+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 228

Thread: Classic Hi-Fi Advertising

  1. #31
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Lancaster(-ish), UK

    Posts: 16,937
    I'm ChrisB.

    Default

    Now then people, enough of this nonsense!

    Let's try and be sensible here - let's get back to the matter in hand.








    ..............now is that cool or what?

  2. #32
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Lancaster(-ish), UK

    Posts: 16,937
    I'm ChrisB.

    Default

    Way-Hey, how about more sounds on the move?!


  3. #33
    Join Date: May 2009

    Location: gone away

    Posts: 4,870
    I'm joe.

    Default

    Hifi For Pleasure always baffled me. I mean, would you want hifi that wasn't for pleasure; that turned you into a geek wanting to try out that latest tweak in a doomed attempt to find perfection, listening obsessively to the same track from 'Love Over Gold' time and time again?

  4. #34
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 31,852
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe View Post
    Hifi For Pleasure always baffled me. I mean, would you want hifi that wasn't for pleasure; that turned you into a geek wanting to try out that latest tweak in a doomed attempt to find perfection, listening obsessively to the same track from 'Love Over Gold' time and time again?
    It was just a name of an audio magazine. There were plenty of others around in the 70's and '80s:

    Popular Hi-Fi - would you wan't it to be 'Unpopular Hi-Fi'?

    Practical Hi-Fi (and Audio) - 'Impractical Hi-Fi' ?

    Hi-Fi for Pleasure - 'Hi-Fi for Pain and Misery'?

    Hi-Fi Answers - 'Hi-Fi Obfuscation and Confusion'?

    In the '90s there was:

    Audiophile - 'Audiophobe'?

    The Flat Response -'The Flatulant Response'?

    Hi-Fi Review - 'Hi-Fi Refuse'?

    (The last two alternative titles are closer to the mark, for those blatently biased and sycophantic rags).

    Regards
    Barry

  5. #35
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 31,852
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Grand Wazoo View Post
    Way-Hey, how about more sounds on the move?!

    Steady on - you'll get Andre all excited! (though maybe it's more '60s than '70s)

    Regards
    Barry

  6. #36
    Join Date: May 2009

    Location: gone away

    Posts: 4,870
    I'm joe.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    It was just a name of an audio magazine. There were plenty of others around in the 70's and '80s:

    Popular Hi-Fi - would you wan't it to be 'Unpopular Hi-Fi'?

    Practical Hi-Fi (and Audio) - 'Impractical Hi-Fi' ?

    Hi-Fi for Pleasure - 'Hi-Fi for Pain and Misery'?

    Hi-Fi Answers - 'Hi-Fi Obfuscation and Confusion'?

    In the '90s there was:

    Audiophile - 'Audiophobe'?

    The Flat Response -'The Flatulant Response'?

    Hi-Fi Review - 'Hi-Fi Refuse'?

    (The last two alternative titles are closer to the mark, for those blatently biased and sycophantic rags).

    Regards
    The title that Caroline really hates is 'What HiFi?' As she pointed out, it should really be 'Which HiFi?', but I guess 'Which' is copyrighted by those consumer champions in Hertford (where hurricanes hardly happen).

  7. #37
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 31,852
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe View Post
    The title that Caroline really hates is 'What HiFi?' As she pointed out, it should really be 'Which HiFi?', but I guess 'Which' is copyrighted by those consumer champions in Hertford (where hurricanes hardly happen).
    No - 'What HiFi' is the correct title, both factually and literally. Just read the contents, and you will ask yourself "what hi-fi?". Your good lady is of course correct, and a pedant after my own heart!

    Regards
    Barry

  8. #38
    Join Date: May 2009

    Location: gone away

    Posts: 4,870
    I'm joe.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    No - 'What HiFi' is the correct title, both factually and literally. Just read the contents, and you will ask yourself "what hi-fi?". Your good lady is of course correct, and a pedant after my own heart!

    Regards
    Caroline's even more pedantic that me, which is quite an achievement. I'm a bit hazy on when to use 'that' and when to use 'which', but Caroline's a sub-editor on a scholarly journal and is down on any incorrect usage like a ton of bricks.

    Our elder daughter clearly takes after her; I remember many years ago when she was about 5, we went past a sign that read: 'Don't even think about parking here!'. My daughter said 'That sign's not right, is it daddy?'. I asked her what was wrong with it, and she replied 'It should say: 'Please don't even think of parking here!''

  9. #39
    Join Date: May 2010

    Location: Croatia

    Posts: 188
    I'm Robert.

    Default

    Here is nice link to Germans audio forum with lots of classic hi-fi advertising.

    On the other hands I'm especially interested in tests or reviews of Sansui's gear from UK audio magazines in period 70'-80'.So,if someone has an old magazines,and can scan,would be very,very grateful
    Something like that:



    PS-money is not an object.
    Regards
    Speakers: WLM Diva Monitor
    CD: Marantz SA8003
    Tuner: Sansui TU-9900,TU-919...
    Amplifier: Almarro A318B,Sansui AU-X1111 MOS VINTAGE,Sansui AU-11000A,...
    Receiver: Sansui G-22000,Sansui G-7000,Sony STR-V7...

  10. #40
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 31,852
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe View Post
    Caroline's even more pedantic that me, which is quite an achievement. I'm a bit hazy on when to use 'that' and when to use 'which', but Caroline's a sub-editor on a scholarly journal and is down on any incorrect usage like a ton of bricks.

    Our elder daughter clearly takes after her; I remember many years ago when she was about 5, we went past a sign that read: 'Don't even think about parking here!'. My daughter said 'That sign's not right, is it daddy?'. I asked her what was wrong with it, and she replied 'It should say: 'Please don't even think of parking here!''
    We are perhaps confusing pedanty with politeness. However your daughter's comment does raise the interesting question: which of the two imperatives is more effective? The blunt order, or the appeal to reason and one's better nature?

    Regards
    Barry

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •