pipes and through holes in but not contacting the glass shelves. So each shelf is hanging in a plastic sandwich as the only contact with the floor.It of course personal preference how tight you do up the end caps on the rods, which does have some small effect on sound.

GEOFFP
Posted on: 04 November 2003 by Dan M
here goes -- first time trying to upload...
Posted on: 05 November 2003 by Steve Toy
Geoff,

It does seem to be of at least a similar constuction as my old Optimum. The rods ring more when they aren't holding the shelves together though. The manual also advised against overtightening of the rods.

The problem sonically (as I perceive it) may lie with the fact that the shelves are glass and there is no coupling arrangement between the shelves and the uprights in the form of spikes as per Mana, or ball-bearings as per Fraim.

The principal culprit for deleterious resonance amplitude may therefore be the glass in this configuration.

The QS Ref does sound considerably more musical if you ever get the chance to hear a demonstration.



Regards,

Steve.
Posted on: 05 November 2003 by Justin
Here's hoping this works.



Judd
Posted on: 05 November 2003 by Justin
here we go. The most enjoyable system I have yet assembled - and just about the cheapest one as well.



Rega P3 with Ortofon Kontrapunk A into Stageline K into Nait 5 into Ela Mk I's. All on a nice Sound Org equipment stand.

Judd

[This message was edited by Justin on THURSDAY 06 November 2003 at 04:47.]
Posted on: 05 November 2003 by Justin
Ignore

[This message was edited by Justin on THURSDAY 06 November 2003 at 04:49.]
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Dan M
Judd,
Where's the pic? The suspense is killing me! Wink
Dan
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Justin
Dan,

The two pics appear above. What do you mean?

Judd
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Taylormade
The pics don't appear for me Justin.
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by NB
doesn't do it for me either!
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Rasher
Justin - keep the pics below 50k and stick them in as an attachment, not just a shortcut to yourself Wink
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Justin
OK, let's try again.



Did this work for everybody?

Judd

[This message was edited by Justin on THURSDAY 06 November 2003 at 19:21.]
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Justin
And this



And this



I'll learn how to shrink them next time.
Judd
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Justin
ignore

[This message was edited by Justin on THURSDAY 06 November 2003 at 20:52.]
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Justin
OK, I'm working on it.

Judd
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Justin
This can't be right. My DSL service says I have 500 megs of space on which I can host pages, store photos, etc. What good is this if nobody else can see my content? Also, the folder holding my pics are "open for public access" or something like that.

Something clearly isn't right.

Judd
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Dan M
Judd,

I'm thinking you're doing this on purpose Wink -- there's already nearly 20 posts on your sistem pic, and no one's seen it yet! Lets hope the piccy lives up to the hype. Smile

Dan
Posted on: 06 November 2003 by Robert Derwae
Hi all:

I'm trying to help Judd get his pictures up and I thought I'd best get SOMETHING up before we have a riot on our hands. Here's one of his pics:

Robert