saint.panda

Thanks, I'll use that as benchmark.

Spritzer, how much did you sell your HE60 for? There's a HE60 on ebay right now and I'm kind of want it.

As keen as they are on Utrasones, they all seem to be a very nice bunch of folks and I don't think the Ultrasonistas will be able to recruit this steadfast HD 650 / OII listener. I'm mainly going to listen to somebody's HE60 and it happens to be in a city just 20 min from my place by car. (yep, small country)

In Germany you have religion all the way till high school graduation but you can choose between Catholic, Protestant or ethics (if you're not Christian). If there's no ethics, you just get a period free. But especially in high school the curriculums were quite the same and mostly centered around moral and ethical issues, not so much religion per se. I think I might have learned more about Nietzsche than Christianity in the Protestant course.

I'm hopefully going to hear the entire Ultrasone line-up quite soon (Netherlands meet). Never liked the HFI-650/700 much and the Proline 750 was quite decent with a few selected genres but terrible with most others. In general I think the Ultrasone sound engineer may all have some kind of minor hearing loss in the treble regions.

I had to read Faulkner's "Light in August" in English Literature. Other than religion in 2nd grade, I think it was the only school course I ever failed.

I would've taken McCain over most of the other Republicans and I think a lot of Europeans, especially liberals would agree.

One thing is that America is to be credited for most of the innovation in the medical field, from which other countries benefit. But while R&D is always expensive, it still doesn't explain 16% of GDP.

Also, most of Americans' health-care bills end up being met by the government anyways due to tax subsidies in the employer-based system.

I agree but in practice I try to evaluate things case by case, and in this case it seems to work or not as in the US. For one, hospitals are forced to help anyone who arrives in the emergency room. Since those without insurance coverage usually cannot pay for that care, the bill is passed on to everyone else, driving up premiums. Higher premiums in turn increase the ranks of the uninsured. Secondly, if I am young and usually healthy, I would think twice about paying for health insurance even though I might need it later on in my life. However, if only the elderly and sickly pay for health insurance, they are the only ones that need to insured, and that will make premiums very high because these people obviously are going to need medical care more often. This, again, increases the ranks of the insured because premiums are expensive and people think "why should I pay so much premium if I'm not that often sick". So now, only the very sick and very elderly and still in health insurance (exaggerated to make my point). And so on. In theory less and less people will opt out of health insurance and premiums will go up more and more. The data in the US substantiates this prediction.

Government isn't necessarily bad when it comes to public goods. Many public economists explain, supported by studies, how the provision of public goods is more efficient when the government provides it than if the individual consumer were to try to maximise their benefit each on their own. Some game theory combined with basic economic theory. Further, in the case of health care, it also shows in the US that because health care is not mandatory, young and healthy people gamble against it, thereby driving up premiums for the others, which then increases the number of insured people again. Adverse selection, a most popular line of research in business studies. There's a reason why the number of uninsured has been increasing continuously in the US over the years. One could argue that "why should I forced into health insurance", but just by not being in health insurance, ones makes it more expensive for everyone else. I'm all for injecting more competition and market principles when it comes to spending health care money - I think that's where most of the money is wasted - but for raising health care money, mandatory universal health care looks like the best option from an efficiency point of view. Albeit nor perfect, it simply works in Europe and apparently Canada, too. The level of insurance coverage need only be very basic and people can still upgrade their insurance coverage if they want but a basic level should be mandatory for all (I believe the British do it this way, mandatory universal health insurance plus private insurers). Raising money from taxation also looks like a better option than social security, which obviously doesn't work so well in Germany.

Happy Birthday!

I thought Hillary already blew it once with a similar idea some years ago.

I've read that one problem with not having universal health care is that a lot of people, when young and/or unsickly, do not pay for health insurance and gamble against needing a doctor, safe in the knowledge that they can free-load off those paying insurance if they find themselves in hospital. So there are proportionally more elder and sick people in the insurance schemes and since those without insurance coverage usually cannot pay for that care, the bill is passed on to everyone else, driving up premiums. Higher premiums, in turn, increase the ranks of the uninsured. Adverse selection, free riding and rising costs. I'm sure this isn't the only explanation but there must be some reason why Americans pay the most per head on health (16% per GDP, almost double that of Germany or Britian) but at the same have experienced the least decline in avoidable deaths according to a study. Note that big improvements were recorded in countries that started with both low levels of avoidable deaths like France and those with already higher levels like Britain. I believe the American health system is also one with the least IT penetration, which could reduce costs if pursued mor vigilantly. Anyways, the situation in Europe is far form ideal either, but I would say that it's better. I often read that the problem with health care is not how you raise the money but how you spend it. Britain does it via taxation, Germany via social security (which raises labour costs, which is bad, too). Britian has injected competition into the health market by giving more and more hospitals a "foundation" status, which gives them more independence and therefore encourages them to compete for business. Also, many hospitals are starting to get paid according to the amount of work they do. So the focus is not about how to raise the money but how to tackle the roots of rising health-care costs by getting medical markets to function more effectively. I think Milton Friedman already said that 50 years ago.

Just bought the SR-007/717 package for $2300 shipped. Saw some pictures, perfect condition, really nice. Gotta love the weak dollar.

Cool, thanks guys. Excellent condition as far as I know with flight case and everything.

Hm, I'm eyeing that Omega II with 717 interest check on headfi. Has the right voltage, too, 230V. Do you think something like $2200 is a realistic offer?

What's the going price for a 717?

I didn't like the SR404 either regardless which amp, tube and non-tube. I think I tried a SRM-313, T1, an really old SS amp and that OII tube amp. Agree with deepak about the upper midrange emphasis. The whole headphone sounded a bit sterile. SR-007 is a great phone though, I've heard it on many occasions and would love to have one someday, preferably with a nice tube amp. I'm also a huge fan of the HE90, had one for a while although I never provided it with the amp it deserved (ran out of money). I would also love to hear the Omega I someday. A lot of people who've had both the HE90 and Omega I for an extended period of time often seemed to prefer the later. The general impression I got from electrostats is that they're fast, effortless, transparent, well-layered and usually have precise imaging. I wouldn't give up my dynamic headphones in exchange for electrostats though.

Monk, I think you need to find some people you can talk to about such things at lunch. Edit: not about the spider thing of course.

I thought it was ok. I think what he means is that the world is growing together, not sure why "flatter" and he's beating that analogy till death. Lots of stories but they all tell the same thing more or less. As a globalisation book, it's good but I prefer Baghwati's In Defence of Globalisation.

Considering that the Age of Enlightment brought things such as tolerance and understanding to the Western World, it would seem that some people didn't even make it out of the 17th century. And I believe a famous NY Times columnist recently wrote a book about how the earth is flat. Plus, I look outside my window, and it's flat.

I've compared a new and used HD 650 once, and the difference was quite real (did a blind test, too). Part of it might have been the used level of the earpads but we paid attention to eliminate that variable as good as we could. Might have also been production differences between the two models but then any burn-in test becomes impossible to do.

About yourself?

Good to know. I still have my big PS2 and it's loud as hell.