Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 7/19/2008 6:55:14 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 6:59:05 AM EST
That's insane
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 6:59:26 AM EST
McIntosh is the shit.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:00:12 AM EST
OMG that's awesome.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:04:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/19/2008 7:04:48 AM EST by NoStockBikes]
Ugly as hell, but it would be a hell of a viewing experience.

Oh, and IBCMJ.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:05:31 AM EST

Originally Posted By CounterStrike:
McIntosh is the shit.


Especially when you have 30 of their amps connected to one system!

fap fap fap
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:07:52 AM EST
All that amazing theater shit, costing over $6mil, and he has one medium size couch for viewing.

Dude must not have many friends.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:08:00 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/19/2008 7:08:12 AM EST by Cypher214]
Double Tap
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:08:00 AM EST
Actually, I'm really not impressed.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:08:40 AM EST
From the comment section:


Posted Tue Feb 5, 2008, 1:50 PM — By David
Wow...someone has a lot of cash, and needs to be donating it to charity, not spending it on rediculous "entertainment" systems.


I'd like to know what portion of his income David donates to charity. It's probably nothing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be donating.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:09:39 AM EST
in about ten years they will have a direct neural interface that works better and you will be able to interface it with a apple brainPod that you can have surgically implanted..
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:13:08 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:15:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By Canned_Ham:
From the comment section:


Posted Tue Feb 5, 2008, 1:50 PM — By David
Wow...someone has a lot of cash, and needs to be donating it to charity, not spending it on rediculous "entertainment" systems.


I'd like to know what portion of his income David donates to charity. It's probably nothing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be donating.


David needs to mind his own business.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:16:48 AM EST
Let's see his electric bill.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:18:30 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/19/2008 7:27:15 AM EST by mjrowley]


Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:19:55 AM EST
The setup looks ugly. Would love to see how it looks and sounds.

I found this comment funny:


Posted Thu Feb 7, 2008, 2:19 PM — By Rong

At first I was impressed, then I thought to myself, this whole thing had better be powered by solar panels, otherwise watching a single movie would warm up the planet by 10 degrees Fahrenheit.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:20:43 AM EST
He's compensating for something.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:23:29 AM EST
Pfffft, my butler has a better system than that.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:24:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By TX_CO4:
He's compensating for something.


I'm pretty sure it's hearing loss!
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:25:35 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/19/2008 7:31:24 AM EST by armoredsaint]
You would think he would have a hotter looking wife too

and his system cost $6 MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTF! I am happy with my Sony Blu-ray 7.1 system for less than $3k
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:28:26 AM EST

Originally Posted By 4v50:
Let's see his electric bill.



Yeah, with all that equipment he might be up to half a Gore.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:33:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By mjrowley:

Originally Posted By Canned_Ham:
From the comment section:


Posted Tue Feb 5, 2008, 1:50 PM — By David
Wow...someone has a lot of cash, and needs to be donating it to charity, not spending it on rediculous "entertainment" systems.


I'd like to know what portion of his income David donates to charity. It's probably nothing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be donating.


David needs to mind his own business.


Socialism is refreshing, eh Comrade?
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:34:25 AM EST
Nice, but ABSOLUTELY ridiculous.

With all that power, I bet that system cranked up to 1 (out of 10) would cause anyone in the room to go deaf in 3 seconds or less. Overkill comes to mind.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:35:23 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:41:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:
Carzy. I read a story earlier this week about a guy in Italy who built two huge subwoofers into his listening room. Each of them were plenty large enough to pass off as an apartment in New York City. The mounted 9 (?) 18" woofers each into a horn like 40 feet long made of brick and large enough to walk though.

Brown note capable?


There was a guy over on AVS forums who built his HT over the top of (what used to be) an indoor swimming pool, and used the pool as a subwoofer enclosure. I can't imagine what that would sound/feel like.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:44:33 AM EST
that is friggin ridiculous! to much money! for 6 mil he could have built a real theater!
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:44:38 AM EST
For 6 million I could have built a freaking planetarium!

Unimpressed. He's probably the kind of guy that swears those $150 hdmi cables make a difference.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:47:18 AM EST
To think, the jackass next door manages to piss me off with his 36" Sylvania blaring all night.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:47:35 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/19/2008 7:48:21 AM EST by NoStockBikes]

Originally Posted By kraftwerk:
For 6 million I could have built a freaking planetarium!

Unimpressed. He's probably the kind of guy that swears those $15000 hdmi cables make a difference.


Fixed.

ETA: Can't believe I'm still IBCMJ.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:50:16 AM EST

Originally Posted By armoredsaint:
You would think he would have a hotter looking wife too


If he traded her in for a newer, hotter model, he wouldn't be able to spend as much on home theater.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:52:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By ZW17:
If you look at all the comments from the guys that do know their shit, the dude blew a bunch of cash on a crappy set up. Good equipment, horrible set up.


How do you know that commenters (who, presumably, have not built a $6 million HT) "know their shit", but that this guy, who walks the walk, doesn't?
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 7:53:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By Canned_Ham:
From the comment section:


Posted Tue Feb 5, 2008, 1:50 PM — By David
Wow...someone has a lot of cash, and needs to be donating it to charity, not spending it on rediculous "entertainment" systems.


I'd like to know what portion of his income David donates to charity. It's probably nothing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be donating.


Roughly half of ARFcom agrees with David, in that the "greater good" is more important than this guy's right to spend his money on whatever he wants.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 8:02:01 AM EST
Most people couldn't even afford to keep tubes in those 30 McIntosh amps. He probably spends $5000 a year just to keep fresh tubes in those 30 amps. That's just insane.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 8:06:18 AM EST
All that and only a glass table to put your feet up on?
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 8:34:02 AM EST
For all that money, it looks like he didn't spend a dime on room acoustic treatments.


Give me a 1 million dollar budget and free reign and I'll design and assemble a home theater room and system that's more appealing to the eye, has better acoustics, and
sounds better if for no other reason than the difference made by proper room acoustic
treatments.

Mr. Kipnis has more dollars than sense. No doubt he's built an awesome system,
and it may be among the most IMPRESSIVE looking systems anyone's put together,
but it's not the BEST overall home theater you could find.

And there's a respectable dose of "tweak audiophile" bullshit in his system. Audiophile
grade power wiring, cryogenically treated circuit breakers...give me a break!

I think he's maybe the ultimate gadget freak, with too much money to waste. His
system is extremely...how to put it...CHILDISH.

It's admirable in many respects but I see room for a lot of improvement, which would
include REMOVING excess equipment, of which there is plenty.

His system is needlessly complex.


CJ

Link Posted: 7/19/2008 8:36:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
For all that money, it looks like he didn't spend a dime on room acoustic treatments.


Give me a 1 million dollar budget and free reign and I'll design and assemble a home theater room and system that's more appealing to the eye, has better acoustics, and
sounds better if for no other reason than the difference made by proper room acoustic
treatments.

Mr. Kipnis has more dollars than sense. No doubt he's built an awesome system,
and it may be among the most IMPRESSIVE looking systems anyone's put together,
but it's not the BEST overall home theater you could find.

And there's a respectable dose of "tweak audiophile" bullshit in his system. Audiophile
grade power wiring, cryogenically treated circuit breakers...give me a break!

I think he's maybe the ultimate gadget freak, with too much money to waste. His
system is extremely...how to put it...CHILDISH.

It's admirable in many respects but I see room for a lot of improvement, which would
include REMOVING excess equipment, of which there is plenty.

His system is needlessly complex.


CJ



Link Posted: 7/19/2008 8:38:01 AM EST

Originally Posted By Jason280:
Actually, I'm really not impressed.


Me either. Looks like shit.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:06:40 AM EST
That's the ugliest home theater I've ever seen. 3 seat couch? All the speakers/amps in a circle around it? Perfect example of how money can't buy style or class. The guy obviously is trying to win points for spending the most money, but I've seen setups that cost a third of the money look far better.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:19:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

I think he's maybe the ultimate gadget freak, with too much money to waste. His
system is extremely...how to put it...CHILDISH.

It's admirable in many respects but I see room for a lot of improvement, which would
include REMOVING excess equipment, of which there is plenty.

His system is needlessly complex.

CJ


your attitude is childish.

since when did "need" come into the equation?

Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:22:34 AM EST
I'm happy enough with my theater.

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=136&t=376381
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:24:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
For all that money, it looks like he didn't spend a dime on room acoustic treatments.




you are wrong again, both for his active (deliberate) and his passive (as a side benefit)


Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:42:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/19/2008 9:42:56 AM EST by M4tty]
Alright, which one of you is David?



­


ETA: Well nevermind, I see you've already discussed that. Carry on.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:42:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
For all that money, it looks like he didn't spend a dime on room acoustic treatments.


Give me a 1 million dollar budget and free reign and I'll design and assemble a home theater room and system that's more appealing to the eye, has better acoustics, and
sounds better if for no other reason than the difference made by proper room acoustic
treatments.

Mr. Kipnis has more dollars than sense. No doubt he's built an awesome system,
and it may be among the most IMPRESSIVE looking systems anyone's put together,
but it's not the BEST overall home theater you could find.

And there's a respectable dose of "tweak audiophile" bullshit in his system. Audiophile
grade power wiring, cryogenically treated circuit breakers...give me a break!

I think he's maybe the ultimate gadget freak, with too much money to waste. His
system is extremely...how to put it...CHILDISH.

It's admirable in many respects but I see room for a lot of improvement, which would
include REMOVING excess equipment, of which there is plenty.

His system is needlessly complex.


CJ



Considering he was an engineer/producer for one of the top audio production companies in the world, he's probably got a pretty good idea of what sounds good.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 9:49:39 AM EST
McIntosh MC-2102 Amplifiers (30)
Insane!

I don't need all that to do the job. UBER OVERKILL.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:24:01 AM EST

Originally Posted By TurdyDingo:


Considering he was an engineer/producer for one of the top audio production companies in the world, he's probably got a pretty good idea of what sounds good.



That's open to conjecture.


If he's so good, as an engineer/producer for "one of the top audio production companies in the world", then explain to me why there's nothing in the way of acoustic room treatments visible, and with more odd reflective surfaces (both sonically and visually) in the room than
you can shake a stick at?

No principles of good acoustic design are evident based on those pictures.

If he neglected those principles, I don't care how much money he put into the system,
he's a hack who doesn't know what he's doing.


Room acoustics are possibly the most important factor in quality of audio reproduction
that there is.

If you put several million dollar's worth of the best audio equipment in the world into
a room that has terrible acoustics, it'll sound terrible. But a very modest system
set up properly in a room that has excellent acoustics will sound pretty darned good.


So many people overlook that. They want a home theater system that looks good
and sounds good, they go out and buy expensive (to their way of thinking) speakers,
set them up over a non-carpeted TILE floor, for heaven's sake, and then wonder why
it really doesn't sound good like it did in the showroom.

This guy has wood floors, which is better than tile or concrete, but the FIRST thing to
good room treatment is to control sound reflections off the floor, which means at least
a few carefully placed throw rugs are to be used, or better yet, just carpet the room
in a medium thick carpet with a good thick pad under it.


CJ
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:26:08 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:27:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

Originally Posted By TurdyDingo:


Considering he was an engineer/producer for one of the top audio production companies in the world, he's probably got a pretty good idea of what sounds good.



That's open to conjecture.


If he's so good, as an engineer/producer for "one of the top audio production companies in the world", then explain to me why there's nothing in the way of acoustic room treatments visible, and with more odd reflective surfaces (both sonically and visually) in the room than
you can shake a stick at?

No principles of good acoustic design are evident based on those pictures.

If he neglected those principles, I don't care how much money he put into the system,
he's a hack who doesn't know what he's doing.


Room acoustics are possibly the most important factor in quality of audio reproduction
that there is.

If you put several million dollar's worth of the best audio equipment in the world into
a room that has terrible acoustics, it'll sound terrible. But a very modest system
set up properly in a room that has excellent acoustics will sound pretty darned good.


So many people overlook that. They want a home theater system that looks good
and sounds good, they go out and buy expensive (to their way of thinking) speakers,
set them up over a non-carpeted TILE floor, for heaven's sake, and then wonder why
it really doesn't sound good like it did in the showroom.

This guy has wood floors, which is better than tile or concrete, but the FIRST thing to
good room treatment is to control sound reflections off the floor, which means at least
a few carefully placed throw rugs are to be used, or better yet, just carpet the room
in a medium thick carpet with a good thick pad under it.


CJ


It's a big room. There's some texture on that back wall that looks like it's probably some kind of acoustic treatment. It's IMPOSSIBLE that he overlooked that. It's obviously not designed to be graceful, so he's not going to bother with many of decorative camoflage-the-function features found in most setups.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:34:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By NoStockBikes:

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

Originally Posted By TurdyDingo:


Considering he was an engineer/producer for one of the top audio production companies in the world, he's probably got a pretty good idea of what sounds good.



That's open to conjecture.


If he's so good, as an engineer/producer for "one of the top audio production companies in the world", then explain to me why there's nothing in the way of acoustic room treatments visible, and with more odd reflective surfaces (both sonically and visually) in the room than
you can shake a stick at?

No principles of good acoustic design are evident based on those pictures.

If he neglected those principles, I don't care how much money he put into the system,
he's a hack who doesn't know what he's doing.


Room acoustics are possibly the most important factor in quality of audio reproduction
that there is.

If you put several million dollar's worth of the best audio equipment in the world into
a room that has terrible acoustics, it'll sound terrible. But a very modest system
set up properly in a room that has excellent acoustics will sound pretty darned good.


So many people overlook that. They want a home theater system that looks good
and sounds good, they go out and buy expensive (to their way of thinking) speakers,
set them up over a non-carpeted TILE floor, for heaven's sake, and then wonder why
it really doesn't sound good like it did in the showroom.

This guy has wood floors, which is better than tile or concrete, but the FIRST thing to
good room treatment is to control sound reflections off the floor, which means at least
a few carefully placed throw rugs are to be used, or better yet, just carpet the room
in a medium thick carpet with a good thick pad under it.


CJ


It's a big room. There's some texture on that back wall that looks like it's probably some kind of acoustic treatment. It's IMPOSSIBLE that he overlooked that. It's obviously not designed to be graceful, so he's not going to bother with many of decorative camoflage-the-function features found in most setups.


I would have to agree. Until you've been in the room you can't tell me that it doesn't sound good.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:38:08 AM EST
A fool and his money eh?
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:49:47 AM EST
The room layout suggests that he didn't put as much effort into acoustic design as he did stuffing as many speakers and amplifiers in there as he could.
Link Posted: 7/19/2008 11:54:20 AM EST
He's got so much extraneous reflective crap in or near the lines of sight and sound that it HAS to have a significant negative effect on the overall sound quality. His setup is arranged to impress, not to sound the best it could.


CJ
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top