Indeed, street criminality is very low. Tokyo is a pleasure to walk around at night. There may be relatively dangerous areas that I am not aware of, but not at all on the level of certain american cities.
It was a figure of speech. I meant, it is very difficult to find a dangerous area in Singapore. The most seedy place is probably Geylang and it is still very safe. There are areas in for example Brussels and Paris (both are otherwise nice cities) where I prefer not to walk at night. Probably nothing would happen, but the feeling of being less safe is palpably there.
Look, I agree with the principle about democracy. However, living there I began to change my mind, perhaps democracy is not as good for the population as enlightened despotism like in Singapore. I originte from Belgium where so many issues and projects simply get stuck in endless politicall squabbles. Not so in Singapore which is run like an efficient company. You have to live there to appreciate it.
Again, if you are into drugs, then it is best to stay away. Everyone in Signapore, not just the government, prefers you being not in their country.
Honestly, what is bad about that? Drugs are linked to increased criminal activity. The city state successfully scared off the smugglers.Perhaps the USA should take an example in this matter instead.
Regarding "jailing homosexuals", you are plain wrong. There are a good number of lbgt people in the city. It is true, very unfortunately it is still somewhere in the laws that it is forbidden, but to my knowledge it is only referred to in case of rape, paedophile misdeeds and the like, making the related punishment heavier. The city is not persuciting the lbgt community.
And your statistics are ridiculous, if you do not indulge in obviously criminal activities you will not get executed.
What is so difficult about leading a normal, non-criminal lifestyle?
Let us put things in perspective.These unfortunate riots were very exceptional. It has been more than 20 years since Singapore experienced something similar.
I partly agree, yet China is gradually implementing a Singapore-like model throughout the country with considerable economic success, but I agree that safety and general well being are far from the Singapore model at the moment.
Look, I am a normal dude who doesn't involve in criminal activities. Life is good then in Singapore.
If you think you can have a career in drug dealing, then you would indeed be very, very dumb to try that in Singapore. The result is that the city state is visibly suffering far less from drug abuse issues than nearly any other city.
And indeed, neither the government, NOR THE LOCALS, are fond of graffiti. If you want to be an asshole and try it anyway, well you know the risk associated.
And yes, even the locals call it a "fine" city as their are fines for a lot of misdemeanors, yet the fine system did change behaviour. As an amusing example, if I am remembering well, you can have a fine for not flushing in a public toilet. This had an effect, you have to keep in mind the poor uncultivated beginnings of Singapore. Currently the behaviour of most everyone is changed, nobody even wonders if they should apply basic hygienic procedures.
I agree that whipping is draconian and overkill towards foreigners overstaying their work visum. It is luckily enough of a deterrent to strongly discourage the practice.
In general however it is not at all a fascist police state. I have lived there, I experienced it. I would call the non-democratic government rather a kind of "enlightened despotism", and I (and my fellow expats back then) had to admit that they did a lot of things very, very well indeed.
Interestingly, Singapore in the 1980s was the model for Deng Xiaoping who during a visit noticed how you can have good prosperity and strong government influence together. This is how he started the reforms that made China into the economic powerhouse that it is now.
It was an example. What I want to say is that it is very difficult in Singapore to find a dangerous area. The most "seedy" place is probably the Geylang district, yet it is very safe as well.
I have been in multiple cities, originally I am European, but have travelled to many cities all around the globe. The general safety and quality impression in Singapore is truly remarkable. In these two elements, Singapore and Tokyo are both excellent.
I have lived 2 years in Singapore, and indeed it is a tremendously safe place. Nobody worries about taking a shortcut through an alley, something not done in most western cities. It does mean that my local friends were often uncomfortable when traveling abroad, all countries seem dangerous after you've experienced Singapore.
It may not be a democracy, but we have to admit, they do a lot of things RIGHT. It is a pleasure to live there, as long as you have no political ambitions.
I have eaten it once in Norway. My friend and I thought it was excellent. It is a very dark meat that tastes somewhere between a beefsteak and a tuna.
I understand the reasons for a ban, I can also understand that people like the meat.
Next to easy repairs of household items (instead of the western way of throwing things away), it all depends on your creativity level. And you need to have a bit a tinkerer mindset.
As an example: I love to dabble in electronics in my too scarce free time. It would be fun to have totally original case designs for some of my little projects instead of the usual generic boxes.
I like the concept of 3D printing. Beining a bit of a tinkerer, albeit with too little free time, I could see myself using one in a number of creative projects.
But the material used by most printers is an ugly ABS. Sturdy but not appealing.
Furthermore the detail level of what I have seen so far is no match for stereolithography.
Now progress is being made quickly. I think that within 5 years or so they will be at a reasonable hobbyist price offering a quality and flexibility level that I would be interested in buying.
As an aside the best sound that I ever experienced was from these 3 systems:
- Big Proac speakers driven by nagra electronics
- Enormous magneplanar panels driven by mcintosh electronics
and, refreshingly so,
- vintage deepfreezer-sized coxial Tannoys (Westminster model, or similar) driven by some kind of truly vintage tube amp.
In all cases except perhaps the last example the speakers will have made the biggest difference in the end result of course.
I experienced other systems at shows that irritated me so much that I could not stay in the room with them.
Yes Adams are great, excellent tweeters and general engineering. I recommended the Artist 5 to a colleague, he loves them.
My KRKs are from their affordable series, hence likely a level below your Adams, yet still pretty good. They also have a higher end series but at a price level that was overkill for my hobby computer room.
My friend is a mastering sound technician and he uses the best monitors I have heard so far. Unfortunately the name escapes me now, but they look peculiar. The speaker part is not big but rather wide, with the top drivers from SEAS in it, but speaker blok is put at ear level, connected at the left and right of the box to with 2 metal pillars in which the dsp and amplification is located. Seriously good stuff, horribly expensive but remarkably uncoloured sounding.
Oh I know about the tricks with volume. You can also check with friends, I think you would then agree with me that cheap AV amps sound less good for music than dedicated stereo amps.
Anyway I agree with your remark on speakers. In general the biggest sound difference happens at the speakers, also in passive mode. Bigger than any digital source change. I also agree that the way forward is towards active bi/tri-amped speakers, ideally with dsp processing both the speaker response and doing proper room adjustment. Genelec is one of the brands that offer this, at a hefty price. I use bi-amped KRK monitors in my computer room. Fun to do occasional home movie edits on, and a true pleasure for listening.
I am critical enough, and not swayed by hifi marketing. Why don't you try it yourself. Go to a decent hifi dealer, ask to compare a cheap AV amp, say an entry level Denon, and a reasonable traditional stereo amp, say a NAD, both driving the same good speakers. Bring a well recorded cd, preferably acoustical with voice. They should use a good cd player as well.
Take a blindfold if you will. You will hear the difference immediately, it is not subtle.
Whether you can reliably hear the difference between 2 decent analogue amps, that is another matter entirely.
Yes. Just try it yourself when you have the opportunity, you will notice that affordable multichannel AV amps are really not that good for well recorded music compared to a traditional well designed stereo amp. Both driving good speakers. You will notice it immediately, no need to be an audiophile with perception issues.
The DA chips and other components in these affordable AV amps are very basic, I think that is where the difference comes from.
I am interested in good musical rendering, I am not a hifi snake oil believer. There is indeed a lot of crap going on in that little world.
I have currently a specific interest in the topic as my current vintage amps: preamp Quad 44 has problems, and previously already refurbished Quad 405-2 power amp has a bit of a buzz now but that is repairable. Both were reference grade in de 1970s and 1980s and are still very good. No real need to change the power amp after repair. But for the preamp I want to be able to connect a number of digital sources (hdmi, optical, coax), yet it should still sound good for music - which is not that easy to find. A Classé CP-800 would fit for practicality but I don't want to pay crazy money. This afternoon I will check out the Nuforce AVP-18 which seems both practical, minimal and really quite focused on good audio quality (according to all reports so far) and a reasonable price that still has relation to the expected performance. It is in essence a rather flexible multichannel dac. I would use it only for stereo. More after I can hear it, should you be interested:-)
Indeed well conceived amps are very close. But in fact I recently heard the Naim Uniti and the Linn Majik DSM. Both are very good, and there is a small difference in character between them, which might be down on their DA conversion process.
A bigger difference is audible between listening to affordable AV amps and well executed stereo amps. I wonder if it's the signal processing chips in the AV amps that, even played direct, sound less good for music than a proper stereo amp (say a NAD for example).
You know, I am not really disagreeing with you.
In this comparison I don't have an issue with the Behringer - I agree that there is not so much, if any, sound quality difference between well designed amplifiers driving speakers that are a normal load. And don't get me started about the cable myth.
However!
At least in my system the difference between the separate DAC (a DACMagic Plus, a decently engineered product but not crazily expensive) and the analog out of an affordable older CD player is immediately obvious even when switching blindly. My wife likes music but is not at all into hifi, and she also noticed it immediately. So did a friend who admittedly is into the subject.
Longer ago I had originally one of the earlier cd players,a TEAC with a traditional multibit DAC and then a Harman Kardon with the then newfangled 1-bit DAC - the Harman had presumably better audio components as well. There was also a bit of immediately recognisable difference between the 2. Mind, the TEAC was ok, but esp. with well recored acoustic music there was a bit of difference.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but in Sg there is no indication that they do.
Indeed, street criminality is very low. Tokyo is a pleasure to walk around at night. There may be relatively dangerous areas that I am not aware of, but not at all on the level of certain american cities.
It was a figure of speech. I meant, it is very difficult to find a dangerous area in Singapore. The most seedy place is probably Geylang and it is still very safe. There are areas in for example Brussels and Paris (both are otherwise nice cities) where I prefer not to walk at night. Probably nothing would happen, but the feeling of being less safe is palpably there.
Your point being?
Look, I agree with the principle about democracy. However, living there I began to change my mind, perhaps democracy is not as good for the population as enlightened despotism like in Singapore. I originte from Belgium where so many issues and projects simply get stuck in endless politicall squabbles. Not so in Singapore which is run like an efficient company. You have to live there to appreciate it.
Again, if you are into drugs, then it is best to stay away. Everyone in Signapore, not just the government, prefers you being not in their country.
Honestly, what is bad about that? Drugs are linked to increased criminal activity. The city state successfully scared off the smugglers.Perhaps the USA should take an example in this matter instead.
Regarding "jailing homosexuals", you are plain wrong. There are a good number of lbgt people in the city. It is true, very unfortunately it is still somewhere in the laws that it is forbidden, but to my knowledge it is only referred to in case of rape, paedophile misdeeds and the like, making the related punishment heavier. The city is not persuciting the lbgt community.
And your statistics are ridiculous, if you do not indulge in obviously criminal activities you will not get executed.
What is so difficult about leading a normal, non-criminal lifestyle?
Let us put things in perspective.These unfortunate riots were very exceptional. It has been more than 20 years since Singapore experienced something similar.
I partly agree, yet China is gradually implementing a Singapore-like model throughout the country with considerable economic success, but I agree that safety and general well being are far from the Singapore model at the moment.
Look, I am a normal dude who doesn't involve in criminal activities. Life is good then in Singapore.
If you think you can have a career in drug dealing, then you would indeed be very, very dumb to try that in Singapore. The result is that the city state is visibly suffering far less from drug abuse issues than nearly any other city.
And indeed, neither the government, NOR THE LOCALS, are fond of graffiti. If you want to be an asshole and try it anyway, well you know the risk associated.
And yes, even the locals call it a "fine" city as their are fines for a lot of misdemeanors, yet the fine system did change behaviour. As an amusing example, if I am remembering well, you can have a fine for not flushing in a public toilet. This had an effect, you have to keep in mind the poor uncultivated beginnings of Singapore.
Currently the behaviour of most everyone is changed, nobody even wonders if they should apply basic hygienic procedures.
I agree that whipping is draconian and overkill towards foreigners overstaying their work visum. It is luckily enough of a deterrent to strongly discourage the practice.
In general however it is not at all a fascist police state. I have lived there, I experienced it. I would call the non-democratic government rather a kind of "enlightened despotism", and I (and my fellow expats back then) had to admit that they did a lot of things very, very well indeed.
Interestingly, Singapore in the 1980s was the model for Deng Xiaoping who during a visit noticed how you can have good prosperity and strong government influence together. This is how he started the reforms that made China into the economic powerhouse that it is now.
It was an example. What I want to say is that it is very difficult in Singapore to find a dangerous area. The most "seedy" place is probably the Geylang district, yet it is very safe as well. I have been in multiple cities, originally I am European, but have travelled to many cities all around the globe. The general safety and quality impression in Singapore is truly remarkable. In these two elements, Singapore and Tokyo are both excellent.
I have lived 2 years in Singapore, and indeed it is a tremendously safe place. Nobody worries about taking a shortcut through an alley, something not done in most western cities. It does mean that my local friends were often uncomfortable when traveling abroad, all countries seem dangerous after you've experienced Singapore.
It may not be a democracy, but we have to admit, they do a lot of things RIGHT. It is a pleasure to live there, as long as you have no political ambitions.
I have eaten it once in Norway. My friend and I thought it was excellent. It is a very dark meat that tastes somewhere between a beefsteak and a tuna. I understand the reasons for a ban, I can also understand that people like the meat.
Next to easy repairs of household items (instead of the western way of throwing things away), it all depends on your creativity level. And you need to have a bit a tinkerer mindset.
As an example: I love to dabble in electronics in my too scarce free time. It would be fun to have totally original case designs for some of my little projects instead of the usual generic boxes.
I like the concept of 3D printing. Beining a bit of a tinkerer, albeit with too little free time, I could see myself using one in a number of creative projects.
But the material used by most printers is an ugly ABS. Sturdy but not appealing.
Furthermore the detail level of what I have seen so far is no match for stereolithography.
Now progress is being made quickly. I think that within 5 years or so they will be at a reasonable hobbyist price offering a quality and flexibility level that I would be interested in buying.
As an aside the best sound that I ever experienced was from these 3 systems:
- Big Proac speakers driven by nagra electronics
- Enormous magneplanar panels driven by mcintosh electronics
and, refreshingly so,
- vintage deepfreezer-sized coxial Tannoys (Westminster model, or similar) driven by some kind of truly vintage tube amp.
In all cases except perhaps the last example the speakers will have made the biggest difference in the end result of course.
I experienced other systems at shows that irritated me so much that I could not stay in the room with them.
Agree about the cable. But as for the speakers, I heard many speakers over the years and these are amongst the most neutral I have experienced so far.
I found it back. It is the Grimm Audio LS1. Really impressive, at the price of a small car sadly... Check it out.
Yes Adams are great, excellent tweeters and general engineering. I recommended the Artist 5 to a colleague, he loves them. My KRKs are from their affordable series, hence likely a level below your Adams, yet still pretty good. They also have a higher end series but at a price level that was overkill for my hobby computer room. My friend is a mastering sound technician and he uses the best monitors I have heard so far. Unfortunately the name escapes me now, but they look peculiar. The speaker part is not big but rather wide, with the top drivers from SEAS in it, but speaker blok is put at ear level, connected at the left and right of the box to with 2 metal pillars in which the dsp and amplification is located. Seriously good stuff, horribly expensive but remarkably uncoloured sounding.
Oh I know about the tricks with volume. You can also check with friends, I think you would then agree with me that cheap AV amps sound less good for music than dedicated stereo amps.
Anyway I agree with your remark on speakers. In general the biggest sound difference happens at the speakers, also in passive mode. Bigger than any digital source change.
I also agree that the way forward is towards active bi/tri-amped speakers, ideally with dsp processing both the speaker response and doing proper room adjustment. Genelec is one of the brands that offer this, at a hefty price. I use bi-amped KRK monitors in my computer room. Fun to do occasional home movie edits on, and a true pleasure for listening.
I am critical enough, and not swayed by hifi marketing. Why don't you try it yourself. Go to a decent hifi dealer, ask to compare a cheap AV amp, say an entry level Denon, and a reasonable traditional stereo amp, say a NAD, both driving the same good speakers. Bring a well recorded cd, preferably acoustical with voice. They should use a good cd player as well. Take a blindfold if you will. You will hear the difference immediately, it is not subtle. Whether you can reliably hear the difference between 2 decent analogue amps, that is another matter entirely.
Yes. Just try it yourself when you have the opportunity, you will notice that affordable multichannel AV amps are really not that good for well recorded music compared to a traditional well designed stereo amp. Both driving good speakers. You will notice it immediately, no need to be an audiophile with perception issues. The DA chips and other components in these affordable AV amps are very basic, I think that is where the difference comes from. I am interested in good musical rendering, I am not a hifi snake oil believer. There is indeed a lot of crap going on in that little world.
:-)
I have currently a specific interest in the topic as my current vintage amps: preamp Quad 44 has problems, and previously already refurbished Quad 405-2 power amp has a bit of a buzz now but that is repairable. Both were reference grade in de 1970s and 1980s and are still very good. No real need to change the power amp after repair. But for the preamp I want to be able to connect a number of digital sources (hdmi, optical, coax), yet it should still sound good for music - which is not that easy to find. A Classé CP-800 would fit for practicality but I don't want to pay crazy money. This afternoon I will check out the Nuforce AVP-18 which seems both practical, minimal and really quite focused on good audio quality (according to all reports so far) and a reasonable price that still has relation to the expected performance. It is in essence a rather flexible multichannel dac. I would use it only for stereo. More after I can hear it, should you be interested
Indeed well conceived amps are very close. But in fact I recently heard the Naim Uniti and the Linn Majik DSM. Both are very good, and there is a small difference in character between them, which might be down on their DA conversion process. A bigger difference is audible between listening to affordable AV amps and well executed stereo amps. I wonder if it's the signal processing chips in the AV amps that, even played direct, sound less good for music than a proper stereo amp (say a NAD for example).
As an aside I loved all Adam speakers that I heard so far.
You know, I am not really disagreeing with you.
In this comparison I don't have an issue with the Behringer - I agree that there is not so much, if any, sound quality difference between well designed amplifiers driving speakers that are a normal load. And don't get me started about the cable myth.
However!
At least in my system the difference between the separate DAC (a DACMagic Plus, a decently engineered product but not crazily expensive) and the analog out of an affordable older CD player is immediately obvious even when switching blindly.
My wife likes music but is not at all into hifi, and she also noticed it immediately. So did a friend who admittedly is into the subject.
Longer ago I had originally one of the earlier cd players,a TEAC with a traditional multibit DAC and then a Harman Kardon with the then newfangled 1-bit DAC - the Harman had presumably better audio components as well. There was also a bit of immediately recognisable difference between the 2. Mind, the TEAC was ok, but esp. with well recored acoustic music there was a bit of difference.
>> If you think your amplifier influences the "Pace, Rhythm and Timing" of your music, you need a straightjacket.
I never claimed that, I am not that interested in the marketing, but fact is that their products are sounding very good indeed.