DarTZeel Preamp

OB, the manual was written for the original version of the amp and not for version 'B'. if you read my first post in this thread; it describes the reason for the required breakin. when the importer ordered a large amount of these amps at once; the manufacturer did not have the facility to burn them in in a timely way. So the importer accepted the responsibility to tell the customers about that. also, version 'B' has the auto DC compensation circut that is also not mentioned in the manual.

it is curious that Mr. Fritz's review doesn't say one tiny word about breakin, and then in an e-mail i asked him directly about break-in and in his response he ingnored my question. now Frank tells us it was broken in for 5 weeks.....and still no word about the DC compensation.

either he followed the importer's instructions fully or he did not. i guess each person will have to judge for themselves what happened.

i posted this same message last night as a response to Frank's post but it was blocked by the moderator. why? i don't know. there was nothing inflamitory about that post or any others of mine in this thread.

Gentlemen

I don't know what to believe any more

Mike

I am still in the dark as to what "delicacy, liquidity and palpability" mean in describing this unit.

Just when it appears Mr. Tinn that your posts cannot get any more illogical - you outdo yourself yet again.

First, lets look at the FACTS about this thread:

1. The ORIGINAL poster, Ubglub, asked a specific question about experiences with the DarZeel PREAMP (NOT the amplifier).

2. Hooper, NOT me, originally led the post astray by taking the opportunity, in response to a specific post about the Dart PREAMP, to bring up Jeff's review of the AMPLIFIER and called it "utterly ridiculous"! (why he felt he needed to do that when the question was about the PREamp - I could not figure out).

3. So, knowing Hooper is a nice guy, I simply asked Hooper why he claimed Jeff's review was "utterly ridiculous" and in his next post he claimed it was because, in his reasoning, Jeff was "irresponsible" by mismatching the Dart to the Wilsons claiming it wasn't powerful enough to drive the Wilsons.

4. I challenged Hooper's claim that the Dart was not powerful enough to drive the Wilsons. In FACT, JTinn himself later acknowledged the Dart WAS powerful enough to drive the Wilsons - thus giving credence to my challenge of Andy's reasoning in calling Jeff "irresponsible" and his review "utterly ridiculous." GO BACK AND READ MY AND HOOPERS DIALOGUE! AT THIS POINT THE INTERACTION WAS CIVIL, PLEASANT AND WE WERE HAVING NO PROBLEMS. REMEMBER, I DID NOT DO ANYTHING BUT CHALLENGE A CLAIM THAT MY FELLOW COLLEAGUE WAS "IRRESPONSIBLE" AND THAT HIS OPINION WAS "UTTERLY RIDICULOUS." HOOPER AND I WERE FINE AT THAT POINT AND DONE WITH THE INTERACTION AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE END OF IT.

5. Enter Mr. Tinn and his completely unprofessional post calling Jeff and Marc biased and Jeff "slimy" and "an out and out liar" and "unprofessional" and then condemning Soundstage. SO EVERYONE, ASK YOURSELF THIS: IF HOOPER AND I WERE DONE AND EVERYTHING WAS CIVIL PRIOR TO THAT POINT, WHEN DID ALL THAT CHANGE AND WHO HIJACKED THE THREAD???

IN ADDITION, ASK YOURSELF WHO HAS BEEN UNPROFESSIONAL, WHO HAS SOMETHING TO GAIN FROM INSULTING THE DARTZEEL REVIEW IN SOUNDSTAGE AND WHO HAS DONE THE NAME CALLING?

I stuck to the facts of the thread, to Jtinn's actual language from the thread and to the Owner's Manual from his product to show where the real bias was and who had the real agenda. People responded to challenge Jtinn and his close friend Mike LaVigne even said he did NOT agree with JTinn's categorization of Jeff and Marc or their motives and that JTinn made "assinine assertions!" If his good friend even thought his bashing of Marc and Jeff was wrong and his assertions assinine, then either my challenge to Mr. Tinn's post was justifed or I guess then Mike TOO has an agenda to destroy Mr. Tinn.

However, here is Mr. Tinn claiming I hijacked the thread and that HE is the victim. LOL!! Ya gotta love Mr. Tinn's logic!

In closing, Mr. Tinn, may I suggest that if you are going to commit something to writing in a thread (and unjustifiably insult and defame a reveiwer and a magazine) or carry a product with an Owner's Manual that contradicts your claims, you may want to think twice before you post and know your product a little better since all I have done is point out what you and the Manual have said. Period!

"IN ADDITION, ASK YOURSELF WHO HAS BEEN UNPROFESSIONAL, WHO HAS SOMETHING TO GAIN FROM INSULTING...."

JTinn be insulting...? Nah, couldn't be...

Just do a search...this thread ain't an isolated incident.

Pointing out a paragraph in an owners manual as proof that there is no break in required, could be seen as a cover story by Jeff Fritz to justify his lack of effort in doing the review properly.
The truth will be hear when ... was the owners manual provided with the amp physically, or was it looked at after the review by download as Jtinn suggests?