I started to take note of the comments you made to show that you did in fact pick cinema's post apart, I realized when I was done I should've copied the whole thing...
and I only revisted this because I felt guilty about my name calling
There's direct name calling and then there's what you do...I think we both fall under the definition of rude, but I prefer the direct approach any day, for those who don't I apologize.
"While I appreciate your ability to respond, what was given
obviously doesn’t help"
"None of the abovementioned speakers address the heart of my question; and seeing that the needed comparison in the required conditions
wasn’t made either, you further missed the stated mark."
"
Hopefully you’re aware that communicating non-supported statements of a few model designations from one manufacturer’s line, doesn’t cover specific questions from another series;
especially when you lend no experience with the series in question. While each manufacturer tends to have their ‘house sound’,
it’s wise not to use blanket statements unless you know how to supply comparative information to illustrate the point"
"No offense, but without providing substantive observations to support your statement,
it’s unfortunately useless to me and those interested in the comparative fidelity of the ‘1.6’s to the ‘626’s"
"then the general use of “Maggie’s” in your ‘summation’ makes it even more vague for all of the apparent reasons"
What problems/observations/anomalies/etc. led you to your abovementioned ‘conclusion’ was it:
"8.
Lack of time and experience"...this takes the cake
"Is your acquaintance with the ‘R’s and the unmentioned surrounds
what led you to make a sweeping conclusion for Maggies in general"
"As the ‘1.6’s are more tolerant of dynamic swings at a given volume in comparison to their R Series brethren, this wont be as much of a problem - if it arises at all seeing that I listen below nominal reference.
Again, do you have experience with the ‘1.6’s in how they relate to the ‘626’s or not? "
"
Though this once again is an unqualified statement, you
may’ve understood from the original post that I’m not interested in other Magnepans (especially as surrounds); if I were; I would’ve made the plea more general"
"
That’s a nice opinion and all but it doesn’t address my specific questions.
I’m not looking for random unqualified responses,
if so I would’ve opened the thread to that very purpose. If you can qualify the above statement (
actually your whole ‘response’) with the litmus test listed in the original post thereby staying on track, it would be much appreciated."
"
Again, more indistinctness…"
"
Nevertheless had you paid attention"
"
Seeing that you provided absolutely no care in addressing my questions; and what you did relay has no bearing on the subject matter, I obviously can’t put credence into the above opinion either. Moreover, if your inability to genuinely handle direct issues is any indication to the way you deal with the specific needs and questions of customers, it’s a good thing you didn’t waste my time in person. "
"
If I have time to do a proper audition of the given entrants, you can DAMN well be sure that you’ll have a great deal of communicated insight to their given properties; not a host of unsupported fluff found common in (sic) manya today’s reviews and forum banter"
