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