Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
ups.com 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? The A77 had a number of advantages over those old Ampexes especially the 351- size, weight, price, reliability, and availability. All that and equivalent or better performance. Unlike you Bret, I've actually seen and touched a 351. The thing is about the size of a washing machine and about as portable. People who carted 351s around to record live performances were heroes! Besides, aren't the Studer versions of the Revox generally easier to use and more desireable? Only in terms of practical use. ;-) The new head and other part suppliers are geared up to supply Ampex parts, morso than anything else. The real problem is that restoring or even maintaining a reel-to-reel recorder is an act of love, not an act of utility. Plus, 351 transports can be had for free sometimes, and you can build your own electronics or use the aftermarket Inovonics units. A few years back, I turned down the gift of a PR 99, admittedly in need of some parts. A friend who lives nearby has a 351 in his basement. |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote in
message 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. No Jenn you've got it all wrong. We're accusing vinyl fans of distorting established scientific facts to support their delusional position that the best sounding LPs sound more lifelike than a well-made CD. |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote in
message 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. I read your posts, Jenn. Unfortunately they chronicle your futile search for meaning. Here's a friendly hint - you probably won't find it in a store that sells LPs, or while sitting next to your turntable daydreaming. |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Peter Wieck" wrote in message
ups.com On Aug 30, 6:53 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote: There's no lack of outrageous and ignorant claims made by vinyl-fanatics. Oh, fer krissakes... get a grip. Opinion is just that. Yes, but that wasn't what the OP was about. It was about inverting the meaning of established scientific facts. Peter, why are you misreprenting the facts repeatedly? I've come to expect far better from you! |
#45
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 "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 now that the DJ-driven demand for vinyl is falling off, and sales are already dropping preciptiously, the hype will trail off. 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. I think we need to consider the psychology and sociology of the situation, By publically fawning all over vinyl, people join what they perceive to be an elite. The psychology of preferring vinyl despite its warts is similar to piercing. They then have to come up with stupid explanations plausible to themselves, Especially those who have a full-blown addiction, and repeatedly blow $100's and $1,000's on overpriced upgrades to their vinyl-mangling equipment. and once they have convinced themselves, feel the need to be evangelical and convert the rest of the world, just like most religions :-) Vinylista propaganda is more like an indeology than a religion. Converting to Vinylism seems to often involve refuting the established claims of science, as the OP shows Mr. Krakow doing. |
#46
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*.... OK, I've changed my mind and will add to this thread... But vinyl has NOT been banned. You are still welcome to buy it and listen to it. What more do you need??? Perfect example of the deliberate distortion that all vinyl bashers need to forward their agenda - or you really can't distinguish between banning *vinyl* or the *topic of vinyl* in an audio ng....?? Others are just sick of hearing the same stupid arguments for 25 years! Their problem, not mine.... |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - can you point me to one, or is this another example of the distortion you vinyl-bashers need to reinforce your hopeless *antivinyl* arguments? You are still welcome to buy it and listen to it. What more do you need??? Reinforcement that said activity makes him "special". Don't be so ridiculous, I'm fed up with seeing/hearing everything being related to vinyl - all the way down to CDs being made to look like 7 inch 45s.... |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Note to Jenn
Mr.**** said: 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? If this doesn't tell you how futile it is to argue with ****, then you deserve the coming rounds of "debating trade" you're heading for. |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Jenn" wrote in message 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. No Jenn you've got it all wrong. We're accusing vinyl fans of distorting established scientific facts to support their delusional position that the best sounding LPs sound more lifelike than a well-made CD. Which, of course, it does - ask anybody who isn't in *denial*.... |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 31, 2:19?am, Adrian C wrote:
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. Not an equal number of ones and zeroes ... An LP has two sides, a CD only one. 50% difference. -- Adrian C Some LP's had three sides. One side had two grooves, which one you got was determined by where the stylus fell. So, 33 to 50% Actually, I think it was just a way to use up surface space when there was a shortage of taped master stuff. Three tracks were less than two. Maybe. But, nobody makes an acoustic CD player ... Happy Ears! Al |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message u "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 now that the DJ-driven demand for vinyl is falling off, and sales are already dropping preciptiously, the hype will trail off. No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing rapidly. Vinyl continues to chunter on and with the flood of new hardware (turntables, carts &c.) I supect it will only grow when the lofts have been emptied and the owners of that hardware want to feed their investments... I think we need to consider the psychology and sociology of the situation, By publically fawning all over vinyl, people join what they perceive to be an elite. The psychology of preferring vinyl despite its warts is similar to piercing. Studying the psychology of those who feel *excluded* from what is a fairly commonplace and mundane leisure activity might be more interesting and then maybe go on to try and fathom why the same evidenced *denial* is being applied to any new HD audio media?? Readers of a UK newsgroup might want to ask themselves why a foreigner feels it necessary to pound it relentlessly with *antivinyl propaganda*?? All I can say is that I believe this group exists primarily for and is staffed by *UK audio enthusiasts* (not the legions of Chavs who couldn't care less and who could be sold shrink-wrapped dog**** with the right marketing hype) and, as far as I can say, everyone I know locally as such an 'enthusiast' plays LPs on a routine basis, as do almost all the members of this group who have visited here - all bar one, I think... Anyway, like it or not, vinyl will never become *extinct* in ukra while I can be bothered to subscribe - elsewhere, I couldn't give a rat's arse.... |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
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. Right, with "believe" being the operative word. Who is really smarter then :-) You and me. :-) |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
The recording is made up of noughts and ones.
An LP has two sides, a CD only one. 50% difference. Some LP's had three sides. LOL, you guys kill me. :-) |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message 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. I read your posts, Jenn. Unfortunately they chronicle your futile search for meaning. Here's a friendly hint - you probably won't find it in a store that sells LPs, or while sitting next to your turntable daydreaming. Arny, you views about my life is interesting to me only for their unintentional humor and for their irony. |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message 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. No Jenn you've got it all wrong. We're accusing vinyl fans of distorting established scientific facts to support their delusional position that the best sounding LPs sound more lifelike than a well-made CD. You've missed the point yet again. My point is that I've distorted NOTHING. You and Mr. T can keep distorting my statements any way you wish to. I "pity the fools" who can read simple posts. |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Note to Jenn
In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast . net wrote: Mr.**** said: 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? If this doesn't tell you how futile it is to argue with ****, then you deserve the coming rounds of "debating trade" you're heading for. I'm finished. I have no desire to be caught up in yet another endless loop of this sort. |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Mr.T wrote:
"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", Prefer the sound, OK. I think you just have to take a deep breath, relax, and get over it. Until then - but can't possibly accept the fact that they may PREFER something not actually as technically accurate. I don't think 'they' know or care, in general. They then have to come up with stupid explanations plausible to themselves, Really? Again, generally people just prefer the sound. The 'why' isn't particularly important. Knowing why might be interesting, but it's hardly requisite. and once they have convinced themselves, feel the need to be evangelical and convert the rest of the world, just like most religions :-) Unlike digitypes? ;-) Rob |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is. Is this another example of the distortion you vinyl-bashers need to reinforce your hopeless *antivinyl* arguments? Vinyl-bashing? I see playing vinyl for enjoyment sort of like riding in a horse-drawn carriage for enjoyment. For practical purposes, vinyl is like a tomb where some interesting music is entrapped, but can be released if you want to do some work. You are still welcome to buy it and listen to it. What more do you need??? Reinforcement that said activity makes him "special". Don't be so ridiculous, I'm fed up with seeing/hearing everything being related to vinyl - all the way down to CDs being made to look like 7 inch 45s.... Those funny black CDs tricked up to look like 45s are an interesting trip down memory lane... |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" foamed at the mouth and said: No Jenn you've got it all wrong. We're accusing vinyl fans of distorting established scientific facts to support their delusional position that the best sounding LPs sound more lifelike than a well-made CD. Note the 'we' again - not one of these *types* has got the ******** to stand up and speak only for himself... You've missed the point yet again. My point is that I've distorted NOTHING. You and Mr. T can keep distorting my statements any way you wish to. I "pity the fools" who can read simple posts. Twisting what you have said, putting words into your mouth and ascribing false claims to general, subjective remarks (opinions, usually) you have made are the well-known SOP of these *rabid* vinyl-bashers. Their 'scientific arguments' fly out off the window when it comes to the simple task of listening to the *music* - here's a little test I would like to see carried out (but CBA to do myself): Select a number of 'innocent parties' - people who like music but have no interest in *audio*. Ask their preference in music or get them to choose or bring a CD. Sit them in a room (one at a time) with a CD setup, the CD of their choice, some refreshments and a remote control, tell them they've got all the time they want and shut the door on them. Secretly observe them. Report how many of them listened to the whole disk without skipping/fast fowarding tracks.... Then, for bonus points, play them the CD and SACD tracks (blind) of the same music and ask which they thought *better*.... (I make no predictions, but I have my own suspicions... ;-) |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is. I get excited about finding good music well recorded. I've posted maybe 5 or six such posts. I've also commented on finding good sounding CDs. If you don't want to read about music, then don't. It's very simple. |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Rob" wrote in message ... Mr.T wrote: "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", Prefer the sound, OK. I think you just have to take a deep breath, relax, and get over it. Until then - but can't possibly accept the fact that they may PREFER something not actually as technically accurate. I don't think 'they' know or care, in general. They then have to come up with stupid explanations plausible to themselves, Really? Again, generally people just prefer the sound. The 'why' isn't particularly important. Knowing why might be interesting, but it's hardly requisite. and once they have convinced themselves, feel the need to be evangelical and convert the rest of the world, just like most religions :-) Unlike digitypes? ;-) ****ing hard to stay out of all this crap, ain't it? :-) |
#62
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is. OK, I saw myself quoted above and it appeared to relate to what I had said, so I made an assumption (unsurprisingly) - you will note it triggered my *aggressive defence* circuits elsewhere, despite a promise to not get into any 'vinyl debate' as I really couldn't GAS who listens to what and what they prefer or what medium may or not be superior to another in any way that may or may not be in any way relevant. My only problems are to do with oppression and the restrictions some people want to place on others in this public forum. If it makes a noise (from MP3 to Bluray) it's all on the menu, AFAIAC - nobody has to like it *all*.... Those funny black CDs tricked up to look like 45s are an interesting trip down memory lane... No, as I've said recently elsewhere, I'm heartily sick of seeing the words 'valvelike' and 'analogue sound' being applied to SS kit and digital music by silly *hip* magazine writers. If it comes to it, I'll take 'turgid' over 'florid' any day - I can work the rest out for myself... |
#63
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Jenn said to MusicHaterBorg: If you don't want to read about music, then don't. It's very simple. Rumor has it that a future release of Arnii's SnotWare™ will include a logic loop that will allow him to ignore mentions of music. Until that happens, though, the Beast will continue to react with violent revulsion to all posts containing direct references to music. -- "Music is irrelevant to audio." A. Krooger (1998, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006) |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
On Aug 31, 7:45?am, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com
wrote: The recording is made up of noughts and ones. An LP has two sides, a CD only one. 50% difference. Some LP's had three sides. LOL, you guys kill me. :-) Shhh! There are serious insults being sprayed around ... Happy Ears! Al |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Jenn" wrote in
message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is. I get excited about finding good music well recorded. So do I. OK, so that precludes anything on vinyl because any recording on vinyl is by definition not well recorded. No skin off my nose. |
#66
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Keith G" wrote in message
No, as I've said recently elsewhere, I'm heartily sick of seeing the words 'valvelike' and 'analogue sound' being applied to SS kit and digital music by silly *hip* magazine writers. Agreed, no reason to slander good SS kit and good digital recordings that way. |
#67
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is. I get excited about finding good music well recorded. So do I. Great, what is a recent find? OK, so that precludes anything on vinyl because any recording on vinyl is by definition not well recorded. No skin off my nose. Great, so shut up about it. |
#68
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article .com,
Bret Ludwig wrote: On Aug 31, 11:02 am, Jenn wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message .au "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. If you are talking about me I would be interested to see such a post - Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is. I get excited about finding good music well recorded. I've posted maybe 5 or six such posts. I've also commented on finding good sounding CDs. If you don't want to read about music, then don't. It's very simple.- Hide quoted text - Well, you have. But you conveyed the impression to Arny that you preferred vinyl because it's vinyl and he has a problem. Then Arny needs to actually read the posts, because I've said no such thing. |
#69
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Jenn said: Well, you have. But you conveyed the impression to Arny that you preferred vinyl because it's vinyl and he has a problem. Then Arny needs to actually read the posts, because I've said no such thing. Apparently, Bratzi is telling us that Arnii got confused about your meaning. I suggest prefacing all your comments about records you like with the simple introductory phrase "I know vinyl is inherently crappy, but I found this recording ..." Then you can go on to discuss how the album pleases you despite being conveyed on the horribly flawed medium of vinyl. Also, it wouldn't hurt to insinuate snidely that the happenstance of a good-sounding record is most likely accidental. Adding a comment to that effect will tend to assuage the Beast's fragile ego and distract him from the obviously hostile overtones of your attack on digital media. |
#70
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
New Rule!
Good old Arns is reverting back to childhood.
On Aug 31, 3:52 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in I get excited about finding good music well recorded. So do I. OK, so that precludes anything on vinyl because any recording on vinyl is by definition not well recorded. No skin off my nose. Did it work when you were seven, Arns? New rule: Arns has to whip himself from now on. No more using chiorboys! |
#71
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Jenn wrote:
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. I have. |
#72
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
dickless maleclotski said: It would also be helpful if those here who accuse vinyl fans of saying something would actually read the posts of those individuals. I have. Jenn, in case you didn't already know, dickie is a known criminal. He rips people off by posing as an acoustic engineer. He also duped some poor woman in Massachusetts into fencing some stolen audio gear for him on ebay. |
#73
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Keith G wrote:
No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing rapidly. LOL Idiot. |
#74
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
Keith G wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message ... Mr.T wrote: "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", Prefer the sound, OK. I think you just have to take a deep breath, relax, and get over it. Until then - but can't possibly accept the fact that they may PREFER something not actually as technically accurate. I don't think 'they' know or care, in general. They then have to come up with stupid explanations plausible to themselves, Really? Again, generally people just prefer the sound. The 'why' isn't particularly important. Knowing why might be interesting, but it's hardly requisite. and once they have convinced themselves, feel the need to be evangelical and convert the rest of the world, just like most religions :-) Unlike digitypes? ;-) ****ing hard to stay out of all this crap, ain't it? :-) Well, the weekend had started :-) This thread is fairly benign. It's when the rant gets ratcheted up to bits and noise, and CDs simply *must* sound better that I get bemused. A clear case of autosuggestion. Rob |
#75
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
In article ,
Rob wrote: This thread is fairly benign. It's when the rant gets ratcheted up to bits and noise, and CDs simply *must* sound better that I get bemused. A clear case of autosuggestion. The CD *medium* will always sound better than vinyl - if you value audio quality. Individual CDs are a different matter. Rubbish in rubbish out. But then that applies to vinyl too. Vinyl lovers tend to give the impression there are no poorly recorded LPs. -- *I'm not your type. I'm not inflatable. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#76
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Keith G" wrote in message
No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing rapidly. Not in terms of sales percentages. Vinyl continues to chunter on and with the flood of new hardware (turntables, carts &c.) In the US, LP sales have hit the skids. Again. I think we need to consider the psychology and sociology of the situation, By publically fawning all over vinyl, people join what they perceive to be an elite. The psychology of preferring vinyl despite its warts is similar to piercing. Studying the psychology of those who feel *excluded* from what is a fairly commonplace and mundane leisure activity might be more interesting and then maybe go on to try and fathom why the same evidenced *denial* is being applied to any new HD audio media?? What are you talking about? Who is being excluded from what fairly commonplace and mundane leisure activity? If you're saying that playing vinyl is fairly commonplace and mundane, you need to get out more! Hardly anybody does that any more. Most people who have seen it done in the last decade saw it in a dance club. Even among audiophiles, only a small fraction still mess with vinyl. If you're saying that people are excluded from playing vinyl against their will, then you *really* need to get out more! Vinyl used to be the only game in town, and everybody played it. Now only a few percent of the population bother with it. And, if you're talking about me Keith, then you're really going on ignorantly because I'm one of those few people who have a working vinyl playback system, and use it to this day, occasionally, to digititize LPs for friends and acquaintances. Readers of a UK newsgroup might want to ask themselves why a foreigner feels it necessary to pound it relentlessly with *antivinyl propaganda*?? What *antivinyl propaganda*?? Vinyl is what it is - a legacy technology that has been largely abandoned by music lovers because of its inferior sonics and practical difficulties. |
#77
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com On Aug 31, 7:11 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Bret Ludwig" wrote in message ups.com 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? The A77 had a number of advantages over those old Ampexes especially the 351- size, weight, price, reliability, and availability. All that and equivalent or better performance. The 351 has big synchronous motors that run on AC and are mechanically foolproof if the rubber parts are available. Ironic that you talk about big synchronous motors (note plural) , when there is only one motor in a 351 that has any need to synchronize with anything. Bret are you saying that you have a problem with the Revox solution to the same basic need, which is a motor that is in a constant-speed servo loop? Unlike you Bret, I've actually seen and touched a 351. The thing is about the size of a washing machine and about as portable. People who carted 351s around to record live performances were heroes! For house use, the heavier the better. 351s are awkward to even move around inside a house, especially between floors. |
#78
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message No, as I've said recently elsewhere, I'm heartily sick of seeing the words 'valvelike' and 'analogue sound' being applied to SS kit and digital music by silly *hip* magazine writers. Agreed, no reason to slander good SS kit and good digital recordings that way. Except to *tempt* people to buy it....?? (Think about it...) |
#79
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Dozy" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing rapidly. LOL Idiot. If you are posting/crossposting into ukra it's not necessary to declare your *occupation* Dozy, old bean... |
#80
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
|
|||
|
|||
Here we go again!
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message No Arny, you've got that all wrong (unless you are *distorting* again which, of course, is highly likely) - it's CDs that are disappearing rapidly. Not in terms of sales percentages. No? I would have thought a fall in sales revenue of 19.8% in just three months was a pretty good indicator: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6933632.stm Vinyl continues to chunter on and with the flood of new hardware (turntables, carts &c.) In the US, LP sales have hit the skids. Again. Wouldn't know, but the phrase 'down, but not out' springs immediately to mind...?? snip Readers of a UK newsgroup might want to ask themselves why a foreigner feels it necessary to pound it relentlessly with *antivinyl propaganda*?? What *antivinyl propaganda*?? Vinyl is what it is - a legacy technology that has been largely abandoned by music lovers because of its inferior sonics and practical difficulties. This is my point entirely - I don't think the 'transatlantic view' is anything like relevant in this UK ng. You and a *precious few* others (crossposted with only a couple of indigenous, from what I can see) can hide behind all the *vinyl denial* you want but the facts are a wee bit different and speak for themselves; the current issue (Aug 2007) of just one 'UK audio magazine' has a 'vinyl mention' on at least 20 pages - not counting much more stuff hidden in text and/or small ads. Here are some quick snaps of the cover and *only* the double-page spreads, to give you an idea: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/MagCover.jpg http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/DoubleSpread01.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/DoubleSpread02.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/DoubleSpread03.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/DoubleSpread04.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/DoubleSpread05.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/DoubleSpread06.JPG How *legacy* and *abandoned* does that look to you? Really? And remember the point I made a day or two ago - having bought some of this hugely expensive kit, the owners are going to want to feed it for a long time to come so I think it's safe to say that there's still a future for modern LPs. I don't think many people are paying 4K for turntables (DoubleSpread05) or 2.3K for carts (DoubleSpread06) just to play the 80s crap from their lofts or Classics For Pleasure cheepies from the local charity shop.... Perhaps you are confusing modern LPs with 78s on 'gramophones'....?? |