Starting off this issue with a humorous note: I had gone to a Web site to get some information on a particular audio related measuring system to use in conjunction with my PC. As with many, many Web sites the Web master of this site (who was also the owner of the business, father of the product, and a graduate engineer; EE I assume) took me to task for stating the truth about his site. The truth was that the site was a typical Nerdy type presentation that was long on details and short on information. When I go to purchase something I want to know if it will accomplish a certain task. I don't need all of the details; those are best saved for the instruction manual. Anyway...

I had sent off an e-mail asking for information and made note of the fact that the Web site left a bit to be desired. I received a reply back that was dripping with sarcasm and told me to go elsewhere for my purchase. Okay, I can live with that. But what is hilarious (at least I think it's hilarious) is this individual used five paragraphs comprised of 496 words to tell me this. It shouldn't have taken more than nine words. e.g., "I do not like your manner. Please go elsewhere." I don't doubt this dude's technical prowess; there's no doubt that he knows his stuff, and I'd be willing to bet he has a fine product. But his reply was further proof that he thinks (excruciating painful) details are more important than concise and informative. I tried to make my point with a return reply of nine words. They were: "Sorry I offended. I appreciate your time and effort." I'd be willing to bet he still doesn't get it and never will.

I am not a member of the Home Theater sound is inherently awful club. In fact the Home Theater sound is the wave of the future. What I am not is a movie fan. I only wish there could be good 5.1 sound devoted exclusively to the listening experience. Probably one of the reasons Home Theater sound gets a bum rap is the exorbitantly high levels of bass boost dialed in by the users. Added to this are users dialing in sound pressure levels exceeding those of a air raid siren (at two feet away) and the result is something never heard in a real life. Yes, the sound may be awful, but it's a result of abusing the technology (including the recording process) and not a problem with the technology.

On another humorous note: A guy from Montana kept blowing a very expensive set of speakers. Customer service kept replacing or repairing the speakers at no cost until they asked the right question. The speakers were located on the guy's porch; he listened to them while chopping wood in the back yard and had the volume all the way up!! Humorous and true. Honest.

I find this difficult to write but I can no longer ignore the publishing schedule (what publishing schedule?) of The Audio Critic. As this is being written it is now 17 months and 7 days since I received the last copy (issue No. 24). Considering the masthead says it's a quarterly publication there is something wrong here. This kind of treatment of the subscribers is unpardonable. As the old saying goes, Peter Aczel should shit or get off the pot. I suspect that there is more to this erratic publishing schedule than meets the eye. I only wish the man would be truthful about this intolerable mistreatment of his subscribers and those who really believed in this guy and have defended him against the tweak press. I was one of those who defended him... I would now vote yes for an impeachment hearing if he doesn't resign.

Please note my review of the Sunfire tube preamp and the article on visiting LP land. I started out life as an audiophile with tube equipment and LP's. I was never a happy camper, even owning some of the best equipment and recordings for the time. Time eventually proved me correct. But...tubes are fine if used in low power applications (preamp) and over the years the LP and phono cartridge technology have improved. No, I am not throwing away my CD player, but I do realize that there's a lot of material out there that will never be transferred to CD. For this reason I have resurrected my analog front end. And there's a wonderful nostalgia trip back to my early loves every time I place an LP on the turntable and hear the old familiar snap, crackle, and pop.

Staying on the "when I was a young audiophile" theme.... In 1950 we got our first TV set. It wasn't too long after that I took the TV audio signal (just after the detector and before the built-in amplifier and) and routed it through my preamp! The result was great sound even if though there was probably an slight impedance mismatch between the detector output and the preamp input. I was the neighborhood Tom Edisoniak! Not only did I pioneer Home Theater sound but I also used a very rough form of double-blind testing to prove that my inexpensive Heathkit amplifier was as good as a Fischer or H. H. Scott, both of which cost more than $100! No, I didn't pioneer Home Theater sound or double-blind testing. But always take with a grain of salt a claim that only one individual was responsible for a particular invention, concept, or theory. Even the great Einstein followed in the footsteps of James Clark Maxwell, whose equations Einstein built upon. And keep in mind that Maxwell completed his work in 1864....during our Civil War! Considering that Maxwell did his work when candles and oil lamps were state-of-the art-art illumination is indicative of a genius greater than Einstein's.