the discussion should be limited to the production span(same time line) like the bbx`s mentioned above.

A controversy (v. lat: contra contrary; versus addressed) is a prolonged dispute, or a debate, in which the parties actively from each other "opposing sides' arguments.

As the controversy can be both a private debate between two individuals as well as powerful social unrest call (eg dispute between two parties). Many early writers such as Irenaeus and Jerome were known as "Rover control of theologians" and authored works against heretical teachings or heretics, therefore contributed their works titled "Adversus ..." for example Irenaeus: Adversus haeresis. The Christian writer took from the classical Rhetorics the traditional view that controversial confrontations, even over trivial matters, a demonstration of intellectual superiority would be. See Orations of Cicero and Demosthenes in Catalinam ( "against Catalina").

It is the nature of the controversy that it is not with the intention of concluding an either-or can be, and is, therefore, often by polemics and armed support. Konstantin I. convened in the year 325 the Council of Nicaea in the hope of a settlement of the dispute Aria niche. Once the council his decision had deteriorated any further discussion of the anathema.

How on earth did they come up with these sound classifications? I think that is the real question.

When I do my comparisons I know that design and intent will be a part of the equation. For example, I plan a comparison of my CP-7 against my PC-3 as they both are equally matched and similar in design and excecution. I think this gives a proper head to head matchup.

Now when I compare my RX-DT680 against the RX-C100 it won't be so much head to head as evolution in technology and design that will be a part of the discussion because they are totally different beasts to go with the expected comments on sound.

Wow, sound sure sucked in 1987..... LOL.


I guess you could go year by year, and 87 was truly a decline year.

Still, putting the RX-C52 two "classes" below the CFD-5 is clearly a bias towards the presence of a cd player on-board the CFD-5. The C52 easily hangs with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Panasonic Fan:
Wow, sound sure sucked in 1987..... LOL.


I guess you could go year by year, and 87 was truly a decline year.

Still, putting the RX-C52 two "classes" below the CFD-5 is clearly a bias towards the presence of a cd player on-board the CFD-5. The C52 easily hangs with it.

what is the Difference between class's here?
1? 2? 3? 4? 5?

quote:

Originally posted by *TPR*:

1 being the highest quality category, 5 being the "least best", it would seem. It's a subjective opinion list from folks at that magazine way back when.....

It's a good idea to put BBX in different levels.
But where are those level defined ?.
Without a clear deffinition seems a marketing aproach.
The only truly way is comparing some BBX paremeter with an instrument. But measurements don't always shiels what the human ear really likes.

This is a hard one for me since I have only heard 2 of the units listed above!

Same here i only have 2 of the models mentioned. that being the rxc52 and the pana rx cd70