The true minimum WAF

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
46
18,570
Visit site
In a post on another thread, I referred to 'near all-time low WAF.' I just wanted to explain my use of the word 'near,' as I believe I have discovered the true all-time low WAF:

http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_kleinhorn1.pdf

Has to be.
 

chebby

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2008
1,253
26
19,220
Visit site
SpursGator said:
In a post on another thread, I referred to 'near all-time low WAF.' I just wanted to explain my use of the word 'near,' as I believe I have discovered the true all-time low WAF:

http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_kleinhorn1.pdf

Has to be.

The implication being that male hi-fi enthusiasts would all be drooling over these gross monstrosities?

I have never got this 'WAF' nonsense. (Ugly acronym for an ugly concept.) In our house I am the one who wants less clutter and less boxes and I am the one who want's the system to look good. (My wife didn't mind the look of our last seperates system whereas I hated it.)
 

chebby

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2008
1,253
26
19,220
Visit site
BenLaw said:
Are you feeling unwell chebby? You've managed to include a grammatical error (less boxes), a punctuation error (want's) and a spelling error (seperates)! :O

My standards of spelling, grammar and punctuation are pretty awful even at the best of times.

I frequently need to make multiple corrections afterwards.

Please accept my apologies for being lax this time.
 

philipjohnwright

New member
Jun 26, 2009
30
0
0
Visit site
Aren't they just magnificent?!

In a gargoyle sort of way. And this from the guy who posted only today that the Cyrus look is in need of a refresh! There's nothing like consistancy (spelt with an a to make Chebby feel better)

You can tell it's weekend can't you?
 

BenLaw

Well-known member
Nov 21, 2010
475
7
18,895
Visit site
chebby said:
BenLaw said:
Are you feeling unwell chebby? You've managed to include a grammatical error (less boxes), a punctuation error (want's) and a spelling error (seperates)! :O

My standards of spelling, grammar and punctuation are pretty awful even at the best of times.

I frequently need to make multiple corrections afterwards.

Please accept my apologies for being lax this time.

You're normally spot on, just checking you're ok :grin: Anyway, agree with the anti-'WAF' sentiment.
 

fr0g

New member
Jan 7, 2008
445
0
0
Visit site
I agree with Chebby.

They are in a word, bloodyawful.

I wouldn't care if they sounded like angels dancing on the outstretched hands of a fair maiden, they wouldn't even get in my skip.

As for my better half, she would prefer completely invisible/non-existant.
 

busb

Well-known member
Jun 14, 2011
83
5
18,545
Visit site
chebby said:
SpursGator said:
In a post on another thread, I referred to 'near all-time low WAF.' I just wanted to explain my use of the word 'near,' as I believe I have discovered the true all-time low WAF:

http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_kleinhorn1.pdf

Has to be.

The implication being that male hi-fi enthusiasts would all be drooling over these gross monstrosities?

I have never got this 'WAF' nonsense. (Ugly acronym for an ugly concept.) In our house I am the one who wants less clutter and less boxes and I am the one who want's the system to look good. (My wife didn't mind the look of our last seperates system whereas I hated it.)

Do you expect any better from dinosaurs?
 

lindsayt

New member
Apr 8, 2011
16
2
0
Visit site
fr0g said:
I agree with Chebby.

They are in a word, bloodyawful.

I wouldn't care if they sounded like angels dancing on the outstretched hands of a fair maiden, they wouldn't even get in my skip.

As for my better half, she would prefer completely invisible/non-existant.

I would.

And that frog is the difference between you and me when it comes to hi-fi.
 

Overdose

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
279
1
18,890
Visit site
lindsayt said:
fr0g said:
I agree with Chebby.

They are in a word, bloodyawful.

I wouldn't care if they sounded like angels dancing on the outstretched hands of a fair maiden, they wouldn't even get in my skip.

As for my better half, she would prefer completely invisible/non-existant.

I would.

And that frog is the difference between you and me when it comes to hi-fi.

What, a better half?
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
46
18,570
Visit site
Just to be sure I said it: they are indeed bloody awful, a complete horror show.

And keep in mind when you think about WAF (and some of you think pretty deeply about the concept, apparently), the 'appeal' is how much appeal YOU still have after you bring the monstrosities home, not the speakers themselves. As in, you think she hates the speakers, but if the speakers are that bad, she hates you.

But it isn't offensive...especially since anyone can be a 'wife' these days...as we have seen in this thread.

My pahtna loves my speakers but they are a lot smaller. When I build the three-ways we'll see who the wife is.
 

busb

Well-known member
Jun 14, 2011
83
5
18,545
Visit site
With me, it used to be "It's the sound, stupid!" Now I fully admit the the looks are just as important (they always were). However, if willing to stray from the core brands, you can get the best of both - it just takes more effort but hell, that can be half the fun of acquiring new stuff.

My Totem Arros are as small as towers get but still give a more than decent sound (Art Stilettos are a similar size) & I do get comments from visitors along the lines of "My wife could live with those!" It's usually "live" rather than "love". Looks are a matter of taste - very subjective - but most people with any sense of aesthetics know when something is just butt ugly or not.

As to why so many women approach HiFi with their hand on their hips, I'm not sure. Maybe some feel the need to assert themselves regarding male hobbies as part of the rebalancing of power in a relationship or simply a matter of being house proud - who knows. Perhaps if men did more housework, their spouses would use their arms to embrace them!
 
busb said:
With me, it used to be "It's the sound, stupid!" Now I fully admit the the looks are just as important (they always were). However, if willing to stray from the core brands, you can get the best of both - it just takes more effort but hell, that can be half the fun of acquiring new stuff.

My Totem Arros are as small as towers get but still give a more than decent sound (Art Stilettos are a similar size) & I do get comments from visitors along the lines of "My wife could live with those!" It's usually "live" rather than "love". Looks are a matter of taste - very subjective - but most people with any sense of aesthetics know when something is just butt ugly or not.

As to why so many women approach HiFi with their hand on their hips, I'm not sure. Maybe some feel the need to assert themselves regarding male hobbies as part of the rebalancing of power in a relationship or simply a matter of being house proud - who knows. Perhaps if men did more housework, their spouses would use their arms to embrace them!

Very succinctly put. :grin:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
For Chebby and Alears

and their fine sense of the aesthetic.

They can display it next to their Royal Doulton!

Ebay item 180617776964
 
Derildo said:
For Chebby and Alears

and their fine sense of the aesthetic.

They can display it next to their Royal Doulton!

Ebay item 180617776964

Oh wow! I've just got to get a pair of those.

And it's Wedgewood by the way. :)

I couldn't make out just where rectifier with bile, gallbladder regulation
comes into the equation though!
 

DandyCobalt

New member
Oct 8, 2010
203
0
0
Visit site
TrevC said:
Years ago my speakers died and I went to buy more from the hifi shop, Before I left she said "don't get black ones". I bought a pair of black B&Ws after a demo

We're still together!

You and your speakers, or you and your wife? .:)
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts