Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41   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!

"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   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!

"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   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!

"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   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!

"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   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!

"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   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!


"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   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!


"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   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 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   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!


"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   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!

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   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!


"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   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!

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   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!

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   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 ,
"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   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 ,
"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   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 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   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!

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   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!

"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   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!


"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   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 ,
"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   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!


"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   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!


"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   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!




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   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!

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   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!

"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   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!

"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   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 ,
"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   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,
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   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!



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   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,415
Default 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   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!

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   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!



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   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!

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   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!

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   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 ,
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   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!

"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   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!

"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   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!


"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   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!


"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   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!


"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'....??



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 08:51 AM.

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"