Jump to content

Kal Rubinson

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Kal Rubinson

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. By the company's "FOUNDER // INDUSTRIALIST-PROPAGANDIST?" Do not recall.
  2. Really? My experience with them is limited but I did hear them at an audio show. While listening, I was trying to figure out how to tell the demonstrator that the sound of the recording was strikingly different from how I have heard it on my own and several other systems. When the music stopped, however, another listener stepped up and what I had been thinking. When challenged by the assertion that this is the way it should sound, he responded that he had worked at the sound board for those recording sessions. Hmmm.
  3. One? Ooops. I wrote what follows the stuff about my main system before I reflected on the context of the question. In the system where I use my prepro, there are several ways to do this but all include a MacMini running BootCamp/Win7, Jriver Media Center and DiracLive. It accesses files located on QNAP NAS drives via wired LAN. It can be connected to the power amps:I 1. Via HDMI directly to the Marantz prepro. 2. Via UPnP to the Marantz. 3. Via USB to a multichannel DAC which feeds the multichannel analog inputs of the Marantz. 4. Via USB to a multichannel DAC which connects directly to the power amps. If I choose this option, I have a multichannel balanced signal switch to choose between the outputs from the Marantz and those from the DACs. Basically (in the other system): 1. File storage on a hierarchy of QNAP NAS drives connected to wired LAN. 2. PC-based (Baetis Prodigy-X) server running Jriver Media Center and DiracLive and connected to wired LAN. 3. exaSound e38 Mk. II DAC with balanced XLR output and connected to server by USB. (Alternative is connection from server via LAN and exaSound Sigma Streamer.) 4. Audio Research MP1 6 channel analog preamp with balanced XLR in/outs. (Several alternatives to this including a direct balanced XLR connections from DAC to power amps.) See above. Whew.
  4. There are many threads on that topic but, not so strangely, some of the same speakers in this thread appear in them.
  5. What's that saying? Children should be seen but not heard. Not that I subscribe to that...............................
  6. Agreed. There have been many instances in which I got one impression from the press release and a contrasting one in person.
  7. Ah. Not modern but a mix of traditional and conservative/contemporary.
  8. Lots of other stuff. What is your point?
  9. Well, the sound could have biased my opinion of the appearance. 😜
  10. Just as I found many speakers in the "most beautiful" thread to be unappealing or outright ugly, here's one in the "ugly or angry" through that was comfortable and appealing when in my own room. De gustibus........
  11. I doubt it. AFAIK, the reason that Cozart/Fine made three channel recordings is that they did not believe that they could make an acceptable mono release from the stereo pair and, at the time, the mono LP releases were what they had based their success on. So, the center microphone was, in fact, the same single Living Presence mono channel they had always used. The stereo pair were separate. The three-channel remasterings were really re-mixes from the fortuitous availability of the three tracks.
  • Create New...