Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
http://krakow.msnbc.msn.com:80/archi...29/338888.aspx
"There's a good reason for this. In addition to what people remember as the bad things that LPs provide (scratches, clicks and pops) vinyl discs have lots of good things going for them. LPs contain close to 100-percent of the uncompressed music information as originally recorded. CDs contain only about half of that recorded information. And compressed music files are left with only a small percentage of the information that's on a CD." With all due respect to Gary Krakow, he seems to be flaunting his ignorance of the relevant technologies. I understand that Gary wrote for Stereophile once upon a time. I don't think that even John Atkinson would tolerate this kind of technical error, heavy vinylista advertising in Stereophile notwithstanding. Information theory (which Gary is obviously appealing to when he says "music information") states that information can be quantified, based on the product of bandwidth and dynamic range. For example, an analog or digital channel with 6 dB more dynamic range is capable of passing twice as much information. An analog or digital channel with twice the bandwidth is capable of passing twice as much information. Applying the most generous weighting factors will allow the claim that the LP format is capable of about 75 dB dynamic range. In the real world, disappointing dynamic ranges of even 45 dB are not unheard of when vinyl is in play. The CD format is capable of more like 95 dB dynamic range, even when judged by a stiffer standard - unweighted noise. The clear advantage goes to the CD format, and by a factor of 10 or more. BTW, my analysis ignores the fact that LPs are prone to many scratches, clicks, and pops while CDs are not. Krakow goes further than most vinylistas in the direction of truth by admitting that these exist. Scratches, clicks and pops do more than just distract you from the music, they detract from dynamic range. A good scratch or pop may be louder than the music, possibly leading to the mind-bending concept of negative dynamic range. Therefore, by the most pro-LP-biased of technical evaluations, the music information leader is as always the CD format, and by a factor of at least 10. This means that if the LP format had far more bandwidth than the CD format (which as a practical matter it does not) the LP format would need to have 10 times more bandwidth than the CD format to break even. It would be a different world if journalists who pretend to be technical experts by dispensing technical advice had useful amounts of basic audio engineering training. |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 30, 9:46 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
Much obvious, but essentially meaningless stuff. And those who like vinyl will continue to like it. And those who do not will continue in their ways as well. Nothing will change and nothing will be learned other than a monumental waste of bandwidth will transpire if this thread gets legs. Which it should not IMHO. Even the likes of the "commander" and Bret should recognize that much and stay under their various rocks. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article om, Peter Wieck wrote:
On Aug 30, 9:46 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Much obvious, but essentially meaningless stuff. And those who like vinyl will continue to like it. And those who do not will continue in their ways as well. Not necessarily. greg |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Peter Wieck" wrote in message ps.com... On Aug 30, 9:46 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Much obvious, but essentially meaningless stuff. And those who like vinyl will continue to like it. And those who do not will continue in their ways as well. Says it all and I will not add to this thread again other than to say, having been cornered into the position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few* should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible audio topic' - no-one ever said it was *compulsory*.... |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Uuf Duh! As we say in Minnesota, well, northern Minnesota, anywho ...
It is wonderful to see you monkeys raping other peoples' hobby horses Such Elan! Perspicacity! Meters can measure stuff very accurately, occasionally, if not every last picosecond ... several were over before meters were even thunked up, theoretically. Without meters, how can we know??? I listened to big, floor standing AM radio for years well below the noise floor. Negative dynamic range? Sure, kids. OK, the ocassional fake gun shot may have breached the surface, briefly ... unless there was coincident events in the noise mix Noise is not meaningful, hence the term: noise. Signal to Noise Ratio and Noise to Signal Ratio are both measureable, but, if you are listening to the Lone Ranger and Tonto planning to outwit those Bad Guys, friends, nobody gives a RAT's ass, you should pardon ... I remember the Lone Ranger. I know there was noise, but, frankly, I forgot it. You guys never have any fun. Just keep pulling it. Happy Ears! Al |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article om,
Peter Wieck wrote: On Aug 30, 9:46 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Much obvious, but essentially meaningless stuff. And those who like vinyl will continue to like it. And those who do not will continue in their ways as well. Nothing will change and nothing will be learned other than a monumental waste of bandwidth will transpire if this thread gets legs. Which it should not IMHO. Even the likes of the "commander" and Bret should recognize that much and stay under their various rocks. I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 30, 1:38 pm, John Byrns wrote:
I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". And even analog tape, both via the ubiquitous A77 and even ~~SHUDDER~~ cassette or 8-Track. I do own the mandatory A77, of course. A road-deck as it happens. It even gets used on occasion. Also a few cassette decks, but never and no 8-Tracks. One would think that the sole-and-entire purpose of the hobby is to have fun with it. Those that perforce must make a living at it, and those who believe that they are God's Gift to the hobby and its bleeding edge will see things differently of course. Writing for myself, I am happy to putter about with what crosses my path, learning a little as I go and spending a good deal of time being pleasantly surprised at what I hear and what I do. And I can rest in the certain knowledge that *nothing* I do will be cause for earth-shattering revelations... the pressure is 'off' in other words. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA Kutztown Space 338 |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article . com,
Peter Wieck wrote: On Aug 30, 1:38 pm, John Byrns wrote: I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". I certainly agree. I personally like them both. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article , John Byrns wrote:
In article om, Peter Wieck wrote: On Aug 30, 9:46 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Much obvious, but essentially meaningless stuff. And those who like vinyl will continue to like it. And those who do not will continue in their ways as well. Nothing will change and nothing will be learned other than a monumental waste of bandwidth will transpire if this thread gets legs. Which it should not IMHO. Even the likes of the "commander" and Bret should recognize that much and stay under their various rocks. I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. I thought there would be a lot of collectors of old jackets, but I have not seen anything to my knowledge, except that I still have a stack of records, and of course they are in the jackets. greg |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 30, 3:00 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
I agree 8 Tracks are dog****. But, while the Revox was one of the better consumer decks, why not ante up for a real one-an AG440 Ampex maybe? Or even a 351. Bret, the Revox A700 is perhaps the best 1/4" tape deck ever made. Even more so than any Ampex ever, or even the (in)famous Crowns. I kept one briefly, but frankly, the A77 met my needs, is much more portable, and with the built in amps and speakers is far more adaptable to most uses. So I made a nice little profit on the 700, and kept the A77. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Arny,
CDs contain only about half of that recorded information. LOL, I wonder how he came up with "half." Arny, you should email him and ask for the exact formula he used to determine that. :-) --Ethan |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
GregS wrote:
In article , John Byrns wrote: In article om, Peter Wieck wrote: On Aug 30, 9:46 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Much obvious, but essentially meaningless stuff. And those who like vinyl will continue to like it. And those who do not will continue in their ways as well. Nothing will change and nothing will be learned other than a monumental waste of bandwidth will transpire if this thread gets legs. Which it should not IMHO. Even the likes of the "commander" and Bret should recognize that much and stay under their various rocks. I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. I thought there would be a lot of collectors of old jackets, but I have not seen anything to my knowledge, except that I still have a stack of records, and of course they are in the jackets. greg I recently sold several hundred LPs (from a 30 quid ebay job lot) to a bloke who uses the covers to decorate rooms in his stately home in Yorkshire. He's had frames built in some rooms so he can change the covers to suit his mood. And why not :-) Rob |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
|
#14
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Peter Wieck wrote:
On Aug 30, 1:38 pm, John Byrns wrote: I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". Indeed. Many of the arguments would stop if ignorant vinyl-lovers would stop spewing their ignorance. Seems as though every half-wit out there thinks they have sufficient knowledge of digital audio to make bold statements about it's supposed limitations. |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article . com,
Bret Ludwig wrote: Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". And even analog tape, both via the ubiquitous A77 and even ~~SHUDDER~~ cassette or 8-Track. I do own the mandatory A77, of course. A road-deck as it happens. It even gets used on occasion. Also a few cassette decks, but never and no 8-Tracks. I agree 8 Tracks are dog****. They sounded better than the average cassette of the day due to running at twice the speed. I've got a rather rare Woolensack recorder with Dolby B which uses ferrichrome tape. Just as good as a decent 1/4" at 7.5 ips. Of course they all suffer from the limited track running time. -- *The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
Ethan Winer ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote: CDs contain only about half of that recorded information. LOL, I wonder how he came up with "half." Arny, you should email him and ask for the exact formula he used to determine that. :-) The recording is made up of noughts and ones. Noughts naturally are nothing so only the ones count. Therefore 50% of the total. -- *I must always remember that I'm unique, just like everyone else. * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article . com,
Bret Ludwig wrote: Besides, aren't the Studer versions of the Revox generally easier to use and more desireable? Studer is the name for the pro machines - Revox the domestic ones. Most are totally different. -- *Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
dizzy wrote: Peter Wieck wrote: On Aug 30, 1:38 pm, John Byrns wrote: I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". Indeed. Many of the arguments would stop if ignorant vinyl-lovers would stop spewing their ignorance. Seems as though every half-wit out there thinks they have sufficient knowledge of digital audio to make bold statements about it's supposed limitations. It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote ...
dizzy wrote: Indeed. Many of the arguments would stop if ignorant vinyl-lovers would stop spewing their ignorance. Seems as though every half-wit out there thinks they have sufficient knowledge of digital audio to make bold statements about it's supposed limitations. It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. There's no lack of outrageous and ignorant claims made by vinyl-fanatics. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
"Richard Crowley" wrote: "Jenn" wrote ... dizzy wrote: Indeed. Many of the arguments would stop if ignorant vinyl-lovers would stop spewing their ignorance. Seems as though every half-wit out there thinks they have sufficient knowledge of digital audio to make bold statements about it's supposed limitations. It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. There's no lack of outrageous and ignorant claims made by vinyl-fanatics. Of course, but my point stands. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 30, 6:00 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
The Ampex units are total overkill for domestic use. I'd take a Revox A700 over an Ampex any day. For speed stability, that direct drive Pabst capstan motor combined with the electronic servo tensioning, was just unbeatable. And the electronics were modern and quiet. Plus, unlike the Ampex, the whole package doesn't take up an entire room. What's better about a Revox than an AG440 or a 351? Besides, aren't the Studer versions of the Revox generally easier to use and more desireable? The new head and other part suppliers are geared up to supply Ampex parts, morso than anything else. Plus, 351 transports can be had for free sometimes, and you can build your own electronics or use the aftermarket Inovonics units. Bret: It becomes increasingly clear from your general driveling and trolling that you haven't even the faintest actual knowledge or direct experience of anything audio beyond one (1) Dynaco ST-70 that scared you as a child, and maybe you observed an Ampex product somewhere, somehow. You do have a talent for juxtaposing random tidbits culled from hours of web-wanderings (apparently mostly while intoxicated) passed off as experienced opinion, but vanishingly little more. You really need to get some sort of life or you will wind up like Jute... a superannuated, stroked out never-was posing as as some sort of Audio Avatar. Oops... you are there already. Sorry. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. http://krakow.msnbc.msn.com:80/archi...29/338888.aspx It would be a different world if journalists who pretend to be technical experts by dispensing technical advice had useful amounts of basic audio engineering training. But such rags are only designed to sell advertising to uneducated suckers. What really annoys me is when I see similar howlers in technical trade magazines, and I have unfortunately. MrT. |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Keith G" wrote in message ... Says it all and I will not add to this thread again other than to say, having been cornered into the position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few* should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible audio topic' - no-one ever said it was *compulsory*.... But vinyl has NOT been banned. You are still welcome to buy it and listen to it. What more do you need??? Others are just sick of hearing the same stupid arguments for 25 years! MrT. |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"John Byrns" wrote in message ... I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. So true. One simply has to decide if the music or the cover art is more important to them, and buy whatever suits their needs. MrT. |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message ... CDs contain only about half of that recorded information. LOL, I wonder how he came up with "half." Arny, you should email him and ask for the exact formula he used to determine that. :-) Firstly the quote is "about half", and my guess is he simply believes vinyl has a possible frequency response to ~40kHz rather than 22 kHz, and doesn't understand in the slightest the concepts of information theory. Then he simply ignore the flatness of the response, the bass problems, noise problems, distortion problems, speed problems and every other bloody problem associated with vinyl, . People here seem to forget the most important thing though, such writers are *PAID* to write such crap for the audio rags. The people here waste their time endlessly for free. Who is really smarter then :-) MrT. |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 30, 6:53 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote ... dizzy wrote: Indeed. Many of the arguments would stop if ignorant vinyl-lovers would stop spewing their ignorance. Seems as though every half-wit out there thinks they have sufficient knowledge of digital audio to make bold statements about it's supposed limitations. It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. There's no lack of outrageous and ignorant claims made by vinyl-fanatics. Oh, fer krissakes... get a grip. Opinion is just that. And this world would be a terribly dull place if opinion and "claims" were required to be factually accurate at all times and in all places. Where failure sets in is when one feels that one's own "claims" are the only valid facts, and that one's own opinions are inherently and naturally so much better than another's that that same 'other' is to shrivel up, give up, and kowtow to such obviously superior claims. With respect, what inneffable hogwash. If you are secure in your opinions and claims, enjoy them. Allow others to be the same. Arguing them with the expectation of foisting "yours" on "theirs" is a fool's game, one that Arny and Bret live for. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA Kutztown Space 338 |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote in message news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS- There's no lack of outrageous and ignorant claims made by vinyl-fanatics. Of course, but my point stands. You don't have a point though, only an opinion. You are entitled to it of course, but how many times do we need to be told you have one? Who really cares? You admit you don't care about other opinions either, so surely that is the end of the argument? MrT. |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Mr.**** said: You admit you don't care about other opinions either, so surely that is the end of the argument? You misspoke again, ****. The corrected version reads "You, like other enlightened individuals, are perfectly justified in ignoring the opinions of gibbering baboons." If the shoe fits..... |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Mr.**** said: You admit you don't care about other opinions either, so surely that is the end of the argument? You misspoke again, ****. The corrected version reads "You, like other enlightened individuals, are perfectly justified in ignoring the opinions of gibbering baboons." If the shoe fits..... .. |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"George M. Middius" cmndr _ george @ comcast . net wrote in message ... You, like other enlightened individuals, are perfectly justified in ignoring the opinions of gibbering baboons." Thank you, I will. MrT. |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS- There's no lack of outrageous and ignorant claims made by vinyl-fanatics. Of course, but my point stands. You don't have a point though, only an opinion. No, the point of my post (which you cut) is very clear: It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. Your posts to me and the bogus thing you accuse me of are perfect cases making my point. You are entitled to it of course, but how many times do we need to be told you have one? Who really cares? Here's a question for you: In, say, the past year, other than around three brief posts about a specific LP that I found, how many times have I offered an opinion about LPs other than in response to someone else, mainly Arny? You admit you don't care about other opinions either, Incorrect. so surely that is the end of the argument? MrT. |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote in message om... Of course, but my point stands. You don't have a point though, only an opinion. No, the point of my post (which you cut) No I didn't. is very clear: In your mind maybe. Still have no idea what it is. It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. Your posts to me and the bogus thing you accuse me of are perfect cases making my point. Which is? You are entitled to it of course, but how many times do we need to be told you have one? Who really cares? Here's a question for you: In, say, the past year, other than around three brief posts about a specific LP that I found, how many times have I offered an opinion about LPs other than in response to someone else, mainly Arny? No idea, why would I know or care? You admit you don't care about other opinions either, Incorrect. What part of "And I couldn't give a rat's what YOU prefer either." is incorrect? MrT. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
Mr.T MrT@home wrote: Firstly the quote is "about half", and my guess is he simply believes vinyl has a possible frequency response to ~40kHz rather than 22 kHz, and doesn't understand in the slightest the concepts of information theory. Then he simply ignore the flatness of the response, the bass problems, noise problems, distortion problems, speed problems and every other bloody problem associated with vinyl, . To me the real killer point is if you take any decent source - analogue or digital - and copy to digital in the CD format and to vinyl, there were be a *very* noticeable difference between that master and the vinyl but not between it and the digital copy. Of course *some* will prefer the vinyl sound. But then come up with all sorts of bull**** as to why. -- *Just remember...if the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On 30 Aug, 21:10, Jenn wrote:
In article . com, Peter Wieck wrote: On Aug 30, 1:38 pm, John Byrns wrote: I like them both, the LP has the edge in the information carrying capacity of the jacket, while the CD has the edge in convenience. Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". I certainly agree. I personally like them both. so do i, but i like one even better than the other. |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
The recording is made up of noughts and ones. Noughts naturally are nothing so only the ones count. Therefore 50% of the total. An LP has two sides, a CD only one. 50% difference. -- Adrian C |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... To me the real killer point is if you take any decent source - analogue or digital - and copy to digital in the CD format and to vinyl, there were be a *very* noticeable difference between that master and the vinyl but not between it and the digital copy. Of course *some* will prefer the vinyl sound. But then come up with all sorts of bull**** as to why. Yep it's been happening for 25 years and no sign of stopping. My take is that they PREFER the so called "euphonic distortions", but can't possibly accept the fact that they may PREFER something not actually as technically accurate. They then have to come up with stupid explanations plausible to themselves, and once they have convinced themselves, feel the need to be evangelical and convert the rest of the world, just like most religions :-) MrT. |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message ups.com... Exactly. It is permitted to "like them both". I certainly agree. I personally like them both. so do i, but i like one even better than the other. Me too, I just like one *FAR* better than the other :-) (and am especially happy that it's not ALL we have any more) MrT. |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article . com, Bret
Ludwig scribeth thus The Ampex units are total overkill for domestic use. I'd take a Revox A700 over an Ampex any day. For speed stability, that direct drive Pabst capstan motor combined with the electronic servo tensioning, was just unbeatable. And the electronics were modern and quiet. Plus, unlike the Ampex, the whole package doesn't take up an entire room. What's better about a Revox than an AG440 or a 351? Besides, aren't the Studer versions of the Revox generally easier to use and more desireable? The new head and other part suppliers are geared up to supply Ampex parts, morso than anything else. Plus, 351 transports can be had for free sometimes, and you can build your own electronics or use the aftermarket Inovonics units. Inovonics Who are they?, AFAIK they make broadcast processor equipment do they or did they make recording equipment?.. -- Tony Sayer |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u... "Keith G" wrote in message ... Says it all and I will not add to this thread again other than to say, having been cornered into the position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few* should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible audio topic' - no-one ever said it was *compulsory*.... But vinyl has NOT been banned. You are still welcome to buy it and listen to it. What more do you need??? Others are just sick of hearing the same stupid arguments for 25 years! Uh huh. So this is where you hang out these days, still banging the same old anti-vinyl gong. Different newsgroup, same message. Not much changes, does it T? ruff |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u "Keith G" wrote in message ... Says it all and I will not add to this thread again other than to say, having been cornered into the position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few* should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible audio topic' - no-one ever said it was *compulsory*.... But vinyl has NOT been banned. Agreed. Although the trite "I just bought a new LP" posts should be were that to be possible. You are still welcome to buy it and listen to it. What more do you need??? Reinforcement that said activity makes him "special". Others are just sick of hearing the same stupid arguments for 25 years! Arguments like those presented by Krakow, which are based on a complete contradiction of established facts, get very tiring, very fact. The real question is: "Is Krakow knowlegable enough to be lying"? Or, is he merely mislead? |