Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Stereo -- That's TWO Channels, Right?

I know very little about sound systems. I just barely know that stereo is a term so old it's likely new again. For almost a year I ran a stereo system on one speaker, and it sounded fine to me. When a friend harangued me into going out to get a second speaker, I did, and I could tell the difference....but it didn't seem worth the bother to me.

So right now, as I'm looking for someplace to spend my windfall of a few days ago, my mind turns to two things. A digital camera. And a sound system. The camera, we've identified -- the Canon Powershot S3 looks good to me. (Ask me again when it comes time to fork over the money.) The sound system, we're not sure about. A lot of that comes from my idiosyncratic (from the Latin Idio, meaning 'my way', and Syncrat, meaning 'dammit') method of evaluating sound systems, coupled with some requirements that probably aren't in the common vernacular.

The evaluation is as much based on what the stereo system looks like as what it sounds like. I have an old Pioneer receiver. Wooden case, manual tuning dial with the frequencies in blue and the tuning indicator in yellow. I like it. I really like it. I have been known to sit in a darkened room and just look at the colors of the dial, delighted. Eventually, I turn on the receiver, and then I sit back down and look at the colors some more. But now -- well, apparently receivers are all metal (or plastic made to look like metal), with digital tuning, for which read: push the button and watch the freq change. They're way big, with twenty inputs and twenty outputs, and if they don't put out 250 watts per channel, they're relics. My old receiver puts out 15 watts per channel, and that was (and is) enough for me. So no house blasters for me.

A new receiver has to be able to handle a turntable. Most amps cannot. In fact, from what little I see, only the really high end amps have a pre-amp stage any more -- and even there, its usually preferred to have a separate external preamp, so as to not affect the color of the music. (What exactly does that mean? Well, I have a guess....but not really.) And, of course, it should be able to handle CDs, MP3, cassette deck output, and whatever else comes along.... talk to our PC if we want (wirelessly, of course) -- and the TV, too. And while we're at it, a wireless connection to the speakers, and to a wireless headset -- and, of course, a remote control.

So basically, we want new technology in an old looking shell. I think it's gonna be a while. But what the heck. It's been a while.

2 comments:

Sweeti said...

Well, if it were me having to decide between a Canon Powershot S3 and a sound system, I'd choose the camera. But then the Mr. would have definatly choose the sound system over the camera... By the way the Canon Powershot S3 was a nice choice in cameras.

Cerulean Bill said...

I haven't done any photography to speak of for quite some time, barring the helpful little Nikonette -- or something -- a point and shoot camera with an extending lens that looks as if it will keep whirring out to infinity. My preferred (does that sound pretentious, or what?) camera is a Canon AE1 with a 35-70 lens. The S3's focusing capability awes me.