WhyFi

Really? I haven't listened to DS in surround, but 95% of the music that I've heard in surround sucks; usually too heavy-handed with the side/rear mixing, but on the rare occasion that they get the ambients right, I don't think that it adds much to a decent two channel system that's been properly set up.

halfspeed

DSOTM is largely sonic gimmickry anyway and surround is a natural extension of Pink Floyd's exploitation of the stereo medium to multichannel. There aren't too many recordings more appropriate for surround remix.

Most recorded music, especially in rock, pop, dance, rap, electronica etc, creates utterly artificial environments and instrumental balances impossible in any real acoustic space so the question of how ambients are handled is usually moot. (DSOTM and Steven Wilson's work are good examples of surround in that context.) Live acoustic recordings originally recorded with a coincident pair or an artificial head binaural setup aren't really amenable to surround and aren't usually translated to the medium. So that leaves things like multi-microphone recordings of acoustic music that attempt to maintain a natural balance. Of the few of those that I've heard, I'd say that the Buena Vista Social Club's DVD-A and Telarc's 1812 Overture in 4 channel are both quite effective in creating good environments. YMMV.

Fly2High

Just a FYI, Carbon has lots of extra cost items.

Carbon frames require polished molds. You do not just pull a mold from a CNC machine and use it. It needs finishing. A mold can only have so many 'pulls' or parts made from it after which time it will need work to correct imperfections or be replaced.

Having worked with carbon and kevlar for R/c plane building, it requires a skilled hand and is partly an art. It is rather challenging to hit a target weight reliably.

If they are using prepreg, the epoxy is already in the fabric. They could be using infusion where they inject the resin after putting the dry fabric into a mold. Both methods will produce a rather repeatable weight. If they are hand applying to dry fabric, it takes skill to recognize when enough has been applied and when it is too wet. A part that is too dry will fail and cannot be sold. a too wet part will weigh too much and the extra epoxy will do nothing to improve strength.

Then you need ovens to heat cure the epoxy. Most production parts in carbon use a heat sensitive epoxy to keep it workable at room temp and to result in a stronger bond by using a post curing temps. It also can take hours in the oven to fully cure and until that i done, nothing else can be put in. The cost to operate and the time limits the number that can be made in a single day.

Also for each part being made, you need a mold for. Those molds are not cheap to have made and this too needs to be amortized across all parts made.

Epoxy is one of those chemicals that everyone eventually becomes allergic to. I am sure they are using chemical masks and /or respirators but exposure will eventually turn to allergy and I wonder if this will limit their lifespan in the job.

With metal, I wonder if the welding frames need replacement as often or if at all. I have no experience with metal.

I would think metalworking can be done more assembly line and only the time to cut weld and treat, etc needs to be worked out and each step , I would think, takes less time so more parts can be made per day.

Another issue is that the carbon tow that is used to make the woven fabric is only manufactured in a rather limited number of locations. Some sizes of tow are hard to come by. In any case, carbon cloth has jumped in price over the last 10 years due to the demand by aerospace ( Boeing and Airbus ) and many other markets.

IMHO

loimpact

It's only because you haven't bought a SuperSix EVO yet.

To be honest, yes, there is a nostalgic return (albeit small) to steel. Not unlike vinyl, etc. But carbon most definitely has its place. I recently did a horribly paved ride that was almost intolerable except that the amazing absorption of the EVO frame was doing its job quite well. (Not to mention keeping the bike quite silent) Even aluminum can do its thing quite well, when geometry is created to make it so.

In fact, dare I say these material debates have a whole lot less to do with material now than geometry. I've said before, I don't even know why Cannondale & Spesh make the Synapse & Roubaix. The EVO & Tarmac are so shock absorbing that the only thing left for those other 2 frames to do is put a ride in a more upright position. And, heck, you could do that with a stem anyway.

I'd bet if you tested enough aero bikes in CF, you'd find one you like a lot. If the Venge didn't work for you, I don't know that steel is the answer in so much as a "different" bike. (geometry being key)

Still, I admire steel and am glad we have several materials to choose from. That's why we don't all drive Fords.

rms13

Frame material has a lot less to do with comfort now that everyone is moving to 700x25 or 28 tires at 60-75 psi

Stucky

I agree- I think geometry and design and construction can be used to make a frame of any material have the desired features and characteristics. Some materials might lend themselves more readily to certain traits...like, I'm sure that it took a lot more doing to design my AL Klein in such a way to make it ride so nice,because AL by nature can be harsh.

And it's not that I don't like the Venge. It's a fine bike, and very comfy- and offers the stiffness that I desire- but it's just "missing something" compared to even my AL bike. Bith bikes have good road feel, which I like- but the Klein has something more; it's like the Klein isn't just on the road...it's more like it's planted on the road; whereas the Venge is just on the road. The Klein only weighs 2 lbs. more...but yet has a feeling of substance that the venge lacks. (Hmmm....just ocurred to me: I wonder if the carbon Aerofly bars on the Venge are soaking up what I'm missing?)

I remember when I was a kid, I once rode another klid's Big Wheel- Man! That thing seemed so cheesy compared to banana-seat Ross boat anchor I had at home... CF bikes remind me of that Big Wheel. And while you may well be correct, that there may be a CF bike that can reproduce the characteristics of a steel bike,; the thing is, there are lots of steel bikes which all posess the desired characteristics; and for a lot less money- so why look for a CF which will replicate metal...when I can just get metal?

The only thing I'll have to watch for, is not to get one that is noodly- I don't need a bike flexing under me as I'm Hulk-smashing up these hills! (It'll be interesting to see how good steel compares to my Klein in that respect- the Klein may have spoiled me. Been a long time since I've ridden steel, and when I did, it was gas-pipe steel... Who knows, I may find that nothing beats the Klein, eh? Which wouldn't be a bad thing....but I have a feeling that an old DeRosa or similar will be pretty sweet.)

WalksOn2Wheels

If the only CF bike you've owned is a Venge, I would argue that you have NOT really gotten the carbon experience. It's been stated here recently (you were there for it) that the Venge is a notoriously stiff ride. I would recommend you ride a Tarmac, Emonda, or SuperSix to get a feel of what carbon truly has to offer.

All that said, I love me some steel. My Bianchi is a plush ride, but I think part of that it the light tubing combined with my "formidable" frame.

But from all of your previous posts, I would recommend you stick with steel. Mostly because I don't want to hear you *****ing about the next carbon bike you buy.

I have to ask: WHY did you buy a Venge in the first place?

Stucky

I wanted to give CF a try- and the venge has a lot of the characteristics I desire- like stiffness and good handling. Again, it's not that i dislike the Venge; and I'm not looking for a plush-riding bike- I like road feel. When I had gotten back into riding recently, my first road bike was a relaxed-geo couch on wheels, and i hated it.

One of the reasons I want to go with C&V steel, too, is that I want to return to downtube shifters.

I'm really just selling the Venge to finance my steel endeavor- and because i don't ride enough to justify having 3 bikes. Otherwise i'd keep it. It's a fine bike, and I've done my longest rides on it, in great comfort and no complaints....like I said, I just feel that something is missing compared to real metal. Not that big of a deal really- it's just that my Klein has that "something".

I've always thought that the Supersix Evos were NICE-looking bikes.

Hey, if i still ***** after getting a steel bike, then you give me 40 lashes with a soggy brake cable (Just the cable; not the housing!), and then I'll stick with Kleins! (Maybe that's what I should just do from the git-go...just get an older Klein with DT shifters to complement my '97).

But yeah, my ultimate take-away is, there's nothing wrong with CF, and it won't assplode if you look at it wrong.....but I just see no real advantage to it. I can't complain about the Venge....but i can't rave about it either. I want to be able to rave. (Just being a lunatic isn't good enough! I need to be a raving one! )

Slackerprince

That's a good point, but I would think they would keep the CAAD and introduce a new, aero bike, independent of the CAAD.
Maybe, Trek could help them with the name. DAAC, DACA, CADA, etc.

S

Leinster

I think we'll see the CAAAD1 (Cannondale Advanced Aluminum Aero Design) in the 2017 range. "How do you pronounce it differently from CAAD?" "Well, one's a CAAD, and the other's a CAA-AD." "Ummm..."

Slackerprince

caadaero.


S

WalksOn2Wheels

I only just realized that Canyon missed out big by not naming their aero bike the Canyon Aero.

https://youtu.be/7ZeFDe44Ddo

McBTC

... how about, CKAD for Computer Kool-Aided Design.

Leinster

Top o' the line in utility sports, unexplained fires are a matter for the courts.

PiLigand

All doctors I know of recommend getting vaccines, but demand keeps dropping for those as well. And now medical professionals keep having to remind people the necessity of getting vaccinated.

See? People can believe dumb things in large numbers. Especially when the internet is involved.

halfspeed

I've ridden thousands of miles on all of those materials and I'll choose carbon over any of the others every time.

Nostalgia sells.

Some people like the limited capabilities of vinyl records, too.

Bah Humbug

No one is sponsoring pro race car drivers to drive the cars at Barrett-Jackson, but people buy them anyway. Don't know if the prices are still going up, but they were for a long time. Never underestimate the buying power of boomers trying to recapture their youth.

bakes1

Terrible analogy that makes no sense at all. Those cars are classics there were built
50 years ago and are desirable because they were around and all over the road when today's buyers were young. It's pure nostalgia.
This discussion pertains to brand new bikes being better built with what is simply an older material.

For what it's worth I would bet any amount of money that the MAJORITY of the carbon fiber obsessed non professional crowd wouldn't know the ride difference between it and aluminum if they were riding the bike blindfolded.
Call me crazy but marketing is a very powerful tool that can delude the best of us. Most people want to spend their money and need to feel justified for doing so regardless of how wealthy they are.

Bah Humbug

Steel bikes were built 50 years ago and are desirable because they were around and all over the road when today's buyers were young. It's pure nostalgia.

sleepy

It's also affordable durable nostalgia.

halfspeed

It's easy to promise to bet on an untestable scenario. I'm also pretty confident you'd lose were it practical to setup an objective test with blindfolded cyclists. There are some pretty obvious giveaways.

Deontologist

Thanks for nailing it.

halfspeed

Too bad it's harder and more expensive to repair when it does break. Affordability is relative.

bakes1

You are completely lost
My point quite clearly referenced the OP who quite clearly referenced the NEW 2016 CAAD12. People are
not shelling out all that cash for a 2016 bike for nostalgiac purposes. Makes no sense at all. If they were truly nostalgiac they would buy a bike that was actually built and around when they were young. Hence the terrible classic car analogy

sleepy

Yup.

Some folks are happy shelling out a couple of hundred and riding steel for years. Other folks are stoked to shell out Thousands and then paying a couple of hundred for Carbon for years. Or until the new Upgraded Frame comes out that shaves 10 minutes off 200 km, disregarding previous thousand dollar frame.