Search results

I am still waiting for a screen larger than 34" that looks as good as my HD tube. Plasma and LCD are getting closer, but still have a long way to go yet.

Being a compulsive upgrader myself, I sympathize completely. My current 2-channel setup sounds so good that I am not sure if anything I could buy would make a significant improvement to my ears. In spite of this, I will undoubtably buy something new the next time I have some money built up...

Thanks guys. Your responses are helping keep the upgraditis demon at bay for now. As I said, I am happy with the sound, but always think "maybe it could be even better!" Since I recently got new speakers that I like a lot (Boston VR2s), and since I really don't believe that CD players make any...

I have lost track of how many DVDs I own. I am sure that it is well over 1,000.:)

One thing is certain: I will not invest in either format until the matter has been decided once and for all, and neither will 90% of the buying public. Nobody wants to spend their hard-earned money on the next Beta or Laserdisc.

1) No cell phones. 2) No screaming babies. 3) Nobody saying "what just happened?" every 30 seconds. 4) I can drink beer. 5) I can pause the movie for RR breaks (refer to item 4. :D) 6) Much better sound. 7) When it is over, I am already at home instead of having to drive home. 8) If it is a bad...

The whole concept of a movie based on a toy commercial (masquerading as a TV show) never appealed to me.

Suppose I am shooting a home video in the yard, and a car goes by with a loud stereo. Do I have to pay royalties on whatever song they were playing? Sure, that is an extreme example, but who decides where we do draw the line?

I have read a couple of "off-the-cuff" remarks that single-drawer players (CD or DVD) perform better than changers. Is there any truth in this? If so, why?:confused:

Then I would ask you why it would cost you more not to get it, which is obviously what you wanted me to ask.:rolleyes: (I would also feel sad thinking what a nice system you could get for that same money.)

The ones I have heard were "that" bad. A pair of really cheap bookshelves (Athena B1) utterly blew my brother's 301s away.

My integrated amp (a Carver CM-1090) is considered a classic. It still sounds good to me, but it is 15 years old. Has amplifier technology advanced so much in the meantime that I am missing something by not having a newer unit? Also, how long can I expect this one to keep working?

You mean that listening to your first one was not sufficient to convince you that they totally suck?:confused:

I am looking forward to watching it when it comes out on DVD. (I don't go to theaters any more. I greatly prefer my HT.)

I absolutely loved it. As visually intriguing as Waking Life, and with a better story. Of course, it helps that I have always been a big P.K. Richard fan. (I had to enter the name as "Richard" because the idiotic auto-censor edited out the proper name ****!:eek:)

Ok, so it has great bass. Now, how was the movie?:rolleyes:

Being a Star Trek movie is sufficient for me to want to see it.

Pretty much any floorstanders from a reputable brand in that price range will blow the Bose out of the water. My Boston VR2s are $800/pr MSRP (I got them on sale), and destroy anything at any price by Bose.

So turn it down. Problem solved.:) (FWIW my typical volume setting is between -25 and -29 db.)

I watch a movie because of the movie. If it also happens to have great bass, that is a bonus rather than a reason for choosing it.