AngusThermopyle

You're right, I've noticed those TT's for sale at those stores. The downside is that they're junk and as such just won't give you a good listening experience. A good table is worth every penny. For instance at FS they sell a Denon TT for about $300, while it is better than the others they offer its still junk. For the same price you can get into a table by Pro-Ject that is far superior and will give excellent performance. If USB is a must have they also make a great USB equipped table and also a USB equipped phono stage. Honestly, I can't adequately describe just how sublime the sound of good vynil playing on a good table is. you have to hear it to believe it. Of course the rest of the system plays a major role in that sound as well. On Friday I picked up my new NAD T748 receiver and was most impressed by the jump in sound quality. It feature an analogue bypass so I can disable the digital processing for my TT and tape deck. Thats another thing, it has an actual tape loop so now I can hook up my Braun Atellier C1 casette deck properly. Its far and away superior to the Denon I had ( the Denon now belongs to the GF). As for digital, well I have a Panasonic Blue Ray, its okay but I'm thinking of buying a modified Marantz SACD player, its used and costs $650 but new it was a $1300 unit and has been modified with upgraded DAC's and Kimber Kable throughout. The mods alone cost over $1200 so actually it really is quite a steal. This player does a fine job with digital so I will continue to buy CD's but my first love is vynil. So I spread the gospel of vynil whenever and wherever I can.

Granted that BD does sound good I still prefer the sound of Vynil. Having said that I do have some pretty damn good recordings on BD though. When it comes to specs they can be a bit misleading, the ultimate test of any audio gear is the listening test. Many times I've heard equipement with the same or very similar specs yet one will sound better than the other. Is this purely subjective? I can't really answer that so I just depend on my ears and what sounds good to them. Yesterday we went to the 400 Flea Market and I picked up ZZ Top Live in Texas and the new Kate Bush 50 Words For Snow Both are heavy Vynil (180 gr) and both sound exceptionally good, especially the Kate Bush. If you guys think the NAD Masters series look good you should check out the new stuff from Luxman, beautifull gear. Sadly though it'll cost about $17,000 to get into a nice integrated amp. Thats too rich for my blood. This is why I like the Roksan stuff, it sounds very good and an integrated runs about $1700 or so, much more reasonable. Still, every time I go into All That Jazz I can't help ogling the beautifull Mastersound integrated tube amp he has for sale, at $4700 ogling is all I'll be doing. Yes Bill large drivers will push a lot of air but I've heard plenty of speakers that use smaller drivers and sound exceptional for instance the Revolvers I mentioned, beautifull sound. Generally Canadian made speakers like Paradigm, Axiom, Mirage etc are very good, another one is Totem, really nice stuff. Of course as with most things the sky really is the limit with audio, for instance if you are so inclined you can spend around $300,000 for a pair of Goldmund speakers. Not being that wealthy I have to limit myself in my expenditures, oh well, we should give thanks for what we have I suppose. For those of you who may be interested this is a great site. Its sort of like a Kijjiji for audio nuts. Good Site For Audio The forums are pretty good as well and a lot of good info is availlable for those with questions.

Some good points on speakers Bill, thats why I bought my Klipsch as mains, they stand about 4' tall and are about 18" deep. They utilize twin 6 1/4" drivers with a Tatrix horn for highs in each enclosure and each is twin port vented (rear fireing). If you know Klipsch you know they've always used horns for the highs and are quite articulate as well as having an ability to really pound for long periods of time. In short, they're good enough for now. On the other hand I'm going to buy a pair of PSB Alphas for the girlfriends system, these are a small speaker but have a sound far beyond their physical size. Since her system will be in the kitchen they should be fine, eventually she'll inherit my Velodyne sub to go with them. For myself, well when I pick up the new NAD I'll also grab a pair of PSB B5's for the rears and the JBL Pro monitors will be relegated to side channel duty as its a 7.1 receiver. When it comes to power sources I can't say enough about the NAD, compared to other offerings it really is very good. I've compared it to most including Harmon Kardon and it far outshines them as far as musicality goes. As for power, well its an NAD, need I say more? The problem with modern receivers is that they must be a Jack of all Trades. As such the pure reproduction of 2 channel musical sources quite often suffers. NAD have managed to maintain very nice reproduction quality while also doing all the other stuff. I've been a Hi-Fi junkie for most of my life, really, I love this stuff. At the end of the day though it comes down to Vynil for me, just love that sound when played on a decent system.

That depends, Rega can be very pricey gear so my old TT was a used one that I picked up for the bargain basement price of $600, a very good price since new it would have run me around $1400. My new Pro-Ject has been receiving rave reviews with reviewers comparing it favourably to tables costing three or four times as much. After listening to it for a while I have to agree with them. The TT comes with an Ortophon OM10 Red cartridge and costs $500, add another $200 for the phono pre amp and total cost is about $700, not bad at all considering the sound quality. Now I can't wait to get my new NAD receiver and see how it sounds with that. Eventually I'll have two systems, one HT and one stereo for purely musical listening duties. I'm thinking something like a Roksan CD and integrated amp coupled with the Pro-Ject and a pair of Revolver speakers for the audio system. That'll have to wait a little while though since the Roksan components come to $3500 and the Revolvers are about $3000 a pair. I'm kinda wondering how the girlfriend will react when she finds out there'll be a total of two systems with nine speakers and a sub in the living room, should be interesting to say the least.

This is something I've heard more than once before. Yet whenever I let people hear my system playing vinyl they all comment on the difference in sound quality between the vinyl and digital. Overwhelmingly they prefer the good old turntable to the CD. Not that I'm running a good old turntable, I had a Rega, a very good TT but have just very recently replaced it with a new Pro-Ject RPM 1.3 Genie coupled with the matching Phono Box II TT amp. Here's a picture of it, definately not A TT for the DJ scratcher croud, this is Audiophile grade. I Love This TT It sounds absolutely sublime. For Christmas the girlfriend picked up a new copy of Dark Side Of The Moon for me on 180gr Rhino Vinyl half speed mastered from the original pressing, fantastic sound quality. In January my receiver is going on the hit list and I'll be replacing it with the NAD T748, once again I'm sure I'll see a jump in sound quality. I really don't buy very many CD's for me its vinyl all the way, I'd say I buy about 20 albums for every CD I buy. Sure, most of the vinyl I get is used but if properly cared for it has an amazing shelf life. My main source is a store called All That Jazz in Cookstown, he wont sell used vinyl unless its in great condition. So I probably will miss CD but in a way its a moot point as I'm sure there'll be plenty of used CD sales going on anyway.

Well personally I'm not into electronic although I have owned a few electronic albums in the past (Kraftwork, Are we Not Men). However I do believe you've left one of the biggest off your list, Tangerine Dream, these guys have been around forever and if I recall correctly they released the first all digital album. One should also keep Jeanne Michele Jarre in mind (I think thats the correct spelling of his name, I may be wrong though).

Just read the PDF file I recommended guys, it outlines all the events in complete form, its really all you need. If you are interested in knowing what actually happened that is. Hey Charter, didn;t you recently acuse smallc of telling lies because he couldn't provide a cite or proof for what he was saying? Thats right, you did exactly that. So how about some proof from you? Or are you up to your actuall time worn tactics of just making things up again? Oh, right, thats exactly what you are doing again. You're a real piece of work aren't you. First you say there was only one "Warrior" then you post a link showing you to be the one who is telling lies, thats hilarious actually. Then when I show a picture showing two of them you back pedal and make ludicrous and childish claims of pants pissing. Do you really not see just how retarded you make yourself look? I'm sure just about everyone here does even if you don't. This is why I generally don't bother with you anymore, you're so full of it you aren't even worth wasting any time on.

Two In This Shot As you can see clearly in this shot there is indeed another "Warrior". In the complete shot there are three. Yes Bryan they did keep walking away and finally when they realized they couldn't get to him they walked away completely. For those who want to know the facts surrounding Oka and not just the propaganda there is a very thoroughdocument available, its in PDF form so I can't post it but if you do a google search using "Canadian Forces Mandate At Oka" it will be the first link that comes up. Its a lengthy read but well worth it for any who are truly interested in the facts of this matter. It clearly shows that no use of excessive force was authorized for the CF and non was used. Further it shows that the CF performed admirably and gives dates and locations when the Warriors were compelled to abandon barricades and move back into an increasingly smaller area. As I said, a lengthy document but very well worth the read.

You must be too young to remember Oka when it happened Cybercoma. The picture you posted has been cropped to remove the two other Natives who were there. The three of them did their best to intimidate the single young guy in the picture, he was at a post isolated from his fellow soldiers, this is why they chose him. Nevertheless the young guy did not let them intimidate him, he maintained his post and didn't even flinch in the face of these tactics. I've noticed that when people post this picture they don't post the complete picture showing the three Native guys, then, rather than commenting on how this young man could'nt be phazed by the three others they make some innacurate comment such as wetting his pants. Ask anyone who is old enough to remember seeing this on the news, they'll tell you the same. As for Millitary vs Natives at Oka. The mandate was to act as a buffer, to keep the Quebec cops away from The Natives. Their mandate did not include conflict or combat with the Natives, any who claim otherwise are simply lying, this is a matter of public record and easily verified. Could that be a reason they did not engage the Natives? Ya think?

Well Oleg as per usual you've managed to post a bunch of words that are about as usefull as a box of dental floss at a Willie Nelson concert. Well done.

What a misinformed post. Over my life time I've owned quite a few dogs, never had one that would eat shit though, maybe you starve your animals so they have no choice. My smallest Cecillia (she only weighs about 65 lbs) is excellent at catching mice, rats moles etc, she's part Chocolate Lab part Pit Bull so she's very fast and extremelly smart. We have a cat as well as our three dogs. Yes we also love our cat but old Elmo is actually very old so he's not good for much except laying around and coming to be petted once in a while. As for utility, dogs are far more usefull. How are those service cats doing, or those search and rescue cats, what about those sheep/herding cats? As for biting, I've never been bitten by a dog but I have been bitten by more than one cat.

BC is correct when he states this. From a personal perspective I had my ID stolen, now I have no health care coverage, of course the answer is simple right? Just get new ID. Well that itself is not so simple. I've been trying for over a year and a half now. The system is set up in a sort of circular snake swallowing its tale kind of way. Its a sort of "to issue you this we need to see that" kind of thing. Having recieved citizenship when I was about seventeen I do not have any of the original paperwork, my mother had that, I have no idea what happened to it as she died of cancer last December. As so I have no coverage and the process of obtaining it appears to be stalled indefinately, they won't even accept my military service records as any kind of proof of identity. Ironically the only items they will accept are the two I don't have, a health card or citizenship card. So I'm now in the enviable position of paying for something I'm denied, nice system we have in Canada. As for my mother, as I said she died of Cancer. They said she had it for about 13 years. She saw three seperate doctors and all three misdiagnosed her and treated her for bird flu of all things. Over the years she told them repeatedly that it wasn't the flu but something else and they kept telling her she was wrong, they were the doctors after all. Well she was right but being right didn't help her at all. Yeah, great f*cking system we have in this country.

It is an interesting point and on some levels I can agree with it, on others not so much. certainly Muslims of the past did great works to advance humanity, however they have also done great harm as well. Perhaps I'm merely ignorant of the facts but I can't recall any instance of our canine friends organizing and going on a harmfull rampage of some sort. The impression I get from your arguement is that we should just discount their inhumane cruelty to dogs because in the distant past they made some very admirable contributions to society and the sciences. Sorry, that arguement simply does not wash with me. Cruelty is cruelty, whether it is directed at dogs or any other living creature it remains unchanged from what it is. The fact that such cruelty is condoned and even encouraged by a society speaks volumes about the society that practises such beliefs, such a society is one that I personally wish to have nothing to do with. Of course these are merely my opinions and all are welcome to disagree if they wish, as I've stated, I do not want to associate with or have anything to do with anyone Muslim or not who would practise such barbaric cruelty towards living creatures.

Actually GH I agree with you. The point I was making to Oleg is that these guys didn't secretly consult with some mysterious shadowy group of old white power mongering guys in order to solicit advice on how to set up an organized crime ring. That is something they appear to have done all on their own. The way Oleg talks one gets the impression that they simply called the 1-800 corruption is us help line for all their illegal needs. As I said, I agree with you. The stance that Harper is taking is actually very dismaying to me. When I look at his attitude towards Marijuana I am forced to wonder if he is merely extremely ignorant and unwilling to learn regarding this subject or if he is actually compelled by a cynical and somewhat mallicious motive to profit and generate revenue by victimizing and criminalizing a large segment of the population. When one actually looks at this plant rationally it becomes very hard to understand why those in power go to such lengths to stigmatize it. Much like soy it has a multitude of uses, aside from its many medicinal properties that is. For instance it provides a viable alternative to Ethanol as a fuel, the seeds can provide food and oil, the fibres clothing and other products requiring fibrous matter. If we startd commercially growing it we could generate income and also help the environment in a very significant way. That is why I find it so irrational to waste resources and time, ruin peoples lives and ignore something so beneficial in the name of fabricated boogey men generated from a basis of apparently willfull ignorance.

Wow! There are some very strange attitudes on display here for sure. Some very strange and wrong beliefs as well. For instance a poster claiming that dogs can't love, how very very wrong, dogs feel love that surpases anything the majority of people can feel. Or that if you die and are undiscovered for quite some time your dog will eat you. There are many cases of dogs remaining by their dead owners side and starving slowly. Have none of you heard of the Japanese fellow who's dog would walk to the subway with him every day when he went to work? When he returned each day his dog would be at the subway waiting for him. One day he suffered a heart attack at work and did not return home. His dog continued to go to the subway every Day and wait for him. The dog did this for years until finally he died at the subway waiting for his master to return. This did actually happen and there is now a permanent memorial at this subway honouring the loyalty and love of this fine animal. If only more humans could show such love, loyalty and devotion this world would be a far better place than it is. Some seem to feel that its just a dog, so what? They obviously don't realize or understand the relationship dogs have with the success of humanity. Many scholars have postulated that mankind would not be where we are now without the help and companionship of dogs. Simply put I have trouble understanding how any culture can fail to realize and appreciate these points. Further to that I see no reason at all why I should feel compelled to respect admire or empathise with such a culture. Those of you who wish to do so go ahead and fill yer boots, just don't expect me to jump on your bandwagon simply because you self righteously expect me to.

Nonesense, at least the part regarding Cannabis. Cannabis is not a traditional Native medicine at all. In fact Cannabis is a plant that is not native to the America's. It is a plant that originated in Asia and was largely spread by the Roman Empire. When Europeans came to this continent they brought the plant with them as it is extremely usefull. As such Natives have absolutely no claim to it as a traditional medicine. If you are going to post regarding this subject the least you can do is a little research on it. Here's a link for you. The Truth

So very well said. Thank you.

Actually there has just been another major bust involving Six Nations/Mohawk reserves, very similar to this one. Once again it involved multiple forces, including Native and also was performed with the cooperation of the band council. If you want I can post a link to the article. Bad times for organized crime lately it would appear.

Once again you manage to pretty much miss the boat. You most certainly can eat it, many many people do just that. As for it not being attractive, thats your opinion, once again many would disagree with you. How about this, you don't think it looks nice? Bonsai You mention good opiates. Are you kidding? Opiates are horrible. Highly addictive and in many cases quite deadly, where do you think Heroin comes from? You really have some very very strange and actually very false opinions regarding this subject.

What about Lobster Chowder? Do you like that? I do, a whole bunch! Especially from Mama Camilles in Halifax, best walk in seafood restaurant that ever existed.

In answer to the original question. Yes, I do believe Cannabis laws are headed in the wrong direction.The way we are headed now will see an extremely large proportion of our population criminalized by these laws simply because of their decision to enjoy a plant that has always been around, at least for as long as can be considered significant. In another thread I mentioned to jbg that I had been looking into the whole Cannabis issue as I had seen so many opinions expressed in various forums that appeared to be based upon nothing more than the old "Reefer Madness" concept. What I discovered certainly provided me with an eye opener. Key to what I realised was the idea that there is a huge amount of disinformation floating around regarding this plant. For instance, Oleg repeatedly talks about it being genetically modified, complete nonsense. What has happened is that people have collected strains from around the world. They have cross bred them to create hybrids, plants with traits inherited from each parent, male and female. This is hybridization, not genetic modification. If one were to consider hybridization to be the same as genetic modification then one would have to believe that every human on this planet is genetically modified, as would be every succeeding human to be born. There are only two types of Cannabis plants, Sativa and Indica, anything else merely results from a combination of the variants that exist within these two distinct types. So there is no genetic modification involved, simply the natural process of cross breeding that all living organisms engage in on one level or another. In fact, now seed breaders are seeking out strains that are lower in THC content and instead focusing on CBD and CBN content. Both of these compounds are non psychotropic and in fact CBN has been found to act as a natural THC blocker. In effect if you smoke (or eat) a strain such as Cannatonic you will feel very little, if any at all effects from the THC and will still benefit from the effects of the CBN to your system. Next would be the harm factor. There is not one single recorded or reputable case of death by Cannabis. There are many attributable to Alcohol, Tobacco, Prescription Drugs, Fast Food, etc etc. However not one for Cannabis. On the contrary, many new studies actually show this plant to have a great many beneficial properties. There are many reports by users that this plant acts in a far more beneficial manner than the prescription medicines they have used. When I say users you must realise that I'm not talking about your 17 year old airhead who claims to have a sore back here, I'm talking about people with serious documented aillments, quite often mortal. Further to that research shows us that this plant is non addictive as opposed to some others such as the oppiates, these actually do alter the bodies natural electro-chemical processing functions. Marijuana is no more addictive than alcohol, tobacco, prescriptions, coffee or fast food. In fact far more less than many of the aforementioned. There will also be those who will become addicted to something, thats a given. The direction that should be taken? Well I'm not sure if legalization is a realistic goal at this time. Decriminalization on the other hand would appear to be a good temporary solution. It just doesn't make any sense at all to harshly penalize a large part of the population for essentially doing the same thing as many others do who partake in other arguably more harmfull legal substances. Of course there should be controls, first of all I would say that an efficient road side method should be developed in order to determine whether one is driving under the influence in a dangerously intoxicated state. About equivalent to what we already have for alcohol. Ideally no one would never drive after indulging in anything intoxicating but given human nature thats a little unrealistic. The kids. Well even with laws such as prohibition and legal drinking age/smoking age already in place the kids don't have any problem getting their hands on this stuff, much as it was when I was a kid. Certainly draft a law to prohibit it from use by minors, effective or not, that only makes sense. What doesn't make sense is throwing citizens, many of whom are actually pretty good stand up productive people, in prison for simply enjoying something they like. Obviously prohibition does not and never has worked. In fact all evidence strongly suggests the opposite, that in fact prohibition actively encourages criminal activity. Research has shown that marijuanna has some negative impacts upon the developing brain. Research has also shown that those effects are no more significant than those of Caffiene, Tobacco, Alcohol and sugar (sugar is actually a very big problem) amongst quite a few others and far less severe in most cases. So sure, we should controll it to the best of our abilities, I just don't think we should villianize and demonize it at the expense of rationality.

That is a good point and one can't deny its validity. Still, is it really necessary to embed such a concept within the Constitution? After all the existing laws provide enough protection and legal recourses that none of us really have to worry about the men in black hats coming in the middle of the night to confiscate our stuff. The point you make about your friend who had her computer siezed poses a rather tricky question. On the one hand I do realise the actions the police took were considered to be necessary given that there was reason to believe it had been used in commision of an offence. On the other hand it does also seem to be unfair and given that it contained information she may have required one would think that some sort of compromise position should have been considered by the police. As you pointed out, she should have been given the opportunity to retrieve the information she required, or have an official delegate do so. Under direct police supervision of course. Could it be that the police are becoming less the well liked public servants of the community that they were when I was young? It seems to me that the average cop I meet now is far more authoritarian and far less approachable. Perhaps this is a component of your friends troubles. Having said all that I really don't see any harm in incorporating such amendments to the constitution. On the other hand I also don't see any pressing need to do so either. I suppose I'm rather ambivalent on the subject.

Oleg, he's quoting a really crappy song by an equaly crappy singer. The main flaw of the song is that these things are supposed to be ironic and in fact are really not ironic at all. As for your initial question. Which god? Humans have invented many stories about many gods and still do so till this day. For myself I like the ones about the Norse gods, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster, thats a good one.

Oooohhh! You showed him! Bet he's quaking in fear now!