Originally posted by merlin
>>> OK Jason, let's start with your forum profile. Whilst a manufacturer should declare their position in the interests of integrity, why do you feel the need to sign off as a HiFi+ reviewer at the end of each post
On other forums most participants prefer to have this out in the open. If it offends more than it informs I will remove it post-haste (moderator opinion useful here!). I do have a vested interest in HiFi+ and if that is discussed I think it is important that people realize who I am, perhaps I will just append the disclaimer in those situations. Some background: the first post I made to the old forum was about one of my reviews.
>>> What I am getting at here Jason is that these shortcomings are so minor compared with those introduced elsewhere in your chain that I fail to see the point. From a musical point of view , you already accept that the LP12 is enjoyable. Pointing out it's shortcomings from a HiFi perspective is to my mind irrelevent. You mention it's lack of resolving capability. You also mention the famous mid bass hump. Have you ever thought that these two are in fact intertwined

Have you ever considered how the LP12 might sound in a room with a mild suckout at those frequencies? This is far from uncommon. These are just thoughts of course, but I feel you would be surprised by the effects atributable to adding or removing acoustic energy certain areas.
Balancing a room is as important as balancing a system. The mid bass hump of the LP12 was also very useful with the Linn cartridges of years ago which always seemed to have a reduced output in this region and the combination balanced very well. How do you separate resolution and colouration from musical appreciation? and if you can why do you run such an expensive system? In my opinion you get more enjoyment from a system that digs out and gives you more music. You can extrapolate this to say a very low resolution system with curtailed frequency response will miss certain key musical themes, whole bass lines were missing when I used Linn Kans. The whole maybe enjoyable and the system is probably cheap BUT you are not hearing all of the music and surely this is not desirable?
>>> I'll make you a deal if you like. As you say, I have not heard your system, so I will be happy to remedy that,
I am afraid that your posts on this thread, which are mainly attempts to discredit my opinions and impunge my credibility, have hardly encouraged me to invite you to my house. But if you are near south London / Surrey let me know
>>>whilst at the same time, measuring your room for you. You will possibly be very surprised by how much your opinions on hifi hardware are influenced by external influences that have little relevence to other happy users. Then you might stop hypothesising and get back to the music
I have measured the room with the current system in it and it is pretty flat. Bit too much bass boom around 60Hz but I am working on that. I have heard replicas of my system in the following rooms:
~16*18 thick stone construction 7 foot ceilings, flagged floor
~28*30 foot Breeze block construction 10 foot ceilings, concretet floor
12*24 foot all brick, wooden floor 8 foot ceilings
15narrows to 12*20, concrete floor, 8 foot ceilings
... and the system always sounded similar because the rooms were all carefully optimised to give the HiFi a chance.
Bub, you haven't insulted me, I enjoy our fencing.
W-M, this is the only place Bub and I can discuss things, he has been banned from everywhere I would be wellcome or am not banned from myself ;->
Cheers
Jason