[Arny Krueger]

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message



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.

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

OK Keith, so you can't tell the difference between a
sales percentage for vinyl, and an indicator of an
ongoing transition from one form of digital media to
another form of digital media.

Not my problem!

I think it is, unless you are deliberately
obfuscating/distorting or, as others imply, failing to
read properly or grasp the meaning of my post - my point
was that it is CDs which are disappearing and I provided
evidence.

I reproduced my OP on the topic above, and it doesn't even mention CDs.
Therefore Keith, your attempt to introduce CD sales, given that CDs are
a form of media that I didn't even mention, is an obvious example of a
red herring argument. It's just another one of your an intentional
attempt to mislead the discussion from its origional intent.

AFAIAC and in context, my CD comment was a perfectly valid counter to
the immediately preceding remarks concerning vinyl.

Repeating an intentional distraction doesn't make it less of a
distraction.


Repeating complaints in a UK-centric ng about UK responses to crossposted
US irrelevancies doesn't mean they'll stop either...

I can always tell when you're bleeding pretty badly Keith, because you start
ranting and raving about xenophobic crap like this. Friendly advice: Cut
your losses and run.

[Arny Krueger]

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"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.

Where the hell do YOU live?

Keith seems to spend a lot of time in some other universe - one where
there are actually a signficiant number of people who care about tubes,
vinyl, noisy microphones and tinny-sounding speakers.


Much as it may irk you, I gather there are *millions* of people on this
planet who do some or even all of those things....



But I note you do NOT claim vinyl sales have even reached the most
minuscule
percentage of CD sales, or availability.

Letsee, RIAA statistics show that several hundred million CDs were sold
last year, and Keith thinks that they are "disappearing rapidly"?


No, you got that wrong - I wouldn't know, I merely posted a link to show
that the BBC (if no-one else) thinks they are....

Every large US news organization seems to have at least one writer that is
their resident Looney. Why should the BBC be any different?

[Arny Krueger]

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
...

"Rob" wrote in message
...
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.

And IF they did, these debates would have finished 25 years ago.
Some people still listen to wax cylinders, without needing to "prove"
they
are better than CD


I don't know a single soul who plays LPs who feels he needs to *prove*
anything....

It is not the playing LPs that indicates a need to prove anything, it is the
continual ranting and raving on audio newsgroups about the technical
superiority of the LP that tells us about their state of mind.

My biggest concern about playing LPs is the ongoing degradation of what
should be archival media.

[Keith G]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message



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.

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

OK Keith, so you can't tell the difference between a
sales percentage for vinyl, and an indicator of an
ongoing transition from one form of digital media to
another form of digital media.

Not my problem!

I think it is, unless you are deliberately
obfuscating/distorting or, as others imply, failing to
read properly or grasp the meaning of my post - my point
was that it is CDs which are disappearing and I provided
evidence.

I reproduced my OP on the topic above, and it doesn't even mention
CDs. Therefore Keith, your attempt to introduce CD sales, given
that CDs are a form of media that I didn't even mention, is an
obvious example of a red herring argument. It's just another one
of your an intentional attempt to mislead the discussion from its
origional intent.

AFAIAC and in context, my CD comment was a perfectly valid counter
to the immediately preceding remarks concerning vinyl.

Repeating an intentional distraction doesn't make it less of a
distraction.


Repeating complaints in a UK-centric ng about UK responses to
crossposted US irrelevancies doesn't mean they'll stop either...

I can always tell when you're bleeding pretty badly Keith, because you
start ranting and raving about xenophobic crap like this. Friendly
advice: Cut your losses and run.


That sort of remark tells me you're the one who's bleeding - believe me,
neither I nor probably anybody else on the planet gives a rat's what
vinyl is *doing* in the US. The fatal error you have made is to
crosspost US irrelevancies into a UK newsgroup.

The only mystery is - *why*??

[Keith G]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
...

"Rob" wrote in message
...
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.

And IF they did, these debates would have finished 25 years ago.
Some people still listen to wax cylinders, without needing to
"prove" they
are better than CD


I don't know a single soul who plays LPs who feels he needs to
*prove* anything....

It is not the playing LPs that indicates a need to prove anything, it
is the continual ranting and raving on audio newsgroups about the
technical superiority of the LP that tells us about their state of
mind.


The only people who combine the words 'technical superiority', 'LP' or
'vinyl' in a sentence *without* the 'couldn't care less' qualifier is
you mostly and occasionally a couple of other people who quite obviously
feel threatened by it all or just want to grab a little 'airtime' on a
deliberately provocative, crossposted thread...

(Congratulations on a good troll, really!! ;-)



My biggest concern about playing LPs is the ongoing degradation of
what should be archival media.


Your nagging anxieties are not my nagging anxieties...

[Rob[_3_]]

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Rob wrote:
Mmm. Not sure what you mean. I know that I generally prefer the sound of
vinyl. I don't know why it sounds better than, say, CD. And I post here.

You like the added harmonic distortion. Rock guitar players do too. Others
will find it pleasant enough on some material but very objectionable on
others.


That may well be one reason why.

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.
Sure it is when they are claiming to the world that their *preference*
is technically superior, when all proof is to the contrary.


I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other. It depends on your definition of 'technical', and the
significance of that definition when it comes to the sound. I think.

Parameters to measure an audio signal have been around and accepted for
many a year - and by the very people who make both the equipment and
sources you listen to. And vinyl doesn't measure well. Of course you can
fool yourself that those parameters aren't important. Provided you are
very selective about which ones.


'Sound' and 'audio signal' are different.

Rob

[Rob[_3_]]

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

I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other.

Sure we do, within the context of audio technology.


I suspect the context is the problem.

It depends on your definition of 'technical',

Check your dictionary.


Well, you might check yours and understand that it's an ambiguous word!
Think 'context'.

and the significance of that definition when it comes to the sound. I
think.

Think again.


Just did :-)

Rob

[George M. Middius]

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.

Yes George, silly isn't it to debate with someone who can actually quote
what [Jenn] said when [Jenn] deny[sic] it[sic].

Your problem appears to be understanding rather than mere regurgitating,
****. It's not unusual for 'borgs to have language deficiencies; in fact,
all of you known 'borgs have it to some degree.

Why don't you admit the truth, ****? You hate and fear Jenn because she's
female. Krooger admitted it, and so did Terrierborg.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I don't know a single soul who plays LPs who feels he needs to *prove*
anything....

If that were the case, Keith, and you added in valves to that you'd cut
your postings here by about 99.9%.

--
*Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Rob wrote:
Parameters to measure an audio signal have been around and accepted
for many a year - and by the very people who make both the equipment
and sources you listen to. And vinyl doesn't measure well. Of course
you can fool yourself that those parameters aren't important. Provided
you are very selective about which ones.


'Sound' and 'audio signal' are different.

Perhaps you'd explain that statement? There is no 'sound' from an LP
(apart from needle talk) - just an audio signal.

--
*I started out with nothing, and I still have most of it*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Rob[_3_]]

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Rob wrote:
Parameters to measure an audio signal have been around and accepted
for many a year - and by the very people who make both the equipment
and sources you listen to. And vinyl doesn't measure well. Of course
you can fool yourself that those parameters aren't important. Provided
you are very selective about which ones.


'Sound' and 'audio signal' are different.

Perhaps you'd explain that statement? There is no 'sound' from an LP
(apart from needle talk) - just an audio signal.


Agreed.

Sound is something experienced by the brain, via the ear and other parts
of the body. An audio signal is something that happens before sound.

Whatever, it doesn't get me any closer to understanding which is
'better' or 'preferred'. I'd do that by listening, not measuring an
audio signal.

Rob

[tony sayer]

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
I remember several years ago being demonstrated some vinyl replay at
the home of Derek Scotland of Audiolab fame. I was very surprised by
just how good it was then!. All down to a very good MM pre-amp stage, he
spent a lot of time getting that designed right!. Good replay system
Audiolab and ESL63's, and most important of all there wasn't one single
pressing from the UK!. All were from Germany or the USA and specialised
suppliers at that!.

I've no doubt he was also careful to select the sort of music which either
masks the inherent distortions or is 'enhanced' by them.


You say that but we also had a CD player, quite an early one there, but
it was that good!. I was rather surprised just how good it was at the
time, but the care and quality of the vinyl and pressing it seems made
the difference!...
--
Tony Sayer

[tony sayer]

Now stop bitching or I'll hijack this thread and turn it into a DAB vs,
DAB+ debate and all you Merkins will get to hear about how Brit radio is
going down the *digital tubes* alongside recorded music and TV
transmissions...




Gone my dear Keith .. not going, just gone;(...
--
Tony Sayer

[Keith G]

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
Now stop bitching or I'll hijack this thread and turn it into a DAB
vs,
DAB+ debate and all you Merkins will get to hear about how Brit radio
is
going down the *digital tubes* alongside recorded music and TV
transmissions...




Gone my dear Keith .. not going, just gone;(...


What? DAB+ isn't going to cure all ills then?

(After we've all chucked our 'ordinary' DAB receivers out, of course...)

[Keith G]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I don't know a single soul who plays LPs who feels he needs to
*prove*
anything....

If that were the case, Keith, and you added in valves to that you'd
cut
your postings here by about 99.9%.



Oi oi oi, Plowie - such a *scallywag* you are!! Deliberately distorting
the truth again while you push your
antivalve/antivinyl/antieverythingelseyoudon't like agenda!!

Unless you really haven't seen the recent threads I've started about
microphones, FM tuners, eBay &c. and all the other older threads about
speakers and countless OT subjects??

But, hang on a minute, that's not right - you musta done, you responded
to *all* of them, as you usually do!!


--
*Out of my mind.


We know....


Back in five minutes.


There's no hurry....




Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[tony sayer]

In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
Now stop bitching or I'll hijack this thread and turn it into a DAB
vs,
DAB+ debate and all you Merkins will get to hear about how Brit radio
is
going down the *digital tubes* alongside recorded music and TV
transmissions...




Gone my dear Keith .. not going, just gone;(...


What? DAB+ isn't going to cure all ills then?

(After we've all chucked our 'ordinary' DAB receivers out, of course...)





Dunno if it will even happen. What they ought to do is designate DAB as
it is for lo-fi portable and mobile applications, and make the high
bitrate stuff available on satellite where the is plenty of bandwidth
available.

The BBC doesn't even transmit there at high rates, just 192 for Radio
three whereas a lot of German radio is 320 K or better!....
--
Tony Sayer

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oi oi oi, Plowie - such a *scallywag* you are!! Deliberately distorting
the truth again while you push your
antivalve/antivinyl/antieverythingelseyoudon't like agenda!!

Not anti anything. Just have a balanced view of them. That's the
difference...

Unless you really haven't seen the recent threads I've started about
microphones, FM tuners, eBay &c. and all the other older threads about
speakers and countless OT subjects??

You manage to work valves into most of those too. Why on earth you're
going for valve mics escapes me.

But, hang on a minute, that's not right - you musta done, you responded
to *all* of them, as you usually do!!

--
*My dog can lick anyone

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Arny Krueger]

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
...

"Rob" wrote in message
...
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.

And IF they did, these debates would have finished 25 years ago.
Some people still listen to wax cylinders, without needing to "prove"
they
are better than CD


I don't know a single soul who plays LPs who feels he needs to *prove*
anything....

It is not the playing LPs that indicates a need to prove anything, it is
the continual ranting and raving on audio newsgroups about the technical
superiority of the LP that tells us about their state of mind.


The only people who combine the words 'technical superiority', 'LP' or
'vinyl' in a sentence *without* the 'couldn't care less' qualifier is you
mostly and occasionally a couple of other people who quite obviously feel
threatened by it all or just want to grab a little 'airtime' on a
deliberately provocative, crossposted thread...

Convenient Keith how quickly you want to forget the content of the OP that
kicked the whole thread off. It's a published article from MSN claiming
technical superiority for the LP format.

My biggest concern about playing LPs is the ongoing degradation of what
should be archival media.

Your nagging anxieties are not my nagging anxieties...

Where did I say anything about nagging anxieties, Keith? Having problem with
an overactive projection gland?

[Arny Krueger]

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

I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other.

Sure we do, within the context of audio technology.

I suspect the context is the problem.

Slippery talk.

It depends on your definition of 'technical',

Check your dictionary.

Well, you might check yours and understand that it's an ambiguous word!

More slippery talk.

Think 'context'.

More slippery talk.

and the significance of that definition when it comes to the sound. I
think.

Think again.

Just did :-)

You really didn't say anything that had any meaning, Rob. I take it that you
know you are cornered.

[dizzy]

Keith G wrote:

The only people who combine the words 'technical superiority', 'LP' or
'vinyl' in a sentence *without* the 'couldn't care less' qualifier is
you mostly and occasionally a couple of other people who quite obviously
feel threatened by it all or just want to grab a little 'airtime' on a
deliberately provocative, crossposted thread...

Wrong, fool. I've seen MANY posts over the years from ignoramuses
claiming that LP is technically superior to CD, which "misses
something" because "it's only 1's and 0's" and other such garbage.

[Keith G]

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
Now stop bitching or I'll hijack this thread and turn it into a DAB
vs,
DAB+ debate and all you Merkins will get to hear about how Brit
radio
is
going down the *digital tubes* alongside recorded music and TV
transmissions...




Gone my dear Keith .. not going, just gone;(...


What? DAB+ isn't going to cure all ills then?

(After we've all chucked our 'ordinary' DAB receivers out, of
course...)





Dunno if it will even happen. What they ought to do is designate DAB
as
it is for lo-fi portable and mobile applications, and make the high
bitrate stuff available on satellite where the is plenty of bandwidth
available.

The BBC doesn't even transmit there at high rates, just 192 for Radio
three whereas a lot of German radio is 320 K or better!....



Hah! I have just uploaded a couple of wobblicam clips for you and there
you are!

Call me daft, but I do like a bit of 'wireless' on a Sunday Night (R2
atm - Malcolm Laycock's excellent 'Swing' programme) and ventured up the
'deep end' at one point - check this out:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/106.8MHz.wmv

And compare it with R3 (bloody speech again - as ever, but you'll get
the idea!):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Radio3.wmv


Nowhere is safe these days, even UK radio is down the ****ter - DAB *or*
FM, from what I can see!!

[dizzy]

Keith G wrote:

And CD lovers tend to give the impression there are no poorly recorded
CDs,

No they don't. Borderline lie, there...

[Keith G]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
...

"Rob" wrote in message
...
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.

And IF they did, these debates would have finished 25 years ago.
Some people still listen to wax cylinders, without needing to
"prove" they
are better than CD


I don't know a single soul who plays LPs who feels he needs to
*prove* anything....

It is not the playing LPs that indicates a need to prove anything,
it is the continual ranting and raving on audio newsgroups about the
technical superiority of the LP that tells us about their state of
mind.


The only people who combine the words 'technical superiority', 'LP'
or 'vinyl' in a sentence *without* the 'couldn't care less' qualifier
is you mostly and occasionally a couple of other people who quite
obviously feel threatened by it all or just want to grab a little
'airtime' on a deliberately provocative, crossposted thread...

Convenient Keith how quickly you want to forget the content of the OP
that kicked the whole thread off. It's a published article from MSN
claiming technical superiority for the LP format.


Is it ****. Apart from this tiny bit: "LPs contain close to 100-percent
of the uncompressed music information as originally recorded. CDs
contain only about half of that recorded information." it's no more than
another load of old ******** banging on about 'retro' and 'cool' -
neither of which much bothers an ordinary 'vinylista' like me, or the
dozens of others here who routinely play LPs.

I've told you several times now; I'm as fed up with this sort of thing
as you are - if nothing else, it's pushing up the price of secondhand
records...



My biggest concern about playing LPs is the ongoing degradation of
what should be archival media.

Your nagging anxieties are not my nagging anxieties...

Where did I say anything about nagging anxieties, Keith?


'biggest concern'


Having problem with
an overactive projection gland?


Me no having problem with any gland (yet)....

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article . com,
Bret Ludwig wrote:
But more importantly, almost all pop releases today have audio that
has been through a tube somewhere.

Does that account for the appalling quality? Optimod type thingie set to
kill?

--
*It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Keith G]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oi oi oi, Plowie - such a *scallywag* you are!! Deliberately
distorting
the truth again while you push your
antivalve/antivinyl/antieverythingelseyoudon't like agenda!!

Not anti anything. Just have a balanced view of them. That's the
difference...


Don't talk to me about a 'balanced view', Plowie - you've got no idea. I
have here and routinely switch between or choose from:

4 valve amps and 4 SS amps.

A pair of Lowther 'horns' and a pair of IMF TLS80s side by side and both
in constant (daily) use.

Half a dozen turntables and half a dozen CD/DVD players/recorders (at
least)...

A selection of MM and MC carts...

Both SS and valve phono stages...

Both DAB and FM tuners...



They're all on he

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/myhifi/myhifi.htm


*Balanced* enough for you?




Unless you really haven't seen the recent threads I've started about
microphones, FM tuners, eBay &c. and all the other older threads
about
speakers and countless OT subjects??

You manage to work valves into most of those too. Why on earth you're
going for valve mics escapes me.


I've got a number of SS mics already (also on the above link), I just
want to try a valve mic to see/hear for myself and get, dare I say it, a
'balanced view'...??

[Keith G]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

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

I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has
the ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one
over the other.

Sure we do, within the context of audio technology.

I suspect the context is the problem.

Slippery talk.



Whaaat?

Mind the Hypocrisy Police don't get you Arny....

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

et...
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't (corrected) read simple posts.

Yep, your posts are so simple they are content free it seems. ANY
interpretation is strongly denied!

Tell me Mr. T: What have I "distorted"?

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

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.

So do you have problems with my statements about LPs and digital?

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

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

I don't think anyone on this NG (or elsewhere, come to that) has the
ability to *prove* the inherent technical superiority of one over the
other.

Sure we do, within the context of audio technology.

I suspect the context is the problem.

Slippery talk.



Whaaat?

Mind the Hypocrisy Police don't get you Arny....

make that the Born Again Hypocrisy Police:-)

[tony sayer]

Dunno if it will even happen. What they ought to do is designate DAB
as
it is for lo-fi portable and mobile applications, and make the high
bitrate stuff available on satellite where the is plenty of bandwidth
available.

The BBC doesn't even transmit there at high rates, just 192 for Radio
three whereas a lot of German radio is 320 K or better!....



Hah! I have just uploaded a couple of wobblicam clips for you and there
you are!

Call me daft, but I do like a bit of 'wireless' on a Sunday Night (R2
atm - Malcolm Laycock's excellent 'Swing' programme) and ventured up the
'deep end' at one point - check this out:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/106.8MHz.wmv

Lite FM from Concrete-a-borough, processed to within an inch of its
life!..


And compare it with R3 (bloody speech again - as ever, but you'll get
the idea!):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Radio3.wmv

Indeed..


Nowhere is safe these days, even UK radio is down the ****ter - DAB *or*
FM, from what I can see!!


Go satellite then. Got a Lidel?, near U they do some rather good value
for money satellite stuff from time to time SL65 IIRC. Just needs to see
the *"right" bit of the Sky and avail yourself to some real music radio
in excellent near-as-dammit CD quality)...




* which can be on the ground!..

--
Tony Sayer

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oi oi oi, Plowie - such a *scallywag* you are!! Deliberately distorting
the truth again while you push your
antivalve/antivinyl/antieverythingelseyoudon't like agenda!!

Not anti anything. Just have a balanced view of them. That's the
difference...

Unless you really haven't seen the recent threads I've started about
microphones, FM tuners, eBay &c. and all the other older threads about
speakers and countless OT subjects??

You manage to work valves into most of those too. Why on earth you're
going for valve mics escapes me.

Don't you have access to any valve mics, Dave?
Neumann U47, U49, U50 are particularly good
They are very expensive, and highly regarded
in classical recording. The only people who don't
like them are those that don't have them:-)

Regards
Iain

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
Bret Ludwig wrote:
But more importantly, almost all pop releases today have audio that
has been through a tube somewhere.

Does that account for the appalling quality? Optimod type thingie set to
kill?



I think he means in the recording chain. Tube mic preamps, and
tube compressors are to be found in almost every studio.

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
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.



And CD lovers tend to give the impression there are no poorly recorded
CDs, but you should know better than to go by *impressions*...

Lots and lots on here about poor mastering of recent CDs.

And the sad thing about it is that these poor production
masters are made from perfectly good studio mixes.
As long as the public are generally of the opinion than
"louder is better" with comments like: "It sounds OK
to me, especially in the car", then there is little hope of
improvement.

Of course had this group existed 30 years ago the complaints would have
been about poor pressings.

A much simpler problem to resolve. I cannot speak for all
companies, but I know that Decca in the UK went to great
lengths to ensure customer sastisfaction, and replaced noisy
pressings when they were brought to the company's notice.
This extra attention to QC greatly enhanced their reputation.

I find it interesting that although there is much talk of poor
CD mastering quality, the number or returns and complaints
received by the record companies is very small indeed.
The expectations of the general public these days are
not high:-(

Iain

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 31, 3:54 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"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.

Still having trouble accepting that others don't see it your way.


Just listen to one of Arny's "recordings", and you will understand
why his opinion on recording quality differs from that held by the
many of the rest of us:-)))


Iain

[Eeyore]

Iain Churches wrote:

Just listen to one of Arny's "recordings", and you will understand
why his opinion on recording quality differs from that held by the
many of the rest of us:-)))

Do tell.

Graham

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Oi oi oi, Plowie - such a *scallywag* you are!! Deliberately
distorting
the truth again while you push your
antivalve/antivinyl/antieverythingelseyoudon't like agenda!!

Not anti anything. Just have a balanced view of them. That's the
difference...


Don't talk to me about a 'balanced view', Plowie - you've got no idea. I
have here and routinely switch between or choose from:

4 valve amps and 4 SS amps.

A pair of Lowther 'horns' and a pair of IMF TLS80s side by side and both
in constant (daily) use.

Half a dozen turntables and half a dozen CD/DVD players/recorders (at
least)...

A selection of MM and MC carts...

Both SS and valve phono stages...

Both DAB and FM tuners...



They're all on he

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/myhifi/myhifi.htm


*Balanced* enough for you?




Unless you really haven't seen the recent threads I've started about
microphones, FM tuners, eBay &c. and all the other older threads
about
speakers and countless OT subjects??

You manage to work valves into most of those too. Why on earth you're
going for valve mics escapes me.


I've got a number of SS mics already (also on the above link), I just
want to try a valve mic to see/hear for myself and get, dare I say it, a
'balanced view'...??

Not really. To do reasonable comparisons for the real world requires
reasonable hearing and knowing what you're listening for.

By the amount of experimenting you do - with each new project being an
'improvement' - my guess is you have no real idea what you're searching
for or how to achieve it. Really, you seem to be trying to re-invent the
wheel. Things like valve mics/amps and horn speakers were superseded by
modern techniques for a very good reason - not some conspiracy.

Of course there's nothing wrong in starting from basics and arriving at
your own conclusions. Plenty here will have done this in real time rather
than trying to compress it all into a few years.

But like any child who learns by experience you also seem to dislike
hearing 'I told you so'...

--
*I love cats...they taste just like chicken.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Go satellite then. Got a Lidel?, near U they do some rather good value
for money satellite stuff from time to time SL65 IIRC. Just needs to see
the *"right" bit of the Sky and avail yourself to some real music radio
in excellent near-as-dammit CD quality)...

That would be Lidl. ;-)

Worth also getting their larger disc and a rotator. For about 200 quid
(without installation costs if any) you'll get pretty well all the free
stuff.

--
*If only you'd use your powers for good instead of evil.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
You manage to work valves into most of those too. Why on earth you're
going for valve mics escapes me.

Don't you have access to any valve mics, Dave?
Neumann U47, U49, U50 are particularly good
They are very expensive, and highly regarded
in classical recording. The only people who don't
like them are those that don't have them:-)

Or those who require to impress a client. ;-)

However, these are a rather different matter from new chinese ones.

The heart of any condenser mic is the capsule - and always was. This is a
precision device which like all such things has to be properly made. And
that costs money.

--
*I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
Bret Ludwig wrote:
But more importantly, almost all pop releases today have audio that
has been through a tube somewhere.

Does that account for the appalling quality? Optimod type thingie set
to kill?

I think he means in the recording chain. Tube mic preamps, and
tube compressors are to be found in almost every studio.

Right. So it's these that are responsible for the appalling quality of
much of today's pop output?

--
*Why don't sheep shrink when it rains?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Keith G]

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
Dunno if it will even happen. What they ought to do is designate DAB
as
it is for lo-fi portable and mobile applications, and make the high
bitrate stuff available on satellite where the is plenty of
bandwidth
available.

The BBC doesn't even transmit there at high rates, just 192 for
Radio
three whereas a lot of German radio is 320 K or better!....



Hah! I have just uploaded a couple of wobblicam clips for you and
there
you are!

Call me daft, but I do like a bit of 'wireless' on a Sunday Night (R2
atm - Malcolm Laycock's excellent 'Swing' programme) and ventured up
the
'deep end' at one point - check this out:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/106.8MHz.wmv

Lite FM from Concrete-a-borough, processed to within an inch of its
life!..


And compare it with R3 (bloody speech again - as ever, but you'll get
the idea!):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Radio3.wmv

Indeed..


Nowhere is safe these days, even UK radio is down the ****ter - DAB
*or*
FM, from what I can see!!


Go satellite then. Got a Lidel?, near U they do some rather good
value
for money satellite stuff from time to time SL65 IIRC. Just needs to
see
the *"right" bit of the Sky and avail yourself to some real music
radio
in excellent near-as-dammit CD quality)...




* which can be on the ground!..


Yes, we had a flyer from Lidl's with satellite kit (including 'station
finders') in it only the other day and would expect they are in stock
right now (if not all sold), but I really don't want to go that route -
for the forseeable, anyway.

Despite the various shortcomings, I *do* get by with R2, R3 and Carsick
FM for what limited 'radio time' I get in the evenings. But the holidays
are over (today) and R3 has been not at all bad this morning. (Virtually
no jabber do far!) When the radio is only 'sonic wallpaper' on all day,
I hafta admit I'm not listening too closely (plus in and out all the
time) so 'broadcast quality issues' are not to the forefront!