That is just awesome Ron. I think she will look great in your listening room but I hope she doesn’t get lost against the dark wood paneling.
Ron's Speaker, Turntable, Power and Room Treatment Upgrades
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
That is exactly what I am hoping for. If not a pointing finger, I hope at least for the sound of swirling/swishing air directly above the impending problem.
I think like in the twilight zone, if you look very closely you might be able to perceive a very slight smile on her countenance when everything is working.
I owned a vpi tnt 4 and hated to have to put air in the feet all the time and I sold it because of this.the pulleys we’re also noisy.not a good design.
With those inflatable feet/pods I never was confident that they were properly leveled. I agree with you that it was not a great design.
If he'd let her out of that bag sooner, she mighta pointed at the cracked pipe or maybe the pipe wouldna cracked - godesses can be fickle when kept in a bag for that long. Maybe shoulda gotten a river goddess too.
Ron, I'd be cautious about this in your audio room. That looks a phoenix in front of her. Those things get ignited by the sun. One of the problems you haven't had yet.
That might just be LA smog.
I am concerned that a river goddess might attract water to the house.
Thank you for this heat ignition warning, Tim. I will be sure to keep her out of the sun!
I originally wrote that "I don't think we have smog here anymore." But it turns out that science reports claim that a heat wave in the valleys during the Summer raised the ozone level. So I guess there is still some smog.
We are up the mountain, at about 960 feet above sea level. It usually seems pretty clear up here. With driving and economic activity radically reduced during the middle of last year, I think the air then was as clear as I have ever seen it here at the house.
Since here we covered some zagat and michelin discussion a while back, I found this excerpt on Michelin
Confessions of a Michelin Inspector - Luxeat
Gaining a Michelin star, or three, isn’t simply a mark of excellence, it means your restaurant status goes automatically from a great choice to a must. We had the great pleasure to speak to Chris Watson, ex-Michelin Guide inspector, about the complexity of this rating system, the weight of...
www.luxeat.com
"One star restaurant versus no star restaurant, you know one star restaurant carefully uses produce, that should be seasonal. It’s not about sustainability (that is a different topic), it’s about what is the best available locally. Being in London you can of course, use Scottish langoustine. In London, for a pseudo-French style restaurant, I don’t think it would be appropriate to use a Japanese fish. But simply put, it’s expected in Japanese restaurants in London to use Japanese fish.
Two stars is a step up, you are looking for more complexity in a dish. You’re looking for sometimes multiple ingredients, or techniques that are very difficult to do: make something that is incredibly complex, but that looks incredibly simple. Taste and balance. I look at the difference between the sauce of a one-star dish and the sauce of a two star dish. Nothing is ever written in stone. When you or I go for dinner, the difference between a one-star dish and two-star dish, when you look at it, you can look at the plate and say wow! At one star you don’t necessarily say that. Secondly, saucewise, when you taste the sauce at a one star, it should be deep, clearly identified taste, good flavour, umami. In a two star dish, it should have multilayers, you should be tasting different components, there should be an aftertaste, which was not there in perhaps the one star dish. It is a little difficult to answer. In short, it should be a more complex dish.
Three stars, for me… I still travel a lot and eat at two or three star restaurants on a regular basis. For me, three stars is all about consistency. Of course, getting three stars for a simple rustic pub – no, they are not gonna do that. It’s the grand class, Crillon, Tour d’Argent, Bocuse, Hotel de Paris,… I don’t think rustic pubs are ready to get three stars. But then again, you look at the French guide, issued very recently, there is Alexandre Mazzia, that is a good example. There is always an exception, I think you always have to look to a guide, which has to evolve, like the first vegan star… They have to keep up to date, the green award, the green star… I think they are recognizing sustainability, they have to keep pace, at the end of the day there is a huge population of vegans and vegetarians. Now all serious restaurants offer vegetarian menus, before, if you are a vegetarian, you would be happy to get an omelette. So I think the whole world is changing and a Guide must adapt to the trends.
The challenge is getting a third star. Between one and two is very easy to identify from a diner’s perspective, in my opinion. Where there are much more complex dishes, a much more elevated experience, more complicated, more depth. It’s all about cooking. The difference between two stars and three stars, for me, is about consistency, for most, menus themselves don’t change very much. If you look at the restaurants who are awarded three stars it’s all about consistency, between two and three stars. It’s faultless, absolutely faultless, all the time."
Last edited:
For insight into the fourth star, I found this book to be extremely interesting and entertaining (especially since I was living in Midtown Manhattan at the time and enjoying top-rated restaurants, and my next-door neighbor was a lighting designer for and a personal friend of Daniel Boulud):
Within every fine restaurant there exist two worlds: the elegant, hushed environment of the dining room and the chaotic, explosive, high- tension scene behind the swinging kitchen doors. The ability to create dishes that are utterly sublime and turn them out at breakneck pace while simultaneously juggling kitchen crises, coddling demanding patrons, and managing overworked staff is what defines a four-star chef.
In The Fourth Star, award-winning author Leslie Brenner goes inside those swinging doors to explore the realities behind Daniel, capturing the dramas that arise in the insular, high-pressure milieu of a world-class kitchen. New York’s food establishment had been stunned when Daniel Boulud’s newly opened flagship restaurant was awarded only three stars from the New York Times. From that moment on, it became Boulud’s unspoken mission to regain the four-star rating that he’d previously garnered during his tenure at Le Cirque and then at his own first restaurant. That he was striving to do all this on an unprecedented scale, turning out nearly four hundred meals in a few short hours of service—meals that had to be absolutely perfect every time—made this goal all the more ambitious.
Brenner paints a portrait of a remarkable French chef at a pivotal moment of his career, as Boulud relentlessly drives his staff to the peak of excellence.
The Fourth Star provides full access to every aspect of Daniel, investigating everything from the maître d’s table assignment policies to the internecine politics of advancing up the culinary ladder.
Within every fine restaurant there exist two worlds: the elegant, hushed environment of the dining room and the chaotic, explosive, high- tension scene behind the swinging kitchen doors. The ability to create dishes that are utterly sublime and turn them out at breakneck pace while simultaneously juggling kitchen crises, coddling demanding patrons, and managing overworked staff is what defines a four-star chef.
In The Fourth Star, award-winning author Leslie Brenner goes inside those swinging doors to explore the realities behind Daniel, capturing the dramas that arise in the insular, high-pressure milieu of a world-class kitchen. New York’s food establishment had been stunned when Daniel Boulud’s newly opened flagship restaurant was awarded only three stars from the New York Times. From that moment on, it became Boulud’s unspoken mission to regain the four-star rating that he’d previously garnered during his tenure at Le Cirque and then at his own first restaurant. That he was striving to do all this on an unprecedented scale, turning out nearly four hundred meals in a few short hours of service—meals that had to be absolutely perfect every time—made this goal all the more ambitious.
Brenner paints a portrait of a remarkable French chef at a pivotal moment of his career, as Boulud relentlessly drives his staff to the peak of excellence.
The Fourth Star provides full access to every aspect of Daniel, investigating everything from the maître d’s table assignment policies to the internecine politics of advancing up the culinary ladder.
I got to see this first hand at a Michelin Star restaurant in France (Le Atelier du Painter). We got the Chef’s table that was essentially in the kitchen. We saw the whole production behind the scenes. When a dish was served the Chef would come over and explain his culinary creations. It was not all Gordon Ramsay explosive but there were teams working different aspects and those overlapped a fair bit from what I could discern. Great fun!
I have come to the view that the Grado Epoch3 is not likely to be a good compliance match for the air-bearing, linear-tracking Bergmann Odin.
My ZYX UNIverse Premium is definitely going on the SME 3012R. But to use the Grado Epoch3 I would have to get a Reed 5T instead of the Odin.
My ZYX UNIverse Premium is definitely going on the SME 3012R. But to use the Grado Epoch3 I would have to get a Reed 5T instead of the Odin.
Ron, how are things progressing with your listening room. I can't be the only person that is curious.
Something that, unfortunately, intrinsically does not apply to stereo sound reproduction.
Something that, unfortunately, intrinsically does not apply to stereo sound reproduction.
Fransisco, Here you have just answered my lingering question about whether you view the glass as half full or half empty.
No, Peter, it is not a question of perspective at all, it is simply a question of statistical analysis of a system that is not able to reproduce a fac simile of reality and does not aim at it. We can never have the 100% consistency referred in Bonzo post in stereo.
On PeterA's Natural Sound thread Morricab posted: "Believability is a good term . . ."
I did not want to contribute further to polluting Peter's thread by discussing there general audio philosophy topics not directly relevant to Peter's system.
I am picking up Brad's comment here because I think believability is a good term. It is a one word version of "suspension of disbelief" which I think is a very good concept. I think "suspension of disbelief" bakes into a singular conclusion one's personal subjective sonic preferences and sonic sensitivities and sonic priorities.
In my personal case, with my musical genre emphasis on vocals, my opinion about systems and sound -- applying my sonic preferences and sensitivities -- often boils down to the question: "How much do I believe that this sounds like a live person is singing in front of me?" When comparing components I often ask myself: "Which of these components makes me believe more easily that a live person is singing in front of me?"
I did not want to contribute further to polluting Peter's thread by discussing there general audio philosophy topics not directly relevant to Peter's system.
I am picking up Brad's comment here because I think believability is a good term. It is a one word version of "suspension of disbelief" which I think is a very good concept. I think "suspension of disbelief" bakes into a singular conclusion one's personal subjective sonic preferences and sonic sensitivities and sonic priorities.
In my personal case, with my musical genre emphasis on vocals, my opinion about systems and sound -- applying my sonic preferences and sensitivities -- often boils down to the question: "How much do I believe that this sounds like a live person is singing in front of me?" When comparing components I often ask myself: "Which of these components makes me believe more easily that a live person is singing in front of me?"
Last edited:
Similar threads
