Rega RP8

[Audioman]

I agree with Dave, clothes on please. We have enough Terminator style turntables out there already! It's not clear to me though what the plinth is for if the skeleton can simply sit on its own. Shouldn't the feet be under the main plinth with the skeleton/motor/platter then decoupled from this for isolation?

Probably so as not to frighten existing Rega customers who don't like skeletal turntables. Oh and to accomodate a hinged lid!

Paul.

[hifi_dave]

I agree with Dave, clothes on please. We have enough Terminator style turntables out there already! It's not clear to me though what the plinth is for if the skeleton can simply sit on its own. Shouldn't the feet be under the main plinth with the skeleton/motor/platter then decoupled from this for isolation?

The 'skeletal' part sits on rubber cradles in the main plinth, so it's double decoupled. The plinth part sits on it's own feet and holds the lid.

[krenzler]

The outer plinth:



From the Naim forum thread:

http://forums.naimaudio.com/displayF...3731346/page/2

[hifi_dave]

I've just spotted that 'Krenzler' has nicked my RP8 pics and posted them on The Vinyl Engine forum, without my permission. Is that ethical ?

[The Grand Wazoo]

Originally Posted by krenzler
Nicked?

Well if you Google Rega RP8 these pictures come up as they are readily available on the internet. You have shared them with the world and I posted them on a turntable forum - specifically for Rega.

It's not as if I broke into your personal computer and stole For Your Eyes Only files.

I don't see the problem?

P.S. I currently own a P7 (for 4 years now) which I like very much and have owned both Planar 2 & 3 in the distant past. So it's not as if I would post an RP8 pic to cause any discredit.

Did I by any chance cause some grumblings by posting the above picture of the outer plinth for the RP8?

Kim,
I'm sorry, but if Dave would rather you did not use those photos, then it's only right that you remove them.
Many of us use photos from the internet too, but if the owner of some specifically asked me to remove them, I would.
....and make no mistake, if Dave took them, then he does own them, whether that's inconvenient to you or not.

[The Grand Wazoo]

.....and as if by magic, Kim's reply disappears.
For a moment.


Kim, if you don't have the decency to remove Dave's pictures the very least you should do is to acknowledge where they came from.

[Audioman]

.....and as if by magic, Kim's reply disappears.
For a moment.


Kim, if you don't have the decency to remove Dave's pictures the very least you should do is to acknowledge where they came from.

I don't think there is an infringement of copywrite as these photos have been put in the public domain. I think if they are from the Naim forum Kim may have not realised they were taken by Dave. Frankly if you don't want them copied either don't put em up or watermark them with Radlett Audio in bold letters.

[The Grand Wazoo]

No, I'm sorry that's not correct.
It's one thing to nab something off the web & put it somewhere else - strictly speaking though, that is a breach of copyright.
It's another thing to ignore a specific request by its owner for it not to be used.

[The Grand Wazoo]

....I think if they are from the Naim forum Kim may have not realised they were taken by Dave.

But they originate from Dave's photobucket account and Kim now knows who took them - Dave just told him.

[hifi_dave]

Thank you for the support.

The pics are from my Photobucket account and were first posted on this forum. I had no intention of making them available to the www in general.

Recently, on this forum, the Source/Oddysey man asked my permission to use one of my pics and credited me with this on his forum. That was perfectly acceptable to me but I don't like my pics being stolen without my permission.