Miss print
Thu, Feb 12 2009, 1:12PM
Have I mis read the 'sound advice' this month and a CA 640p has been reconmended as a DAC?
Thu, Feb 12 2009, 1:21PM
#2
Andrew Everard:It should, of course, suggest the Dacmagic.*
*other DACs are available
Thu, Feb 12 2009, 1:22PM
#3
JohnDuncan:
*other DACs are available
Which is why it also suggested the Beresford.
Thu, Feb 12 2009, 1:31PM
#4
Andrew we work in metric now so it should be to within 2.5cm
Thu, Feb 12 2009, 1:37PM
#5
cheyworth:Andrew we work in metric now so it should be to within 2.5cm
2.54cm actually - and that 0.04cm can mean the difference between life and death.
Thu, Feb 12 2009, 4:47PM
#6
Flippin' 'eck - I knew it was high pressure in the magazine trade, but...
Fri, Feb 13 2009, 12:10AM
#7
Andrew Everard:JohnDuncan:*other DACs are availableWhich is why it also suggested the Beresford.
it certainly did!
Fri, Feb 13 2009, 12:55AM
#8
al7478:
Andrew Everard:JohnDuncan:*other DACs are availableWhich is why it also suggested the Beresford.
it certainly did!
...and it was doing so well...
Fri, Feb 13 2009, 2:09PM
#9
...expects the author of the review to get a certain equine part as a bed-buddy...
Fri, Feb 13 2009, 2:12PM
#10
Wouldn't want to drown the horse too, now would we...? 
Fri, Mar 6 2009, 10:26AM
#11
Is your subject title itself a misprint or maybe a typo?
- Login to post comments
No, you haven't misread it; that's what it says, and the person responsible is now being lashed to a capstan ready to be flogged within an inch of his life.
It should, of course, suggest the Dacmagic.
Consulting Editor, What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision/whathifi.com Audio Editor, Gramophone