Did you find the difference? Inventory of four foreign UK Smart Socket. Au Smart Outlet smart socket. it can be remotely controlled to turn off the power switch through the application when outdoors. According to the video description, US Smart Dimmer Switch can help save 50% Of household electricity. Have you found any difference? Inventory of four foreign smart sockets |
Resurrecting this thread after nearly 20 years.
Having just read a series of about two dozen reviews for products I’m interested in spanning the past ten years, I feel that Roy Gregory stands out among reviewers over the last 10 year time period.
Not only beautiful writing style, but a depth of analysis that puts most others to shame. |
Wes Phillips. Great ears, good taste in music and no B.S.! |
Art Dudley of Listener. No audiophile mumbo jumbo. When I first started reading his mag I was really offended with the cutting down of high end audiophile equipment. But after a few years of reading him I think he is right on about musicality vs. high end trickery. I've heard many pieces of equipment the main stream press is crazy over because its list of audiophile attributes but is not musical. Art is always talking about drive and rhythm and if a given piece does't have either of these who cares about sound stage, frequency extreams, or any other things most reviewers go on about. |
Hasnt anyone mentioned Martin Colloms???? Honorable mention to JA and REG, but come on. |
Michael Fremer tells like it is without all the B.S. embellishment. Too many reviewers write about products as if they just met god. |
Martin from Bound for Sound.No add $ to prostitute him.Unlike the rest of them out there. |
Corry Greenburg Nuff Said |
Gerry writes: Myles should know "Ultimate Audio". My mistake - sorry. I also appreciated that he didn't slam me because of my opinion and just read it for what it is worth, just opinion. Gerry: Everyone's welcome to their opinion of the mags ;-) Obviously, every reviewer has their cadre of readers. Myles B. Astor |
Myles should know "Ultimate Audio". My mistake - sorry. I also appreciated that he didn't slam me because of my opinion and just read it for what it is worth, just opinion. |
Gerry writes: <> Excuse me but it's Ultimate Audio magazine. |
I respect Holt and Pearson the most. Holt is the best, period! He is humble, honest, and straightforward. He has good listening skills, good music taste with good insight and perspective from an average audiophile's point of view. My next favorite is HP and not for the same reason I like Holt. Harry is Harry and that's ok. He has a point of view that is very consistent and has really contributed to our audiophile language in being able to describe what he is hearing. I give him credit also for keeping S.O.T.A. system over a period of time. He compares equipment against his reference so therefore you know where Harry's listening reference is. Many other reviewers don't own complete systems and just rotate equipment under review and operate from memory on past components. Reviewers I always try to read first are Jonaton Valin (good taste and always music tips), Mike Fremer (analog city), Anthony Cordesman (objective with solid comparisons), Sam Telieg (funny, but I am sure misleads first time buyers with each article praising a new piece of equipment). There is wider group of reviewers that Wayne Donnelly (fair), Wayne Garcia (value point/fair) Ken Kessler (he tries) that are examples that most of our reviewers are trying to communicate some information to us that will be useful. So by knowing your own musicall preferences you can get a lot of useful information in Audiophile Magazines. Its just another source of opinions use it to what extent you want to, but always make your own choices. There are articles/writers that I find are a wasted of time. There's a category of reviewers that constantly praise the latest edition from the same manufactures regardless of component's true sonic characteristics. Jonaton Skull's gives me that uneasy feeling most of the time. There's a couple I dislike period. Michael Gindi's PHD (Ultimate Sound), Mike Tres review's (Listner) are full on delusions of grandeur and the absolute worst ration of bullshit to useful information written. |
Does anybody like e.e.Cummings? |
I am also revolted by J10's self-centeredness. Actually a lot of bloated-egophile reviewers regularly post on AudioAsylum, where you can verify what is being said here. Some equally egotistic equipment manufacturers and designers do to. And if I may, I will add to the list of reviewers I do not admire Mr Tom Gillet, a.k.a. Sam Tellig. His reviews usually read like "Special Advertising Sections". They are either intentionally skewed or unintentionally unconvincing. |
Wow, did this get weird--I don't even know where to begin, so I'll go back to the beginning. Have always like Robert Harley because he is concise and logical, have come to like Michael Fremer, because he is right (mostly) about the virtues of vinyl, and can't stomach another Johnathan Scull with his endless 'cult of personality' prattle about J-10, K-10 and the Ribbon Chair. I read his reviews ONLY to see if he can somehow restrain himself from mentioning this precious ass cradle. Hasn't happened yet! |
Yes, that could be true alright. That actually makes sense. |
One thing that I just recalled was that I read Darth Sidious is not actually a Sith. He was raised by the Sith. Darth Maul is an actual Sith. Maybe I should go back to some of this stuff. I used to go to a website(when the anticipation of Episode 1 was at its height) that really took this stuff seriously. I wonder how Lucas felt about them. As they had biographies on literally countless Jedi, from the thousand generations. Replete with all of the feuds, battles, accomplishments. Quite detailed, and fascinating. I presume they make this stuff up? I don't believe that it was liscensed. But, maybe so long as the content is good, the officials are OK with it. Less for them to write later... |
Start another thread if you don't like where this one has gone. I'm stream of consciousness oriented sometimes, so why criticize me just for getting sidetracked a little bit? Is this a thought controlled forum? Music isn't the only thing we discuss on this site anyway, or there wouldn't be so many threads where people discuss power cords, and not just any, but the "best"...only the "best" will do!!.....Also, I submit that "love" is too strong a word for you, if you haven't seen the most recent episode in the more than a year and a half since its release. "Casual enjoyment" might be more accurate. Also, I assure you that there are very few non-xers that "get Star Wars", basically because they don't need to, IMO. |
Hey Carl don't get me wrong I LOVED the Star Wars Trilogy. Just haven't seen the last one. As far as film goes it's tough to beat. Wonderful story well told. I don't think for a minute that Lord of the Rings would translate as well to film neither would "Stranger in a Strange Land" which is my favorite sci-fi book to date, quite religious in its overtones. But then again I haven't read a good Sci-fi book in a while. Hear the Dune series is great. Sorry Fpeel I stand corrected. The Tolkein books are indeed fantasy. What is so absolutely amazing to me about them is the language created. It was quite an experience when I read these books almost 30 years ago and they stand out to me as among the great works of literature of the 20th Century. Star Wars I agree is a cultural phenomenom and Carl I assure you, it's appeal isn't limited to the Xers. As a matter of fact I was still in my 20's when Star Wars was first released in 1977 and btw what does any of this have to do with music. Oh yeah, I love the Williams score. |
The ideal magazine would be so pure, that if the reader had ever done anything less than perfect in his life, he would be smited from the earth as he read those most holy words, so perfect that no one anywhere would be worthy of reading them, instead it only condemns them to eternal torment. What a page-turner it would be, I am salivating! |
The Best reveiwer would be one whose ONLY payment would be from the magazine at a price per article. The ideal reveiwer wouldn't recieve FREE or discounted product from manufacturers in exchange for a good reveiw. The ideal reveiwer wouldn't be seen selling mega dollar components 6 months after a, "This is the best thing in the World" reveiw. The ideal magazine wouldn't rely on advertising dollars to keep afloat. A magazine without politics. A magazine of truths. |
I submit that you just don't get Star Wars, and there's nothing degenerate about it, nor is it simply "commercial fare". It is a generational phenomenon and spectacle. So-called "baby boomers" "just don't get it", and they don't need to get it, we don't need them to get it, nor do we care if they ever get it. Lord of the Rings is fantasy, not science fiction, and it didn't have the effect that Star Wars has had. History is proof of that. If you want to talk works of fiction, "Gone With the Wind", the novel and the movie, had far more impact than Lord of the Rings could ever hope to have...and it's still eclipsed by Star Wars. You can knock it all you like... |
Gentlemen, this post has clearly degenerated. But i'll throw my two cents anyway. Nothing tops LOTR (Lord of the Rings). Star Wars is OK, but it is commercial fare. Comparing it to LOTR is like comparing a Big Mac with dinner at Taillevent in Paris (though I acknowledge I sometimes crave for a Big Mac, and nothing else will do). |
Trelja, you are too kind. Tell me this: if the movie will be finished in 2001, why must they wait until summer 2002 to release it? I hear that few movies will be made starting spring 2001, another actor's strike or some such nonsense, and so it seems like they shouldn't wait so long to release a time-tested product. |
All valid points Carl. Perhaps that's why we so look forward to the next movie. I have been feeling these things since Episode 4(1977?), always so many unanswered questions. As soon as you leave the movie, you are already are monstrously craving the next. It must be analogous to the way people get hooked on something. Maybe this is why I haven't gotten into any other science fiction. Not only sci-fi, but almost everything else in tv, movies, etc. never gives me that feeling. I do remember that Hill Street Blues had me hating that the show had ended every week. Many people feel this way about soap operas, but I don't have time for them. Thanks for your perspectives, you DEFINITELY planted more seeds in my head. Can't wait till Episode 2! |
Trelja, if that's correct, then I am wrong, and you are right. I saw the movie several times, but the sound was never up to "Jurassic Park" standards (EP 1's sound was a major disappointment for me), so I likely couldn't understand those words, if indeed they were uttered (on several of these occasions, the soundtrack was indeed DTS, but it still was sub-par by a mile!)..................However, here's something that has troubled me: if Senator Palpatine and Darth Sideous are the same guy, then how can the Senator be both human, and Sith? They refer to them as a "race", implying that they aren't human. Darth Sideous looks like an old man (every bit as old as he does as Emperor in 5 and 6), and the Senator looks middle aged. How can this be? I've debated this with others, who always seem to favor the "simplest is best" explanation...namely that it doesn't matter that they look different, they're still the same guy (I still am not convinced). Seems like it's too big a mistake to not be on purpose. And, I still think it's the death of Amadala that will be the final straw, though I have no doubt that Anakin's mom will definitely get "wacked" in Ep 2...probably by two thugs from the planet "Jersey-tooine", when she doesn't get square with her gambling debts... |
"The Shining" is the only King movie I care for (and I loved The Simpson's lampoon of it, called "The Shinning"). I haven't liked any of the tv miniseries based on King's work. If you are an SF fan, you shouldn't miss Asimov's Foundation series, and much of Larry Niven's work (he's Tom Clancy's favorite sf author). |
First off, you are all wrong. Falstaff is A BEER, dammit! A character in a play? God, what sacrilege will be visited upon us next! As a life-long sci-fi afficianado I have to agree with Tubegroover, though Tolkein's works were more fantasy- than science-fiction. For me Herbert (Dune series), Heinlein (Starship Trooper, Stranger in a Strange Land and the Lazarus Long novels), Farmer (Riverworld and World of Tiers series) are tops. Interestingly, though generally not a big fan of the writer, Stephen King's "The Stand" is a classic good vs. evil story. It's one of the few novels brought to any screen where the true essence of the story was captured in its entirety. And it was made for TV of all media! |
Well I haven't kept up to date on the Star Wars double Trilogy (sexology?) For pure synthesis can anything beat The Hobbitt and "Lord of the Rings"? A true world unto itself and the granddaddy of this genre of science fiction, language and the timeless plight of good" versus evil". And for any of you Led Zepplin fans a few of their early songs revolved around characters from these timeless pieces of literature. |
I believe that there are contradictions in all people, if this is in fact a contradiction. Star Wars is referred to be a great many people as science fiction for the rest of us. I have come across no science fiction enjoyable to me, other than the Star Wars series. I have found everything else to utterly BORE me(among other things). NO apologies. Being that you cannot stand people who cannot stand science fiction, then you cannot stand me. That does not(and CANNOT) hurt me at all. I love all of the things you list about Star Wars. And while you go making statements about me philosophically(ant in an anthill), you ought to give thought to what it requires to really understand what another person is about(which is not possible from what I or anyone else offers on this site). If you refer back to Episode 1, one of the two Trade Federation pawns(Nute Gunray or whatever his name was) did specicifically address the later to be Emperor as Darth Sidious. I also share your leanings towards what will later transpire. Although, I have read in Newsweek that a potential plot is that Anakin's mom gets wacked, and it's at the hand of a Jedi. In one of those "official" books that explain the characters, etc. of the original trilogy, the Darth Vader "life support system" is explained as being necessary due to him falling into a pit of molten something during a fight with his former master, Obi Wan Kenobi. We'll see. I know I can't wait. |
Also, I'm surprised, given the nature of this forum, that no one mentioned Verdi's Falstaff (based on yet another of Will's plays, The Merry Wives of Windsor, in which the character appears). Falstaff is in my view Verdi's greatest work. You will note, Mr eber, that he is also quite pompous, as are you. |
eber, I concede that you know more than Falstaff than I since YOU ARE FALSTAFF !!! |
Actually, I don't think anyone addresses him as Darth Sideous in the actual Episode 1 film. I also don't know that he's "the leader of the Sith", he is only identified as a Sith Master, again in the film. "They were thought to be extinct", and we only see two of them in Episode 1.................I also think that the real tragedy will be, when Anakin/Vader is convinced to somehow help "hunt down and destroy ALL the Jedi Knights", as per Kenobi's reflections in Episode 4. Also, I feel that the death of Anakins' wife will somehow be connected to Kenobi, and will thus be the final straw for the Vader transistion...seems like the Jedi mass deaths and the death of Amadala will occur in Episode 3. I also think it'd be silly to be such a fan of this series, and not be a fan at all of Science Fiction, Trelja. I absolutely cannot stand people who cannot stand Science Fiction. If you really love these movies, and hate Science Fiction, you are conflicted. Take the Science Fiction out of these movies, and there's no meaning left. Why obsess over the interpersonal relationships of people, and ignore the machines, the aliens, the vast distances, the adventure, the warfare ensuing from a transitional republic/empire consisting of multitudes of sentient beings over vast distances? In short, you are a person who does not wonder about the universe, but only about your immediate surroundings and the implications of the relationships you have with a few people....much like an ant in an anthill........I take issue with Mark Hamill's "It's only a cowboy movie, a space opera". If it were only that, nobody wouldn't have paid to see it, since there's no horses, and no singing. |
Tubegroover, Emperor Palpatine is the Emperor from the Star Wars trilogy(episodes 4 to 6, "A New Hope", "The Empire Strikes Back", and "Return of The Jedi"). In last year's "Episode 1: The Phantom Menace", he is still a senator. In Episode 1, he is also(secretly) Darth Sidious, leader of the Sith. He trains Darth Maul, and later will seduce Anakin Skywalker to the Dark Side, becoming Darth Vader(and completing the young Jedi's training in the ways of the Force). Watch in the upcoming two episodes for his ascent to the throne. I absolutely CANNOT stand science fiction, but the Star Wars story is incredibly powerful to me. So much there. A galactic story of a Samurai feud/warriors. A man's life gone wrong(through weakness and bad decisions), which only can redeemed by the strength and love of his only son. Incredible religious overtones(both Eastern and Judeo-Christian). Etc., etc., etc... |
Jeez Carl you're starting to get dangerously close to "Dennis Miller" territory. Who in the hell is Emperor Palpatine? BTW excellent 12/9 post. |
And actually, I was wrong in my analogy anyway. Maybe HP is more like a cross between Emperor Palpatine, Frazier Krane, and Blackwell? |
And Joe, for once I thank you for the half hearted compliment, and wish you happy holidays also. |
Well, you are wrong. I do know. I've been wrong several times about audio, and admit to the "Mitty" mistake (it's how several instructors and essentially everyone pronounces it, and it's been a while since I've read it). I was discussing Falstaff, and since you don't know it was William Shakespeare's "Henry IV" and additionally one other Shakespeare play where he appears, it is you who is lacking in the knowledge of literature, from where I sit. AND, WHY DO YOU CARE WHAT I SAY TO JOE COHERENT? Are you his mother, or something? Admit it, you have a personal vendetta against me that goes back a long way, having little rational basis, and I want you to get over it. Only a sociopath would not admit that it's time to get past it. And Merry Christmas to you and yours. |
carl, you're even dumber than i thought (a seeming impossibility...but then). it's not "walter middy." it's "walter mitty," as in "the secret life of......" that work was written by james thurber. oh, yeah, it wasn't thurber who penned plays with falstaff as a character; that was a couple of other guys, not to mention the libretists. remember, carl, you were the one who challenged joe_coherent to a game of trivial pursuit on literature. carl, you have shown yet again you know not of what you speak. i think this quite clearly extends to your knowledge of audio. |
It is you who is "once again out of his element"! |
It's not j thurber, and I suggest that you give this up corn, or it is you who will be gone from here. YOU TELL ME WHAT PLAY IT IS, AND WHO WROTE IT....I ALREADY KNOW IT'S NOT THURBER....AND ALSO KNOW THAT FALSTAFF APPEARED IN MORE THAN ONE PLAY. I can name any one you like, so since you are so interested to see me not know something, why don't you tell ME what play? RIGHT NOW! I vividly remember how much I enjoyed it in college, so be so bold as to answer the question....IF YOU KNOW...admit you don't know, and I'll tell you the answer. The first initial of the author is "W". |
carl, you are once again out of your element. what play in which falstaff appears is that upon which you opine. and how does j. thurber's creation become a foil for m. pearson? c'mon, carl, i really want to read your response to this one. |
You don't even know who Flastaff is, since you think Falstaff was pompous. He's the opposite of pompous...I meant something else entirely...that HP is a joke, and lives in his own mind, Like Falstaff. (the pomousness is what makes HP think he can lord it over everybody), which is very unlike Falstaff. Perhaps a better comparison would be to Walter Middy, but then you don't know who he is either, Joe. You might want to take a remedial course in literature sometime. |
Well, for once I confess I actually enjoyed carl_eber's post. Particularly his comparison of HP to Falstaff. He probably deserves that given the pompousness... on the other hand I still find him one of the most enjoyable writers, "uber alles" and "gestalt" notwithstanding. Nobody is perfect. Why, I thought REG's review of the Thiel's 7.2 was rather unfair. Other products get by with a strong recommendation or a Golden Ears award with only a passing mention to their faults. The Thiels are not perfect, but they are still a great product in their price bracket. In my opinion REG exaggerated the speaker's faults. And the assertion that he could have "heard" that the woofer was made of aluminum...give me a break !! There's a nice blind testing opportunity, get REG in a room and ask him to tell you what different cones are made of by the sound of them. In spite of al the respect I have for his opinions, in the case of the Thiel I think he is mistaken. Perhaps this post should have been more "Best reviews of All Time", since that would be enlightening as well. |
Anthony Cordesman. He is the only reviewer that I know of who has a lucrutive "real" job outside of the audio industry. This job does not allow him to get paid for reviewing stereo gear. This gives him the most credibility among the reviewers. (His reviews are well respected, by most of the reviewers that I personaly know, also) |
Yep, I missed Robert Harley in my above post-- he's good, especially for digital. And I miss Corey Greenberg from when he was with Stereophile-- they gave him "room" to be himself. HP is WAAAAAAAY to long winded for me. Craig. |
NICE POST Carl,baby. Outf'nstanding!!! I'm sure I wouldn't know half of how to describe what I hear without the *rags*Some of this techno stuff I've been reading for years seems to have crept inside me.When I'm conversing with my "phile buddys,I feel I have to use it.Did a 3 dedicated line/dedicated ground/completed yesterday.I sure can hear further into the sound stage. I think you can't get all things from one person.While there maybe things you can't get from the one person/ if you're open/ you can get other things from that same person.And we're all standing on the shoulders of our predessors.While most of us can't bring home every thing we'd like to listen to (boy, what an understatement)we have to use these guys(or I have to) So, like them or not, I read them all. Happy Holidays! |
For those who like Robert Harley, I feel that his absolute best review (and I've said so here several times before) is that of the original Wadia 27, back in 1996 at Stereophile. To compare Stereophile back then, to now, is like comparing the original "Jaws", to its sequels. His book is good too, but the screwed up way he refers to "the listener" as "she"....well, that's 1990's political correctness run amock....like my old friend from another thread, the "rabid gorilla". Anyways, the way so many used to lament the "old days of Stereophile, back when JGH was in charge"....well, I'm now lamenting the "old days of the mid 1990's", back when JA owned Stereophile, and defended it to naysayers with "I'll do what I want with MY magazine"; and was revered by most everyone. Nostalgia is a drink best served by the gallon, apparently, but nonetheless seems genuine for me. BTW, as stated above, my fave reviewer is Fremer...followed VERY closely by Harley (who is past his prime...but who isn't?), and then Wes Phillips (has his own site thru onhifi.com).............Harry Pearson is old and pompous, and the reason to read him is if he's reviewing something that nobody else gets to review. He certainly can't hear well enough to make value judgements on anything, IMO, and yet he sees himself as the Zeus of audioland....it's more like Falstaff. Jonathan Valin is very musically inclined, about as much so as Harley is technically inclined (i.e., a lot). Sam Tellig (not his real name, for those of you who truly are wet behind the ears) NEVER tries a product he doesn't like...but then, how many of them do? Not many: Jonathan Scull hated the "Powerstation" filter, but so what? JGH, only cares about making his own symphonic "surround" recordings, and thinks everybody who listens to 2 channel "doesn't know crap". Jonathan Scull is good for a laugh, except when you realize that 2000 is the first year in a long time, WHEN THERE WAS NO STEREOPHILE SHOW...hmmm........................AND THE ABSOLUTE WORST REVIEWER IN THE COSMOS IS THE EDITOR OF AUDIO REVOLUTION.COM, Jerry Colliano. If you want to read a hilariously lame review by a rank amateur, read his Wilson Watt Puppy 6 review at that site. |
For a completely different perspective, one that is not influenced by the amount of advertising dollars paid to his magazine (because he doesn't have one)look up Arthur Salvatore at www.high-endaudio.com Very refreshing and well experienced in audio reviewing. One of the very few people who openly expresses his prejudice's and bias and rational for them.Best of all: it s free. |
Robert Harley seems honest,thorough and unhyped whenever I have had a chance to read something he has reviewed. |
