I have an old B&O stereo (w/turntable) and speakers.Any suggestions
on how to find it a new home?
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

On Monday, June 8, 2015 at 9:50:57 AM UTC-5, Kurt Ullman wrote:
I have an old B&O stereo (w/turntable) and speakers.Any suggestions
on how to find it a new home?
--

Craigslist

eBay

Classified ads

[8~{} Uncle Used Monster

On 6/8/2015 9:50 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
I have an old B&O stereo (w/turntable) and speakers.Any suggestions
on how to find it a new home?


Craigslist would be my first bet, with Ebay a close second depending on
the size of the unit and hassle with shipping.

If you're near a large Metro area, Ebay would still be contender and you
could specify local pickup only.

On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 10:50:52 -0400, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

I have an old B&O stereo (w/turntable) and speakers.Any suggestions
on how to find it a new home?

Yard Sale

Charity donation - Goodwill, etc. (get receipt for tax deduction)

In article ,
Unquestionably Confused wrote:

On 6/8/2015 9:50 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
I have an old B&O stereo (w/turntable) and speakers.Any suggestions
on how to find it a new home?



I don't like the idea of CL since this a big system and I don't want
random people coming to my house.

Craigslist would be my first bet, with Ebay a close second depending on
the size of the unit and hassle with shipping.

If you're near a large Metro area, Ebay would still be contender and you
could specify local pickup only.

I live in Indy which certainly qualifies. I might try that. I do have
the original boxes.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

In article ,
Oren wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 10:50:52 -0400, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

I have an old B&O stereo (w/turntable) and speakers.Any suggestions
on how to find it a new home?

Yard Sale

Nothing else to sell and I want to get rid of it pretty soon.

Charity donation - Goodwill, etc. (get receipt for tax deduction)

The unit worth north of $500 as far as I can tell from what ebay sales,
etc., I can find. I'd certainly prefer to try and sell it first.
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein

On 6/8/2015 12:00 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote:


If you're near a large Metro area, Ebay would still be contender and you
could specify local pickup only.

I live in Indy which certainly qualifies. I might try that. I do have
the original boxes.


Original boxes probably adds a hundred bucks to the value.

"Robert Green" writes:
Turntables produce better quality audio,

Using what _objective_ criteria? What does "better" mean? How do
you measure it?

On Tue, 9 Jun 2015 12:39:20 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message

stuff snipped

Did you use Monster Cables? I remember a test by Stero Review some
years ago. They did a test on speaker cables using lamp cord and Monster
Cable. You can probably guess at the results.

That's easy. Lamp cord produces brighter sound. (-:

I still have my turntable and play it once in a while to remember how
jarring it is to listen to the beginning of a very soft classical and hear
"thwip, thwip, thwip." Turntables produce better quality audio, but only
for a very short time unless you handle your LP's with surgical gloves in a
clean room. Even that won't totally work just because every time a diamond
needle lands on a soft vinyl surface, it will leave a mark. One that you

My turntable uses genuine steel needles, guaranteed to play 10 records.

can both see and hear. A CD can take an incredible amount of mishandling
before you can hear it on playback. Plus, I've only seen one turntable
design in my life that can skip tracks (designed by the guys who eventually
went on to create X10 home automation). Both my CD and MP3 players can do
that with ease.

I found the real world experience of CDs to be so much better,
convenience-wise, that I replaced virtually all my LPs with CDs where I
could find them. Some day I will convert the rest of my LP collection to
MP3. Someday.

Sum Ting-Wong wrote:
On 6/8/2015 6:38 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:

I've gone through thrift stores and seen wonderful old audio gear
that kids tore the hell out of after it was put on the shelf. A
turntable might last a half a day before some little brat tears the
tone arm off of it. 8-(

Good lord, this is 2015. Who in their right mind would ever buy a
turntable when they could have an MP3 player? Do they still drive a
horse and buggy to work?

You obviously don't appreciate the finer things in life .

--
Snag

Scott Lurndal wrote:
"Robert Green" writes:
Turntables produce better quality audio,

Using what _objective_ criteria? What does "better" mean? How do
you measure it?

Better is in the ear of the beholder . And it ain't objective , but
subjective . I can hear the difference ...

--
Snag

"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
...
"Robert Green" writes:
Turntables produce better quality audio,

Using what _objective_ criteria? What does "better" mean? How do
you measure it?

Listening to music is a very subjective experience. While it's quite
possible to speak of it in scientific terms of compression, dynamic range,
etc. the final arbiter of "better or worse" is in the ear of the listener.
Obviously people are spending increasing amounts of $ on LPs and turntables
and justify that spending because they perceive a better listening
experience.

My early comparisons were with high-end analog gear, a fairly early version
of a Sony CD player and ears that were not yet suffering from HF hearing
loss. I noticed quite a difference in the sound of very quite passages like
the beginning of Beethoven's Ninth. Would I notice a difference now?
Probably not because ADC-DAC's have gone through tremendous improvements and
my hearing has degraded.

However, even if I COULD still detect a difference, I would opt for CDs or
an MP3 player because of the convenience of having every recording I own
able to fit on a TF card that's smaller than a postage stamp.

Even in the old days I would be more likely to listen to cassettes with
their markedly inferior performance because of the ease of listening. On
cassettes, listening to the Ninth would almost certainly reveal
print-through on the tape where you could hear an upcoming loud passage
playing faintly over the current quiet one.

The biggest difference these days, and why I would NOT choose LPs over
CDs/MP3s is that LPs are born to die. They degrade with each play as the
diamond needle rides over the vinyl, dust settles into the grooves,
fingerprints begin to appear, etc. On the other hand, I've had very badly
scraped up CD's play without incident. And, of course, you can copy digital
music without flaw to the target. You can sort, filter, create playlists
and do all sorts of things well beyond the capacity of LPs.

I won't go further into the CD-VINYL debate but anyone caring to read up can
try:

https://londonjazzcollector.wordpres...s/cd-or-vinyl/

http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)

http://www.wired.com/2015/03/hot-stampers/

To ensure the best sound quality, some boutique companies that press heavy
vinyl today limit their stampers to 1,000 pressings. In contrast, during the
peak of the vinyl boom, major labels churned out as many as 10,000 copies on
a single stamper. It's preferable to have a record pressed early in a
production run, before the metal exhibits signs of wear, rather than toward
the end, right before a fresh stamper is slapped on. . . Scott Hull, a
recording engineer who owns Masterdisk, one of the world's premier mastering
facilities, compares producing a vinyl record to making wine. "Each pressing
of the grape, and each pressing of the disc, is unique," Hull says.
"Hundreds of subtle things contribute to each pressing being different.
Everything matters, from plating the lacquers to various molding issues to
the quality of the vinyl pellets."

So if the great debate interests you, there are credible claims for both
sides:

http://www.npr.org/2012/02/10/146697...than-cd-or-not

says: "Well, first of all, when CD first came out, a lot of the CDs that
were released were actually recordings made for vinyl. And those master
tapes, rather than remastering, they just made them into CDs. So a lot of
the, you know, objectionable sounds of CD was actually because the record
companies didn't bother to remaster these old recordings. And this is
something that I learned from Phil Ramone, who admitted this that, you know,
there was a reason why these bad CDs first sounded bad, but it had nothing
to do with the medium. And it was the actual recordings.

--
Bobby G.

On 06/11/2015 04:11 AM, Robert Green wrote:

[snip]

My early comparisons were with high-end analog gear, a fairly early version
of a Sony CD player and ears that were not yet suffering from HF hearing
loss. I noticed quite a difference in the sound of very quite passages like
the beginning of Beethoven's Ninth.

My father listened to classical music a lot (it seemed like 30 hours a
day), mostly opera. He listened to a weak FM station and I could hear
the constant hiss. He said he didn't hear any. Sometimes "HF hearing
loss" is a good thing.

BTW, the applause after one of those operas (live broadcast from New
York) sounded just like the hiss, not like clapping at all.

[snip]


--

BTW, your sig delimiter is wrong. It should be dash-dash-space on a line
by itself.

Bobby G.







--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"It is my deliberate opinion that the one essential requisite of human
welfare in all ways is scientific knowledge of human nature." [Harriet
Martineau]

"Mark Lloyd" wrote in message
...
On 06/11/2015 04:11 AM, Robert Green wrote:

[snip]

My early comparisons were with high-end analog gear, a fairly early
version
of a Sony CD player and ears that were not yet suffering from HF hearing
loss. I noticed quite a difference in the sound of very quite passages
like
the beginning of Beethoven's Ninth.

My father listened to classical music a lot (it seemed like 30 hours a
day), mostly opera. He listened to a weak FM station and I could hear
the constant hiss. He said he didn't hear any. Sometimes "HF hearing
loss" is a good thing.

Same thing with my dad. He really had bad hearing loss from his Navy years.
Towards the end I had to buy special smoke alarms and telephone ringers that
operated within a range he can hear.

BTW, the applause after one of those operas (live broadcast from New
York) sounded just like the hiss, not like clapping at all.

After reading through a number of CD v. Vinyl sites it's clear that
mastering and original recording has a tremendous impact on sound quality
and that it's different for each listened. If the standard were simply "is
it as true to life as the original" then (well-implemented) CD technology
will win. But it's not that simple and some people are passionate about the
difference in sound quality. It reminds me of the Parthenon. Not built to
right angles but built with deliberate distortion so that the effect when
viewed from the ideal angle was that it was perfectly square.

The kinds of optical refinements that we detect in the architecture of the
Parthenon were far older than the fifth century. In the sixth century, in
what we call the Archaic period, entasis can be far more exaggerated than it
is on the Parthenon. But the Parthenon brings all these various refinements
together in a particularly harmonious and integrated way. The steps curve
upward, the columns tilt inward, the metopes tilt outward, the columns
swell, the corner columns of the building are slightly thicker than the
other columns of the building. All of these refinements are combined
masterfully.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient...parthenon.html

[snip]


--

BTW, your sig delimiter is wrong. It should be dash-dash-space on a line
by itself.

By god, you're right. Who would use a trailing space like that? It's even
dumber than using 1 and L's and 0 and O's in serial numbers. I've used that
SIG for a long, long time and don't recall anyone noticing before or at
least my not noticing that they noticed. Thanks.

Despite the stupidity of using a trailing space, I will attempt to comply
with what seems to be a fairly confused set of rules and suggestions
concerning sig delimiters. Here's one search sample.
=================================================
a.. Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
.... Son of RFC 1036 has no authority. ... Son of RFC 1036 is the *de-facto*
article format standard. ... of the signature standard, i.e. the 'sig-dash'
delimiter, and *not* to ...
(news.software.readers)
a.. Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
.... it's also in the GNKSA (Good Net-Keeping ... Son of RFC 1036 has no
authority. ... Son of RFC 1036 is the *de-facto* article format standard.
....
(news.software.readers)
a.. Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
.... Son of RFC 1036 has no authority. ... in the 'upcoming' USEFOR standard.
.... of the signature standard, i.e. the 'sig-dash' delimiter, and *not* to
.... If there were an alt.long-sigs newsgroup, ...
(news.software.readers)
a.. Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
.... The GNKSA is a valuable resource ... when choosing a newsreader. ... Son
of RFC 1036 is, in some places, *wrong*. ... that Son of RFC 1036 is the
de-facto article format standard, ...
(news.software.readers)
a.. Announcing XSig - Xnews Companion
.... it's also in the GNKSA (Good Net-Keeping ... Son of RFC 1036 has no
authority. ... Son of RFC 1036 is the *de-facto* article format standard. ..

=================================================

Who sets a standard where a critical character is invisible? Is it one
trailing blank or twenty? Who could tell by simple inspection?

--
Bobby G.

On 06/12/2015 12:27 AM, Robert Green wrote:

[snip]

Who sets a standard where a critical character is invisible? Is it one
trailing blank or twenty? Who could tell by simple inspection?


I think it (the sig delimiter) is supposed to be something you're
unlikely to type as part of the message.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The Devil...clutched hold of the miserable young man...and flew off
with him through the ceiling, since which time nothing has been heard of
[him]." [Martin Luther]