Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


plasticpenguin last won the day on May 29 2020

plasticpenguin had the most liked content!


1,985 Excellent


About plasticpenguin

  • Rank
    Veteran Wammer
    Veteran Wammer
  • Birthday April 25

Personal Info

  • Location
    Bookham, Surrey

Wigwam Info

  • Turn Table
    Pro-ject Classic
  • Tone Arm & Cartridge
    ClearAudio Concept
  • SUT / Phono Stage
  • Digital Source 1
    Exposure 2010
  • Digital Source 2
    Panasonic player
  • Integrated Amp
    Leema Pulse MKI
  • My Speakers
    PMC TB2i
  • Headphones
  • Trade Status
    I am not in the Hi-Fi trade

Recent Profile Visitors

6,203 profile views
  1. I'm sure I will. I've yet to hear a less than good modern amp. The issue will be if I can make work with rest of my system, and, of course, it has to justify the asking price. Clearly, I won't have any of these answers until I hear it. Certainly will enjoy the experience.
  2. Yesterday, spoke to a local dealer (not Guildford Audio) about the Sugden A21a. Hopefully I'm going to demo one in a fortnight. I say hopefully because the dealer said, due to the pandemic, stocks of the A21 is low, but he's hopeful in a couple of weeks. So I'm going to 'ping' him an email in 2 weeks and take it from there.
  3. Going back to printing, genuine Litho is made up of DPI or Dots Per Inch. Look at a brochure or leaflet with a "spy glass" and it's nothing more than a mass of dots. It's quite otherworldly. In theory, the more dots the better the resolution. (plenty of images on the net to show poor to great resolution). On the flipside, if it has no dots it's digital. As I worked in the industry for over decade it was a constant fascination to me.
  4. It's true, however, stereo imaging is an audible illusion not optical.
  5. I used to work in the lithographic printing industry, and although not as spectacular as the above examples, printing, whether Litho or digital, is an optical illusion. Whatever you look at in brochures or leaflets, colour or monochrome, it's an illusion.
  6. Gutted but proud of the players and manager.
  7. C'mon England! Really enjoyed the game once I crawled from the back of the sofa. England were the better team. People on here can say that Southgate was negative. If Germany had subbed a sub to see a game out to reach a major final, everyone would say "mmm... clever tactics by Low". Southgate does it and it's negative. Think what Southgate has done is taken us from all-so-rans, team of mispasses, not cohesive blah blah to a team that can now play tournament football. Was it a penalty? Of course not. But don't want any negative comments regarding Sterling possibly diving. Hold on? hasn't Italy, Spain, Argentina and Brazil done this sort of thing for decades? Blow on them and they roll over like they've been shot. And Maradona's Hand Of God was legit? England have been on the end of some poor officiating. Perhaps England have finally wised up to it. You fight fire with fire.
  8. @Speedracer Can we stop the negative rubbish about Southgate? I will not not put him into a modern day Ramsey bracket, that's unfair on Ramsey and Southgate. What I will say is just because you took a club team down doesn't mean you can't be any good at a national level. He worked for England youth, then took over at under-21 level. The ex-German manger Low is the perfect example. He started off as Klinsmann's coach in 2006. Look at what he's won? He had no worthwhile credentials as a club manager. After the shambles of Capello, Hodgson and Alladyce, the FA asked him to be the manager of England. He flatly refused, so the FA asked if he could just take temp charge until they could find a suitable candidate. After that period they [FA] formally announced Southgate as the permanent manager. Since then he's taken us to the semis of the World Cup in Russia and now the Euros. We tripped up against Croatia but he's tweaked the squad and we're back in a consecutive semi-final. That's not been achieved since 1966 and 1968. Chances are we won't beat Denmark, but chances are we might. Even if they don't make the final, on home soil we have a great chance, he's achieved more in 5 or 6 years since Terry Venables in 1996. Is it coming home? It might be, it might not. That song is a jinx. Much prefer. So far we've had no serious injuries, Kane is starting to peak, scoring from defenders and midfielders. Add the spirit and depth of the squad, it looks good. Denmark will be a tough nut to crack, but with home support and the momentum. Southgate has geared them for tournament football... exactly as the Germans of yesteryear.
  9. The last big tournament game where England was this convincing and that was the 4-1 drubbing we gave to Holland in Euro 1996. Before this tournament started everyone was concerned about the defence, an area we have traditionally been good at. Let me throw a stat out: Gordon Banks, Ray Clemence, Peter Shilton, Dave Seaman, David James.... have not keep as many clean sheets as Pickford. He has only had to save 5 attempts on goal all tournament so far (excluding corners). Is Pickford the same class as Banks, Shilton and Seaman? Nope. But a confident goalie and a solid defense clearly pays dividends. There seems to be leaders all over the pitch, from Pickford to Stones to Maguire, Henderson, Kane, Sterling, Trippier... and the latter has only played a bit part. Surely, good on-field leadership has to come from the manager and coaching team and mentality they've promoted. In fact I can't think of a weak area.
  10. Another composed and organised performance from the Three Lions. What I thought was telling is how Southgate, immediately after the final whistle, made a beeline for Grealish, put his arm around him and whispered in his ear. And after the match, interviewed by Lineker on the Beeb, Southgate said one of the hardest jobs is keeping the fringe players feel a part of it. This echoed what Bobby Robson said after the 1990 World Cup. Not only is Southgate an excellent man manager/communicator but his decisions thus far has been spot on. The squad depth is quite impressive: Champions League winners such as Chillwell and James have yet to kick a ball in anger. Even seasoned players such as Trippier are only making a cameo appearance. He isn't frightened to make big decisions and leave out important players. Not going to say England can win it but this current crop of England players feels different from previous squads. Long gone are the so-called "golden generation" of Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney, Beckham....no point having great individuals if you don't gel as a team.
  11. I think the England performances in this tournament is all about degree. Have they been sparkling to watch? of course not. I think @Non-Smoking Manis being too harsh. Firstly, I bet my boot those odds are from an English-based company. As with any other sporting events the odds for Brits or English don't reflect the individual talent. Put into context, other than Italy England are yet to concede a goal. Clearly Southgate is playing certain personnel/systems to nullify the opposition. It doesn't make for a great watch but it's effective thus far. Trying to think of a Euros winners that has played sparkling football over the last 30 years. In 1992 Denmark aren't exactly known for "pretty" football. They're only included at the last minute because Yugoslavia were banned because of the civil war. 2004 Greece? bore-fest. Spain, although technically great, weren't a good watch with their tippy-tappy style of football. If England were to lift the trophy playing negative or unexciting football, not too many England fans will complain. England should only be judged after the tournament ends. Most of the England players seem to need permission to play from their respective parents. But a very young squad obviously works. The so-called "Golden Generation" had too many egos, in-house competition... in 2008 this "Golden Generation" couldn't even qualify. Do I hope England win the Euros? Most definitely. Do I think they will win? no. They should, however, reach the finals.
  12. Had a rubbish few days. Last Thursday using a hedge cutter and accidentally chomped through the Sky box cable. No telly, Freeview radio. Been let down 3 times by so-called reputable TV repair companies. Not sure if it's due to the gardening but my back muscle snapped (or felt like it) over the weekend. That all said, I've been reacquainted with the Denon tuner. As we ran out of plug sockets, due to poxy Google Alexa, the Denon has been nothing more than a demonstration in still life. All my radio has been Freeview, via the Sky box. Anyhoo, the 4th repair man has kept his word and actually called me this morning and he'll be with us between 9 and 10 am.
  13. Harbeths are my taste, but the over-inflated prices makes me want to vomit.
  14. Interesting video. This guy reckons the Tucana Anniversary is as good as a 16k integrated amp.
  15. Spot on: The Scots gave everything in terms of endeavor and graft. England, it seems, were complacent. IMO Scotland lack what you'd call a real talented individual. Gilmour has great potential. But he isn't a regular for Chelsea, and no one can expect a youngster to drag them through a game. Wales is a perfect example: They've got to the last 4 in the previous Euros because of two players: Bale and Ramsey. If it wasn't for them they wouldn't have gone beyond the initial group stage. England have the second youngest squad in the tournament and Southgate has the greater depth, but this comes back to my earlier point: They were playing to the mythical rivalry. It's a rivalry that's irrelevant in the 21st Century and less relevant in the middle of a pandemic. Look at domestic so-called rivalries such as Liverpool and Everton. When they play each other it's all blood and guts with little skill and tactics. Genuine fans want to see, as the Dutch say, the beautiful game. That never happens when England play Scotland. England had one attempt on target while Scotland had IIRC 3. That shows the poor quality of both teams in that game.
  • Create New...