Difference between revisions of "Talk:Dual CS 714 Q"
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Hallo,
+
Hello,
−
zu meiner Änderung der Modelle der gleichen Serie Folgendes.  
+
to my modification of the models of the same series the following.  
  
−
Die Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger haben ihre Plattenspieler- und Plattenwechslerserien bei den Vierstelligen Wechslern nach den ersten beiden Zahlen benannt, z. B. 12XX, oder 10XX
+
The Dual brothers Steidinger named their turntable and record changer series with the four-digit changers after the first two numbers, e.g. 12XX, or 10XX.
  
−
Bei den Dreistelligen bezeichnet die erste Zahl die Serie, wie z. B. bei 721, 704, 714 usw. handelt es sich um die Siebener-Serie, allesamt damals die Referenzgeräte von Dual und alle mit Direktantrieb.
+
For the three-digit changers, the first number indicates the series, e.g. 721, 704, 714 etc. are the seven-digit series, all of which were Dual's reference units at the time and all of which were direct drive.
  
−
Ein 522 z. B, ist ein Riementriebler, gehört zur 5er Serie und war kein Referenzgerät. Deshalb habe ich das in meiner Version geändert.  
+
A 522 for example, is a belt drive unit, belongs to the 5 series and was not a reference unit. That's why I changed that in my version.  
  
−
Die Bezeichnung CS bezieht sich auf den Spieler in Verbindung mit einer entsprechende Zarge und ist keine Typenbezeichnung.  
+
The designation CS refers to the player in conjunction with a corresponding frame and is not a type designation.  
  
−
Meines Wissens nach ist die derzeitige, wieder veränderte Auflistung nicht richtig, die Gemeinsamkeit der aufgeführten Geräte bezieht sich die Baujahre 1979 - 1981, aber nicht auf die Serie.
+
To my knowledge, the current listing, which has been changed again, is not correct, the commonality of the listed units refers to the years of manufacture 1979 - 1981, but not to the series.
  
−
Bitte aber um Erklärung, warum es wieder geändert wurde.
+
However, please explain why it has been changed again.
 
   
 
   
−
--[[Benutzer:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 18:32, 2. Jan 2007 (CET)
+
--[[User:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 18:32, 2 Jan 2007 (CET)
  
−
Unter Modellen der gleichen Baureihe verstehe ich die Modelle, die gleichzeitig mit diesem Modell im Programm waren.
+
By models of the same series I mean the models that were in the range at the same time as this model.
−
Beim CS 714 Q eben der CS 731 Q, CS 650 RC, CS 626, CS 606 etc.
+
With the CS 714 Q just the CS 731 Q, CS 650 RC, CS 626, CS 606 etc..
−
Beim CS 741 Q eben der CS 728 Q, CS 627 Q, CS 617 Q, CS 607, CS 528 etc.
+
For the CS 741 Q the CS 728 Q, CS 627 Q, CS 617 Q, CS 607, CS 528 etc.
  
−
Ein CS 750 und ein CS 701 liegen nun einmal über 10 Jahre auseinander und sind weder optisch noch technisch vergleichbar, auch wenn die beide eine Typenbezeichnung haben, die mit 7 anfängt.
+
A CS 750 and a CS 701 are more than 10 years apart and are neither visually nor technically comparable, even if they both have a type designation that starts with 7.
  
−
Wenn ich einen Plattenspieler anschaue und will wissen, welcher Dreher aus der "Serie" das nächst kleinere oder größere Modell ist, dann komme ich mit der Systematik "7er-Serie", "6er Serie" etc. nicht weiter. Das nächst kleinere Modell vom 714 Q ist der 650 RC, den finde ich bei der Systematik "7er Serie" nicht.
+
When I look at a turntable and want to know which model from the "series" is the next smaller or larger model, I don't get anywhere with the systematics "7-series", "6-series" etc.. The next smaller model from the 714 Q is the 650 RC, but I can't find it in the "7 Series" system.
  
−
Übrigens stimmt es nicht, das alle 7er Direktantrieb haben und das Topmodell waren.
+
By the way, it is not true that all 7s have direct drive and were the top model.
−
Der CS 750 und CS 750-1 haben Riemenantrieb und sie waren nicht das Topmodell!
+
The CS 750 and CS 750-1 have belt drive and they were not the top model!
−
Über dem 750 gab es noch den Golden 1, Golden Stone und Silver Stone.
+
Above the 750 there was the Golden 1, Golden Stone and Silver Stone.
−
Und zur Zeit des CS 5000 gab es keinen 7er Dreher, da war der CS 5000 das Topmodell und das nächst kleinere Modell der CS 630 Q.
+
And at the time of the CS 5000 there was no 7 leno, the CS 5000 was the top model and the next smaller model was the CS 630 Q.
  
−
Grüsse
+
Greetings
 
Roman
 
Roman
  
−
:Die Bezeichnung ist leider etwas zweideutig wie ich zugeben muss... Von mir war es so gedacht, wie Roman gesagt hat, also um das entsprechende Gerät leistungsmäßig einzuordnen (kleinstes Modell -> Topmodell eines "Jahrgangs"), ähnlich wie z.B. hier [[Pioneer SX-424]]. -- [[Benutzer:Gero|Gero]] 15:54, 3. Jan 2007 (CET)
+
:The designation is a bit ambiguous I'm afraid I have to admit.... From me it was meant like Roman said, so to classify the corresponding device performance-wise (smallest model -> top model of a "vintage"), similar to e.g. here [[Pioneer SX-424]]. -- [[User:Gero|Gero]] 15:54, 3 Jan 2007 (CET)
  
−
Hallo,
+
Hello,
  
−
um die Sache besser zu verstehen, muss man ein wenig über die Dual-Geschichte wissen.  
+
to understand the matter better, you need to know a little about the Dual history.  
−
Der erste 7er war der 701, das war 1973. Der 721 war 1976 die konsequente Weiterentwicklung, zusammen mit seinem halbautomatischen Bruder, dem 704. 1979 kam der 731Q mit Halbautomat 714 Q.  
+
The first 7 was the 701, that was in 1973. The 721 was the logical progression in 1976, along with its semi-automatic brother, the 704. In 1979 came the 731Q with semi-automatic 714 Q.  
−
Warum ich so weit aushole: Das sind alles Geräte aus dem Hause Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger, was ich auch unter Hersteller: Dual-Gebr. Steidinger vermerkt habe.  
+
Why I go so far: These are all machines from Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger, which I also noted under manufacturer: Dual-Gebr. Steidinger.  
−
1982 war Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger bankrott und das unwiederruflich letzte Gerät der 7er aus dem Hause Steidinger, der 741Q kam ein Jahr vorher, 1981 auf den Markt. Die hier erwähnten Geräte waren alle! Topmodelle aus dem Hause Gebrüder Steidinger und alle sind Direkttriebler (EDS 1000; EDS 1000/2; EDS 900; EDS 920; EDS 930).
+
In 1982, Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger went bankrupt and the irrevocably last unit of the 7 series from Steidinger, the 741Q, was released one year before, in 1981. The units mentioned here were all! top models from the house of Gebrüder Steidinger and all are direct drive models (EDS 1000; EDS 1000/2; EDS 900; EDS 920; EDS 930).
  
−
Dual ging dann an die französische Firma Thomson Brandt, die 1985 den CS 5000, einen Riementriebler auf den Markt brachte. Auf dieser Basis wird 1987 ein weiteres Spitzenmodell, der Golden one auf den Markt gebracht. Natürlich gab es keinen 7er zu dieser Zeit, weil es die Firma Gebrüder Steinginger schon lange nicht mehr gab und weil sich die Weiterentwicklung der großen Direkttriebler nicht mehr lohnte, es gab ja schließlich seit ein paar Jahren die CD.     
+
Dual then went to the French company Thomson Brandt, which launched the CS 5000, a belt-driven model, in 1985. On this basis, another top of the range model, the Golden one is launched in 1987. Of course, there was no 7 series at that time, because the company Gebrüder Steidinger had long since ceased to exist and because the further development of the large direct drives was no longer worthwhile, after all, the CD had been around for a few years.     
  
−
Dann übernimmt Schneider die Regie und bringt die Weiterentwicklung des CS 5000, den CS 750 und dann den CS 750-1 auf den Markt, die Bezeichnung sollte wohl an die ehemaligen Spitzengeräte der Traditionsfirma erinnern.  Streng genommen sind das schon 7er, haben aber eigentlich nichts mit den 7ern aus dem Hause Steidinger zu tun, da es prinzipiell CS 5000er sind. Die letzten Spitzenmodelle sind dann die 1991er Golden Stone und Silver Stone, die ca 3000.-- DM gekostet haben. Trotzdem werden die CS 5000er und deren Weiterentwicklungen auf den meisten Webseiten zu den 7ern gezählt, bzw. wird keine extra Rubrik dafür angelegt.  
+
Then Schneider took over the reins and launched the CS 5000, the CS 750 and then the CS 750-1, the designation probably meant to remind of the former top devices of the traditional company.  Strictly speaking, these are already 7s, but they have nothing to do with the 7s from Steidinger, because they are basically CS 5000s. The last top models are the 1991 Golden Stone and Silver Stone, which cost about 3000 DM. Nevertheless, the CS 5000s and their further developments are counted among the 7s on most websites, or there is no separate category for them.  
  
−
Also ich meine, wenn ich z. B. das nächstkleinere Modell vom 714Q suche, ist das meinetwegen der 650 RC, der gehört aber nicht zur 7er Serie. Das wird in sämtlichen Internetforen und Dual- Sammlerseiten so gehandhabt.  
+
So I mean, if I'm looking for the next smaller model of the 714Q, it might be the 650 RC, but it's not part of the 7 series. That's how it is handled in all internet forums and Dual collector sites.  
  
−
Schaut mal z. B. hier: http://hometown.aol.de/alflanger/
+
Look for example here: http://hometown.aol.de/alflanger/
  
−
Also ich würde hier nicht empfehlen, eine WIKI-spezifische Einteilung aufzubauen, das verwirrt blos.
+
So I wouldn't recommend to build up a WIKI-specific classification here, that just confuses.
  
−
Gängig ist ja z.B. bei Autos wie BMW auch die Bezeichnung 7er und 5er. Der 5er ist der kleinere 7er, aber niemand würde den 5er zur 7er Baureihe zählen.   
+
Common is for example with cars like BMW also the designation 7 series and 5 series. The 5 series is the smaller 7 series, but nobody would count the 5 series to the 7 series.   
  
−
Nichts für Ungut.  
+
No offence.  
−
Gruß Peter
+
Greetings Peter
  
−
--[[Benutzer:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 20:26, 3. Jan 2007 (CET)
+
--[[User:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 20:26, 3 Jan 2007 (CET)
  
−
Man sollte hier im Wiki die Sache herstellerübergreifend einheitlich gestalten.
+
You should make things consistent across manufacturers here on the wiki.
−
Und da ist es nun einmal diese Systematik.
+
And there it is this systematic.
−
Die "7er"-, "6er"- etc.-Systematik passt schon bei den HiFi-Geräten von Dual nicht mehr.
+
The "7s", "6s" etc. system already doesn't fit with Dual's hi-fi equipment.
−
Mal hieß das Topmodell der Verstärker CV 1600, mal CV 1700, mal CV 1450, mal CV 440 etc.
+
Sometimes the top model of the amplifiers was called CV 1600, sometimes CV 1700, sometimes CV 1450, sometimes CV 440 etc..
−
Die Systematik sollte über alle Gerätegruppen inkl. Plattenspieler identisch sein.
+
The system should be identical for all device groups including turntables.
  
−
Und ob der Dreher aus der Steidinger-Aera, der Thomson-Aera, der Schneider-Aera oder von Fehrenbacher stammt, das interessiert nur Dual-Freaks, aber nicht die breite Masse an HiFi-Interessierten.
+
And whether the turntable is from the Steidinger-era, the Thomson-era, the Schneider-era or from Fehrenbacher is of interest only to Dual freaks, but not to the broad mass of HiFi enthusiasts.
−
Die interessiert nur, das auf dem Gerät "DUAL" drauf steht.
+
They are only interested in the fact that the device says "DUAL" on it.
  
−
Grüsse
+
Greetings
 
Roman
 
Roman
 +
 +
 +
I don't think you should generally label the masses as not being interested in (even historical) details. I think that the person who informs himself about Hifi-Wiki already has to decide for himself what he is interested in. That's why I think it's important to provide as objective and comprehensive information as possible. It can't be the task of the authors of a database to decide what people are interested in and what they are not. What is sold today under the name Dual is cheapest mass-produced goods, with the exception of Fehrenbacher products. For this reason alone, differentiation is important.
 +
 +
Incidentally, here in Hifi-Wiki under the entrepreneur profile Dual in short form also refers to the company history.
 +
 +
The fact that devices of a series, which are produced over 10 and more years, have different designations according to the series code number (7xx) is probably compellingly necessary, otherwise one could not differentiate them. In 1973 the top model was the 701, in 1979 it was the 731Q. But today the 701 is still the top model from 1973 - that's history, which even Hifi-Wiki can not turn upside down, because it is based on technical progress.
 +
 +
The fact that devices from different series, which Dual had in their range from 1979 to 1981, for example, are thrown together into one series at Wiki may be understood by anyone who wants to, but certainly not a Dual freak and also not the broad masses. If this is common practice at Wiki, then I don't understand the whole system. Someone who informs himself here at Wiki and then comes across a Dual collector's page, he really doesn't understand anything anymore. 
 +
 +
Greetings Peter
 +
 +
--[[User:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 17:38, 4 Jan 2007 (CET)
 +
 +
This system has already proven itself.
 +
There have been questions in various HiFi forums, for example, which is the larger model of the series to which the CS 528 belongs.
 +
And then the correct answer is CS 628 (or as semi-automatic CS 607) and not e.g. CS 530.
 +
 +
With a 7, 6 etc. System no normal person can find out the bigger or smaller models of the same period.
 +
 +
I personally don't care much about the history of a make either.
 +
A CV 440 comes from the Thompson era, but that still doesn't make it bad, in fact it is, next to the CV 441, the best integrated amplifier ever to bear the Dual logo.
 +
 +
Incidentally, some Dual players are almost identical in construction despite clearly different designations, for example the aforementioned CS 528 with the CS 1268. The 1268 has only the automatic record changer more.
 +
If one would now claim that the two units belong to a different series, this might be true for the type designation, but not technically. Both devices even have a common service manual.
 +
 +
Greetings
 +
Roman
 +
 +
 +
I can see what you mean. But the correct way is to look for the next smaller series. The next smaller series to the 7 is the 6 series. Then, starting from the 714Q, I come to the 650RC, the turntable of the smaller series that was in the range during the same period.
 +
 +
The crux of the matter is that this is the dual program 1979-81. So Wiki makes a single series out of all the units in that program. Very informative!
 +
 +
In the program 1977/78 e.g. the changers and players CS 430; CS 1224; CS 1225-1; CS 502; CS 510; CS 601; CS 1249; CS 704; CS 721 are represented. All devices '''of one series'''.
 +
 +
Have I understood this correctly now?
 +
 +
Greetings Peter
 +
--[[User:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 20:19, 4 Jan 2007 (CET)
 +
 +
 +
 +
I think you can satisfy both sides despite the different views. I'd like to keep the division by devices as it is (because of comparability with models of the same vintage). A division according to model series (7xx, 12xx, etc) as Peter prefers can already be found on the overview page ([[Dual Turntable]]), there you can also enter additions or comments on the different series.
 +
 +
Both are certainly information that could interest a visitor, and I think we should not give up one of them in favor of the other.
 +
-- [[User:Gero|Gero]] 10:06, 5 Jan 2007 (CET)
 +
 +
True, I hadn't thought of that either.
 +
On the record player/disc changer overview page, the devices are listed in ascending order by type.
 +
And there you can see which 7 or 6 turntables were available.
 +
At the device itself then all devices that were in the program at the same time period, so that you can jump directly to the chronologically matching larger or smaller model.
 +
 +
Greetings
 +
Roman
 +
 +
 +
 +
OK. probably the expectations of Hifi Wiki users are different than I thought. Or maybe I really am too much of a dual-insider.
 +
Just one more suggestion:
 +
 +
Why not like this?
 +
 +
== Comments ==
 +
Other models from the 1979-1981 vintages:
 +
* [[Dual CS 506|CS 506]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 522|CS 522]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 606|CS 606]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 626|CS 626]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 650 RC|CS 650 RC]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 714 Q MC|CS 714 Q MC]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 731 Q|CS 731 Q]]
 +
* [[Dual CS 731 Q MC|CS 731 Q MC]]
 +
 +
There you would have the different series staggered by size and the comparison within a Dual program (here 1979-1981). That would combine both requirements into one and you wouldn't have to abandon one in favor of the other. In my opinion, it would be less misleading and clearer than before.
 +
 +
I just mean, if not it is also ok.
 +
 +
Greetings Peter
 +
--[[User:Giradischi|Giradischi]] 17:49, 5 Jan 2007 (CET)

Latest revision as of 11:49, 5 January 2007

Hello, to my modification of the models of the same series the following.

The Dual brothers Steidinger named their turntable and record changer series with the four-digit changers after the first two numbers, e.g. 12XX, or 10XX.

For the three-digit changers, the first number indicates the series, e.g. 721, 704, 714 etc. are the seven-digit series, all of which were Dual's reference units at the time and all of which were direct drive.

A 522 for example, is a belt drive unit, belongs to the 5 series and was not a reference unit. That's why I changed that in my version.

The designation CS refers to the player in conjunction with a corresponding frame and is not a type designation.

To my knowledge, the current listing, which has been changed again, is not correct, the commonality of the listed units refers to the years of manufacture 1979 - 1981, but not to the series.

However, please explain why it has been changed again.

--Giradischi 18:32, 2 Jan 2007 (CET)

By models of the same series I mean the models that were in the range at the same time as this model. With the CS 714 Q just the CS 731 Q, CS 650 RC, CS 626, CS 606 etc.. For the CS 741 Q the CS 728 Q, CS 627 Q, CS 617 Q, CS 607, CS 528 etc.

A CS 750 and a CS 701 are more than 10 years apart and are neither visually nor technically comparable, even if they both have a type designation that starts with 7.

When I look at a turntable and want to know which model from the "series" is the next smaller or larger model, I don't get anywhere with the systematics "7-series", "6-series" etc.. The next smaller model from the 714 Q is the 650 RC, but I can't find it in the "7 Series" system.

By the way, it is not true that all 7s have direct drive and were the top model. The CS 750 and CS 750-1 have belt drive and they were not the top model! Above the 750 there was the Golden 1, Golden Stone and Silver Stone. And at the time of the CS 5000 there was no 7 leno, the CS 5000 was the top model and the next smaller model was the CS 630 Q.

Greetings Roman

The designation is a bit ambiguous I'm afraid I have to admit.... From me it was meant like Roman said, so to classify the corresponding device performance-wise (smallest model -> top model of a "vintage"), similar to e.g. here Pioneer SX-424. -- Gero 15:54, 3 Jan 2007 (CET)

Hello,

to understand the matter better, you need to know a little about the Dual history. The first 7 was the 701, that was in 1973. The 721 was the logical progression in 1976, along with its semi-automatic brother, the 704. In 1979 came the 731Q with semi-automatic 714 Q. Why I go so far: These are all machines from Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger, which I also noted under manufacturer: Dual-Gebr. Steidinger. In 1982, Dual-Gebrüder Steidinger went bankrupt and the irrevocably last unit of the 7 series from Steidinger, the 741Q, was released one year before, in 1981. The units mentioned here were all! top models from the house of Gebrüder Steidinger and all are direct drive models (EDS 1000; EDS 1000/2; EDS 900; EDS 920; EDS 930).

Dual then went to the French company Thomson Brandt, which launched the CS 5000, a belt-driven model, in 1985. On this basis, another top of the range model, the Golden one is launched in 1987. Of course, there was no 7 series at that time, because the company Gebrüder Steidinger had long since ceased to exist and because the further development of the large direct drives was no longer worthwhile, after all, the CD had been around for a few years.

Then Schneider took over the reins and launched the CS 5000, the CS 750 and then the CS 750-1, the designation probably meant to remind of the former top devices of the traditional company. Strictly speaking, these are already 7s, but they have nothing to do with the 7s from Steidinger, because they are basically CS 5000s. The last top models are the 1991 Golden Stone and Silver Stone, which cost about 3000 DM. Nevertheless, the CS 5000s and their further developments are counted among the 7s on most websites, or there is no separate category for them.

So I mean, if I'm looking for the next smaller model of the 714Q, it might be the 650 RC, but it's not part of the 7 series. That's how it is handled in all internet forums and Dual collector sites.

Look for example here: http://hometown.aol.de/alflanger/

So I wouldn't recommend to build up a WIKI-specific classification here, that just confuses.

Common is for example with cars like BMW also the designation 7 series and 5 series. The 5 series is the smaller 7 series, but nobody would count the 5 series to the 7 series.

No offence. Greetings Peter

--Giradischi 20:26, 3 Jan 2007 (CET)

You should make things consistent across manufacturers here on the wiki. And there it is this systematic. The "7s", "6s" etc. system already doesn't fit with Dual's hi-fi equipment. Sometimes the top model of the amplifiers was called CV 1600, sometimes CV 1700, sometimes CV 1450, sometimes CV 440 etc.. The system should be identical for all device groups including turntables.

And whether the turntable is from the Steidinger-era, the Thomson-era, the Schneider-era or from Fehrenbacher is of interest only to Dual freaks, but not to the broad mass of HiFi enthusiasts. They are only interested in the fact that the device says "DUAL" on it.

Greetings Roman


I don't think you should generally label the masses as not being interested in (even historical) details. I think that the person who informs himself about Hifi-Wiki already has to decide for himself what he is interested in. That's why I think it's important to provide as objective and comprehensive information as possible. It can't be the task of the authors of a database to decide what people are interested in and what they are not. What is sold today under the name Dual is cheapest mass-produced goods, with the exception of Fehrenbacher products. For this reason alone, differentiation is important.

Incidentally, here in Hifi-Wiki under the entrepreneur profile Dual in short form also refers to the company history.

The fact that devices of a series, which are produced over 10 and more years, have different designations according to the series code number (7xx) is probably compellingly necessary, otherwise one could not differentiate them. In 1973 the top model was the 701, in 1979 it was the 731Q. But today the 701 is still the top model from 1973 - that's history, which even Hifi-Wiki can not turn upside down, because it is based on technical progress.

The fact that devices from different series, which Dual had in their range from 1979 to 1981, for example, are thrown together into one series at Wiki may be understood by anyone who wants to, but certainly not a Dual freak and also not the broad masses. If this is common practice at Wiki, then I don't understand the whole system. Someone who informs himself here at Wiki and then comes across a Dual collector's page, he really doesn't understand anything anymore.

Greetings Peter

--Giradischi 17:38, 4 Jan 2007 (CET)

This system has already proven itself. There have been questions in various HiFi forums, for example, which is the larger model of the series to which the CS 528 belongs. And then the correct answer is CS 628 (or as semi-automatic CS 607) and not e.g. CS 530.

With a 7, 6 etc. System no normal person can find out the bigger or smaller models of the same period.

I personally don't care much about the history of a make either. A CV 440 comes from the Thompson era, but that still doesn't make it bad, in fact it is, next to the CV 441, the best integrated amplifier ever to bear the Dual logo.

Incidentally, some Dual players are almost identical in construction despite clearly different designations, for example the aforementioned CS 528 with the CS 1268. The 1268 has only the automatic record changer more. If one would now claim that the two units belong to a different series, this might be true for the type designation, but not technically. Both devices even have a common service manual.

Greetings Roman


I can see what you mean. But the correct way is to look for the next smaller series. The next smaller series to the 7 is the 6 series. Then, starting from the 714Q, I come to the 650RC, the turntable of the smaller series that was in the range during the same period.

The crux of the matter is that this is the dual program 1979-81. So Wiki makes a single series out of all the units in that program. Very informative!

In the program 1977/78 e.g. the changers and players CS 430; CS 1224; CS 1225-1; CS 502; CS 510; CS 601; CS 1249; CS 704; CS 721 are represented. All devices of one series.

Have I understood this correctly now?

Greetings Peter --Giradischi 20:19, 4 Jan 2007 (CET)


I think you can satisfy both sides despite the different views. I'd like to keep the division by devices as it is (because of comparability with models of the same vintage). A division according to model series (7xx, 12xx, etc) as Peter prefers can already be found on the overview page (Dual Turntable), there you can also enter additions or comments on the different series.

Both are certainly information that could interest a visitor, and I think we should not give up one of them in favor of the other. -- Gero 10:06, 5 Jan 2007 (CET)

True, I hadn't thought of that either. On the record player/disc changer overview page, the devices are listed in ascending order by type. And there you can see which 7 or 6 turntables were available. At the device itself then all devices that were in the program at the same time period, so that you can jump directly to the chronologically matching larger or smaller model.

Greetings Roman


OK. probably the expectations of Hifi Wiki users are different than I thought. Or maybe I really am too much of a dual-insider. Just one more suggestion:

Why not like this?

Comments[edit]

Other models from the 1979-1981 vintages:

There you would have the different series staggered by size and the comparison within a Dual program (here 1979-1981). That would combine both requirements into one and you wouldn't have to abandon one in favor of the other. In my opinion, it would be less misleading and clearer than before.

I just mean, if not it is also ok.

Greetings Peter --Giradischi 17:49, 5 Jan 2007 (CET)

Retrieved from "https://hifi-wiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Dual_CS_714_Q&oldid=11167"