Quote:



Because I did not attend that meet and was already responsible for sending five other amps and made arrangements to send two on top of that.Antness should have contacted JMT if he wanted a Gilmore V2 at JMT's meet.I bear no responsibility to assure that the Gilmore V2 gets exposure.

Let the flames begin...

Quote:



Oy nice way to completely miss the other 4 paragraphs

The problem was that only the top end presented the individual instruments on their true character. The bottom and mid were cluttered, muddy, instruments sounded the same though vastly different in real life.

Reminds me a little of a problem Paradigm had in their studio line for a while. Drums and bass guitar were just wrong, not resembling anything near their true character. The problem is intelligability not that it was dry. Dry is a character, something you could have a preference for but not really a flaw in the way that a bass guitar and drum sound the same or mesh together into one unrecognisable mess

I can't trust Tuberollers reviews anymore. You promise him some gear and then you don't send it to him an he ends up bad mouthing your gear forever..

Anyways, the reason I sold my gilmore was that I found the midrange uninvolving..

Biggie.

*replaced "you" with "your gear" to clarify my stance

Quote:



What in my review or past impressions or anything I have said would lead you to doubt the impartiality of what I have posted?I don't think I've ever shown any real "brand loyalty" or strong preference for anything other than the "tube sound" and analog but I've never been shy about openly stating my listening preferences.

I have no reason to disparage the Gilmore circuit and I'd like to know why you would think so.I only own three of the amps I used to compare(MPX3,Wheatfield,Max),the rest are borrowed.I don't feel the need to qualify or justify anything I've said here.It's what I heard,you could possibly hear something different and like it a lot.Do you really think I have the time,energy,or inclination to arrange this review with the preconcieved intention to bash the Gilmore V2? I was really hoping that the V2 was better than I initially thought.I gain no joy in writing negative things about any product,especially an amp like the V2 that has had such strong positive reviews on this site.I don't want to be the guy that disagrees with the masses but I heard what I heard.I went through the trouble(not really, Gopher is beyond cool) to do this because I thought I wasn't being fair and really wanted to audition the V2.think what you will.

Quote:



What?????? Dude, please tell me where you got this info?Where have I ever bad mouthed Antness or Kevin Gilmore? Find it and I'll delete this entire thread pronto. You sold yours(for some of the same reasons I posted) but I can't borrow one and post my thoughts as honestly as I know how?

Fine.

Hey Tuberoller--

I think my earlier post containing your review remarks already answers your concerns. You've gone beyond the review stage to negative conjecture.

Quote:



I'm really sorry you feel that way.I hope you can understand that I never intended anything negative to come from my impressions.

Hang in there tuberoller.

If people disagree with the opinions of the reviewer and they own the product in question, there's always the "New Thread" button where you are free to express your own subjective opinion. Write your own review, please don't resort to questioning the reviewer's integrity!

I think the last thing we want to do is create a hostile environment where no one feels free to post their true thoughts, especially in reviews, which are the life-blood of this forum.

Thanks for the review Tube. I appreciate any, and all, comments about a product - even not-so-complimentary ones (maybe especially those!). All to often I read very positive reviews that fail to mention the small negative details that matter to me, but fail to rise to a level of importance to the reviewer for whatever reason.

I don't know if I would agree with everything you write, as I did not get a chance to listen to this amp extensively at the recent NY meet. But I have to acknowledge you heard what you heard, and that is all I could ask you to write.

Quote:



I don't think the problem is people disagreeing with Tuberoller's review. However, I do think it's a problem to accuse someone of being one-sided and impartial when you disagree with their findings. I have yet to see one rebuttal of any of the comments that Tuberoller made about the Gilmore. Whether he's right, wrong, or indifferent (not something that I would ever accuse him of, LOL), let's stick to commenting on his findings.

FCJ--

On the contrary, I think that Tuberoller's subjective comments re: the amp are his business. OTOH, when he conjectures that adding a stepped attenuator and improving the psu would not significantly (in relation to said earlier amps) alter the character of the Gilmore, I have to object.

From my own personal experience, I can say that a stepped attenuator and improved psu makes a significant and immediate improvement in the Gilmore amp. Tuberoller, not having tried either, treads past the point of impartiality by dismissing (quite strongly, too) the possible impact of these changes.

This is what is meant by negative conjecture.

Quote:



You don't have to be wrong to write an unfair review.

Quote:



So, his findings were correct in your view, but it was "unfair" of him to post them? How was it "unfair"? Do you think he had low quality sources at his disposal? Did he not have experience with other amps to compare against? Did he compare the amp to units costing 10 x the asking price of the Gilmore? Was he using stock ear buds as his headphones?

Quote:



I meant unfair in the way it was written and not in how he conducted the his comparisons and such. Things like what BoyElroy points out come to mind...
I don't doubt that Tuberoller had all the great headphones and amps at his disposal that he lists.