increase transparency for philips sacd 1000

This exchange between Sean and Infinity audio { IA } has been good for all audiogone members. Integrity is all we have between us and a disregard for that is treason in our circles. IA is having a good time with this but I see a deeper problem. These threads and exchanges are learning tools for the average audio enthusiast . Many people turn to people like Sean for leadership because it is obvious if you have followed his extensive , altruistic responses ; he takes great pains to help people he will never know. Sean probably insulted IA to provoke a response so this exchange could occur. Bravo Sean. He backs his reasoning with facts and well supported opinions that any seasoned audiophile is familiar with. I follow this because I too am interested in becoming more intelligent and responsible in this interesting field we all love and obsess over. Sean uncovered an all too familiar issue of speaking before thinking and it is an embarassment to IA I feel sure. We all should however swallow pride from time to time and IA , its your turn. We all embrace arguments in that growth results from the dissection of two divergent points of view . That is the essence of intelligent sparring but Sean is eating your lunch. Fess up IA , you need to do your homework and think twice before putting on the gloves when your saftey pins have undone.

I will cut mine and save, yet I agree some of Sean's points and at the mean time I disagree some. As all you say, I am just trying to share my review with you all; wells...

For I to say about the unit, itls MSRP is $1599 and its suppose to be treated like a $1000 class player, not a $400.00 player, anyhow, it's a SUPER DEAL that for $399, but for reference redbook purposes there are posibly many many strong competitors in this range (1K class).

Fluance is my HT speakers (since my kids like to turn the knob all the way), my main speaker is a DIY Focal Kit that many expert in Malaysian International AudioClub put together for me in a nice Ebony finish.

Brainwater: It was not my intention to take the route that i ended up travelling. While i would have preferred to sit back and enjoy the day and not been forced to play the part of "hard-nosed bastard", i received more than a few emails inquiring to the validity of IA's comments. While anyone that has followed all of the various SACD 1000 threads that are currently open would have been familiar with IA's inconsistencies, some folks simply don't read every thread related to similar topics.

Rather than respond to a few dozen emails individually, i decided to confront the situation "head on" and try to clear the air. In order to do that, those that have not followed all the various threads would need to be brought up to speed as to where both IA, myself and several other individuals were coming from.

By tying the various SACD 1000 threads into one and providing various links, i had hoped to make it easy for others to better see & understand how we arrived at this point. In doing so, i probably went "slightly" overboard. My main goals were to help others to fully comprehend the inconsistent comments that have been posted by IA regarding this specific product. There were other points of conflict that also came into play, but i had wasted enough time and energy as it was. I think that i made my point, probably in both a large and cruel fashion, but i did what i thought needed to be done. Judging by IA's previous responses, i still don't think that he sees his posts and attitudes as being inconsistent.

If we have learned anything from this turn of events, it should be that it takes no talent or consistency to post comments on the internet and stir things up. As such, one should take their time and fully digest the comments that one reads AND makes while considering the source of information. For that matter, my comments are no better than any one else's and i hope that everyone here realizes that. That is why i presented the evidence that i did via the links that i posted. I left it up to the reader to decide for themselves how credible IA's statements were.

As to me, the only thing that i have going for me is that i "try" to be both honest and consistent and do the best that i can. IA basically attacked me and several others that had reported "positive" results with the SACD 1000. He even went so far as to infer that there was some type of conspiracy taking place. Hopefully, those that are concerned will recognize this and take it into consideration when reading my posts / point of view.

As to Glai, i apologize for sidetracking / ruining your thread. I would only add that you might want to do a search of the archives regarding the SACD 1000 and look for others that are using this machine. From there, you can email them directly or ask them publicly as to their thoughts on what works best. I had hoped that we could share information as a community regarding this product but it appears that this is not to be.

IA: As to your additional comments regarding your Focal based DIY speakers, i see no mention of these within the system that you posted on Agon. You also stated that this was being used in your "second system", which i took to mean your HT system. On top of that, the SACD 1000 is a multi-channel device, making it a logical HT component. Since you have the Fluance speakers listed as your HT mains, putting 2 + 2 together did equal 4. I also thought it pertinent that you considered the quality of these $269 towers to be "excellent" as a rather telling factor to those that might not have known what your personal preference in sonics / equipment consist of.

To top all of this off, in another SACD 1000 related thread, you stated that you were using B&W's with the Philips. As such, you've only further confused me and added to the lack of credibility in what you've posted. I can understand owning multiple speakers and systems, but the manner that you've presented various bits of information make it hard to follow along and / or swallow. Sean
>