Alternative audio websites

[Gordon Gray]

PM,

Your attention to details deserves applause. :bowdown:

Or is it a communist conspiracy?

GG

 

[amey01]

Most modern watches are pretty accurate so having a $36k watch (or multiple expensive watches) is just giving yourself a pat on the back that you're not a 99%er.

That's like saying "any modern audio system will create music, so there's no point in spending more than $200 on a pair of speakers".

Fact is, appreciation of high-end audio is generally an occupation engaged in by people who appreciate high-end (and demand finer things) in general. Watches, cars, etc all follow on from that.

If you appreciate high-end audio, you're also eminently likely to appreciate high end cars, high end watches, high end furniture or whatever.

It is not so profound.

 

[slowGEEZR]

Sweet watch Steve.........is that fine corinthian leather ??

I don't know, but notice the fine stitching!

 

[slowGEEZR]

Steve sorry but you wasted a whole $2 because Yuri Gagarin never made it into space it was all a lie

I give up, what am I missing here?

 

[slowGEEZR]

Steve,

I love your watch. Great find for $2.

Regarding posting one's stuff, I think Rich said it best. At least from my perspective.

Gordon

Actually, the watch was a gift from a co-worker who vacationed in Russia. He brought in a bunch of them for fellow co-workers. As far as posting one's stuff, you know me, I had to get my 2 cents in!

 

[User211]

Hey pig - yeah you. Hey pig, piggy pig pig pig!!

I personally know two of the contributors on this new start up. Gordon has conversed with Jerry, the MBL 116F owner. In fact I'm going to see Jerry and listen to his latest setup soon. He seems very happy with a Parasound A21 driving the MBLs - he has tried an awful lot of amps with the MBLs and really likes the Curl effort.

Quite like the site, considering it has literally pretty much just started. May contribute at some stage. They're even getting kit to review, so it seems to be being taken seriously. Cool.

 

[|Tch0rT|]

That's like saying "any modern audio system will create music, so there's no point in spending more than $200 on a pair of speakers".

Fact is, appreciation of high-end audio is generally an occupation engaged in by people who appreciate high-end (and demand finer things) in general. Watches, cars, etc all follow on from that.

If you appreciate high-end audio, you're also eminently likely to appreciate high end cars, high end watches, high end furniture or whatever.

It is not so profound.

There's nicer ways of saying you don't like my "justification" of the frivolity of high end watches . Yeah it was kinda crappy but my point was diminishing returns really. Does a $36k watch keep time better than a $5 Casio, perhaps but is it worth $36k on that merit alone? My problem is you're not so much buying a product as you are an idea "I'm rich enough to afford this."

I like high end stuff as much as the next person however it's just my blue collar function over form opinion that high end watches are the icing on the cake of the statement "look how rich I am". It's not a whole lot different then a big ass diamond ring on a woman except a watch is at least useful.

As I stated before, different strokes for different folks.

 

[amey01]

There's nicer ways of saying you don't like my "justification" of the frivolity of high end watches .

I didn't mean to not be nice.

I like high end stuff as much as the next person however it's just my blue collar function over form opinion that high end watches are the icing on the cake of the statement "look how rich I am". It's not a whole lot different then a big ass diamond ring on a woman except a watch is at least useful.

As I stated before, different strokes for different folks.

You musn't understand high-end watches then. Nothing wrong with that. Plenty of people don't understand high-end audio either - and for them, Bose is perfectly acceptable. I don't see high end watches as you do at all. To me, they are the definition of function before form.

What's more - most people wouldn't know a Patek Philippe from a cheap Seiko knockoff at the markets. I kinda like that!

 

[|Tch0rT|]

I didn't mean to not be nice.

LOL Sorry it was a joke about the $200 speakers, you know that's blasphemy to us. (Even though I hear Pioneer has a line of $200 speakers by Andrew Jones that sound way better than they should for the price.)

I do appreciate the engineering and mechanics behind high end watches. However I feel like they're kinda like a Rube Goldberg machines on your wrist. Not that they resemble them, in the sense that they are elaborate and an extreme way of doing something that something else has simplified and/or made more cost effective.

BTW I added more to my other post as you were replying to it.

 

[Rich]

I don't see high end watches as you do at all. To me, they are the definition of function before form.

I must be missing something, then. Because many of the so-called high-end watches seem to put form before function to me. Lots of bling, but many of them have very little useful functionality. You can get a much more functional timepiece for a fraction of the cost, minus the diamond baguettes, of course. But then again, if you happen to need a star chart, you're covered.

 

[Wardsweb]

Serenity comes not from what you have but knowing what you can live without. I have plenty of watches, but I can't live without aquiring some more audio.

 

[cstory]

Cool watch.

It's just might make me rethink my plan to get a Sony Android Walkman so I can run Sky Safari.

 

[amey01]

I must be missing something, then. Because many of the so-called high-end watches seem to put form before function to me. Lots of bling, but many of them have very little useful functionality. You can get a much more functional timepiece for a fraction of the cost, minus the diamond baguettes, of course. But then again, if you happen to need a star chart, you're covered.

A watch is two things. It is a timepiece, AND (since you wear it after all), a concession is made to fashion - it is in fact a FUNCTIONAL item of jewellery.

I'm not saying I like all watches. The one you posted would not be my first choice (but I do like it!!).

But good watches are an engineering marvel. The good bits are on the inside! They serve a purpose (time) that everyone refers to multiple times a day, every day. And some of them also happen to look good - since you have to wear them on your wrist!

And the jewellery/bing component is not worthless anyway. Would you go to a job interview in a pair of board-shorts and t-shirt? Likewise, if someone turns up to a job interview with me wearing a Casio or a Citizen then......well, I won't discount him.......but I'll certainly notice.

 

[Rich]

A watch is two things. It is a timepiece, AND (since you wear it after all), a concession is made to fashion - it is in fact a FUNCTIONAL item of jewellery.

I think the "jewelry" component is much, much larger than the "functional timepiece" component. In fact, I would say it is a piece of jewelry and a concession is made to functionality. A Casio isn't nearly as pretty, but is probably a more reliable timepiece that has a half dozen other useful functions. I just think you are mistaken when you say that these types of watches are "the definition of function before form." They are clearly the opposite. They aren't priced in the stratosphere because that is what it costs to build a quality watch. They are priced that way because of their looks, use of precious metals and gemstones, and the brand prestige. But they do make elegant and beautiful jewelry. I'll give you that. And yes, there is a lot of quality engineering that goes into them. But the functionality is really pretty limited compared to the price and the bling factor.

I guess that's what it boils down to as far as the other forum goes. It is like having a forum section to discuss the latest ruby or emerald ring you bought. Or the latest gold chain or diamond earring. Not much to discuss about them except to say "oooh, look what a pretty I just bought." It just seems kind of shallow and self-absorbed. To me that is very different spending tens of thousands of dollars on audio gear or cars or boats or motorcycles or (in Dave's case) snowmobiles, etc. and getting on forums to discuss them. Because those things actually do give you a lot of functionality as well as a lot of interesting topics to discuss about them with others on a forum.

I'm not saying I like all watches. The one you posted would not be my first choice (but I do like it!!).

Actually, I like it too. It is a beautiful piece. But I probably wouldn't spend what it costs to buy it. Just not my thing. Then again, I wouldn't hesitate to spend that kind of money on a good camera and some quality lenses. To each his own.

 

[amey01]

I think the "jewelry" component is much, much larger than the "functional timepiece" component.

I pretty much agree with what you said. And I agree with this too. But not to forget - it DOES have a functionality component.

And I enjoy looking at watches - as in the one you posted - because I appreciate both the engineering and the design. Just like looking at audio equipment - I can't appreciate the sound or emotional factors by looking at pictures of audio equipment, but I can certainly appreciate the design and engineering. No different.

To each his own - absolutely. Otherwise we'd all own the same stuff!!

 

[Gordon Gray]

This just in.

I checked back in on the AA / timepiece website and saw a thread entitled "Nadal wears $525K watch at the French Open".

For those that don't know, Rafael Nadal is one of the three current best mens tennis players on the planet.

The majority of posters were outraged about this apparent show of wealth in a public place and were quite critical of Rafa.

Oh the sweet irony of it all. :ROFL:

GG

 

[amey01]

This just in.

I checked back in on the AA / timepiece website and saw a thread entitled "Nadal wears $525K watch at the French Open".

For those that don't know, Rafael Nadal is one of the three current best mens tennis players on the planet.

The majority of posters were outraged about this apparent show of wealth in a public place and were quite critical of Rafa.

Oh the sweet irony of it all. :ROFL:

GG

I don't know if I'd call it a public show of wealth. It was more like a sponsorship arrangement no doubt.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Adam,

I totally agree with that supposition.

However, others who thought it was OK to wear a $20K to $70K watch assumed he paid for it and were very upset about this blatant show of conspicuous consumption.

The pot calling the kettle black. How hypocritical.

Gordon

 

[Hocky]

This just in.

I checked back in on the AA / timepiece website and saw a thread entitled "Nadal wears $525K watch at the French Open".

For those that don't know, Rafael Nadal is one of the three current best mens tennis players on the planet.

The majority of posters were outraged about this apparent show of wealth in a public place and were quite critical of Rafa.

Oh the sweet irony of it all. :ROFL:

GG

And proof that this whole argument is about relativity. heh