Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
GregS[_2_] GregS[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Keith G Keith G is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 552
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
tubegarden tubegarden is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 343
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
John Byrns John Byrns is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,441
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Jenn Jenn is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,021
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
GregS[_2_] GregS[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 23
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Ethan Winer Ethan Winer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 536
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Rob[_3_] Rob[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 26
Default 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
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
dizzy dizzy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 652
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Jenn Jenn is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,021
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Richard Crowley Richard Crowley is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,172
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Jenn Jenn is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,021
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Peter Wieck Peter Wieck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
George M. Middius George M. Middius is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,173
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
George M. Middius George M. Middius is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,173
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Chris Hornbeck Chris Hornbeck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,744
Default Here we go again!

On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:46:29 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

http://krakow.msnbc.msn.com:80/archi...29/338888.aspx


" CDs contain only
about half of that recorded information"


Obviously true. Vinyl records the analog half and CD
records the digital half. Where's the beef?

I'm right now listening to a CD collection that has BOTH
halves, arrived just today from England, where they manage to
get this delicate balance right sometimes...

Anyway, it's called _The Roots of Taj Mahal_ and besides
having both the original analog (although beautifully
transfered and massaged) and the modern digital halves
preserved. Excellent work on the Son House (very respectful
yet amazingly modern sound) and the Blind Willie Johnson,
especially.

It includes Leadbelly's "Lining Track" and John Hurt's
"Frankie and Albert" if yer not already convinced.

And the original (?, but great!, Lemon Jefferson) "Corrina".
Sweet, sweet, sweet.


Thanks, as always,

Chris Hornbeck
"The camera is an instrument that teachs one how to see
without a camera" -Dorothea Lange
  #32   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Jenn Jenn is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,021
Default 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.

  #33   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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.




  #34   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default 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.
  #35   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Clyde Slick Clyde Slick is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,545
Default 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.



  #36   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Adrian C Adrian C is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default 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
  #37   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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.



  #38   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default 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.


  #39   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default 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

  #40   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
roughplanet roughplanet is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 126
Default 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


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:02 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"