In article
<473424370.706046369.930681.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>,
Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <kckml8F2ve2U2@mid.individual.net>,
> > Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
> >
> > To think that you've either got no interest in audio or are hearing
> > impaired.

> Who isn‘t at our age? ;-)

:-). Oh agreed.

Yet recently I've discovered I can still hear a difference between
DACs, in fact I couldn't find two that sounded the same.

Bob.

On 18/05/2023 09:32, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>
>>
>> Having said that modern materials make even cheap speakers sound as
>> good as the 'greats' from yesteryear.
>
> **You reckon? Find me a speaker that sounds as good (accurate) as a pair
> of Quad ESL57s or ESL63s and I will take notice.
Compromise dear boy. No bass and precious little output power.

Until then, you know
> where you can stick your modern speakers. FWIW: Apart from my ESL63s, my
> moving coil speakers are now celebrating their 30th birthday.

Mine are over 40 years old. Mostly.

--
“It is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of
intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on
intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is
futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into,
we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every
criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a
power-directed system of thought.”
Sir Roger Scruton

In article <u43d1t$3vm3n$1@dont-email.me>,
Fredxx <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote:
> On 17/05/2023 20:48, Bob Latham wrote:

[Snip]

> > Compared to what?

> My hearing isn't that precise,

Same here.

> but these do me and a lot of other people just fine:

I'm sure that's true.

> https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/move

Oh. You would have to pick Sonos !! :-).

> Please explain why these are more suited to someone who has no
> interest in audio or is hearing impaired?

I don't have your speakers but I do have two Play5s in the house.

They're OK for background listening, compact and for many just fine.
However, they're mono not stereo unless you get two in the same room.
I've not heard of anyone doing that but I'm aware that you can. But
in honesty they don't get close to our mini system let alone the main
hi-fi for sound quality or detail or stereo image.

The mini system is a Denon RCD-N9 and a pair pair of Q acoustic
speakers. Sorry but it's better than Play 5s.

I'm not criticising when I say if you were "into" hifi you would know
that. As you're not into it, nothing I say will convince you only
listening to a modern hifi system might but I wouldn't recommend
that. You're happy with what you have, stick with it.

Forgive the rant but you mentioned Sonos....

The reason I smiled at you picking Sonos is I admit because they are
a pet hate of mine. Not because of their sound quality but mainly
because of their forced firmware upgrade policy. For that reason
alone I wouldn't recommend them to anyone.

Sonos force software/firmware updates on their customers by shutting
down functionality of your devices until you update. Crucially, you
cannot re-index your music library or make changes to network
settings etc. all this is removed without warning several times per
year. My hi-fi streamer doesn't do that. It informs me of an upgrade
and lets me decide.

You may say big deal, so what. Well it all goes pair shaped if you
purchased something like an iPad to control the Sonos devices. When
you update Sonos it frequently also updates the control point
software on the iPad. Then Sonos insist that the iPad operating
system is the latest version. All fine unless your iPad is a few
years old and Apple provide no more updates. You are then stuffed.

(Just in case you're thinking of it I'll mention that I'm aware of
"sonopad" and it's peculiarities.)

From having a gully working system one day to a crippled one the next
without warning or choice AND the only way out is buy a new control
device or a new iPad at £500 or so. That's why I hate Sonos.

I also wouldn't choose them because they use SMB connections to a NAS
and not UPnP from a server which means each device has it's own index
and not the common one on the server. Finally because they will not
play hi-res audio and most other streaming devices do these days.

Bob.

On Wed, 17 May 2023 12:21:18 +0100, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
wrote:

>On Wed, 17 May 2023 10:16:48 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote:
>
>> Now what is so special then? They were never that price when new.
>> Is this a case of money for old rope if you can make something
>> look authentic?
>
>It's what's called a cult-following. Lots of stuff about these on
>t'internet e.g.
>https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/falcon-acoustics-bbc-ls35a/
>the Wiki article is good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LS3/5A
>
>If you have a pair, sell them for the best money you can get. As you
>get older your hearing won't be up to needing the best hifi anyway.

They were never designed to be Hi Fi. They were monitor speakers and
designed to emphasize the kind of errors that sound engineers were
prone to. I would not use these as domestic speakers.

d

On 17 May 2023 20:38:02 GMT, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

>On 17 May 2023 at 20:02:00 BST, "Adrian Caspersz" <email@here.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 17/05/2023 13:27, Tim Streater wrote:
>>> On 17 May 2023 at 13:01:21 BST, "Adrian Caspersz" <email@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bluetooth speakers mainly. Streaming.
>>>
>>> What's streaming or bluetooth got to do with the sound quality that the
>>> speaker will generate? You can use bluetooth or streaming to supply audio to a
>>> tin box but it won't sound very good.
>>>
>>
>> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
>
>A combination of decent speakers with a quality amp is going to be rare in
>such a device, which is why one might stick to separate speakers, separate
>amp.
>
>Although I suppose it's possible someone might do a proper job, but not much
>change out of £5k I wouldn't have thought.

I have a bluetooth dongle that plugs into my Hi Fi (speakers by Sonus
Faber and Adire). It sounds very nice.

d

On 18 May 2023 at 10:53:17 BST, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

> They're OK for background listening, compact and for many just fine.
> However, they're mono not stereo unless you get two in the same room.
> I've not heard of anyone doing that but I'm aware that you can. But
> in honesty they don't get close to our mini system let alone the main
> hi-fi for sound quality or detail or stereo image.

Quite.

[snip]

> Sonos force software/firmware updates on their customers by shutting
> down functionality of your devices until you update. Crucially, you
> cannot re-index your music library or make changes to network
> settings etc. all this is removed without warning several times per
> year. My hi-fi streamer doesn't do that. It informs me of an upgrade
> and lets me decide.

My separates never do this to me.

> You may say big deal, so what. Well it all goes pair shaped if you

pear-shaped

> purchased something like an iPad to control the Sonos devices. When
> you update Sonos it frequently also updates the control point
> software on the iPad. Then Sonos insist that the iPad operating
> system is the latest version. All fine unless your iPad is a few
> years old and Apple provide no more updates. You are then stuffed.
>
> (Just in case you're thinking of it I'll mention that I'm aware of
> "sonopad" and its peculiarities.)
>
> From having a fully working system one day to a crippled one the next
> without warning or choice AND the only way out is buy a new control
> device or a new iPad at £500 or so. That's why I hate Sonos.

A good reason for eschewing all this bollocks. Same with smart phones really.

--
"... you must remember that if you're trying to propagate a creed of poverty, gentleness and tolerance, you need a very rich, powerful, authoritarian organisation to do it." - Vice-Pope Eric

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Having said that modern materials make even cheap speakers
> sound as good as the 'greats' from yesteryear.

Although I might consider it perfectly plausible that modern materials
*can* allow one to make cheap speakers sound comparable to the 'greats'
of yesteryear; I have bought several inexpensive cd/radio/speaker audio
appliances which would, I believe, demonstrate to just about anyone
that your claim is not true.

#Paul

On 17/05/2023 21:22, Fredxx wrote:
> On 17/05/2023 20:48, Bob Latham wrote:
>> In article <kckml8F2ve2U2@mid.individual.net>,
>>     Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
>>
>> To think that you've either got no interest in audio or are hearing
>> impaired.
>>
>>> Some sound OK,
>>
>> Compared to what?
>
> My hearing isn't that precise, but these do me and a lot of other people
> just fine:
>   https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/move
>
> Please explain why these are more suited to someone who has no interest
> in audio or is hearing impaired?
>

Before lockdown I paid a visit to John Lewis and there was a
Sonos rep in the store.

I asked him how a single unit could reproduce a proper stereo
image. His reply was that there were two speakers in it, a woofer
and a tweeter.

On 17/05/2023 21:39, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 17 May 2023 at 21:22:21 BST, "Fredxx" <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 17/05/2023 20:48, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> In article <kckml8F2ve2U2@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
>>>
>>> To think that you've either got no interest in audio or are hearing
>>> impaired.
>>>
>>>> Some sound OK,
>>>
>>> Compared to what?
>>
>> My hearing isn't that precise, but these do me and a lot of other people
>> just fine:
>> https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/move
>>
>> Please explain why these are more suited to someone who has no interest
>> in audio or is hearing impaired?
>
> Going to be junk at that price. You'd be much better off with decent
> headphones.
>
+1

In article <u45pca$bbo1$1@dont-email.me>, Andrew <Andrew97d@btinternet.com>
wrote:
> On 17/05/2023 21:22, Fredxx wrote:
> > On 17/05/2023 20:48, Bob Latham wrote:
> >> In article <kckml8F2ve2U2@mid.individual.net>, Adrian Caspersz
> >> <email@here.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
> >>
> >> To think that you've either got no interest in audio or are hearing
> >> impaired.
> >>
> >>> Some sound OK,
> >>
> >> Compared to what?
> >
> > My hearing isn't that precise, but these do me and a lot of other
> > people just fine: https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/move
> >
> > Please explain why these are more suited to someone who has no interest
> > in audio or is hearing impaired?
> >

> Before lockdown I paid a visit to John Lewis and there was a Sonos rep in
> the store.

> I asked him how a single unit could reproduce a proper stereo image. His
> reply was that there were two speakers in it, a woofer and a tweeter.

Similar reasoning to the people with a stereo record player who thought it
was equipped with speakers to feed two separate rooms,

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
> On 18 May 2023 at 10:53:17 BST, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

>> From having a fully working system one day to a crippled one the next
>> without warning or choice AND the only way out is buy a new control
>> device or a new iPad at £500 or so. That's why I hate Sonos.
>
> A good reason for eschewing all this bollocks. Same with smart phones really.
>

Ha! Gotta love luddites who haven’t a clue about smart phones.

Today I was out in the middle of nowhere listening to a bird (unseen)
singing it’s heart out. Whipped out my phone and within seconds my phone
had identified the bird from its song and provided me with a picture.

Try doing that with a dumb phone.

Any who says that smart phones are bollocks might as well dismiss the
internet, digital cameras, and all manner of mind bogglingly useful apps
that are well nigh indispensable these days.

Yes, I *could* live without them, but I wouldn’t want to live such an
impoverished life.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 18 May 2023 at 19:04:58 BST, "Andrew" <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 17/05/2023 21:22, Fredxx wrote:
>> On 17/05/2023 20:48, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> In article <kckml8F2ve2U2@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
>>>
>>> To think that you've either got no interest in audio or are hearing
>>> impaired.
>>>
>>>> Some sound OK,
>>>
>>> Compared to what?
>>
>> My hearing isn't that precise, but these do me and a lot of other people
>> just fine:
>> https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/move
>>
>> Please explain why these are more suited to someone who has no interest
>> in audio or is hearing impaired?
>>
>
> Before lockdown I paid a visit to John Lewis and there was a
> Sonos rep in the store.
>
> I asked him how a single unit could reproduce a proper stereo
> image. His reply was that there were two speakers in it, a woofer
> and a tweeter.

You don't expect a rep who knows how many beans make five for £399.

--
"People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc

On 18 May 2023 at 21:04:07 BST, "Tim+" <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:

> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 18 May 2023 at 10:53:17 BST, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> From having a fully working system one day to a crippled one the next
>>> without warning or choice AND the only way out is buy a new control
>>> device or a new iPad at £500 or so. That's why I hate Sonos.
>>
>> A good reason for eschewing all this bollocks. Same with smart phones really.
>>
>
> Ha! Gotta love luddites who haven’t a clue about smart phones.
>
> Today I was out in the middle of nowhere listening to a bird (unseen)
> singing it’s heart out.

OTOH I know that your apostrophe is superfluous.

> Whipped out my phone and within seconds my phone
> had identified the bird from its song and provided me with a picture.
>
> Try doing that with a dumb phone.
>
> Any who says that smart phones are bollocks might as well dismiss the
> internet, digital cameras, and all manner of mind bogglingly useful apps
> that are well nigh indispensable these days.

None of these have anything to do with smart phones.

My life is not controlled by apps.

Some of us were already using the Internet back in the 80s.

--
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network.

-- Tim Berners-Lee

On 18/05/2023 7:06 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 18/05/2023 09:32, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Having said that modern materials make even cheap speakers sound as
>>> good as the 'greats' from yesteryear.
>>
>> **You reckon? Find me a speaker that sounds as good (accurate) as a
>> pair of Quad ESL57s or ESL63s and I will take notice.
> Compromise dear boy. No bass and precious little output power.

**Not quite true. Sure, the ESL57 cannot deliver significant SPLs, but
the sound quality, when used within their limits, is sublime. The ESL63
is entirely adequate for most listeners, most of the time. Bass is
fabulously clean, which makes most listeners think they don't deliver
much bass. The Quad ESL63 exhibits a usefully flat response down to 30Hz.

>
> Until then, you know
>> where you can stick your modern speakers. FWIW: Apart from my ESL63s,
>> my moving coil speakers are now celebrating their 30th birthday.
>
> Mine are over 40 years old. Mostly.

**There you go.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Fri, 19 May 2023 07:12:35 +1000, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
wrote:

> On 18 May 2023 at 21:04:07 BST, "Tim+" <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 18 May 2023 at 10:53:17 BST, "Bob Latham"
>>> <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> From having a fully working system one day to a crippled one the next
>>>> without warning or choice AND the only way out is buy a new control
>>>> device or a new iPad at £500 or so. That's why I hate Sonos.
>>>
>>> A good reason for eschewing all this bollocks. Same with smart phones
>>> really.
>>>
>>
>> Ha! Gotta love luddites who haven’t a clue about smart phones..
>>
>> Today I was out in the middle of nowhere listening to a bird (unseen)
>> singing it’s heart out.
>
> OTOH I know that your apostrophe is superfluous.
>
>> Whipped out my phone and within seconds my phone
>> had identified the bird from its song and provided me with a picture.
>>
>> Try doing that with a dumb phone.
>>
>> Any who says that smart phones are bollocks might as well dismiss the
>> internet, digital cameras, and all manner of mind bogglingly useful apps
>> that are well nigh indispensable these days.
>
> None of these have anything to do with smart phones.
>
> My life is not controlled by apps.

Neither is mine. It is however made much more convenient.

> Some of us were already using the Internet back in the 80s.

But not wherever you happened to be when out and about.

On 18 May 2023 at 19:04:58 BST, Andrew wrote:

> On 17/05/2023 21:22, Fredxx wrote:
>> On 17/05/2023 20:48, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> In article <kckml8F2ve2U2@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A bluetooth speaker is a popular current replacement for a Hifi.
>>>
>>> To think that you've either got no interest in audio or are hearing
>>> impaired.
>>>
>>>> Some sound OK,
>>>
>>> Compared to what?
>>
>> My hearing isn't that precise, but these do me and a lot of other people
>> just fine:
>> https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/move
>>
>> Please explain why these are more suited to someone who has no interest
>> in audio or is hearing impaired?
>>

I've a Sonos One and an Ikea table lamp with a Sonos speaker built in. Both
are good for what they are, and give decent easy to access sound. Although it
helps that I've got an Alexa account and Spotify.

While I still appreciate my 'proper' hifi I use smart speakers more often
nowadays. Not sure why - just seem to get me to what I want to listen to at a
quality I find perfectly good.

>
> Before lockdown I paid a visit to John Lewis and there was a
> Sonos rep in the store.
>
> I asked him how a single unit could reproduce a proper stereo
> image. His reply was that there were two speakers in it, a woofer
> and a tweeter.

Unusual IME - I find the JL sales staff to be pretty knowledgeable.
--
Cheers, Rob, Sheffield UK

On Thu 18/05/2023 23:37, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 18/05/2023 7:06 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 18/05/2023 09:32, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Having said that modern materials make even cheap speakers sound as
>>>> good as the 'greats' from yesteryear.
>>>
>>> **You reckon? Find me a speaker that sounds as good (accurate) as a
>>> pair of Quad ESL57s or ESL63s and I will take notice.
>> Compromise dear boy. No bass and precious little output power.
>
> **Not quite true. Sure, the ESL57 cannot deliver significant SPLs, but
> the sound quality, when used within their limits, is sublime. The ESL63
> is entirely adequate for most listeners, most of the time. Bass is
> fabulously clean, which makes most listeners think they don't deliver
> much bass. The Quad ESL63 exhibits a usefully flat response down to 30Hz.
>
>>
>> Until then, you know
>>> where you can stick your modern speakers. FWIW: Apart from my ESL63s,
>>> my moving coil speakers are now celebrating their 30th birthday.
>>
>> Mine are over 40 years old. Mostly.
>
> **There you go.
>
>

I was lucky enough to be present when Peter Walker and his wife did a
demonstration of the ESL63 at the Harrogate Hi-fi Show around 1980. Even
in a ballroom(?) their ability to produce sound levels and project sound
was amazing.

I have lived in Harrogate since 1990 - about 5 years after the hi-fi
shows ceased!

On 19 May 2023 at 02:10:32 BST, "ken" <klop@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Some of us were already using the Internet back in the 80s.
>
> But not wherever you happened to be when out and about.

When I'm out and about, I want to enjoy the out and about. That's what it's
for.

--
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."

James Nicoll, rasfw

In article <u478td$jurm$1@dont-email.me>,
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> I was lucky enough to be present when Peter Walker and his wife did
> a demonstration of the ESL63 at the Harrogate Hi-fi Show around
> 1980. Even in a ballroom(?) their ability to produce sound levels
> and project sound was amazing.

> I have lived in Harrogate since 1990 - about 5 years after the
> hi-fi shows ceased!

Was that called the Festival of sound by any chance?

I went to a Hi-Fi show in Harrogate around that time but can't be
sure of the exact year. It's a long way from Stourbridge and my wife
and I had intended to stay overnight.

I'm sure Quad, Kef, SME were there but my most memorable thing from
the day was that there was a 'big band' playing in the theatre. It
was great but I remember thinking - my father keeps telling me my
music is loud and so was the music of his era.

We found we completed the show quicker than expected and went into
town were we found a branch of Comet. I purchased a new SME arm from
there, the one you can unplug the whole arm tube from the bearings.

We then decided to drive home without staying. The furthest I've ever
driven in a day.

Bob.

On Fri 19/05/2023 09:11, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <u478td$jurm$1@dont-email.me>,
> Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> I was lucky enough to be present when Peter Walker and his wife did
>> a demonstration of the ESL63 at the Harrogate Hi-fi Show around
>> 1980. Even in a ballroom(?) their ability to produce sound levels
>> and project sound was amazing.
>
>> I have lived in Harrogate since 1990 - about 5 years after the
>> hi-fi shows ceased!
>
> Was that called the Festival of sound by any chance?
>
> I went to a Hi-Fi show in Harrogate around that time but can't be
> sure of the exact year. It's a long way from Stourbridge and my wife
> and I had intended to stay overnight.
>
> I'm sure Quad, Kef, SME were there but my most memorable thing from
> the day was that there was a 'big band' playing in the theatre. It
> was great but I remember thinking - my father keeps telling me my
> music is loud and so was the music of his era.
>
> We found we completed the show quicker than expected and went into
> town were we found a branch of Comet. I purchased a new SME arm from
> there, the one you can unplug the whole arm tube from the bearings.
>
> We then decided to drive home without staying. The furthest I've ever
> driven in a day.
>

Can't remember what the show was called but it was spread across several
hotels. I do remember that Quad were at the Majestic.
Per the big band - I remember walking along a corridor on the top floor
at the Old Swan Hotel (remember, Agatha Christie disappearance etc?) and
could here a band playing which sounded like Grimethorpe Colliery Band
to my ears. I walked into the Ballroom and wow, what a sound - coming
from a pair of the largest sized Philips Motional Feedback speakers!!

In article <u3u0rh$34s68$1@dont-email.me>, mm0fmf <none@invalid.com>
scribeth thus
>On 15/05/2023 20:18, Woody wrote:
>> On Mon 15/05/2023 17:24, Andrew wrote:
>>> 2,349 UK pounds for a pair of LS3/5A
>>> 4,099 for a pair of LS5/9's
>>>
>>> https://www.whathifi.com/news/musical-fidelity-unveils-two-new-loudspeakers-
>based-on-the-bbcs-original-designs
>>>
>>
>>
>> A pair of LS3/5A started on eBay last week at something like £9.99. They
>> went in the end for well in excess of £1700!!!
>
>Mate from Uni made some (1985?) from Wilmslow Audio driver/crossover
>kits. He was very good at woodwork so the cases were beautiful. They
>sounded rather good especially when you consider how tiny the bass
>driver is in them.
>
>

I almost had a production line going here many years ago, don't know
where most of them are nowadays, but we did make some variants like a
sound bar for a TV it was very good that one!.

Only ones here these days are kosher Rogers ones!...
--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On Fri, 19 May 2023 17:50:16 +1000, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
wrote:

> On 19 May 2023 at 02:10:32 BST, "ken" <klop@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Some of us were already using the Internet back in the 80s.
>>
>> But not wherever you happened to be when out and about.
>
> When I'm out and about, I want to enjoy the out and about. That's what
> it's
> for.

And it can be more conveniently enjoyed when you can look
something up using your smartphone when you show up at
something you plan to enjoy and find that is currently closed,
access isnt currently available etc.

And not all out and abouts are about enjoyment, they can be
for work, access to something you need, or even a medical
appointment with significant time twiddling your thumbs
waiting to be seen etc. Handy to be able read an ebook on
your phone instead of just staring into space etc.

Trevor Wilson wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
------------------------------------------------
>
>>> Having said that modern materials make even cheap speakers sound as
> >>> good as the 'greats' from yesteryear.
> >>

* Does "greats" mean speakers like the AR3a or JBL L-100s?

> >> **You reckon? Find me a speaker that sounds as good (accurate) as a
> >> pair of Quad ESL57s or ESL63s and I will take notice.
>
> > Compromise dear boy. No bass and precious little output power.

** Too blatantly silly to deserve any reply.

> **Not quite true. Sure, the ESL57 cannot deliver significant SPLs,

* How ambiguous. Does your "significant" = ear shattering?

The ESL57 is *speced* as delivering 100dB SPL at 2 m on axis, using a pair increases this to 106dB for in-phase signals

https://www.dadaelectronics.eu/uploads/downloads/05_Other-Quad-Documents/Quad-ESL57-Brochure-1978.pdf

> the sound quality, when used within their limits, is sublime. The ESL63
> is entirely adequate for most listeners, most of the time.

* So is the ESL57.

> Bass is fabulously clean, which makes most listeners think they don't deliver
> much bass.

* What Quad ESL speakers DON'T do is support room bass resonances the way box speakers do.
Bass freak audiophoools like to site them next to walls and corners and exaggerate the effect too.

..... Phil

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------
>>
> >> Amplifiers are now at the point where they are more or less 'perfect'
> >

* That happened decades ago.

>
> Quad 303 was relative junk actually.

** Too absurd to deserve a reply.

> Had a lot of crossover distortion especially at HF.

* Horse poo.
The mid band THD of the 303 hovers around 0.003%, even near full power.
No sign of x-over spikes at all levels.
Measured it myself many times.

> Today even the class D's will beat a Quad 303

* Not many of them.

....... Phil

On 18/05/2023 21:04, Tim+ wrote:
> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 18 May 2023 at 10:53:17 BST, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> From having a fully working system one day to a crippled one the next
>>> without warning or choice AND the only way out is buy a new control
>>> device or a new iPad at £500 or so. That's why I hate Sonos.
>>
>> A good reason for eschewing all this bollocks. Same with smart phones really.
>>
>
> Ha! Gotta love luddites who haven’t a clue about smart phones.
>
> Today I was out in the middle of nowhere listening to a bird (unseen)
> singing it’s heart out. Whipped out my phone and within seconds my phone
> had identified the bird from its song and provided me with a picture.
>
> Try doing that with a dumb phone.
>
Try doing that where the mobile signal is rather poor though.

There are still plenty of not-spots and you also need to have
downloaded the app beforehand and know how to use it.

> Any who says that smart phones are bollocks might as well dismiss the
> internet, digital cameras, and all manner of mind bogglingly useful apps
> that are well nigh indispensable these days.
>
> Yes, I *could* live without them, but I wouldn’t want to live such an
> impoverished life.
>
> Tim
>

There are such things as books, and plenty related to birds, insects
and other stuff.