No argument with you on the merits of the first Quicksilver Messenger Service (QMS) album. But your statement,
"was one of many bands to follow the successful path paved by the Grateful Dead --
which would acquire legendary status in a few short years -- and come off the worse for
it" is puzzling in its apparent reinterpretation of the history of the San Francisco
sound of that era. I would hardly say that QMS followed the Dead. They pretty much
co-existed and were both equally successful during QMS's heyday in the late sixties. In
any case, why would you say that they came off "the worse" for following the
path of the Dead? How so?
Dino Valente joined the band after the third album, at
least two years after the release of the album you are reviewing. I don't believe he had
anything whatsoever to do with that first release. He was talented and the band was good
with him in it, but it really wasn't the same band anymore.
Thanks for reading the review, and doing so as
closely as you have. As a baby boomer and sixties survivor myself -- albeit an East Coast
version -- I too am happy to see albums reissued that were neglected in their day but
worthy of a second listen. When I said QMS "was one of the many bands to follow in
the successful path paved by the Grateful Dead," I was referring to their being a
wonderfully talented band that excelled in live performance, as did the Dead. When I added
that they "came off the worse for it," I was referring only to the end result.
The Dead did go on to capture the hearts, minds and ears of a cross-section of the
nation's youth both in concert and in terms of album sales, but QMS did not. Not that they
were less good, just less lucky. But now, 40+ years on, we can listen again to a band that
had the talent, and reevaluate them for who they were, as opposed to who they were not.
As I noted, I'm from the East Coast, and to be
honest, music lover that I was (and still am), I'd never heard of QMS until I received
this reissue from Pure Pleasure. The band just never made an impression on this coast --
whereas the Dead did. That again is why I wrote that QMS came off the worse. Whether it
was talent -- though after listening to this album I doubt that -- or
management/publicity, or just bad luck, QMS just never captured the majority of attention
Regarding the reference to Dino Valente, that was an
editorial addition meant as background on QMS, but, as you correctly point out, he didn't
play on the album reviewed.
I hope this clears up what I meant by my comments.
would like to be added to your reader list and have enjoyed your articles very much so
join the TAB reader list, send an e-mail message to firstname.lastname@example.org. Those on this list are notified
of new content, upcoming reviews and other articles, and special offers for the site's
readers. -Marc Mickelson
am running dual B&W subs -- the ASW650 with 12" drivers. I have one cable from my
preamp directly to the subs -- same for both subs naturally. Is this the best way to go?
People often talk about speaker-level connections. Is one better than the other? Also, if
I choose to use a Y adapter, does the Y end go in the preamp and one input to the sub or
the other way around? I heard that a Y adapter will add a bit volume to the bass. Is this
accurate and recommended?
the subs at "speaker level," meaning from the outputs of your amp, not only adds
extra circuitry before your speakers, it means that the signals will be subject to the
effect of the subwoofers' crossovers. This is preferable only if you want to limit the
frequency range sent to your speakers, something you'd do if they have very small woofers,
for instance. Connecting your subs at line level, which is what you're doing, is ideal in
almost all cases.
the Y adapter, you would use one of these only if you have one set of outputs from your
preamp, which doesn't seem to be the case. This splits one output into two, so you can
connect subs and your amp when you don't have a spare set of main outputs. As long as you
have those extra outputs, you don't need a Y adapter. -Marc Mickelson
and Esoteric reviews? Appreciation for Galen Carol Audio
am still hoping that you will post reviews of the Silent Running Audio Scuttle rack and
the Esoteric K-01 CD/SACD player sometime soon.
thank you for the recommendation of Galen Carol Audio. Galen is an outstanding person to
work with. I have made several purchases from him, and I am very pleased with his
helpfulness and service.
Aucremann is working on his Scuttle review, which we should be posting soon. Silent
Running is anxious for it as well. Esoteric hasn't yet sent me the K-01, but they've
promised to as soon as a demo unit becomes available. They've told me that I'll be the
first to hear it, and I hope that remains the case.
for Galen Carol, I also found him very helpful and prompt when I purchased products from
him in the past. I've also talked with him a few times at CES and value his opinion.
a quick note to say that I was flattered to be able to provide usable test material for
your insightful and entertaining review of the Ayre
DX-5. It made my afternoon, actually.
Research Reference 250s, in case one of the KT120s failed, do we replace all eight of
them together or just replace the failed one? At $100 each and 2000 hours lifetime, that
is a big running cost for me. That means I will have to spend $1600 every two years to run
the amps, and there are driver tubes too. Right now, the 6550c in my Reference Anniversary
preamp is approaching 1200 hours -- or past half its life.
the Reference Anniversary preamp, all other electronics feel not quite
listenable. I read somewhere that the Reference Anniversary goes very well with D'Agostino
Momentum amps, but they are so expensive.
the failure happened within a couple of hundred hours of service, I think Audio Research
would recommend replacing all of the tubes, although I suspect they are biased
individually. I believe that the driver tubes last longer -- 4000 hours -- than the output
for cost, have you considered pairing your Reference Anniversary with the Ayre MX-Rs or Lamm M1.2s?
Both are wonderful and only the Lamm amps require retubing, and then only a single 6922,
which lasts for many years. You could buy both pairs of amps for the price you'd pay for
the D'Agostino amps and be able to rotate them. I'm using M1.2s with the Reference
Anniversary preamp right now, and the sound is glorious. (I would still like to hear the
Reference 250s, however.) -Marc Mickelson
for the work and beautiful writing you do. It's a vanishing breed in high-end writing.
for the kind words about the site. All of us here are grateful that people appreciate what
we do. -Marc Mickelson
review of Ayre DX-5 and saw that you have the new Shunyata Research signal cables. Are
you planning to review them as well?
to Grant Samuelsen at Shunyata, the new line of cables are "something special,"
so I'm trying to sell my Antares and Andromeda and will buy Python (or Anaconda) cables
later. I just thought it would be fun to see what you (the pros) think about them.
I plan to review Shunyata Research's newest interconnects and speaker cables, which I've
been using for some time -- first the Python and now the Anaconda. That review is still
weeks in the future, however, as I finish other writing projects, but it is coming, so
stay tuned. -Marc Mickelson