Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#241
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"John Atkinson" wrote Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? |
#242
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:59:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:20:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: You're probably thinking of CD's which are constant-linear-velocity playback devices. Their rotational speed varies as you play the disc so that the linear velocity of the track remains the same as the radius increases. Yes, CDs are played from the inside-out. I'm not really trying to envision the rotational speed of the data in the groove itself (so to speak). I'm just trying to envision how you place a scratch in the fashion that you are talking about to measure the rotation. Does this make sense? Place a straight edge across a record, bisecting the spindle hole, and make a scratch along it. I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? If this still gives you a lot of concerns, just use the lead-out groove of a record. It's always the the same length, and always rotating at the speed fo the turntable. I wasn't really concerned about it, nor did I want to test the speed of my turntable. I was just wondering about your statements about the speed of one revolution, as it didn't seem to be correct that the time between clicks would be constant on a disk. However, I'm not surprised about much. I remember once when I was younger, I checked out a Vanguard recording of Tibetian monks chanting (during my John Cage phase). Some friends of mine and I were listening to it and one of us thought that it would be funny to listen at 78 rpm, thinking that they might sound like chipmunks. Keep in mind that this was pretty much random chanting with no musical content. We were all completely flabbergasted to find that the chanting sounded virtually the same. There was no real perceptual "speedup" of the chanting and the pitch of the voices sounded almost the same as well. We tried at 45 rpm and it was the same. You can measure as many repetitions of it as you want, laid end-to-end in a digital recording. Plus, you can have as many test samples as you have LPs, without damaging the music part of any record. The thunks are fatter than a tic, but they generally have some very distinctive parts that you can synch up on. I've found a disk that I'm going to try out. I just have to find a stopwatch or something to measure the difference between the beginning and end of the record. |
#243
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:59:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:20:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: You're probably thinking of CD's which are constant-linear-velocity playback devices. Their rotational speed varies as you play the disc so that the linear velocity of the track remains the same as the radius increases. Yes, CDs are played from the inside-out. I'm not really trying to envision the rotational speed of the data in the groove itself (so to speak). I'm just trying to envision how you place a scratch in the fashion that you are talking about to measure the rotation. Does this make sense? Place a straight edge across a record, bisecting the spindle hole, and make a scratch along it. I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? If this still gives you a lot of concerns, just use the lead-out groove of a record. It's always the the same length, and always rotating at the speed fo the turntable. I wasn't really concerned about it, nor did I want to test the speed of my turntable. I was just wondering about your statements about the speed of one revolution, as it didn't seem to be correct that the time between clicks would be constant on a disk. However, I'm not surprised about much. I remember once when I was younger, I checked out a Vanguard recording of Tibetian monks chanting (during my John Cage phase). Some friends of mine and I were listening to it and one of us thought that it would be funny to listen at 78 rpm, thinking that they might sound like chipmunks. Keep in mind that this was pretty much random chanting with no musical content. We were all completely flabbergasted to find that the chanting sounded virtually the same. There was no real perceptual "speedup" of the chanting and the pitch of the voices sounded almost the same as well. We tried at 45 rpm and it was the same. You can measure as many repetitions of it as you want, laid end-to-end in a digital recording. Plus, you can have as many test samples as you have LPs, without damaging the music part of any record. The thunks are fatter than a tic, but they generally have some very distinctive parts that you can synch up on. I've found a disk that I'm going to try out. I just have to find a stopwatch or something to measure the difference between the beginning and end of the record. |
#244
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:59:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:20:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: You're probably thinking of CD's which are constant-linear-velocity playback devices. Their rotational speed varies as you play the disc so that the linear velocity of the track remains the same as the radius increases. Yes, CDs are played from the inside-out. I'm not really trying to envision the rotational speed of the data in the groove itself (so to speak). I'm just trying to envision how you place a scratch in the fashion that you are talking about to measure the rotation. Does this make sense? Place a straight edge across a record, bisecting the spindle hole, and make a scratch along it. I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? If this still gives you a lot of concerns, just use the lead-out groove of a record. It's always the the same length, and always rotating at the speed fo the turntable. I wasn't really concerned about it, nor did I want to test the speed of my turntable. I was just wondering about your statements about the speed of one revolution, as it didn't seem to be correct that the time between clicks would be constant on a disk. However, I'm not surprised about much. I remember once when I was younger, I checked out a Vanguard recording of Tibetian monks chanting (during my John Cage phase). Some friends of mine and I were listening to it and one of us thought that it would be funny to listen at 78 rpm, thinking that they might sound like chipmunks. Keep in mind that this was pretty much random chanting with no musical content. We were all completely flabbergasted to find that the chanting sounded virtually the same. There was no real perceptual "speedup" of the chanting and the pitch of the voices sounded almost the same as well. We tried at 45 rpm and it was the same. You can measure as many repetitions of it as you want, laid end-to-end in a digital recording. Plus, you can have as many test samples as you have LPs, without damaging the music part of any record. The thunks are fatter than a tic, but they generally have some very distinctive parts that you can synch up on. I've found a disk that I'm going to try out. I just have to find a stopwatch or something to measure the difference between the beginning and end of the record. |
#245
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message
"John Atkinson" wrote Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. No comment about any changes in the SP rate base. Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? It's 9-10 years later, right? Add 8-9 years, allowing some for drop-off due to increased mortality with age. |
#246
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message
"John Atkinson" wrote Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. No comment about any changes in the SP rate base. Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? It's 9-10 years later, right? Add 8-9 years, allowing some for drop-off due to increased mortality with age. |
#247
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message
"John Atkinson" wrote Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. No comment about any changes in the SP rate base. Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? It's 9-10 years later, right? Add 8-9 years, allowing some for drop-off due to increased mortality with age. |
#248
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) |
#249
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) |
#250
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) |
#251
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? It's 9-10 years later, right? Add 8-9 years, allowing some for drop-off due to increased mortality with age. What’s unknown is the source of new (by age) subscribers given an average 4.8 year subscription turnover. If baby boomers still are the largest source of new business then what you infer maybe true. |
#252
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? It's 9-10 years later, right? Add 8-9 years, allowing some for drop-off due to increased mortality with age. What’s unknown is the source of new (by age) subscribers given an average 4.8 year subscription turnover. If baby boomers still are the largest source of new business then what you infer maybe true. |
#253
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote Has the age demographic profile for subscribers changed over the last ten years... different from what I posted for 1994? It's 9-10 years later, right? Add 8-9 years, allowing some for drop-off due to increased mortality with age. What’s unknown is the source of new (by age) subscribers given an average 4.8 year subscription turnover. If baby boomers still are the largest source of new business then what you infer maybe true. |
#254
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. |
#255
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. |
#256
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. |
#257
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) |
#258
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) |
#259
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) |
#260
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) Wrong. You obviously do. |
#261
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) Wrong. You obviously do. |
#262
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) Wrong. You obviously do. |
#263
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) Wrong. You obviously do. Do you know the difference between a gay and an homosexual ? |
#264
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) Wrong. You obviously do. Do you know the difference between a gay and an homosexual ? |
#265
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) Wrong. You obviously do. Do you know the difference between a gay and an homosexual ? |
#266
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Lionel said:
Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) I thought his explanation was very clear. As was mr. Boudreaux's, almost visible :-) -- Sander deWaal Vacuum Audio Consultancy |
#267
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Lionel said:
Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) I thought his explanation was very clear. As was mr. Boudreaux's, almost visible :-) -- Sander deWaal Vacuum Audio Consultancy |
#268
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Lionel said:
Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) I thought his explanation was very clear. As was mr. Boudreaux's, almost visible :-) -- Sander deWaal Vacuum Audio Consultancy |
#269
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
|
#271
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
|
#272
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) Well, anyone would explain it better than Gorge. Most of us would simply refer to the inner grooves of the same 12" LP.............. Even Trots should explain it better, since he's a fan of laserdiscs, which you could get in both CAV and CLV forms. What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) But of course he's the smart guy, and of course you have no problem with homosexuals. You're French....................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#273
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) Well, anyone would explain it better than Gorge. Most of us would simply refer to the inner grooves of the same 12" LP.............. Even Trots should explain it better, since he's a fan of laserdiscs, which you could get in both CAV and CLV forms. What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) But of course he's the smart guy, and of course you have no problem with homosexuals. You're French....................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#274
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:39:43 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:27:27 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:30:56 +0100, Lionel wrote: George M. Middius a écrit : Don't know the technical terminology, but what it amounts to is the speed of rotation is higher the farther you are from the center point of rotation. This part is intuitive: Imagine a 6" disc sitting on top of the 12" LP. Both rotate at the same speed, right? But you know the distance traveled by a point on the edge of each one has to be different because their circumferences are different. The velocity of a point on a circle closer to the center has to be less than a point farther from the center. Hey asshole, you should ask to a worker in a mechanic plant he would explain that better than you with the exact technical terminology. :-) Well, anyone would explain it better than Gorge. Most of us would simply refer to the inner grooves of the same 12" LP.............. Even Trots should explain it better, since he's a fan of laserdiscs, which you could get in both CAV and CLV forms. What *is* your problem? Your *gay* 50% ! ;-) I'm sorry that you have problems with gay people. I don't. You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) But of course he's the smart guy, and of course you have no problem with homosexuals. You're French....................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#275
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 08:37:17 -0600, dave weil
wrote: On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:59:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message m On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:20:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: You're probably thinking of CD's which are constant-linear-velocity playback devices. Their rotational speed varies as you play the disc so that the linear velocity of the track remains the same as the radius increases. Yes, CDs are played from the inside-out. I'm not really trying to envision the rotational speed of the data in the groove itself (so to speak). I'm just trying to envision how you place a scratch in the fashion that you are talking about to measure the rotation. Does this make sense? Place a straight edge across a record, bisecting the spindle hole, and make a scratch along it. I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? If this still gives you a lot of concerns, just use the lead-out groove of a record. It's always the the same length, and always rotating at the speed fo the turntable. I wasn't really concerned about it, nor did I want to test the speed of my turntable. I was just wondering about your statements about the speed of one revolution, as it didn't seem to be correct that the time between clicks would be constant on a disk. It is constant on an LP, and it doesn't happen on CDs. LP's play at 33.333 rpm, hence it doesn't matter *where* on the disc the scratch is, the clicks will occur at precise 1.8 second intervals. Unless of course you have a Linn Sondek, which was speeded up so that it sounded more 'dynamic' than more accurate decks. However, I'm not surprised about much. I remember once when I was younger, I checked out a Vanguard recording of Tibetian monks chanting (during my John Cage phase). Some friends of mine and I were listening to it and one of us thought that it would be funny to listen at 78 rpm, thinking that they might sound like chipmunks. Keep in mind that this was pretty much random chanting with no musical content. We were all completely flabbergasted to find that the chanting sounded virtually the same. There was no real perceptual "speedup" of the chanting and the pitch of the voices sounded almost the same as well. We tried at 45 rpm and it was the same. Perhaps you needed a better deck? :-) You can measure as many repetitions of it as you want, laid end-to-end in a digital recording. Plus, you can have as many test samples as you have LPs, without damaging the music part of any record. The thunks are fatter than a tic, but they generally have some very distinctive parts that you can synch up on. I've found a disk that I'm going to try out. I just have to find a stopwatch or something to measure the difference between the beginning and end of the record. On an LP, of course there *is* no difference. Why would there be? On a CD, which has constant linear velocity (CLV) the speed difference is easily determined simply by measuring the radius. OTOH, getting 'clicks' out of a CD is going to be a rather tricckier exercise...... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#276
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 08:37:17 -0600, dave weil
wrote: On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:59:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message m On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:20:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: You're probably thinking of CD's which are constant-linear-velocity playback devices. Their rotational speed varies as you play the disc so that the linear velocity of the track remains the same as the radius increases. Yes, CDs are played from the inside-out. I'm not really trying to envision the rotational speed of the data in the groove itself (so to speak). I'm just trying to envision how you place a scratch in the fashion that you are talking about to measure the rotation. Does this make sense? Place a straight edge across a record, bisecting the spindle hole, and make a scratch along it. I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? If this still gives you a lot of concerns, just use the lead-out groove of a record. It's always the the same length, and always rotating at the speed fo the turntable. I wasn't really concerned about it, nor did I want to test the speed of my turntable. I was just wondering about your statements about the speed of one revolution, as it didn't seem to be correct that the time between clicks would be constant on a disk. It is constant on an LP, and it doesn't happen on CDs. LP's play at 33.333 rpm, hence it doesn't matter *where* on the disc the scratch is, the clicks will occur at precise 1.8 second intervals. Unless of course you have a Linn Sondek, which was speeded up so that it sounded more 'dynamic' than more accurate decks. However, I'm not surprised about much. I remember once when I was younger, I checked out a Vanguard recording of Tibetian monks chanting (during my John Cage phase). Some friends of mine and I were listening to it and one of us thought that it would be funny to listen at 78 rpm, thinking that they might sound like chipmunks. Keep in mind that this was pretty much random chanting with no musical content. We were all completely flabbergasted to find that the chanting sounded virtually the same. There was no real perceptual "speedup" of the chanting and the pitch of the voices sounded almost the same as well. We tried at 45 rpm and it was the same. Perhaps you needed a better deck? :-) You can measure as many repetitions of it as you want, laid end-to-end in a digital recording. Plus, you can have as many test samples as you have LPs, without damaging the music part of any record. The thunks are fatter than a tic, but they generally have some very distinctive parts that you can synch up on. I've found a disk that I'm going to try out. I just have to find a stopwatch or something to measure the difference between the beginning and end of the record. On an LP, of course there *is* no difference. Why would there be? On a CD, which has constant linear velocity (CLV) the speed difference is easily determined simply by measuring the radius. OTOH, getting 'clicks' out of a CD is going to be a rather tricckier exercise...... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#277
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 08:37:17 -0600, dave weil
wrote: On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:59:06 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message m On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:20:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: You're probably thinking of CD's which are constant-linear-velocity playback devices. Their rotational speed varies as you play the disc so that the linear velocity of the track remains the same as the radius increases. Yes, CDs are played from the inside-out. I'm not really trying to envision the rotational speed of the data in the groove itself (so to speak). I'm just trying to envision how you place a scratch in the fashion that you are talking about to measure the rotation. Does this make sense? Place a straight edge across a record, bisecting the spindle hole, and make a scratch along it. I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? If this still gives you a lot of concerns, just use the lead-out groove of a record. It's always the the same length, and always rotating at the speed fo the turntable. I wasn't really concerned about it, nor did I want to test the speed of my turntable. I was just wondering about your statements about the speed of one revolution, as it didn't seem to be correct that the time between clicks would be constant on a disk. It is constant on an LP, and it doesn't happen on CDs. LP's play at 33.333 rpm, hence it doesn't matter *where* on the disc the scratch is, the clicks will occur at precise 1.8 second intervals. Unless of course you have a Linn Sondek, which was speeded up so that it sounded more 'dynamic' than more accurate decks. However, I'm not surprised about much. I remember once when I was younger, I checked out a Vanguard recording of Tibetian monks chanting (during my John Cage phase). Some friends of mine and I were listening to it and one of us thought that it would be funny to listen at 78 rpm, thinking that they might sound like chipmunks. Keep in mind that this was pretty much random chanting with no musical content. We were all completely flabbergasted to find that the chanting sounded virtually the same. There was no real perceptual "speedup" of the chanting and the pitch of the voices sounded almost the same as well. We tried at 45 rpm and it was the same. Perhaps you needed a better deck? :-) You can measure as many repetitions of it as you want, laid end-to-end in a digital recording. Plus, you can have as many test samples as you have LPs, without damaging the music part of any record. The thunks are fatter than a tic, but they generally have some very distinctive parts that you can synch up on. I've found a disk that I'm going to try out. I just have to find a stopwatch or something to measure the difference between the beginning and end of the record. On an LP, of course there *is* no difference. Why would there be? On a CD, which has constant linear velocity (CLV) the speed difference is easily determined simply by measuring the radius. OTOH, getting 'clicks' out of a CD is going to be a rather tricckier exercise...... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#278
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Stewart Pinkerton a écrit :
You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) But of course he's the smart guy, and of course you have no problem with homosexuals. You're French....................... I don't remember that we have been introduce. ;-) |
#279
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Stewart Pinkerton a écrit :
You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) But of course he's the smart guy, and of course you have no problem with homosexuals. You're French....................... I don't remember that we have been introduce. ;-) |
#280
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Stewart Pinkerton a écrit :
You are the *"smart-guy"* so it's not your role. But you should note that I haven't any problem with homosexuals. ;-) But of course he's the smart guy, and of course you have no problem with homosexuals. You're French....................... I don't remember that we have been introduce. ;-) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Magazine Statitistics | Audio Opinions | |||
Saddam/Time Magazine | Pro Audio | |||
Remove magazine from Sony CDX-656 changer | Car Audio | |||
- TAS magazine Website Updated - | Audio Opinions | |||
FA: Matrix sound design magazine (this might interest some of you) | Pro Audio |