*** You deceived us by pretending to be someone else, directing our attention to an article and not revealing that you had written it. This deception would lead us to be believe that the opinions stated were not only yours but were also held by others, thereby giving them credibility. This is no different than when a dealer posts a positive review of their own products without identifying themselves as a dealer.
Hm, I never thought in this way. I refer to the article because I though it would give you some education. You have to learn to deal with the subject and with points of the writing not with the extending the respect to the author of the writing. You said: his deception would lead us to be believe that the opinions stated were not only yours but were also held by others, thereby giving them credibility. It was exactly where you come very short, insultingly short, unforgivable short! Who cares how many others people hold my opinion and that would extend any credibility? Come on, are you still object you audio-Zombie inclinations or you wiling to sing me more songs about your personal listening experience? Anyhow, since you self-disqualified yourself I would like to point out (again) that Lamm LP2 was initially designed to address the very specific and very restricted level of audio consciousness I am glad that you found the match
*** Glad to see you took yet another opportunity to bash a piece of equipment that other than your analysis has received glowing praise. Everyone that sits down for a listen in my system raves about how lifelike the vocals are, singer present in the room, etc., etc.
This juts portray your surrounding but it said nothing about the performance of the LP2. Furthermore, reading your singer present in the room it is self-evident that you, audio-wise, still swim in very shallow water. Stay with LP2, it is fine preamp for you. I was not trying to be smart-ass in that last sentence; I was very serious and very positive.
*** Your observation below is so far removed from my experience and that of everyone who has listened to my system that I wholeheartedly agree that we have nothing further to discuss concerning this phono stage. You wrote:Also, the LP2 do has a lot of problems with human voice and particularly with upper region. LP2 converts everything above ~4000-5000Hz into a nonspecific, glycerin dipped (thanks for 417A) tenorsish vaseline In your world it called urgency of human voice. In my world it means the urgency to writhe anything is a review
Well I very stay behind of what I said and if should you behaved I might explain what you might do to distinguish this quality of LP2. However, you said enough for me to make a conclusion that it might be waste of my time. Defiantly the ignorance is blessing
Hm, I never thought in this way. I refer to the article because I though it would give you some education. You have to learn to deal with the subject and with points of the writing not with the extending the respect to the author of the writing. You said: his deception would lead us to be believe that the opinions stated were not only yours but were also held by others, thereby giving them credibility. It was exactly where you come very short, insultingly short, unforgivable short! Who cares how many others people hold my opinion and that would extend any credibility? Come on, are you still object you audio-Zombie inclinations or you wiling to sing me more songs about your personal listening experience? Anyhow, since you self-disqualified yourself I would like to point out (again) that Lamm LP2 was initially designed to address the very specific and very restricted level of audio consciousness I am glad that you found the match
*** Glad to see you took yet another opportunity to bash a piece of equipment that other than your analysis has received glowing praise. Everyone that sits down for a listen in my system raves about how lifelike the vocals are, singer present in the room, etc., etc.
This juts portray your surrounding but it said nothing about the performance of the LP2. Furthermore, reading your singer present in the room it is self-evident that you, audio-wise, still swim in very shallow water. Stay with LP2, it is fine preamp for you. I was not trying to be smart-ass in that last sentence; I was very serious and very positive.
*** Your observation below is so far removed from my experience and that of everyone who has listened to my system that I wholeheartedly agree that we have nothing further to discuss concerning this phono stage. You wrote:Also, the LP2 do has a lot of problems with human voice and particularly with upper region. LP2 converts everything above ~4000-5000Hz into a nonspecific, glycerin dipped (thanks for 417A) tenorsish vaseline In your world it called urgency of human voice. In my world it means the urgency to writhe anything is a review
Well I very stay behind of what I said and if should you behaved I might explain what you might do to distinguish this quality of LP2. However, you said enough for me to make a conclusion that it might be waste of my time. Defiantly the ignorance is blessing