Jim Carr wrote:
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
quart.

Also, in the US we go see movies in a theater, not a theatre. (Although
we might see a play in a theatre, but a certain percentage of us will
think they're just trying to be snooty by calling it that.)

So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American English
spelling of the word.

- Logan

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

I accept it is part of the system, I didn't think I would need to put
:-)
after THAT statement. ;-) Still, it would be a giggle to try and change
it all again to get 100 whotsits in a thingy, a hundred of which equal a
day.

Never heard it called MKS before, it it a 'Down-Under' thing?

**I doubt it. We learned it in school in the late 1960s.

So did we, in the USA. There are actually *two* metric systems in common
use, the cgs system (centimeters-grams-seconds) and the MKS
(meters-kilograms-seconds). Chemists use the former, physicists the latter.
More confusion.

By the way, the thing in the Mad magazine pictures was a poiuyt.

Potrzebie,
Paul

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
Jim Carr wrote:
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from
the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
quart.

Also, in the US we go see movies in a theater, not a theatre.

**A theatre is where you watch live plays. A cinema is where you watch
movies.


(Although
we might see a play in a theatre, but a certain percentage of us will
think they're just trying to be snooty by calling it that.)

**Not at all. They're being correct. With George Bush Jnr in charge, it
seems the dumbing down of America is almost complete.


So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American English
spelling of the word.

**Indeed. That still does not make it correct. Just another word mangled by
America.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

**Spoken like a woodworker. The rest of us consider mm far too coarse a
measurement. Having said that, I grew up in a world of Imperial
measurements. When selecting (say) a drill bit, I had to think real hard
on
which was larger - 1/8th inch or 9/64th inch. I don't even need to think
for
more than a millisecond about 3mm or 3.3mm. I KNOW which is larger
instantly.

LOL! Wood is about the only thing I measure. Sometimes I will use cm/mm, but
more often than not I actually find inches and fractions easier. Go figure.
I agree with you about the tools, though. I'm pretty quick and finding the
common denominator, but nothing is simpler than mm.

BTW: Cm is the most commonly used measurement in most Metric nations. It
is
a useful size for most common measurements around the home. Builders
almost
always specify measurements to the nearest mm. There are rarely mistakes
when using such systems.

By the time I get around to cutting something, my margin of error is about
1/8" anyway, so why would I need a finer scale? :-)

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American English
spelling of the word.

Dictionary.com says that litre is "chiefly British" so I would disagree. You
have to admit it violates the standard spelling rules. I wouldn't drive my
old beatre with the heatre on and park at a parking metre, but not put in
any coins because I am a cheatre, now would I?

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:1T7Vd.36881$Tt.17265@fed1read05...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

**Spoken like a woodworker. The rest of us consider mm far too coarse a
measurement. Having said that, I grew up in a world of Imperial
measurements. When selecting (say) a drill bit, I had to think real hard
on
which was larger - 1/8th inch or 9/64th inch. I don't even need to think
for
more than a millisecond about 3mm or 3.3mm. I KNOW which is larger
instantly.

LOL! Wood is about the only thing I measure. Sometimes I will use cm/mm,
but
more often than not I actually find inches and fractions easier. Go
figure.
I agree with you about the tools, though. I'm pretty quick and finding the
common denominator, but nothing is simpler than mm.

BTW: Cm is the most commonly used measurement in most Metric nations. It
is
a useful size for most common measurements around the home. Builders
almost
always specify measurements to the nearest mm. There are rarely mistakes
when using such systems.

By the time I get around to cutting something, my margin of error is about
1/8" anyway, so why would I need a finer scale? :-)

**See? I can spot a woodworker a km away.

:-)

I'm still finding my way with wood, so I always set my tools up to the
nearest mm. Accuracy is around 0.25mm.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Jim Carr" writes:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American English
spelling of the word.

Dictionary.com says that litre is "chiefly British" so I would disagree. You
have to admit it violates the standard spelling rules. I wouldn't drive my
old beatre with the heatre on and park at a parking metre, but not put in
any coins because I am a cheatre, now would I?

My grandmother's house was on Centre St. in Boston. That's in New England!

georgeh wrote:
"Jim Carr" writes:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American
English
spelling of the word.

Dictionary.com says that litre is "chiefly British" so I would
disagree. You
have to admit it violates the standard spelling rules. I wouldn't
drive my
old beatre with the heatre on and park at a parking metre, but not
put in
any coins because I am a cheatre, now would I?

My grandmother's house was on Centre St. in Boston. That's in New
England!

Then you'd be drivin' the beatah with the heatah on and, if you
could find one, you'd pahk wheah theah's no pahkin' metah, cuz
them infuhnal machines'd gip you outah a quatah every time.
Uthuhwise, you'd just be a retahd and a loozah.

"georgeh" wrote in message
...
"Jim Carr" writes:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American English
spelling of the word.

Dictionary.com says that litre is "chiefly British" so I would disagree.
You
have to admit it violates the standard spelling rules. I wouldn't drive
my
old beatre with the heatre on and park at a parking metre, but not put in
any coins because I am a cheatre, now would I?

My grandmother's house was on Centre St. in Boston. That's in New England!

There's one in Manhattan, too. You're undre arrest.

Peace,
Paul

Paul Stamler wrote:
There are actually *two* metric systems in common use, the cgs system
(centimeters-grams-seconds) and the MKS (meters-kilograms-seconds).
Chemists use the former, physicists the latter. More confusion.

Only confusing maybe for people not using the (one) system. Overhere in
Europe, where we actually live by it, a centimeter is another way of
saying 1/100th meter, like a kilometer is 1000 meters, and a kilogram is
1000 grams. That's obviously the main selling point of the metric system.

Luck, Arjan

--
"There's a reason mixing seems so simple; it IS simple" - G. Massenburg
----------------Where I'm from: http://www.soundbyte.nl----------------
--------To email personally go to the website - lower left menu--------

"Arjan P" wrote in message
...
Paul Stamler wrote:
There are actually *two* metric systems in common use, the cgs system
(centimeters-grams-seconds) and the MKS (meters-kilograms-seconds).
Chemists use the former, physicists the latter. More confusion.

Only confusing maybe for people not using the (one) system. Overhere in
Europe, where we actually live by it, a centimeter is another way of
saying 1/100th meter, like a kilometer is 1000 meters, and a kilogram is
1000 grams. That's obviously the main selling point of the metric system.

Of course. But there are derivative units over and above the three basics,
and they're different for cgs and MKS, and there's where confusion reigns.

Peace,
Paul

"Jim Carr" wrote in
news:WwQUd.31941$Tt.16238@fed1read05:

.....snip.....

.. However, I draw the
line at measuring Mr. Happy in centimeters - I prefer a larger scale
on principle.


No doubt your ex dumped you because she preferred something that was simply
larger and that wasn't battery operated.

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...


BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
quart.


**You Americans have short memories, doncha? Without the French, you would
still be British subjects.



It's only a bit farther back to 1066.

--
Les Cargill

"The Ghost" wrote in message
. 130...
"Jim Carr" wrote in
news:WwQUd.31941$Tt.16238@fed1read05:

.....snip.....

. However, I draw the
line at measuring Mr. Happy in centimeters - I prefer a larger scale
on principle.


No doubt your ex dumped you because she preferred something that was
simply
larger and that wasn't battery operated.

LOL! That was a good one, Ghost! How did you know my penis had a battery?
Could you taste it on your tongue?

[ liter vs. litre ]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

Also, in the US we go see movies in a theater, not a theatre.


**A theatre is where you watch live plays. A cinema is where you watch
movies.

Not in the US. In the US, you go see live plays at a theater (or
possibly a playhouse), and you go see movies at a theater or a
movie theater, or maybe a movie house.

Since movies were invented after the variants of the languages had
already diverged, I can't see how you'd have a basis to say one of
them is right and the other is wrong.

we might see a play in a theatre, but a certain percentage of us will
think they're just trying to be snooty by calling it that.)

**Not at all. They're being correct. With George Bush Jnr in charge, it
seems the dumbing down of America is almost complete.

Well, that was a non-sequitor. And a rude one at that.

- Logan

"Les Cargill" wrote in message
m...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...


BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from
the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
quart.


**You Americans have short memories, doncha? Without the French, you
would still be British subjects.



It's only a bit farther back to 1066.

**Except that the French assisted AMERICANS in fighting the British. More
than assisted, in fact. They were pivotal in the defeat of the British. I
wonder why Americans conveniently forget this fact?


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
[ liter vs. litre ]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

Also, in the US we go see movies in a theater, not a theatre.


**A theatre is where you watch live plays. A cinema is where you watch
movies.

Not in the US. In the US, you go see live plays at a theater (or
possibly a playhouse), and you go see movies at a theater or a
movie theater, or maybe a movie house.

**How terribly confusing.


Since movies were invented after the variants of the languages had
already diverged, I can't see how you'd have a basis to say one of
them is right and the other is wrong.

**'Cinema' is perfectly discriptive. Theatre, as applied to live plays AND
cinema, is simply confusing. BTW: Are people who make films in the US
cinematographers? See a connection?


we might see a play in a theatre, but a certain percentage of us will
think they're just trying to be snooty by calling it that.)

**Not at all. They're being correct. With George Bush Jnr in charge, it
seems the dumbing down of America is almost complete.

Well, that was a non-sequitor. And a rude one at that.

**It was a perfectly accurate non-sequitur.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**A theatre is where you watch live plays. A cinema is where you watch
movies.

Not in the US. In the US, you go see live plays at a theater (or
possibly a playhouse), and you go see movies at a theater or a
movie theater, or maybe a movie house.

**How terribly confusing.

I'm sorry you find it confusing. I can assure you that every variant
of every language is chock full of ambiguities, and yet we manage to
sort hundreds of them out all day long. For instance, here on
rec.audio.pro, people speak about "compression" quite often, and it's
usually easy to sort out whether they mean dynamic range reduction
or Kolmogorov-Complexity-bounded-data-file-size-reduction. In a
practical sense, most language ambiguities don't turn into much of
a problem, because context usually makes it clear what you're talking
about. It's usually easy to tell from context whether one is
referring to a theater in which dramatic productions take place
or a theater in which movies are shown.

Since movies were invented after the variants of the languages had
already diverged, I can't see how you'd have a basis to say one of
them is right and the other is wrong.

**'Cinema' is perfectly discriptive. Theatre, as applied to live plays AND
cinema, is simply confusing. BTW: Are people who make films in the US
cinematographers? See a connection?

People who make films are filmmakers. People who direct the specific
aspect of filmmaking that deals with choosing camera equipment,
composing shots, and operating cameras are cinematographers.

I'm sorry if you find it confusing when someone who practices something
has a name that does not share the same root word as the practice
itself. I went to the doctor this morning. He practices medicine,
so I guess in the future I should refer to him as the "medicine man"
in preference to "doctor", since calling him "doctor" is confusing.
I should also remember to stop using the confusing term "luthier"
and replace it with the much more elegant term "guitar-maker".

**Not at all. They're being correct. With George Bush Jnr in charge, it
seems the dumbing down of America is almost complete.

Well, that was a non-sequitor. And a rude one at that.

**It was a perfectly accurate non-sequitur.

I fail to see how GWB's presence in office could have had any effect
on the US spelling of meter, liter, or theater since the spelling
of none of these words has changed since he took office (and probably
not since he was born).

However, if you have an explanation why GWB's utter lack of any effect
on the US spelling of the words in question indicates a dumbing of
America, I'm sure it would be interesting to hear.

- Logan

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:32:14 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:


"Les Cargill" wrote in message
om...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...


BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from
the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
quart.


**You Americans have short memories, doncha? Without the French, you
would still be British subjects.



It's only a bit farther back to 1066.

**Except that the French assisted AMERICANS in fighting the British. More
than assisted, in fact. They were pivotal in the defeat of the British. I
wonder why Americans conveniently forget this fact?

Since Bush's trip to Europe I think it's now officially OK to like
France again, & eat french fries. (Or if you are an upper-crust
republican, foie gras, brie and Bordeaux.)

Al

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**A theatre is where you watch live plays. A cinema is where you watch
movies.

Not in the US. In the US, you go see live plays at a theater (or
possibly a playhouse), and you go see movies at a theater or a
movie theater, or maybe a movie house.

**How terribly confusing.

I'm sorry you find it confusing. I can assure you that every variant
of every language is chock full of ambiguities, and yet we manage to
sort hundreds of them out all day long. For instance, here on
rec.audio.pro, people speak about "compression" quite often, and it's
usually easy to sort out whether they mean dynamic range reduction
or Kolmogorov-Complexity-bounded-data-file-size-reduction. In a
practical sense, most language ambiguities don't turn into much of
a problem, because context usually makes it clear what you're talking
about. It's usually easy to tell from context whether one is
referring to a theater in which dramatic productions take place
or a theater in which movies are shown.

**Perhaps. Perhaps not.


Since movies were invented after the variants of the languages had
already diverged, I can't see how you'd have a basis to say one of
them is right and the other is wrong.

**'Cinema' is perfectly discriptive. Theatre, as applied to live plays
AND
cinema, is simply confusing. BTW: Are people who make films in the US
cinematographers? See a connection?

People who make films are filmmakers. People who direct the specific
aspect of filmmaking that deals with choosing camera equipment,
composing shots, and operating cameras are cinematographers.

**Bingo!


I'm sorry if you find it confusing when someone who practices something
has a name that does not share the same root word as the practice
itself. I went to the doctor this morning. He practices medicine,
so I guess in the future I should refer to him as the "medicine man"
in preference to "doctor", since calling him "doctor" is confusing.

**One could refer to him/her as a 'medical practitioner'.


I should also remember to stop using the confusing term "luthier"
and replace it with the much more elegant term "guitar-maker".

**Perhaps. However, we are straying off-topic. Both 'luthier' and 'guitar
maker' are perfectly descriptive, unambiguous terms. As is cinema and
theatre (as used in most of the rest of the English-speaking world). The
term 'theater' as used by Americans can mean one of (at least) two
completely different things. Perhaps Americans could consider using the term
'cinema' for the cinema and 'theater' (or theatre) for a live performance
venue. Just a thought.


**Not at all. They're being correct. With George Bush Jnr in charge, it
seems the dumbing down of America is almost complete.

Well, that was a non-sequitor. And a rude one at that.

**It was a perfectly accurate non-sequitur.

I fail to see how GWB's presence in office could have had any effect
on the US spelling of meter, liter, or theater since the spelling
of none of these words has changed since he took office (and probably
not since he was born).

**It didn't and I did not suggest that it did. I implied that the dumbing
down of America was now complete. American voters have installed the dumbest
President in living memory. A corrupt, evil, stupid President. That the
majority of Americans find this man, somehow, acceptable, suggests that the
dumbing down of America is complete.


However, if you have an explanation why GWB's utter lack of any effect
on the US spelling of the words in question indicates a dumbing of
America, I'm sure it would be interesting to hear.

**Well, there is "nookular". It sends a shiver up my spine, every time I
hear it.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:
**Perhaps. However, we are straying off-topic. Both 'luthier' and 'guitar
maker' are perfectly descriptive, unambiguous terms. As is cinema and
theatre (as used in most of the rest of the English-speaking world). The
term 'theater' as used by Americans can mean one of (at least) two
completely different things.

The two are not necessarily always separate. It's not unheard-of to
have a stage in a movie theater or to have a projection booth and a
movie screen in a (dramatic) theater. The first time I saw Pink Floyd's
"The Wall", it was in such a room.

Perhaps Americans could consider using the term
'cinema' for the cinema and 'theater' (or theatre) for a live performance
venue. Just a thought.

Perhaps Australians could consider renaming their "National Highway"
system to the "Interstate Highway System" like we say here in the US.
But since names are totally arbitrary, that would be a pretty pointless
suggestion.

However, if you have an explanation why GWB's utter lack of any effect
on the US spelling of the words in question indicates a dumbing of
America, I'm sure it would be interesting to hear.

**Well, there is "nookular". It sends a shiver up my spine, every time I
hear it.

Well, for better or for worse, consonant-vowel metathesis is part of
what happens when people (not just Americans) use language[1]. I agree
that it can be grating and is poor form when you're the elected leader
of a powerful nation, but it is important to keep in mind that it is
often learned as part of a dialect, and one of the key features of
dialects is that each of the dialects of a language has subtlely
different rules than the other dialects. Bush's apparent inability
to say the standard pronunciation of "nuclear" is not entirely
dissimilar to the inability of speakers of many Asian languages to
hear the difference between the English "L" and "R" sounds.

By the way, you know that what we're arguing about here is which
dialect of English should be the esteemed one, right? My argument
is that it's OK for each country to define its own esteemed dialect,
and your view seems to be that there should be only one, and that
your dialect should be it. (I would like to point out that you may
speak a distinct sub-dialect of the dialect you think is correct
without being aware of it.)

- Logan

[1] http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~ehum...etathesis.html

Trevor Wilson wrote:
**Except that the French assisted AMERICANS in fighting the British. More
than assisted, in fact. They were pivotal in the defeat of the British. I
wonder why Americans conveniently forget this fact?

For the same reason the British seem to neglect the fact that they were
bringing in Hessian mercenaries to support their German king anyway.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

wrote:
georgeh wrote:

"Jim Carr" writes:


"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...

So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American

English

spelling of the word.

Dictionary.com says that litre is "chiefly British" so I would

disagree. You

have to admit it violates the standard spelling rules. I wouldn't

drive my

old beatre with the heatre on and park at a parking metre, but not

put in

any coins because I am a cheatre, now would I?

My grandmother's house was on Centre St. in Boston. That's in New

England!

Then you'd be drivin' the beatah with the heatah on and, if you
could find one, you'd pahk wheah theah's no pahkin' metah, cuz
them infuhnal machines'd gip you outah a quatah every time.
Uthuhwise, you'd just be a retahd and a loozah.

Doods! Whut are you saying? You're totally whack. (from the West)

dt

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

I should also remember to stop using the confusing term "luthier"
and replace it with the much more elegant term "guitar-maker".

**Perhaps. However, we are straying off-topic. Both 'luthier' and 'guitar
maker' are perfectly descriptive, unambiguous terms.

Straying? More like racing at breakneck speed. But as long as we're there,
"luthier" is not perfectly descriptive when (conservatively speaking) 90% of
luthiers do not make lutes. It's like calling autoworkers "coachmakers".

Peace,
Paul

Logan Shaw wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
SNIP

Must say, it is highly entertaining to watch a Yank arguing with an Aus
over the semantics and usage of English!! :-)

"Paul Stamler" wrote in message ...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

I should also remember to stop using the confusing term "luthier"
and replace it with the much more elegant term "guitar-maker".

**Perhaps. However, we are straying off-topic. Both 'luthier' and 'guitar
maker' are perfectly descriptive, unambiguous terms.

Straying? More like racing at breakneck speed. But as long as we're there,
"luthier" is not perfectly descriptive when (conservatively speaking) 90% of
luthiers do not make lutes. It's like calling autoworkers "coachmakers".

Peace,
Paul




If 'quizzes' are considered quizzical, what are 'tests' ?

DM

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 18:27:48 GMT, "Paul Stamler"
wrote:

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

I should also remember to stop using the confusing term "luthier"
and replace it with the much more elegant term "guitar-maker".

**Perhaps. However, we are straying off-topic. Both 'luthier' and 'guitar
maker' are perfectly descriptive, unambiguous terms.

Straying? More like racing at breakneck speed. But as long as we're there,
"luthier" is not perfectly descriptive when (conservatively speaking) 90% of
luthiers do not make lutes. It's like calling autoworkers "coachmakers".

Yeah but if you start looking at the archaic roots of language, there
probably are thousands examples of words like that.

Al

"play on" wrote in message
...

Straying? More like racing at breakneck speed. But as long as we're
there,
"luthier" is not perfectly descriptive when (conservatively speaking) 90%
of
luthiers do not make lutes. It's like calling autoworkers "coachmakers".

Yeah but if you start looking at the archaic roots of language, there
probably are thousands examples of words like that.

True; "teamsters" is the first that comes to mind.

Peace,
Paul

"David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message
news:j8UUd.51305$uc.11191@trnddc03...

"Porky" wrote in message
...

"David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message
news:dsRUd.48341$uc.6478@trnddc08...

I think all I am trying to do here, is lodge a slight disagreement
with an
acceptable room temperature that might exceed 90 degrees if you have
any equipment at all that generates it's own heat.


Personally, I recommend keeping your studio at between 65 and 75 F, it
will be more comfortable for you, the musicians, and the equipment. I
certainly wouldn't want to work in a studio at 90F, but iof the music
was
good enough, I wouldn't hestiate to use my stuff to record it even if it
was
90F! :-)


Then we are in complete agreement. I maintain a control room (or anyone
else's control room) at between 70 and 74 degrees. I rarely let the main
recording areas approach 80 degrees.

So.... I can't help but ask, why did you originally say, "It varies with
the
equipment, but typically 40 degrees to 120 degrees if the equipment is
in use, the range for storage is considerably wider" ?? Typo ?? g

Nope, I've recorded live gigs at temps from a little below 40F to about
112F with no equipment problems, though I admit to using extra fans and
insuring good ventilation especially when it was above 90F. In my
experience, 40F to 110 or 120F are the operable ranges usually given when
the equipment mfgr does specify a temp range.

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:fiUUd.33728$Tt.18864@fed1read05...
"Porky" wrote in message
. ..

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell
Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from
the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than
a
quart.

Wait a minute, a liter is 33.8 ounces, making it heavier than a quart.
(Check your coke bottle, Jim. :-)).

Wrong! You measure quarts in ounces, but you measure liters in millilters.
There are 32 ounces in a quart, but 1000 milliliters in a liter.
Therefore,
a quart must be lighter than liter (321000). It's just like a meter is
longer than a yard. You have 36 inches in a yard, but you have 100
centimeters in a meter (10036).

It's the ease of math that makes the metric system so widely popular.

*LOL* By that logic, a mile must be over five times as long as a kilometer
because there are 1000 meters in a kilometer and 5280 feet in a mile!
(5280/1000=5.28), right? :-)

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell
Litre correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First,
it's from the French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is
"lighter" than a quart.

I wish the U.S. Governement would get off their butts and legislate us
into
100% metric. I was involved in the failed attempt at metrification in the
1970s, and still think it was a very good idea.

AFAIK, the only people using the old English measurement system are us
and
some countries in darkest Africa. Is hanging onto this awkward antique of
a
system a form of protectionism or what?

The problem is that all of us old farts think in feet and inches and ounces
and pints and quarts, etc and the US legislature consists of mostly old
farts. :-) BTW if you think that gasoline is expensive in the US today, just
look at the prices in countries that sell it in liters, a liter there often
costs much as a gallon here, and if they start selling gas in liters here it
won't be long before that happens in the US too.

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with
litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from
the
French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
quart.

**You Americans have short memories, doncha? Without the French, you would
still be British subjects.

*LOL*

"Nat" wrote in message
ups.com...
Does anyone know offhand what the range of safe room temperatures (in
F, please) is for studio gear?

Wait! if the correct spelling is litre than wouldn't a meter be spelled
metre too? After all, they're both units of measurement.
You know, any normal person browsing the audio groups must think we all
have Attention Deficit Disorder, we started off on the topic of safe room
temps for audio gear, but now we're discussing measurement systems and
spelling, and the ghost wants to talk about penises (or would that be
penii?)! *ROFL*

Porky wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...


BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell
Litre correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.

According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First,
it's from the French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is
"lighter" than a quart.

I wish the U.S. Governement would get off their butts and legislate us

into

100% metric. I was involved in the failed attempt at metrification in the
1970s, and still think it was a very good idea.

AFAIK, the only people using the old English measurement system are us

and

some countries in darkest Africa. Is hanging onto this awkward antique of

a

system a form of protectionism or what?


The problem is that all of us old farts think in feet and inches and ounces
and pints and quarts, etc and the US legislature consists of mostly old
farts. :-) BTW if you think that gasoline is expensive in the US today, just
look at the prices in countries that sell it in liters, a liter there often
costs much as a gallon here, and if they start selling gas in liters here it
won't be long before that happens in the US too.


That has _NOTHING_ (or at least, very little) to do with what units it
is sold in. Much more to do with a president whose family is into aahhl
in a big way, and protectionism, and no regard to the environmental
impact of burning the stuff. See also the scandal of the US motor lobby
getting an exemption from emission controls for SUVs.

"Andrew Chesters" wrote in message
...
Logan Shaw wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
SNIP

Must say, it is highly entertaining to watch a Yank arguing with an Aus
over the semantics and usage of English!! :-)

**Kinda like watching two ants argue over a crumb of bread.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Porky" wrote in message
...

"Nat" wrote in message
ups.com...
Does anyone know offhand what the range of safe room temperatures (in
F, please) is for studio gear?

Wait! if the correct spelling is litre than wouldn't a meter be spelled
metre too?

**Indeed. That IS how they're spelt.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Porky" wrote in message
...

"Nat" wrote in message
roups.com...

Does anyone know offhand what the range of safe room temperatures (in
F, please) is for studio gear?


Wait! if the correct spelling is litre than wouldn't a meter be spelled
metre too?


**Indeed. That IS how they're spelt.




MET RE, if you say so rast ro :-)
George

"Porky" wrote in message
...

The problem is that all of us old farts think in feet and inches and
ounces
and pints and quarts, etc and the US legislature consists of mostly old
farts. :

Actually, all federal government procurement must be done in metric.

-) BTW if you think that gasoline is expensive in the US today, just
look at the prices in countries that sell it in liters, a liter there
often
costs much as a gallon here, and if they start selling gas in liters here
it
won't be long before that happens in the US too.

Which is why we'll switch to quarts before we switch to liters!

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**Perhaps. However, we are straying off-topic. Both 'luthier' and 'guitar
maker' are perfectly descriptive, unambiguous terms. As is cinema and
theatre (as used in most of the rest of the English-speaking world). The
term 'theater' as used by Americans can mean one of (at least) two
completely different things.

The two are not necessarily always separate. It's not unheard-of to
have a stage in a movie theater or to have a projection booth and a
movie screen in a (dramatic) theater. The first time I saw Pink Floyd's
"The Wall", it was in such a room.

**Good point.


Perhaps Americans could consider using the term
'cinema' for the cinema and 'theater' (or theatre) for a live performance
venue. Just a thought.

Perhaps Australians could consider renaming their "National Highway"
system to the "Interstate Highway System" like we say here in the US.
But since names are totally arbitrary, that would be a pretty pointless
suggestion.

**Actually, I think it would be a pretty good idea. Our roadsigns (here in
NSW) are a joke. It must terrifying for interstate and overseas drivers to
navigate around NSW (generally) and Sydney (specifically). In the US, I
found roadsigns to be excellent, easy to read and placed in a timely manner,
to allow appropriate lane changes. With the sole exception of the rather
bizarre (to me) posting of signs which read: Sepulveda Blvd 13/4 Miles.
Interstate 54 27/8 Miles. All very odd. Why not move the signs to read 2
Miles and 3 Miles respectively?


However, if you have an explanation why GWB's utter lack of any effect
on the US spelling of the words in question indicates a dumbing of
America, I'm sure it would be interesting to hear.

**Well, there is "nookular". It sends a shiver up my spine, every time I
hear it.

Well, for better or for worse, consonant-vowel metathesis is part of
what happens when people (not just Americans) use language[1]. I agree
that it can be grating and is poor form when you're the elected leader
of a powerful nation, but it is important to keep in mind that it is
often learned as part of a dialect, and one of the key features of
dialects is that each of the dialects of a language has subtlely
different rules than the other dialects. Bush's apparent inability
to say the standard pronunciation of "nuclear" is not entirely
dissimilar to the inability of speakers of many Asian languages to
hear the difference between the English "L" and "R" sounds.

**Indeed. It just scares the Hell out of me that the most powerful
individual on the planet has such a poor education.


By the way, you know that what we're arguing about here is which
dialect of English should be the esteemed one, right?

**At this point, yes.

My argument
is that it's OK for each country to define its own esteemed dialect,
and your view seems to be that there should be only one, and that
your dialect should be it.

**No. I am pointing out that cinema makes sense, rather than theater. I am
also pointing out that most of the planet uses the spelling 'Litre', rather
than 'Liter'. Pronunciation has little to do with it. BTW: I am well aware
of the huge differences in English dialects across the US. Here in
Australia, it is far more homogenous. Not right, wrong, better nor worse,
just more homogenous.

(I would like to point out that you may
speak a distinct sub-dialect of the dialect you think is correct
without being aware of it.)

**Indeed. Country visitors often report a 'Sydney accent'.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:GeQVd.38945$Tt.25624@fed1read05...
"Porky" wrote in message
...

The problem is that all of us old farts think in feet and inches and
ounces
and pints and quarts, etc and the US legislature consists of mostly old
farts. :

Actually, all federal government procurement must be done in metric.

Sure, because alcohol comes in metric measure now. :-)

-) BTW if you think that gasoline is expensive in the US today, just
look at the prices in countries that sell it in liters, a liter there
often
costs much as a gallon here, and if they start selling gas in liters
here
it
won't be long before that happens in the US too.

Which is why we'll switch to quarts before we switch to liters!

You know, we here in the US were blissful in our ignorance when we used
imperial measurements, we had no problems with pints, quarts, and ounces;
and yards, feet and inches were easy. Then they had to "simplify" things
with metrics and now most Americans are hopelessly confused.
For instance, I was exactly six feet tall, now I'm 1.828 meters tall, and
I used to weigh exactly 210 lbs, now I weigh 95.455 kilograms. How did
taking whole numbers and converting them to forms of measurement that
required decimal fractions to express simplify things? :-)