dlite Wrote:
Gee's yep, Slim Devices mustn't have wanted to pay for any advertising.
Don't you just love Stereophile. You know they are so unbiased and
filled with journalistic integrity.
You may want to try out the British Hi-Fi World instead!
Better IMHO. Also, not so fixated with
sleepysurf Wrote:
Bummer, just got my Aug Stereophile and NO Squeezebox review... I smell
a conspiracy!
sleepysurf- No conspiracy. Your question was answered on the
Stereophile forum on 7/13/06:
You can read about John's experience with the Squeezebox here:
LOL. Somebody built a Slimp3 player (early Squeezebox) into a
plexiglass case with an 0.75-watt S.E.T. tube amp for power! Also has
RCA jacks for a 2nd source. Not a bad deal for $99. Be nice if it was
a SB2 or SB3 though.
http://tinyurl.com/zbr76
--
Pale Blue Ego
Pale Blue Ego Wrote:
LOL. Somebody built a Slimp3 player (early Squeezebox) into a
plexiglass case with an 0.75-watt S.E.T. tube amp for power! Also has
RCA jacks for a 2nd source. Not a bad deal for $99. Be nice if it was
a SB2 or SB3 though.
http://tinyurl.com/zbr76
I love the
Stereophile is a publication whose income is primarily based on
advertisements for the products it reviews. Anyone that believes such
a publication is objective has the burden of proof on them, not the
other way around.
I don't purchase products based on rave reviews, and I don't read the
if you mostly read your news on Teh Interweb, you may be surprised how
long the print cycle takes between deciding to review something and
actually getting it to the shelves. Sometime three months - and if
they're doing extensive audio tests, even longer wouldn't surprise me.
I think it's a bit
My conspiracy theory post was indeed intended as humor. However, if
it doesn't appear in the Sept issue, I definitely think a class-action
lawsuit is warranted (again, just kidding) ggg.
--
sleepysurf
squeezebox2 (with elpac linear psu) to benchmark dac1, direct to sunfire
cinema grand 200
