Audio as a hobby

I'm with J1a
Cycling
Used to race in the good old days and I'm still good for about 7000 miles a year all in the warmer part of the year. In the winter XC skiing is nice too. I use to golf some.

It's good to have other hobbies because you quickly realize
that we audio folk are not any different than other hobbiests. A whole slew of jargon developes. The arcane discussions about titanium, hollow cranks, dimple flight patterns can compare with the best of what we do!

I remain,

Other than golf, my other hobby is also music. I sing in a couple professional choir groups (large and small chamber).

This is actually the most rewarding. It has brought me in contact with people like Dave Brubeck, The Kings Singers, and Peter Schickele (PDQ Bach and Schickele Mix on NPR).

We are performing for the third time with Dave Brubeck in Baltimore this coming March. We made a recording with Dave last year (not out yet).

Clueless, does titanium really ride that much better than my Klein aluminum?

I should add that although I view audio as being a passive hobby....I don't consider myself a passive listener. Sure, I have music going in the house almost all the time, but there are those moments when I do listen critically.

Clueless...good to see that you are riding....7000 miles a year...way to go.

Hi Nrchy:

"Clueless, does titanium really ride that much better than my Klein aluminum?"

It's been a while since I've been in the market and, I have to admit, I have a tendency to like old stuff. I have never given up steel for bike frames and tubes (SETS) for audio. I would never argue that they are the “best.” Just that they do a wonderful job and are not “proprietary” and so are inexpensive. Great bang for the buck.

I have never ridden a Klein frame for a long period of time (an entire season). I have ridden them for days at a time. This was at least 5 years ago however. It depends on what you mean by “better.” The Klein I rode was a great criterium bike and that is the general comment I heard about them at that time. It was stiff and light and handled really well in a sprint. I would not have wanted it as my training bike because the downside is that the very same stiffness that transfers the energy you put into the crank into the wheel so efficiently also, for the most part, transfers all the road vibrations right up your rear end and up your back. After x days in the saddle you get fatigued if you are not in really good shape for riding. The basic idea of tradeoffs and compromise in frame design is very similar to what you find in audio design. You can’t have it all. If you watch most people get off of a bike after 3 hours in the saddle you realize from the way they walk that they are feeling the road. They need comfort and a frame that absorbs the road shock, not a sprinting machine. Unless you are in exceptionally good shape and are interested in winning a sprint by a wheel length after a few hours of riding there is really no need for the additional stiffness. In general aluminum seems to be unforgiving. I hear that they are getting better though and really I can’t speak to your bike.

I like steel. If you read the reviews of the best $4,000 titanium frames (that’s right 4k for a frame alone) what do they say? Usually that they “ride like steel.” What are you gaining with titanium? About 1 ½ pounds or so on the frame, if that? Is a pound going to make that much difference in your ride? What’s in your saddle pack? How much water are you carrying? Did you eat chips last night that you are carrying around with you now? If you want to drop weight take it off your wheels. Your wheels are moving weight. Take it off your legs. They are moving too. A pound or two is incredibly insignificant if it is on the frame and if the bike is ridden the way most people ride. Most folk do not accelerate (sprint) much after a couple hours out and yet this is really the only time the light stiff stuff excels. The rest of the time – riding in a pace line at 22 mph for a few hours, it does no good, and in fact just beats you up.

In the old days I had one frame I used to race and another one to train on for this reason. It is ridicules the amount of totally out of shape recreational riders buying frames designed for Lance Armstrong and Greg Lamond. I actually had a part interest in a cycling shop at one time and left the business because it became impossible to sell folks what the industry was asking us to sell.

In any event, titanium, in general, will ride softer than aluminum, and if shaped correctly will be stiff (it is very soft and weak if used in simple round/oval tubes). But the shaping is a ridiculously expensive approach for the average rider.

IMHO the truth is that steel cannot be beat for most riders but it is not proprietary and they cannot possibly sell steel frames at the price of the latest gizmo material marketed as the “Tour de France” frame set. This aspect of the marketing in cycling reminds me so much of audio hype too that it is scary.

I admit I am rather opioninated on the subject but at least the opinion comes from riding and not reading "Bicycling Magazine." I logged in 100,000 miles on the bike some years back and stopped counting. J1a will likely object and I'm sure his point will be a valid one.

I remain,