Inside pics of Stellar M700??

In the market for some amplification for my Christmas present to myself of Martin Logan Motion 40s. I’ve googled and found pics of S300 but no M700. Always like to see the internals!

See, e.g., here

Thanks for the link to internal pics.

There doesn’t seem much to these (parts wise at least). Maybe hard to justify spending the $3K.

Perhaps an ‘ask Paul’ question on what makes these stellar line amps good and value for money compared to others in the price range.

I did listen to the S300 a while ago in my home setup but my old PrimaLuna integrated sounded better (to me at least). Maybe it was just what I was used to. I’m looking at replacing the Prima Luna as it needs new tubes now and I want to leave the amp on.

I have ordered a Stellar DAC (to replace an Arcam rDac) - arrives next week.

What’s up with the Nazi moniker, picture, and quote? [the OP]

I personally find it offensive, and despise the backwards direction we have been going in. If you are not a white supremacist, I suggest asking Elk to change your moniker. If you are then please go away.

iangw said There doesn't seem much to these (parts wise at least). Maybe hard to justify spending the $3K.
It always appears there is a little in an audio component, certainly not enough to justify the price. We need to remember the sound is not in the components, but in their careful selection and in the circuit design.

Remember how dreadful most Class D amps sounded until designers began to understand how to work with them? How syrupy the typical tube amp used to sound? The part count did not go up in either case, but both sound vastly better than previous iterations.

jeffstarr said What's up with the Nazi moniker, picture, and quote?
Just use Adblock or the like and block that which upsets you.

I personally find all avatars annoying/offensive so I get rid of every one of them.

I second Jeffstar in being extremely offended by the Nazi supporter on this forum. It’s inappropriate and he should be removed.

Our new member, Rommel, has been gracious, polite, and on-topic. Every one of us gets to choose our personal avatar for any reason, or no reason at all, and a picture (or not) to accompany it.

I am not going to ban a member merely because some speculate he might possibly hold non-audio beliefs they happen to disagree with. Our new member may just as well be a student of military history. Rommel was a brilliant tactician, highly respected by George S. Patton, and Bernard Montgomery - deep admiration which was mutual.

Regardless, it matters not either way.

As I mentioned above, I find all picture avatars annoying/offensive. Thus, I block them. In the alternative, if I banned all with whom I disagree or who have an avatar/picture I dislike, I would have to ban a lot of people. :slight_smile:

You can also go into your Profile and add any member you choose to your list of adversaries. Adversaries are users you want to ignore. Posts by these users will be hidden from you.

I do not think your judgement on this matter is in keeping with the spirit and culture of PS Audio from my perspective.

No avatars are out of bounds?

Are you the lone arbiter on forum issues such as this? I do not see a formal set of forum guidelines but if there is one can you direct me to it.

I too find the avatar and quote highly offensive and wish he would change them. That said, I am in agreement with Elk’s judgment as forum leader. As long as the poster keeps a civil tongue and we don’t turn political in our writings this then stands as a borderline ok. Where would we draw the line? Well, certainly a picture of Hitler, violence, an inflammatory quote, pornography. It’s a terribly hard decision and subject.

Because it is offensive I would hope the poster would be considerate but we’re not at this point going to ban him (or her).

Paul, I never suggested banning him. I am not Jewish, but for those that lost family, it still hurts.

I did not find the post offensive. I do find Elk’s solution to block avatars silly, and as the forum leader should be monitoring avatars. And complementing the Nazi’s brilliant strategies, is no excuse to use the name or photo.

I have tried discussing moderating with Elk offline, I think as a cheerleader, he is good for the forum. But his moderating style could be better. Does anyone think it would be too much to ask our new member to pick a less offensive moniker? If it as just poorly thought out, he will be willing to change it. If not, well there are a whole bunch of people out there thanks to our embarrassment of a President, that will think PSA is a place to further the agenda. That can be done, not in posts, but with profiles. So I would like someone at PSA, maybe other than Elk to contact the new member, and give him the opportunity to change his profile.

Thanks for weighing in on this Paul. I am Jewish and lost family in the Holocaust.

Patton was also a virulent anti-Semite so it’s not surprising he endorsed Rommel. This from the New York Times (not fake news):

“Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews who are lower than animals,” Patton wrote. He complained of how the Jews in one camp, with “no sense of human relationships,” would defecate on the floors and live in filth like lazy “locusts,” and he told of taking his commander, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, to tour a makeshift synagogue set up to commemorate the holy day of Yom Kippur.

“We entered the synagogue, which was packed with the greatest stinking mass of humanity I have ever seen,” Patton wrote. “Of course, I have seen them since the beginning and marveled that beings alleged to be made in the form of God can look the way they do or act the way they act.”

I asked a friend who is a historian of modern Germany and Jewish what he thought of Rommel. He wrote me this: “The main thing is that he was a leading figure within an institution (the German Army) that systematically and enthusiastically supported an aggressive, brutal, genocidal war. The only way to admire Rommel today is to subscribe to the myth that the army somehow wasn’t that bad, which is fundamentally offbase. It was a criminal institution. Not as bad as the SS, which is like saying that Jack the Ripper wasn’t as bad as John Wayne Gacy.”

The avatar and user name may be two separate issues. For example, if the OP’s name happened to be Rommel, use of that user name would not imply an endorsement of the WWII general and would seem reasonable (we don’t typically get to pick our last names). It’s the combination of the user name and avatar that creates the issue. Even if his name is Rommel, I would encourage him to change the avatar.

wakethetown said No avatars are out of bounds?
Certainly an avatar name/picture could be out of completely out of bounds. But there is no clear bright line.

My primary focus is on what a member posts, not in what we speculate they may independently believe separate from the forum.

Along these lines, I am concerned with the political statements already posted in this thread and the heated rhetoric. I see this racing downhill fast. I am therefore locking this thread. The audio topics it contains appear to have been addressed. If someone likes to continue these, please start a new thread.

Those unhappy with the avatar and picture choice have had an opportunity to express their heartfelt displeasure. This is entirely appropriate and I am glad they have done so. Let’s see what Rommel chooses to do.

Update: For Rommel’s response resolving this matter, please see here.