Technology Updates
 

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:40:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

For boating purposes, I can understand the advantage of instant weather
updates from whatever the source. For those equipped with radar,
setting it to it's longest range is helpful also. You can often "see"
thunderstorm cells.

===

We see them on the boat's radar all the time, and you can see the
motion of the storm system also. We try to miss them if we can do so
by nudging our course a little one way or another. It frequently
works, surprisingly enough.

Technology Updates
 

On 1/12/2014 4:31 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:40:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

For boating purposes, I can understand the advantage of instant weather
updates from whatever the source. For those equipped with radar,
setting it to it's longest range is helpful also. You can often "see"
thunderstorm cells.

===

We see them on the boat's radar all the time, and you can see the
motion of the storm system also. We try to miss them if we can do so
by nudging our course a little one way or another. It frequently
works, surprisingly enough.


Really, different mentality... While we are not totally adverse to doing
what we do (farming, biking, etc) in the rain, we do not want to do it
in a rainstorm that has lightning strikes... you probably don't want to
be in any storm..

Technology Updates
 

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 16:53:40 -0500, KC wrote:

On 1/12/2014 4:31 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:40:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

For boating purposes, I can understand the advantage of instant weather
updates from whatever the source. For those equipped with radar,
setting it to it's longest range is helpful also. You can often "see"
thunderstorm cells.

===

We see them on the boat's radar all the time, and you can see the
motion of the storm system also. We try to miss them if we can do so
by nudging our course a little one way or another. It frequently
works, surprisingly enough.


Really, different mentality... While we are not totally adverse to doing
what we do (farming, biking, etc) in the rain, we do not want to do it
in a rainstorm that has lightning strikes... you probably don't want to
be in any storm..

===

Rain by itself does not bother us but no one should head into a
thunderstorm if there is any way to avoid it. Rain, both here and in
the tropics, comes and goes all the time.

Technology Updates
 

On 1/13/2014 12:27 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 12:26:58 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/12/14, 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:25:52 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

That's cool...are those M-Audio speakers? They look very much like mine.

I bought my wife a set of Bose speakers that are the size of a Spam
can and sound like a boom box.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41aYSHGKCwL.jpg

A typical Bose sound.
The only problem is you can hear the flaws in low bit rate rips ;-)


I know they are very popular and highly rated, but I've never been fond
of the sound that emanates from the Bose speakers I've heard. I don't
know why that is. My "main" stereo speakers are electrostatics, about
six feet tall, and I like they way they sound. I've got a pair of
M-Audio speakers on my computer desk, and they're adequate for that
purpose.

Like I said, the Bose sound. It seems to be aimed at people who have
very good hearing in the higher ranges. The sound is very crisp. I
worked on line printers long enough that my hearing has a bit of a
notch in that area.
I like that good old 70s deep sound you got from ARs or Sansui with
cabinets that could hold a small child.



Over the years Bose has earned a (often deserved) reputation for phony
sounding speaker systems but that was not always the case. Way back
when the original 901 speakers were introduced, they were met with very
positive reviews by audiophiles of the time. Also, the Bose sound
reinforcement designs in small sound system packages have been copied
and emulated by many other small speaker and/or radio/CD/mp3 players
manufacturers over the years.

Back when "hi-fi" was the rage, there were two distinctive speaker
"sounds", the "West Coast" sound and the "East Coast" sound. The West
Coast sound emphasized the mid range and tended to be brighter sounding.
The East Coast sound was a more mellow sound with the mids somewhat
de-emphasized.

The original 901 and even the original 501 Bose speakers were pretty
good for their time. Obviously technology has advanced and, to me, the
most natural sounding speakers today are ribbon types and some
electrostatics.

Technology Updates
 

On 1/13/2014 12:37 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:40:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


For boating purposes, I can understand the advantage of instant weather
updates from whatever the source. For those equipped with radar,
setting it to it's longest range is helpful also. You can often "see"
thunderstorm cells.


The local NBC station has a great interactive radar on their web site
that is going to be better than anything you are likely to see on a
boat.
My wife can link directly to that radar on her phone and the Note II
has a big enough screen to make it useful.
That is our boat radar but she also uses it at work.



I remember during the last leg of our trip to Jupiter, FL the VHF
weather channel had thunderstorm warnings near the inlet. I set the
radar out to max range (I think it was 60 miles on a Raytheon radar
system) and could clearly see two, serious looking thunderstorm cells
in our path.

Technology Updates
 

On 1/13/14, 1:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/13/2014 12:27 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 12:26:58 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/12/14, 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:25:52 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

That's cool...are those M-Audio speakers? They look very much like
mine.

I bought my wife a set of Bose speakers that are the size of a Spam
can and sound like a boom box.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41aYSHGKCwL.jpg

A typical Bose sound.
The only problem is you can hear the flaws in low bit rate rips ;-)


I know they are very popular and highly rated, but I've never been fond
of the sound that emanates from the Bose speakers I've heard. I don't
know why that is. My "main" stereo speakers are electrostatics, about
six feet tall, and I like they way they sound. I've got a pair of
M-Audio speakers on my computer desk, and they're adequate for that
purpose.

Like I said, the Bose sound. It seems to be aimed at people who have
very good hearing in the higher ranges. The sound is very crisp. I
worked on line printers long enough that my hearing has a bit of a
notch in that area.
I like that good old 70s deep sound you got from ARs or Sansui with
cabinets that could hold a small child.



Over the years Bose has earned a (often deserved) reputation for phony
sounding speaker systems but that was not always the case. Way back
when the original 901 speakers were introduced, they were met with very
positive reviews by audiophiles of the time. Also, the Bose sound
reinforcement designs in small sound system packages have been copied
and emulated by many other small speaker and/or radio/CD/mp3 players
manufacturers over the years.

Back when "hi-fi" was the rage, there were two distinctive speaker
"sounds", the "West Coast" sound and the "East Coast" sound. The West
Coast sound emphasized the mid range and tended to be brighter sounding.
The East Coast sound was a more mellow sound with the mids somewhat
de-emphasized.

The original 901 and even the original 501 Bose speakers were pretty
good for their time. Obviously technology has advanced and, to me, the
most natural sounding speakers today are ribbon types and some
electrostatics.



I do admire the ability of Bose to market grossly overpriced gear these
days to Americans...the under-TV set sound systems, radios, small
stereos, earphones, etc.

Technology Updates
 

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 4:26:00 PM UTC-5, Wayne. B wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 09:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:



Being on an inland lake, in the south, in the summer, makes you respect the weather and how quickly things can change. I always have my iPhone with me on the boat and keep an eye on the radar. The tree line limits the sight distance.



It was very handy the last time we did the river trip down to Charleston.. We had thunderstorms crossing our path about halfway down. Backtracked a couple of miles and waited for them to clear, then hit an opening to make it down to the harbor. Without the weather app it would have been messy and dangerous.



How far up river from Charleston can you go with a boat that draws 5
1/2 ft and has an air draft of about 20 ft?

At one time the river was navigable from the fall line in Columbia all the way to the coast. I know there are folks who take jet skis down the river from Columbia, but I don’t know if they can still make it all the way to the coast.
When we do the river trip, we put in at Lake Moultrie in Moncks Corner, and go down the Cooper River to Charleston. It’s about 40 or so miles, and in the main river run it’s 15 – 30 feet deep, so you would have no problem in that section. We do it from Moultrie because there’s a lock there that drops you 70 feet down to the Cooper River, and it’s a neat experience.

https://www.santeecooper.com/committed-to-south-carolina/lakes/pinopolis-lock.aspx

Charleston Harbor and the first few miles of the Cooper River is interesting, and of course there’s plenty to do, see and eat in Charleston. Honestly, once you get past that, the river is nothing but nature (not a bad thing) until you get close to Moultrie. There’s a section that can be a little tricky because it’s not marked well and there are flooded marshes (old rice fields?) along the river that have lured a few boats into them, getting them stuck. Oh, and I just realized there is a train crossing about halfway down the river. It is a drawbridge, but I don’t know what it takes to get it raised, as I can just fit under it.

If you ever do decide to cruise up the river a bit, watch for the submarine base signs. There will be a RIB with a 50 caliber on it in the river, and they watch all traffic. No stopping, fishing, or pictures allowed. They WILL board you. Ask me how I know. :-)

Technology Updates
 

On 1/13/2014 9:40 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/13/14, 1:04 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/13/2014 12:27 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 12:26:58 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/12/14, 11:51 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:25:52 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

That's cool...are those M-Audio speakers? They look very much like
mine.

I bought my wife a set of Bose speakers that are the size of a Spam
can and sound like a boom box.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41aYSHGKCwL.jpg

A typical Bose sound.
The only problem is you can hear the flaws in low bit rate rips ;-)


I know they are very popular and highly rated, but I've never been fond
of the sound that emanates from the Bose speakers I've heard. I don't
know why that is. My "main" stereo speakers are electrostatics, about
six feet tall, and I like they way they sound. I've got a pair of
M-Audio speakers on my computer desk, and they're adequate for that
purpose.

Like I said, the Bose sound. It seems to be aimed at people who have
very good hearing in the higher ranges. The sound is very crisp. I
worked on line printers long enough that my hearing has a bit of a
notch in that area.
I like that good old 70s deep sound you got from ARs or Sansui with
cabinets that could hold a small child.



Over the years Bose has earned a (often deserved) reputation for phony
sounding speaker systems but that was not always the case. Way back
when the original 901 speakers were introduced, they were met with very
positive reviews by audiophiles of the time. Also, the Bose sound
reinforcement designs in small sound system packages have been copied
and emulated by many other small speaker and/or radio/CD/mp3 players
manufacturers over the years.

Back when "hi-fi" was the rage, there were two distinctive speaker
"sounds", the "West Coast" sound and the "East Coast" sound. The West
Coast sound emphasized the mid range and tended to be brighter sounding.
The East Coast sound was a more mellow sound with the mids somewhat
de-emphasized.

The original 901 and even the original 501 Bose speakers were pretty
good for their time. Obviously technology has advanced and, to me, the
most natural sounding speakers today are ribbon types and some
electrostatics.



I do admire the ability of Bose to market grossly overpriced gear these
days to Americans...the under-TV set sound systems, radios, small
stereos, earphones, etc.

I agree. Americans are easily led and fooled.

Technology Updates
 

On Monday, January 13, 2014 1:04:50 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/13/2014 12:27 AM, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 12:26:58 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



On 1/12/14, 11:51 AM, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:25:52 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



That's cool...are those M-Audio speakers? They look very much like mine.



I bought my wife a set of Bose speakers that are the size of a Spam

can and sound like a boom box.



http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41aYSHGKCwL.jpg



A typical Bose sound.

The only problem is you can hear the flaws in low bit rate rips ;-)





I know they are very popular and highly rated, but I've never been fond

of the sound that emanates from the Bose speakers I've heard. I don't

know why that is. My "main" stereo speakers are electrostatics, about

six feet tall, and I like they way they sound. I've got a pair of

M-Audio speakers on my computer desk, and they're adequate for that

purpose.



Like I said, the Bose sound. It seems to be aimed at people who have

very good hearing in the higher ranges. The sound is very crisp. I

worked on line printers long enough that my hearing has a bit of a

notch in that area.

I like that good old 70s deep sound you got from ARs or Sansui with

cabinets that could hold a small child.







Over the years Bose has earned a (often deserved) reputation for phony

sounding speaker systems but that was not always the case. Way back

when the original 901 speakers were introduced, they were met with very

positive reviews by audiophiles of the time. Also, the Bose sound

reinforcement designs in small sound system packages have been copied

and emulated by many other small speaker and/or radio/CD/mp3 players

manufacturers over the years.



Back when "hi-fi" was the rage, there were two distinctive speaker

"sounds", the "West Coast" sound and the "East Coast" sound. The West

Coast sound emphasized the mid range and tended to be brighter sounding.

The East Coast sound was a more mellow sound with the mids somewhat

de-emphasized.



The original 901 and even the original 501 Bose speakers were pretty

good for their time. Obviously technology has advanced and, to me, the

most natural sounding speakers today are ribbon types and some

electrostatics.

Wasn't it the 901s that had a special sound processor box that hooked up between the pre-amp and amp? Basically an equalizer that shaped the audio to compensate for the speaker's lack of a flat frequency response.

I always thought they sounded impressive... for a while. Then listener's fatigue set in, and I didn't like them anymore.

I've been running a set of NHT's for a few years now. Great sound, very accurate.

Technology Updates
 

On 1/13/2014 12:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 01:12:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 1/13/2014 12:37 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:40:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


For boating purposes, I can understand the advantage of instant weather
updates from whatever the source. For those equipped with radar,
setting it to it's longest range is helpful also. You can often "see"
thunderstorm cells.


The local NBC station has a great interactive radar on their web site
that is going to be better than anything you are likely to see on a
boat.
My wife can link directly to that radar on her phone and the Note II
has a big enough screen to make it useful.
That is our boat radar but she also uses it at work.



I remember during the last leg of our trip to Jupiter, FL the VHF
weather channel had thunderstorm warnings near the inlet. I set the
radar out to max range (I think it was 60 miles on a Raytheon radar
system) and could clearly see two, serious looking thunderstorm cells
in our path.


The thing I like about the NBC radar is that it is a 1 hour loop. You
can see the motion of the cell.


I also like the google maps app. Totally interactive with traffic and
weather overlays... integrated with the google navigation, etc...