Don Satz asks about my assessment of the sound quality:

>>The sound is acceptable.
>
>I found the sound excellent, although not of demonstration quality.  Could
>Steve just provide a little more detail concerning his perception of the
>sound?

You've got to remember I'm not an audio freak.  My first stereo I bought
in 1966 (since I was convinced for a long time it was a fad and a gimmick).
This was also my first component system.  Until then I had been perfectly
happy with a Victrola.  To this day, I have no problems most of the time
with recorded sound from the Twenties, Thirties, Forties, and mono Fifties.
Consequently, I'm very casual in my assessments of recorded sound, in fact
a bit contemptuous of super-duper electronic resonating chambers.  I have
been listening to a lot of string quartets lately.  Before the Schmidt,
I'd been listening to the Preucil Cleveland Quartet on Telarc (Dvorak and
Schubert).  *That* seemed to me a yummy sound.  Preucil, by the way, has
recently become a favorite violinist of mine.  In comparison, the Nimbus
struck me as a little thin.  Now, this could have been the sound of the
Franz Schubert Quartet itself, but I can say that the Nimbus sound neither
impeded nor enhanced.  In general, Nimbus's sound hasn't impressed me.
Another way of looking at it, I suppose, is that it hasn't called attention
to itself.  All I mean by "acceptable" is probably the latter.  You won't
be put off by the sound - or won over, for that matter.

Steve Schwartz