[John Byrns]

In article . com,
Peter Wieck wrote:


True, there must be someone quite clever behind it... but I seriously
doubt that the persona we observe here is anything at all like that
actual individual. So, whereas I may not *like* you, I must respect
you. McCoy I neither like nor dislike as I do not believe there is an
actual "there" to deserve such efforts. Tweaking it is great fun,
however.

Somehow that paragraph seems internally inconsistent. If "Andre" is
nothing but a chimera as you believe, but as you say "there must be
someone quite clever behind it", then that person would be an
actual "there", deserving of either your like or dislike.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[George M. Middius]

John Byrns said to Worthless Wiecky:

McCoy I neither like nor dislike as I do not believe there is an
actual "there" to deserve such efforts.

Somehow that paragraph seems internally inconsistent. If "Andre" is
nothing but a chimera as you believe, but as you say "there must be
someone quite clever behind it", then that person would be an
actual "there", deserving of either your like or dislike.

No point in getting all philosophical. The prime directive of
Worthlessism is Nothing Shall Make Sense.

Tweaking it is great fun

That explains a lot, Worthless. Too bad you don't have the stones to
make a living at your "hobby".

Here's a pic of Worthless's role model:
http://www.capohedz.com/typebrighter..._12-793513.jpg





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Patrick Turner]

Keith G wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Keith G wrote:
snip,

60 eh? - I'm 60 *tomorrow*!! :-)

Look, I lied a bit.

I have 2 months to go before 60 arrives.
I feel 30 most days

You're lucky - I barely get to feel more than a couple a month....

Ah, a statement by one very insipid mind....

Patrick Turner.

[Patrick Turner]

Clyde Slick wrote:

Arny Krueger a scris:

The Middiot had an. The Middiot out here and
raving coneheads, and downhill rapidly there. Now, he
take credit completely destroying once-vibrant Usenet group with
endless spew cryptic mutterings.

I've been trying out this new Krooglish decoder. Arnie makes much
more sense when you disregard every thid word he babbles.

Its a BS converter, ie, babble to sense device that you want.
Google BS, and you should find one.

Patrick Turner.

[Keith G]

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Keith G wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Keith G wrote:
snip,

60 eh? - I'm 60 *tomorrow*!! :-)

Look, I lied a bit.

I have 2 months to go before 60 arrives.
I feel 30 most days

You're lucky - I barely get to feel more than a couple a month....

Ah, a statement by one very insipid mind....



Works for me - I'll take 'insipid' over *flaky* any time!!

We've done the frantic bike-riding, now tell us other ways how you work
your celibacy off...

[west[_4_]]

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Peter Wieck wrote:

I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling instead.
Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby player,

Hmmm.... that would be just under 202 pounds, figure at about
5'-9" (1.75 meters) = BMI of 29.8.... Using metric numbers, a BMI of
29.9. Obese is 30.

I'm 1.872M x 77Kg, which gives bmi = 21.948, and about the same as i was
when 25.
but last year in July I was 95Kg, and bmi = 27, and I considered myself
overweight.

Between last July and January, I rode about 200km a week, or about
5,000km,
and my weight reduced from 95Kg to 77Kg and probably I lost 20Kg of fat,
about the weight of a seriously good monoblok tube amp,
or the equivalent of at least 5 x 4Litre cans of olive oil, and put on
about 2 Kg of muscle
which keeps me riding as fast as guys 30 years younger.
At one stage my daily weight records showed I lost Kgm a week.
I amused myself when I stalled trying to ride up some hills last July.
The riding is not a leisurely activity just to take in the sights and
sounds of nature,
but a form of self inflicted pain which is excruciatingly enjoyable,
especially when riding up steep long hills with elevated heart rates,
or pushing hard along a flat stretch to catch some dude way out in the
distance,
or to hang on behind the 30 year old.

If you ride real slow, say no faster than you'd jog, you get a sore arse
and get bored, and the energy consumption
is less than walking, good for you, but not nearly as good if you
elevate the heart rate
for 3 hours straight and could barely talk to anyone if they were
present.
But not all the time, not while going down hill.
At a sweat inducing level, especially on a freezing cold day, one can
burn huge amounts of fats.
So best value from cycling is in the winter time, and because snow is so
very rare here,
the cold cloudless skies of about now to September seem to have been
designed by God for cyclist
pleasure.

Even at my age perhaps i burn 600cals per hour and so a 4 hr ride uses
2,400 cals,
or about the same amount as I use in a 24hr day of sedentary life.
This equals about 200gms of fat, so 8 hrs a week uses 400gms of fat
if you still eat the same as when sedentary.

So the bicycle can create a calorie deficit.
The only way I could lose weight easily without feeling hungry all the
time
was to cycle, and switch my diet to a big salad each day and a reduction
of meat and fat and carbohydrates to a minimum.
I completely gave up bread for the 6mths after July.
Processed food is the very worst crap you can ever eat, so i don't, and
if everyone was like me
and couldn't be fooled easily, the whole food producing industry of the
world
would go stone motherless broke.
The excess food that would then be available as natural
produce from US and Oz farmers could then feed the rest of the hungry
world
with ease.

When you get lean and fit, the natural heart rate at rest will fall from
a common 64BPM down to
say 52BPM even if you are 60 like me. A young bloke of 25 who did the
exercize I take would
benefit even more greatly, and have a HR maybe 45.
When I was fit when 40, my HR was 47BPM.
Of course when you exercize, the body rebels to the torture, and becomes
more efficient about
processing the food, so a little food goes a long way, so you won't lose
weight if you exercize and
eat a pile of crappy fat rich garbage afterwards.
I like cabage based salads, 4 apples a day, maybe two bananas and an
orange,
a large serve of cooked oats and yogurt for breakfast; forget about ham,
bacon, sausages,
soft drinks, cheeses, white breads, butter margerine, and all that crap
in plastic packets
with lots of numbers on the label which mean its riddled with dangerous
chemicals to make you feel hungry, and eat more.
protein comes from eggs, and lean meat and fish, which I cannot get
enough of
because what is now beiong sold as fish is often not fish, or its really
crappy,
because mankind has cleaned out the world's oceans of fish.
So I feel guilty eating fish from the sea, not to mention its 5 times
the price
of lean bargain meats selling for $7 a Kg, enough to last me a week.
I do use some olive oil. Its good for anyone, and better than the fats
which I won't eat, and trim off the meat
before I cook it. Animal fat is also where a lot of pesticide and
hormone residues end up,
so don't eat fats. You don't need them and we didn't evolve to survive
off fats.
I never buy deep fried chips, or drink coka cola, its all crap.

Nathan Pritikin said in his book about nutrition for runners that all
you need is
to eat so that 80% of the energy comes from complex carbohydrates,
10% from proteins, and 10% from fats.

Since most UNREFINED grains or breads made with real wholemeal flour has
the whole goodness kept in, not pulled out to get greed driven sales
elsewhere,
then it has the 20% of protien and fat you need, and the CH slow burning
energy.
But even most wholemeal wheat breads are now using rapid yeasts and
chemicals and
I don't eat that anymore, and buy rye natural breads instead, and only
need a
couple of slices a day.


People in the US, UK and Oz are rapidly assuming pig like proportions.


When I am at the supermarket, I am appalled at the fat arse queus lining
up with
trolleys full of crap.
Probably they suffer affluenza, the dysfunctional syndrome of living too
high
and being anxious about everything, so they ain't fit, don't relate
well, and don't ****,
and feed their mouth instead.


I continue to ride about 150km a week and weight has stabilised,
and bmi appears to be a lot better in the mirror.
I treat myself to the occasional 100gm bar of Lindt 70% cocoa choclate.
Its ****ing divine this stuff.
Its much better than buying a 600gram milk chocolate bar with less cocoa
and piled high with fats and sugar,
and chemicals to make you buy more, along with hydrogenated fats to give
long shelf life,
but which are really terrible for your heart.
There are attempts to ban what they are putting into foods now, and as
fast as the banners get stuff
banned, the chemists with no conscience dream up new chemicals.

If I have done 100km on a saturday, I will treat myself to a large serve
of Bavarian Apple from Pancake Parlour, with ice cream and cream,
and unlike a couple of fat guys who play chess while I am there, I don't
have diabetes, and
have earned the treat, which won't hurt me.
These fatsos don't do anything except sit around, and they are paying
the price.

Too much sitting on me arse chatting on news groups and typing up
website
pages and doing electronics had made me heavy.
Now when i have to go into a computer shop there are all these young
dudes and they all look a bit crook,
a bit overweight, and kinda grey, like their PCs have sucked the very
life out of them.

I played Rugby Union when at school, and frankly it was guys just
tumbling over each other,
and I went home sore and sorry after most games. Lord knows how many
unseen injuries meant trouble later in life. Cycling is much better,
unless you fall off, but even if you do, you recover so fast it matters
not.
Cycling has speed, exhilaration, changing scenery, weather, varied
circumstances,
and needs alertness, rapid reflexes, careful judgements, and you learn
lessons
about life.

I am really lucky that there are hundreds of Km of cycling paths here to
ride on,
and that don't include the mountain trails through the bush for which a
mountain bike becomes sensible.
Mountain biking is about getting hot riding up steep climbs slowly, and
descending
with care and putting up with a far rougher ride than on the road.
Modern bikes have suspension and are useable by folks like me over 50
without
enduring injuries.

And even though Canberra has 330,000 people I only have to ride 4Km and
I am
in the middle of sheep paddocks and horse paddocks, and big wide country
areas.
It ain't like London or NY, or Sydney.


If one calculates based on the "average" that individuals undercount
their weight by ~5 pounds, or 2kg, it is obese. In McCoy's case,
using only 2kg is generous given its love of the truth.

No wonder nothing but shadow-pictures, and claims of great height (but
only while riding).

Rugby player...

Peter Wieck

So how do you stay fit Peter?

Patrick Turner.


Wyncote, PA

Patrick: I think your regiment is almost ideal for cardio-vascular
workouts. Do you not believe that working out for the upper body is also
important? There have been many studies that show longevity is best
accomplished by free weights. Nautilus equipment come in a close second and
for the most part, is more practical.

west

[Patrick Turner]

Keith G wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Keith G wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Keith G wrote:
snip,

60 eh? - I'm 60 *tomorrow*!! :-)

Look, I lied a bit.

I have 2 months to go before 60 arrives.
I feel 30 most days

You're lucky - I barely get to feel more than a couple a month....

Ah, a statement by one very insipid mind....

Works for me - I'll take 'insipid' over *flaky* any time!!

We've done the frantic bike-riding, now tell us other ways how you work
your celibacy off...

Nicole and Kylie are both just great, and need my attentions.......

One does a great job clipping the hedge,
while the other handles the mower on the lawns like a real pro....

Patrick Turner.

[Patrick Turner]

west wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Peter Wieck wrote:

I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling instead.
Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby player,

Hmmm.... that would be just under 202 pounds, figure at about
5'-9" (1.75 meters) = BMI of 29.8.... Using metric numbers, a BMI of
29.9. Obese is 30.

I'm 1.872M x 77Kg, which gives bmi = 21.948, and about the same as i was
when 25.
but last year in July I was 95Kg, and bmi = 27, and I considered myself
overweight.

Between last July and January, I rode about 200km a week, or about
5,000km,
and my weight reduced from 95Kg to 77Kg and probably I lost 20Kg of fat,
about the weight of a seriously good monoblok tube amp,
or the equivalent of at least 5 x 4Litre cans of olive oil, and put on
about 2 Kg of muscle
which keeps me riding as fast as guys 30 years younger.
At one stage my daily weight records showed I lost Kgm a week.
I amused myself when I stalled trying to ride up some hills last July.
The riding is not a leisurely activity just to take in the sights and
sounds of nature,
but a form of self inflicted pain which is excruciatingly enjoyable,
especially when riding up steep long hills with elevated heart rates,
or pushing hard along a flat stretch to catch some dude way out in the
distance,
or to hang on behind the 30 year old.

If you ride real slow, say no faster than you'd jog, you get a sore arse
and get bored, and the energy consumption
is less than walking, good for you, but not nearly as good if you
elevate the heart rate
for 3 hours straight and could barely talk to anyone if they were
present.
But not all the time, not while going down hill.
At a sweat inducing level, especially on a freezing cold day, one can
burn huge amounts of fats.
So best value from cycling is in the winter time, and because snow is so
very rare here,
the cold cloudless skies of about now to September seem to have been
designed by God for cyclist
pleasure.

Even at my age perhaps i burn 600cals per hour and so a 4 hr ride uses
2,400 cals,
or about the same amount as I use in a 24hr day of sedentary life.
This equals about 200gms of fat, so 8 hrs a week uses 400gms of fat
if you still eat the same as when sedentary.

So the bicycle can create a calorie deficit.
The only way I could lose weight easily without feeling hungry all the
time
was to cycle, and switch my diet to a big salad each day and a reduction
of meat and fat and carbohydrates to a minimum.
I completely gave up bread for the 6mths after July.
Processed food is the very worst crap you can ever eat, so i don't, and
if everyone was like me
and couldn't be fooled easily, the whole food producing industry of the
world
would go stone motherless broke.
The excess food that would then be available as natural
produce from US and Oz farmers could then feed the rest of the hungry
world
with ease.

When you get lean and fit, the natural heart rate at rest will fall from
a common 64BPM down to
say 52BPM even if you are 60 like me. A young bloke of 25 who did the
exercize I take would
benefit even more greatly, and have a HR maybe 45.
When I was fit when 40, my HR was 47BPM.
Of course when you exercize, the body rebels to the torture, and becomes
more efficient about
processing the food, so a little food goes a long way, so you won't lose
weight if you exercize and
eat a pile of crappy fat rich garbage afterwards.
I like cabage based salads, 4 apples a day, maybe two bananas and an
orange,
a large serve of cooked oats and yogurt for breakfast; forget about ham,
bacon, sausages,
soft drinks, cheeses, white breads, butter margerine, and all that crap
in plastic packets
with lots of numbers on the label which mean its riddled with dangerous
chemicals to make you feel hungry, and eat more.
protein comes from eggs, and lean meat and fish, which I cannot get
enough of
because what is now beiong sold as fish is often not fish, or its really
crappy,
because mankind has cleaned out the world's oceans of fish.
So I feel guilty eating fish from the sea, not to mention its 5 times
the price
of lean bargain meats selling for $7 a Kg, enough to last me a week.
I do use some olive oil. Its good for anyone, and better than the fats
which I won't eat, and trim off the meat
before I cook it. Animal fat is also where a lot of pesticide and
hormone residues end up,
so don't eat fats. You don't need them and we didn't evolve to survive
off fats.
I never buy deep fried chips, or drink coka cola, its all crap.

Nathan Pritikin said in his book about nutrition for runners that all
you need is
to eat so that 80% of the energy comes from complex carbohydrates,
10% from proteins, and 10% from fats.

Since most UNREFINED grains or breads made with real wholemeal flour has
the whole goodness kept in, not pulled out to get greed driven sales
elsewhere,
then it has the 20% of protien and fat you need, and the CH slow burning
energy.
But even most wholemeal wheat breads are now using rapid yeasts and
chemicals and
I don't eat that anymore, and buy rye natural breads instead, and only
need a
couple of slices a day.


People in the US, UK and Oz are rapidly assuming pig like proportions.


When I am at the supermarket, I am appalled at the fat arse queus lining
up with
trolleys full of crap.
Probably they suffer affluenza, the dysfunctional syndrome of living too
high
and being anxious about everything, so they ain't fit, don't relate
well, and don't ****,
and feed their mouth instead.


I continue to ride about 150km a week and weight has stabilised,
and bmi appears to be a lot better in the mirror.
I treat myself to the occasional 100gm bar of Lindt 70% cocoa choclate.
Its ****ing divine this stuff.
Its much better than buying a 600gram milk chocolate bar with less cocoa
and piled high with fats and sugar,
and chemicals to make you buy more, along with hydrogenated fats to give
long shelf life,
but which are really terrible for your heart.
There are attempts to ban what they are putting into foods now, and as
fast as the banners get stuff
banned, the chemists with no conscience dream up new chemicals.

If I have done 100km on a saturday, I will treat myself to a large serve
of Bavarian Apple from Pancake Parlour, with ice cream and cream,
and unlike a couple of fat guys who play chess while I am there, I don't
have diabetes, and
have earned the treat, which won't hurt me.
These fatsos don't do anything except sit around, and they are paying
the price.

Too much sitting on me arse chatting on news groups and typing up
website
pages and doing electronics had made me heavy.
Now when i have to go into a computer shop there are all these young
dudes and they all look a bit crook,
a bit overweight, and kinda grey, like their PCs have sucked the very
life out of them.

I played Rugby Union when at school, and frankly it was guys just
tumbling over each other,
and I went home sore and sorry after most games. Lord knows how many
unseen injuries meant trouble later in life. Cycling is much better,
unless you fall off, but even if you do, you recover so fast it matters
not.
Cycling has speed, exhilaration, changing scenery, weather, varied
circumstances,
and needs alertness, rapid reflexes, careful judgements, and you learn
lessons
about life.

I am really lucky that there are hundreds of Km of cycling paths here to
ride on,
and that don't include the mountain trails through the bush for which a
mountain bike becomes sensible.
Mountain biking is about getting hot riding up steep climbs slowly, and
descending
with care and putting up with a far rougher ride than on the road.
Modern bikes have suspension and are useable by folks like me over 50
without
enduring injuries.

And even though Canberra has 330,000 people I only have to ride 4Km and
I am
in the middle of sheep paddocks and horse paddocks, and big wide country
areas.
It ain't like London or NY, or Sydney.


If one calculates based on the "average" that individuals undercount
their weight by ~5 pounds, or 2kg, it is obese. In McCoy's case,
using only 2kg is generous given its love of the truth.

No wonder nothing but shadow-pictures, and claims of great height (but
only while riding).

Rugby player...

Peter Wieck

So how do you stay fit Peter?

Patrick Turner.


Wyncote, PA

Patrick: I think your regiment is almost ideal for cardio-vascular
workouts. Do you not believe that working out for the upper body is also
important? There have been many studies that show longevity is best
accomplished by free weights. Nautilus equipment come in a close second and
for the most part, is more practical.

Nicole and Kylie provide me with ample opportunity
for topside exercize.
They are very happy with my longevity as well.

The Nautilus sounds like a great idea, but
I am still searching for a suitable private ocean I can buy
to run such a nice sub with all mod cons for me and the gals of course.
They like to take turns using my depth sounder.

I am negotiating with Captain Nemo, who despite his age is a whiz on the
sextant,
and thus knows his way around, giant squids permitting....

But we had to tell him he could only play his organ if we all went
ashore....

The free weights you mention are not available yet in Oz and the prices
here
for weights are exorbident. Before being sold in fatness outlets,
there was a scam here involving weight supplies,
and a dealer offered very long weights online for a low fee, and many
people got caught and are
still weighting for the weights to arrive years later.

Unfortunately, last time I looked in at the gym, I was appalled by the
smell, the absurdity,
the loud raucus dance music, non audiophile PA gear, and all these ppl
working up a sweat but going nowhere,
and the far too few women didn't want to dance with anyone.
I heard you had to pay to go there! crayzee!!.

Patrick Turner.





west

[west[_4_]]

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


west wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Peter Wieck wrote:

I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling
instead.
Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby
player,

Hmmm.... that would be just under 202 pounds, figure at about
5'-9" (1.75 meters) = BMI of 29.8.... Using metric numbers, a BMI of
29.9. Obese is 30.

I'm 1.872M x 77Kg, which gives bmi = 21.948, and about the same as i
was
when 25.
but last year in July I was 95Kg, and bmi = 27, and I considered
myself
overweight.

Between last July and January, I rode about 200km a week, or about
5,000km,
and my weight reduced from 95Kg to 77Kg and probably I lost 20Kg of
fat,
about the weight of a seriously good monoblok tube amp,
or the equivalent of at least 5 x 4Litre cans of olive oil, and put on
about 2 Kg of muscle
which keeps me riding as fast as guys 30 years younger.
At one stage my daily weight records showed I lost Kgm a week.
I amused myself when I stalled trying to ride up some hills last July.
The riding is not a leisurely activity just to take in the sights and
sounds of nature,
but a form of self inflicted pain which is excruciatingly enjoyable,
especially when riding up steep long hills with elevated heart rates,
or pushing hard along a flat stretch to catch some dude way out in the
distance,
or to hang on behind the 30 year old.

If you ride real slow, say no faster than you'd jog, you get a sore
arse
and get bored, and the energy consumption
is less than walking, good for you, but not nearly as good if you
elevate the heart rate
for 3 hours straight and could barely talk to anyone if they were
present.
But not all the time, not while going down hill.
At a sweat inducing level, especially on a freezing cold day, one can
burn huge amounts of fats.
So best value from cycling is in the winter time, and because snow is
so
very rare here,
the cold cloudless skies of about now to September seem to have been
designed by God for cyclist
pleasure.

Even at my age perhaps i burn 600cals per hour and so a 4 hr ride uses
2,400 cals,
or about the same amount as I use in a 24hr day of sedentary life.
This equals about 200gms of fat, so 8 hrs a week uses 400gms of fat
if you still eat the same as when sedentary.

So the bicycle can create a calorie deficit.
The only way I could lose weight easily without feeling hungry all the
time
was to cycle, and switch my diet to a big salad each day and a
reduction
of meat and fat and carbohydrates to a minimum.
I completely gave up bread for the 6mths after July.
Processed food is the very worst crap you can ever eat, so i don't,
and
if everyone was like me
and couldn't be fooled easily, the whole food producing industry of
the
world
would go stone motherless broke.
The excess food that would then be available as natural
produce from US and Oz farmers could then feed the rest of the hungry
world
with ease.

When you get lean and fit, the natural heart rate at rest will fall
from
a common 64BPM down to
say 52BPM even if you are 60 like me. A young bloke of 25 who did the
exercize I take would
benefit even more greatly, and have a HR maybe 45.
When I was fit when 40, my HR was 47BPM.
Of course when you exercize, the body rebels to the torture, and
becomes
more efficient about
processing the food, so a little food goes a long way, so you won't
lose
weight if you exercize and
eat a pile of crappy fat rich garbage afterwards.
I like cabage based salads, 4 apples a day, maybe two bananas and an
orange,
a large serve of cooked oats and yogurt for breakfast; forget about
ham,
bacon, sausages,
soft drinks, cheeses, white breads, butter margerine, and all that
crap
in plastic packets
with lots of numbers on the label which mean its riddled with
dangerous
chemicals to make you feel hungry, and eat more.
protein comes from eggs, and lean meat and fish, which I cannot get
enough of
because what is now beiong sold as fish is often not fish, or its
really
crappy,
because mankind has cleaned out the world's oceans of fish.
So I feel guilty eating fish from the sea, not to mention its 5 times
the price
of lean bargain meats selling for $7 a Kg, enough to last me a week.
I do use some olive oil. Its good for anyone, and better than the fats
which I won't eat, and trim off the meat
before I cook it. Animal fat is also where a lot of pesticide and
hormone residues end up,
so don't eat fats. You don't need them and we didn't evolve to survive
off fats.
I never buy deep fried chips, or drink coka cola, its all crap.

Nathan Pritikin said in his book about nutrition for runners that all
you need is
to eat so that 80% of the energy comes from complex carbohydrates,
10% from proteins, and 10% from fats.

Since most UNREFINED grains or breads made with real wholemeal flour
has
the whole goodness kept in, not pulled out to get greed driven sales
elsewhere,
then it has the 20% of protien and fat you need, and the CH slow
burning
energy.
But even most wholemeal wheat breads are now using rapid yeasts and
chemicals and
I don't eat that anymore, and buy rye natural breads instead, and only
need a
couple of slices a day.


People in the US, UK and Oz are rapidly assuming pig like proportions.


When I am at the supermarket, I am appalled at the fat arse queus
lining
up with
trolleys full of crap.
Probably they suffer affluenza, the dysfunctional syndrome of living
too
high
and being anxious about everything, so they ain't fit, don't relate
well, and don't ****,
and feed their mouth instead.


I continue to ride about 150km a week and weight has stabilised,
and bmi appears to be a lot better in the mirror.
I treat myself to the occasional 100gm bar of Lindt 70% cocoa
choclate.
Its ****ing divine this stuff.
Its much better than buying a 600gram milk chocolate bar with less
cocoa
and piled high with fats and sugar,
and chemicals to make you buy more, along with hydrogenated fats to
give
long shelf life,
but which are really terrible for your heart.
There are attempts to ban what they are putting into foods now, and as
fast as the banners get stuff
banned, the chemists with no conscience dream up new chemicals.

If I have done 100km on a saturday, I will treat myself to a large
serve
of Bavarian Apple from Pancake Parlour, with ice cream and cream,
and unlike a couple of fat guys who play chess while I am there, I
don't
have diabetes, and
have earned the treat, which won't hurt me.
These fatsos don't do anything except sit around, and they are paying
the price.

Too much sitting on me arse chatting on news groups and typing up
website
pages and doing electronics had made me heavy.
Now when i have to go into a computer shop there are all these young
dudes and they all look a bit crook,
a bit overweight, and kinda grey, like their PCs have sucked the very
life out of them.

I played Rugby Union when at school, and frankly it was guys just
tumbling over each other,
and I went home sore and sorry after most games. Lord knows how many
unseen injuries meant trouble later in life. Cycling is much better,
unless you fall off, but even if you do, you recover so fast it
matters
not.
Cycling has speed, exhilaration, changing scenery, weather, varied
circumstances,
and needs alertness, rapid reflexes, careful judgements, and you learn
lessons
about life.

I am really lucky that there are hundreds of Km of cycling paths here
to
ride on,
and that don't include the mountain trails through the bush for which
a
mountain bike becomes sensible.
Mountain biking is about getting hot riding up steep climbs slowly,
and
descending
with care and putting up with a far rougher ride than on the road.
Modern bikes have suspension and are useable by folks like me over 50
without
enduring injuries.

And even though Canberra has 330,000 people I only have to ride 4Km
and
I am
in the middle of sheep paddocks and horse paddocks, and big wide
country
areas.
It ain't like London or NY, or Sydney.


If one calculates based on the "average" that individuals undercount
their weight by ~5 pounds, or 2kg, it is obese. In McCoy's case,
using only 2kg is generous given its love of the truth.

No wonder nothing but shadow-pictures, and claims of great height
(but
only while riding).

Rugby player...

Peter Wieck

So how do you stay fit Peter?

Patrick Turner.


Wyncote, PA

Patrick: I think your regiment is almost ideal for cardio-vascular
workouts. Do you not believe that working out for the upper body is also
important? There have been many studies that show longevity is best
accomplished by free weights. Nautilus equipment come in a close second
and
for the most part, is more practical.

Nicole and Kylie provide me with ample opportunity
for topside exercize.
They are very happy with my longevity as well.

The Nautilus sounds like a great idea, but
I am still searching for a suitable private ocean I can buy
to run such a nice sub with all mod cons for me and the gals of course.
They like to take turns using my depth sounder.

I am negotiating with Captain Nemo, who despite his age is a whiz on the
sextant,
and thus knows his way around, giant squids permitting....

But we had to tell him he could only play his organ if we all went
ashore....

The free weights you mention are not available yet in Oz and the prices
here
for weights are exorbident. Before being sold in fatness outlets,
there was a scam here involving weight supplies,
and a dealer offered very long weights online for a low fee, and many
people got caught and are
still weighting for the weights to arrive years later.

Unfortunately, last time I looked in at the gym, I was appalled by the
smell, the absurdity,
the loud raucus dance music, non audiophile PA gear, and all these ppl
working up a sweat but going nowhere,
and the far too few women didn't want to dance with anyone.
I heard you had to pay to go there! crayzee!!.

Patrick Turner.

To each his own. It's that very smell that attracts characters like Weick.
The gym I go to doesn't have a smell. At least it's hardly noticeable. After
using an apparatus, rules require the user to spray the equipment and wipe
it with a towel.
You must have sexy legs but a flabby torso. Look good in shorts as long as
you keep your shirt on?

west





west

[west[_4_]]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ps.com...

west wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ps.com...

Patrick Turner wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:

Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope
none of
the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness
that
draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad
enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to
correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right.

Andre Jute
uses only CD and so has time for more music

I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon.

But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast
cd
collections
indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl.
Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on
cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and
other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to
delight,
and
give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages
to
do.

I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version
and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old
master
tape
was being played, and we could switch from one to the other,
and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively.

Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a
huge
bodge to.

So is FM stereo mulptiplexing.

Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they
do
it right, IMHO.

Patrick Turner.

I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold
the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too
time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a
boon.

I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like
Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's
pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred
Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big-
engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my
sound systems. I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and
then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels
are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers -- and CDs, so that
chaniging the music is quick and easy.

There is nothing wrong with CD sound quality; it is better than good
enough. I decided to go over solely to CD on the day Nimbus, who
transfer ancient discs to CD, sent me a box of CDs including one of
Ponselle that was better than anything you could buy on any other
medium, no matter how much money you spent.

Andre Jute
Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when
they will get off their collective fat backside and criminalize
negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by the enemies of
fidelity.

And I am not taking a position on the vinyl vs.CD debate but I am
wondering if the convenience of playing both mediums were equal, which
would
you prefer?

That's a good question, West. I would choose CD because it doesn't
wear and it is small. I have 6000 CDs (or so) in a fraction of the
space consumed by 8000 LPs. Vinyl is (for me) simply a nuisance
unjustified by whatever extra audiophiles claim to hear in the
grooves.

Next question, if you don't mind ...what are you using to play your CDs?

Quad CD66 and CD67, very old, very reliable. Both of mine were on
lease to the BBC, then checked over at the factory before they came to
me about fifteen years ago.

Thanks in advance.

west

I guess you're not into SACDs or keeping up with the Jones'. Do you use a
high efficiency horn or those ESL 57s? I'm trying to picture your system
from some of your posts. Perhaps you use 2 systems.

west

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

[George M. Middius]

"west" said:

I think your regiment is almost ideal

If so, let's send 'em to Iraq ASAP.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Peter Wieck]

On May 17, 8:36 am, John Byrns wrote:
In article . com,
Peter Wieck wrote:



True, there must be someone quite clever behind it... but I seriously
doubt that the persona we observe here is anything at all like that
actual individual. So, whereas I may not *like* you, I must respect
you. McCoy I neither like nor dislike as I do not believe there is an
actual "there" to deserve such efforts. Tweaking it is great fun,
however.

Somehow that paragraph seems internally inconsistent. If "Andre" is
nothing but a chimera as you believe, but as you say "there must be
someone quite clever behind it", then that person would be an
actual "there", deserving of either your like or dislike.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Logic chopping. Your specialty.

I would like to believe that the entity behind "the real McCoy" is
having as much fun as I do, or at least one hopes so. The alternative
is too sad to contemplate... again leaving no room for "like" or
"dislike"... as the entity is simply not worth it.

If my contention is true, perhaps grudging admiration... but not
dislike. Dislike I reserve for those worthy of such efforts.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Peter Wieck]

On May 17, 8:46 am, George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast .
net wrote:
John Byrns said to Worthless Wiecky:

McCoy I neither like nor dislike as I do not believe there is an
actual "there" to deserve such efforts.
Somehow that paragraph seems internally inconsistent. If "Andre" is
nothing but a chimera as you believe, but as you say "there must be
someone quite clever behind it", then that person would be an
actual "there", deserving of either your like or dislike.

No point in getting all philosophical. The prime directive of
Worthlessism is Nothing Shall Make Sense.

Tweaking it is great fun

That explains a lot, Worthless. Too bad you don't have the stones to
make a living at your "hobby".

Here's a pic of Worthless's role model:http://www.capohedz.com/typebrighter..._12-793513.jpg

--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

Actually I make a very good living at what I enjoy, as it happens, so
that I may have hobbies. And I have hobbies such that I can indulge in
them without the need to "make a living at them". Imagine you trying
to make a living at anything having to do with electronics... much
less tubes.

As turnabout is fair play, here is "the commander" at work:

http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/sha0090l.jpg

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Henry Pasternack[_3_]]

"John Byrns" wrote in message ...
You are making the wrong measurement, the relevant measurement for this
discussion is the input to the combination of the cutting amp and "RIAA"
equalizer vs. the amplitude, a.k.a. displacement, of the signal actually
cut into the grooves of the LP. I think that if you make this
measurement it will give you a different perspective on how LP records
actually work.

The train is leaving the station, Andre, Arny, Chris, Eiron, and Ian are
already on board, you wouldn't want to be left behind, you don't want to
have people thinking you have an incomplete knowledge of LP cutting. :-)

Hmmm. I guess I'll have to take the next train.

I agree that the shelf in the RIAA curve reduces HF groove amplitude by
about 12dB. On the other hand, there is nothing to prevent transcribing
discs with no cutting head equalization at all. The resulting discs could be
played back flat with an unequalized phono preamplifier. Compared to a
flat system, equalization gives improved dynamic range and HF signal-to-
noise. This is precisely the purpose and definition of recording "emphasis."

You've made it clear that your argument depends on two things. First, the
notion that flat groove amplitude is the frame of reference for the system,
and second, that the overall falling response of the RIAA playback curve
is there to correct for the rising response of the cartridge and is distinct
from the "equalization" due to the mindband shelf.

I don't think there's any dispute whatsoever with respect to the physical
mechanisms involved. But, in my view, it isn't unreasonable to lump the
two parts of the equalization curve together, in which case the RIAA
process would appear to incorporate high frequency emphasis. This
may be more a matter of definition than anything else.

Presumably, the shelf is there as a compromise. Although it reduces the
amount of HF preemphasis (and therefore the SNR improvement), it also
decreases the groove acceleration, which should improve stylus trackability
and probably helps cutting head performance as well. I also seem to recall
there are geometric issues that lead to increased distortion when the grooves
bend very sharply, and the equalization shelf should help that problem as
well.

I can't remember ever seeing the RIAA playback curve described as HF
emphasis. Your description certainly is novel to me. It would be helpful
to dig up some formal documents from the time to see whether or not this
recording characteristic was historically described as "emphasis."

I'm curious to see whether the newsgroup can tolerate this difference of
interpretation without exploding into spasms of conflict and indignation.

-Henry

[Patrick Turner]

west wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


west wrote:

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


Peter Wieck wrote:

I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling
instead.
Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby
player,

Hmmm.... that would be just under 202 pounds, figure at about
5'-9" (1.75 meters) = BMI of 29.8.... Using metric numbers, a BMI of
29.9. Obese is 30.

I'm 1.872M x 77Kg, which gives bmi = 21.948, and about the same as i
was
when 25.
but last year in July I was 95Kg, and bmi = 27, and I considered
myself
overweight.

Between last July and January, I rode about 200km a week, or about
5,000km,
and my weight reduced from 95Kg to 77Kg and probably I lost 20Kg of
fat,
about the weight of a seriously good monoblok tube amp,
or the equivalent of at least 5 x 4Litre cans of olive oil, and put on
about 2 Kg of muscle
which keeps me riding as fast as guys 30 years younger.
At one stage my daily weight records showed I lost Kgm a week.
I amused myself when I stalled trying to ride up some hills last July.
The riding is not a leisurely activity just to take in the sights and
sounds of nature,
but a form of self inflicted pain which is excruciatingly enjoyable,
especially when riding up steep long hills with elevated heart rates,
or pushing hard along a flat stretch to catch some dude way out in the
distance,
or to hang on behind the 30 year old.

If you ride real slow, say no faster than you'd jog, you get a sore
arse
and get bored, and the energy consumption
is less than walking, good for you, but not nearly as good if you
elevate the heart rate
for 3 hours straight and could barely talk to anyone if they were
present.
But not all the time, not while going down hill.
At a sweat inducing level, especially on a freezing cold day, one can
burn huge amounts of fats.
So best value from cycling is in the winter time, and because snow is
so
very rare here,
the cold cloudless skies of about now to September seem to have been
designed by God for cyclist
pleasure.

Even at my age perhaps i burn 600cals per hour and so a 4 hr ride uses
2,400 cals,
or about the same amount as I use in a 24hr day of sedentary life.
This equals about 200gms of fat, so 8 hrs a week uses 400gms of fat
if you still eat the same as when sedentary.

So the bicycle can create a calorie deficit.
The only way I could lose weight easily without feeling hungry all the
time
was to cycle, and switch my diet to a big salad each day and a
reduction
of meat and fat and carbohydrates to a minimum.
I completely gave up bread for the 6mths after July.
Processed food is the very worst crap you can ever eat, so i don't,
and
if everyone was like me
and couldn't be fooled easily, the whole food producing industry of
the
world
would go stone motherless broke.
The excess food that would then be available as natural
produce from US and Oz farmers could then feed the rest of the hungry
world
with ease.

When you get lean and fit, the natural heart rate at rest will fall
from
a common 64BPM down to
say 52BPM even if you are 60 like me. A young bloke of 25 who did the
exercize I take would
benefit even more greatly, and have a HR maybe 45.
When I was fit when 40, my HR was 47BPM.
Of course when you exercize, the body rebels to the torture, and
becomes
more efficient about
processing the food, so a little food goes a long way, so you won't
lose
weight if you exercize and
eat a pile of crappy fat rich garbage afterwards.
I like cabage based salads, 4 apples a day, maybe two bananas and an
orange,
a large serve of cooked oats and yogurt for breakfast; forget about
ham,
bacon, sausages,
soft drinks, cheeses, white breads, butter margerine, and all that
crap
in plastic packets
with lots of numbers on the label which mean its riddled with
dangerous
chemicals to make you feel hungry, and eat more.
protein comes from eggs, and lean meat and fish, which I cannot get
enough of
because what is now beiong sold as fish is often not fish, or its
really
crappy,
because mankind has cleaned out the world's oceans of fish.
So I feel guilty eating fish from the sea, not to mention its 5 times
the price
of lean bargain meats selling for $7 a Kg, enough to last me a week.
I do use some olive oil. Its good for anyone, and better than the fats
which I won't eat, and trim off the meat
before I cook it. Animal fat is also where a lot of pesticide and
hormone residues end up,
so don't eat fats. You don't need them and we didn't evolve to survive
off fats.
I never buy deep fried chips, or drink coka cola, its all crap.

Nathan Pritikin said in his book about nutrition for runners that all
you need is
to eat so that 80% of the energy comes from complex carbohydrates,
10% from proteins, and 10% from fats.

Since most UNREFINED grains or breads made with real wholemeal flour
has
the whole goodness kept in, not pulled out to get greed driven sales
elsewhere,
then it has the 20% of protien and fat you need, and the CH slow
burning
energy.
But even most wholemeal wheat breads are now using rapid yeasts and
chemicals and
I don't eat that anymore, and buy rye natural breads instead, and only
need a
couple of slices a day.


People in the US, UK and Oz are rapidly assuming pig like proportions.


When I am at the supermarket, I am appalled at the fat arse queus
lining
up with
trolleys full of crap.
Probably they suffer affluenza, the dysfunctional syndrome of living
too
high
and being anxious about everything, so they ain't fit, don't relate
well, and don't ****,
and feed their mouth instead.


I continue to ride about 150km a week and weight has stabilised,
and bmi appears to be a lot better in the mirror.
I treat myself to the occasional 100gm bar of Lindt 70% cocoa
choclate.
Its ****ing divine this stuff.
Its much better than buying a 600gram milk chocolate bar with less
cocoa
and piled high with fats and sugar,
and chemicals to make you buy more, along with hydrogenated fats to
give
long shelf life,
but which are really terrible for your heart.
There are attempts to ban what they are putting into foods now, and as
fast as the banners get stuff
banned, the chemists with no conscience dream up new chemicals.

If I have done 100km on a saturday, I will treat myself to a large
serve
of Bavarian Apple from Pancake Parlour, with ice cream and cream,
and unlike a couple of fat guys who play chess while I am there, I
don't
have diabetes, and
have earned the treat, which won't hurt me.
These fatsos don't do anything except sit around, and they are paying
the price.

Too much sitting on me arse chatting on news groups and typing up
website
pages and doing electronics had made me heavy.
Now when i have to go into a computer shop there are all these young
dudes and they all look a bit crook,
a bit overweight, and kinda grey, like their PCs have sucked the very
life out of them.

I played Rugby Union when at school, and frankly it was guys just
tumbling over each other,
and I went home sore and sorry after most games. Lord knows how many
unseen injuries meant trouble later in life. Cycling is much better,
unless you fall off, but even if you do, you recover so fast it
matters
not.
Cycling has speed, exhilaration, changing scenery, weather, varied
circumstances,
and needs alertness, rapid reflexes, careful judgements, and you learn
lessons
about life.

I am really lucky that there are hundreds of Km of cycling paths here
to
ride on,
and that don't include the mountain trails through the bush for which
a
mountain bike becomes sensible.
Mountain biking is about getting hot riding up steep climbs slowly,
and
descending
with care and putting up with a far rougher ride than on the road.
Modern bikes have suspension and are useable by folks like me over 50
without
enduring injuries.

And even though Canberra has 330,000 people I only have to ride 4Km
and
I am
in the middle of sheep paddocks and horse paddocks, and big wide
country
areas.
It ain't like London or NY, or Sydney.


If one calculates based on the "average" that individuals undercount
their weight by ~5 pounds, or 2kg, it is obese. In McCoy's case,
using only 2kg is generous given its love of the truth.

No wonder nothing but shadow-pictures, and claims of great height
(but
only while riding).

Rugby player...

Peter Wieck

So how do you stay fit Peter?

Patrick Turner.


Wyncote, PA

Patrick: I think your regiment is almost ideal for cardio-vascular
workouts. Do you not believe that working out for the upper body is also
important? There have been many studies that show longevity is best
accomplished by free weights. Nautilus equipment come in a close second
and
for the most part, is more practical.

Nicole and Kylie provide me with ample opportunity
for topside exercize.
They are very happy with my longevity as well.

The Nautilus sounds like a great idea, but
I am still searching for a suitable private ocean I can buy
to run such a nice sub with all mod cons for me and the gals of course.
They like to take turns using my depth sounder.

I am negotiating with Captain Nemo, who despite his age is a whiz on the
sextant,
and thus knows his way around, giant squids permitting....

But we had to tell him he could only play his organ if we all went
ashore....

The free weights you mention are not available yet in Oz and the prices
here
for weights are exorbident. Before being sold in fatness outlets,
there was a scam here involving weight supplies,
and a dealer offered very long weights online for a low fee, and many
people got caught and are
still weighting for the weights to arrive years later.

Unfortunately, last time I looked in at the gym, I was appalled by the
smell, the absurdity,
the loud raucus dance music, non audiophile PA gear, and all these ppl
working up a sweat but going nowhere,
and the far too few women didn't want to dance with anyone.
I heard you had to pay to go there! crayzee!!.

Patrick Turner.

To each his own. It's that very smell that attracts characters like Weick.
The gym I go to doesn't have a smell. At least it's hardly noticeable. After
using an apparatus, rules require the user to spray the equipment and wipe
it with a towel.
You must have sexy legs but a flabby torso. Look good in shorts as long as
you keep your shirt on?

Gee you guys don't do any cycling do you.

I don't have a flabby anything and am quite happy with my shape which
is almost unchanged and the same weight as I was at 25.

I am not a silly fanatic who tries to develop the unatural looking
freakish
outlines of body builders who strut about without being very useful to
anyone,
and who, because of their massively muscled upper body can't run or
cycle very far
because they have such a distorted build and poor distribution of weight
for
running or cycling.
The image making media present to men the same stupid models of vanity
to aspire to.
Don't, its bad for your health!
Humans get made in a range of sizes and shapes, OK.
In fact the mindset of the media about how men should look is as stupid
as the way Vogue and Cosmopolitan
present ideal shapes for women to follow. Women don't so easily
tell the world and its messengers to get ****ed so easily as men do
hence the surge in eating disorders
amoung young women who spend whole lives loathing themselves, and trying
desperately
to look 13 which is the age of many models in the magazines the women
buy.
One only has to understand the crappiness of the visual crap one sees
for sale in newsagents
and see how bereft western ppl are of any deep ideas other than trying
to look good.

I understand that the mullahs of Iran have a point about being cranky
about empty western culture being
corruptive.

I sure don't need the steroids used by most bodybuilders to get the look
they want.

I don't give a **** about what anyone else thinks about me, and even
when i was
20Kg over what I liked to be it didn't bug me much, and did not bug
anyone else,
and all the women I met had worse figures so they never had anything to
complain about.

The fact of life is that nobody treasures you for your body,
except yourself, if you are selfish.

Women like a man with a good body,
but they like any man far better if the man's mind suits theirs, and he
earns a trouser load of dollars
ready to spend on them.

This still doesn't gurantee he gets a really nicely performed BJ once a
week, free, no strings.
He gets to go down on her though, and is expected, and the of all the
trades between
humanity and huwomanity, the women always end up with the better side of
the deal
and never give freebies.

"Jus lie down here luvvie, it won't costyer anyfink" is a sentence you
will
never ever hear uttered to you no matter how long you live.
Even if no money changes hands, you end up sweating, she's smilimg, and
perhaps it costs you 1/2 a house.

Patrick Turner.









west





west

[John Byrns]

In article ,
"Henry Pasternack" wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
You are making the wrong measurement, the relevant measurement for this
discussion is the input to the combination of the cutting amp and "RIAA"
equalizer vs. the amplitude, a.k.a. displacement, of the signal actually
cut into the grooves of the LP. I think that if you make this
measurement it will give you a different perspective on how LP records
actually work.

The train is leaving the station, Andre, Arny, Chris, Eiron, and Ian are
already on board, you wouldn't want to be left behind, you don't want to
have people thinking you have an incomplete knowledge of LP cutting. :-)

Hmmm. I guess I'll have to take the next train.

I agree that the shelf in the RIAA curve reduces HF groove amplitude by
about 12dB. On the other hand, there is nothing to prevent transcribing
discs with no cutting head equalization at all. The resulting discs could be
played back flat with an unequalized phono preamplifier. Compared to a
flat system, equalization gives improved dynamic range and HF signal-to-
noise. This is precisely the purpose and definition of recording "emphasis."

What does it mean to use "no cutting head equalization at all"? What
sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had as
was used to cut LPs? I suggest you go and read a few articles on real
world cutting heads, like the Westrex 3D stereodisc cutter pictured at
the web site Peter provided the reference to, at least I think it was
Peter. It is my understanding that the original Western Electric cutter
heads, used in the early days of electrical recording, did not use any
electrical equalization. Due to a mechanical resonance they operated as
a constant amplitude cutter below the resonant, or turnover, frequency
and as a constant velocity cutter above that frequency. The later
Westrex and Fairchild stereo cutters also had mechanical resonances
which made the required electrical equalization considerably different
than the so called RIAA recording equalization curve. Perhaps the
European stereo cutters didn't suffer from these pesky resonances,
although the cutter head resonance did form the basis of the
equalization used in the original electrical recording system.

If you used a cutter similar to the original Western Electric cutter,
with no electrical equalization at all, you would still need to use an
equalized phono preamplifier for playback. If you played back such a
recording with a magnetic pickup you would still require a low frequency
boost below the turnover frequency. If you used an amplitude responsive
pickup you would need to boost the frequencies above the turnover
frequency at a rate of 6 dB/Octave.

So what do you actually mean by a recording made with "with no cutting
head equalization at all"?

Disclaimer, I didn't look all this cutter head resonance stuff up, I am
trying to dredge up ancient memories, so its possible I am remembering
it all backwards, so it would be best to research it for yourself.

You've made it clear that your argument depends on two things. First, the
notion that flat groove amplitude is the frame of reference for the system,
and second, that the overall falling response of the RIAA playback curve
is there to correct for the rising response of the cartridge and is distinct
from the "equalization" due to the mindband shelf.

Yes, flat groove amplitude is my frame of reference, although not that
of today's modern audiophile. Note that flat groove amplitude is
required at low frequencies to get reasonable recording time, hence
constant amplitude recording has always been used below the turnover
frequency. Whatever frame of reference you choose, you are going to
require a different playback equalization curve depending on the type of
pickup you use, velocity responding or amplitude responding. It seems
modern audiophiles don't believe there is such a thing as an amplitude
responding pickup, just goes to show how long the LP has been gone from
the audio scene.

I don't think there's any dispute whatsoever with respect to the physical
mechanisms involved. But, in my view, it isn't unreasonable to lump the
two parts of the equalization curve together, in which case the RIAA
process would appear to incorporate high frequency emphasis. This
may be more a matter of definition than anything else.

While this is a reasonable way to look at the playback system using a
magnetic pickup whose resonance is at or above the high end of the audio
band. It is not reasonable for the disc cutting end of the system where
the real world electrical equalization used bears little resemblance to
any of the curves we have been discussing because of inband resonance.

Presumably, the shelf is there as a compromise. Although it reduces the
amount of HF preemphasis (and therefore the SNR improvement), it also
decreases the groove acceleration, which should improve stylus trackability
and probably helps cutting head performance as well. I also seem to recall
there are geometric issues that lead to increased distortion when the grooves
bend very sharply, and the equalization shelf should help that problem as
well.

If you look back in one of my earlier post I briefly touched on the high
frequency "trackability" and geometric issues, but didn't pursue them
because they don't directly relate to the point I was making, I just
pointed them out as reasons for shelving down the high frequency
recording amplitude.

I can't remember ever seeing the RIAA playback curve described as HF
emphasis. Your description certainly is novel to me. It would be helpful
to dig up some formal documents from the time to see whether or not this
recording characteristic was historically described as "emphasis."

You can certainly find curves presented the way I have described the
RIAA playback curve if you read any one of a number of vintage articles
describing how to equalize ceramic pickups. I think someone in an
earlier thread may have actually dug out one or more of these articles,
although I think it was probably in a different news group. Hard as it
is for audiophiles to believe, amplitude responding pickups were widely
used at one time to play LPs, probably considerably more widely used
than magnetic pickups.

I'm curious to see whether the newsgroup can tolerate this difference of
interpretation without exploding into spasms of conflict and indignation.

I think it already exploded into spasms of conflict and indignation
several days ago, and has since settled back down to normal after
several of the brighter lights in the group realized that I was
precisely correct, even if they found my frame of reference unusual, and
said it was "not useful" even if it is correct.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[robert casey]

electrical equalization. Due to a mechanical resonance they operated as
a constant amplitude cutter below the resonant, or turnover, frequency
and as a constant velocity cutter above that frequency. The later
Westrex and Fairchild stereo cutters also had mechanical resonances
which made the required electrical equalization considerably different
than the so called RIAA recording equalization curve. Perhaps the
European stereo cutters didn't suffer from these pesky resonances,
although the cutter head resonance did form the basis of the
equalization used in the original electrical recording system.


The people cutting the master disc could play the music program material
at a slower speed, and cut the disc at the matching slower speed, as a
work around of cutter head resonances.

Some of the discussions of how much the needle on the record can wiggle
vs the frequency of the groove wiggle seems quite similar to "slew rate"
limitations of op-amps. As if the needle can't "slew" fast enough if
the groove wiggles at too high an amplitude at some too high frequency.

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Fri, 18 May 2007 04:31:18 GMT, robert casey
wrote:


electrical equalization. Due to a mechanical resonance they operated as
a constant amplitude cutter below the resonant, or turnover, frequency
and as a constant velocity cutter above that frequency. The later
Westrex and Fairchild stereo cutters also had mechanical resonances
which made the required electrical equalization considerably different
than the so called RIAA recording equalization curve. Perhaps the
European stereo cutters didn't suffer from these pesky resonances,
although the cutter head resonance did form the basis of the
equalization used in the original electrical recording system.


The people cutting the master disc could play the music program material
at a slower speed, and cut the disc at the matching slower speed, as a
work around of cutter head resonances.

This was done in the latter part of the vinyl years, but cutter-head
resonances still fell well into the audio *mid*band (!) at half-speed.
Lots of other dweeby reasons related to practical details of kerf
and head heating and God-only-knows-what-'cause-it's-all-been-fergot
kept any slower cutting speeds from being used. Ask Scott Dorsey on
rec.audio.pro ; he still cuts 'em and is amazingly fun besides.


Some of the discussions of how much the needle on the record can wiggle
vs the frequency of the groove wiggle seems quite similar to "slew rate"
limitations of op-amps. As if the needle can't "slew" fast enough if
the groove wiggles at too high an amplitude at some too high frequency.

It's a good analogy, IMO, if you consider the information in the
groove to be input to a slew-limited amplifier (all are). Some
folks have made the same analogy for SACD's, FWIW. But all systems
of all kinds are finally slew-limited; talk's only about when.


Also, folks with a deeper interest might want to investigate
the two fundamental resonances in the playback system. At low
frequencies, cantilever compliance and tonearm "effective" mass
resonate at a frequency hopefully above typical warp frequencies,
yet below expected audio frequencies. Lots more available if
anybody's interested.

And at high frequencies stylus (and some distributed portion
of cantilever) mass resonates with vinyl compliance. Moving
this resonance above the audio range requires very light
moving systems (which must still be non-self-resonant themselves
within the audio range) and styli contact geometries that
minimize effective vinyl compliance.

The last three words are the interesting bit. Thanks for sticking
it out.

Much thanks, as always,

Chris Hornbeck
"A little note on SUCCESS:

At age 1................you don't give a ****.
At age 4, success is ....not peeing in your pants.
At age 12, success is .....having friends.
At age 16, success is .......having a drivers license.
At age 20, success is .........having sex.
At age 35, success is ...........having money.
At age 50, success is ...........having money.
At age 60, success is .........having sex.
At age 70, success is .......having a drivers license.
At age 75, success is .....having friends.
At age 80, success is ....not peeing in your pants.
At age 100,.............you don't give a ****."

- anon from the Great and Powerful Internet, with
corrections by Patrick Turner

[Patrick Turner]

robert casey wrote:

electrical equalization. Due to a mechanical resonance they operated as
a constant amplitude cutter below the resonant, or turnover, frequency
and as a constant velocity cutter above that frequency. The later
Westrex and Fairchild stereo cutters also had mechanical resonances
which made the required electrical equalization considerably different
than the so called RIAA recording equalization curve. Perhaps the
European stereo cutters didn't suffer from these pesky resonances,
although the cutter head resonance did form the basis of the
equalization used in the original electrical recording system.


The people cutting the master disc could play the music program material
at a slower speed, and cut the disc at the matching slower speed, as a
work around of cutter head resonances.

Yes, but this never happened on direct to disc recordings, sometimes
made on 45rpm.
I've heard a few, they are really great, and they use the same RIAA
playback filter.

Some of the discussions of how much the needle on the record can wiggle
vs the frequency of the groove wiggle seems quite similar to "slew rate"
limitations of op-amps. As if the needle can't "slew" fast enough if
the groove wiggles at too high an amplitude at some too high frequency.

Vinyl doesn't do real good square waves.

Nor does CD though, and there isn't any need.

What is the maximum signal amplitude at 21kHz able to be recorded
with reference to the maximum 1 kHz signal?

If you tried to record a flat set of test signals, and boosted
the HF by 20dB by 21kHz then if the replay cart id as flat as the ticket
that came with my Denon103R,
you'd think you'd get say 0.4mV at the cart output at 1kHz, and 4mV at
21 kHz,
and BTW, 0.04mV at 10Hz.

My Shure V15 gives far more output, about 5mV at 1 Khz, and presumably
0.5mV at 10Hz, and 50mV at 21kHz.

Patrick Turner.

[John Byrns]

In article ,
Chris Hornbeck wrote:

On Fri, 18 May 2007 04:31:18 GMT, robert casey
wrote:


electrical equalization. Due to a mechanical resonance they operated as
a constant amplitude cutter below the resonant, or turnover, frequency
and as a constant velocity cutter above that frequency. The later
Westrex and Fairchild stereo cutters also had mechanical resonances
which made the required electrical equalization considerably different
than the so called RIAA recording equalization curve. Perhaps the
European stereo cutters didn't suffer from these pesky resonances,
although the cutter head resonance did form the basis of the
equalization used in the original electrical recording system.

The people cutting the master disc could play the music program material
at a slower speed, and cut the disc at the matching slower speed, as a
work around of cutter head resonances.

This was done in the latter part of the vinyl years, but cutter-head
resonances still fell well into the audio *mid*band (!) at half-speed.
Lots of other dweeby reasons related to practical details of kerf
and head heating and God-only-knows-what-'cause-it's-all-been-fergot
kept any slower cutting speeds from being used. Ask Scott Dorsey on
rec.audio.pro ; he still cuts 'em and is amazingly fun besides.

No, Scott hates Ampliphase transmitters, so he can't be all that much
fun.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[John Byrns]

In article ,
John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hornbeck wrote:

On Fri, 18 May 2007 04:31:18 GMT, robert casey
wrote:


electrical equalization. Due to a mechanical resonance they operated as
a constant amplitude cutter below the resonant, or turnover, frequency
and as a constant velocity cutter above that frequency. The later
Westrex and Fairchild stereo cutters also had mechanical resonances
which made the required electrical equalization considerably different
than the so called RIAA recording equalization curve. Perhaps the
European stereo cutters didn't suffer from these pesky resonances,
although the cutter head resonance did form the basis of the
equalization used in the original electrical recording system.

The people cutting the master disc could play the music program material
at a slower speed, and cut the disc at the matching slower speed, as a
work around of cutter head resonances.

This was done in the latter part of the vinyl years, but cutter-head
resonances still fell well into the audio *mid*band (!) at half-speed.
Lots of other dweeby reasons related to practical details of kerf
and head heating and God-only-knows-what-'cause-it's-all-been-fergot
kept any slower cutting speeds from being used. Ask Scott Dorsey on
rec.audio.pro ; he still cuts 'em and is amazingly fun besides.

No, Scott hates Ampliphase transmitters, so he can't be all that much
fun.

Belay that, I must apologize to Scott, I had him confused with someone
else, you are right Scott is fun.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Arny Krueger]

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Ian Bell wrote:

Serge Auckland wrote:

I've read and re-read John Byrne's arguments and still
think he's wrong. Every RIAA amplifier I've ever
designed and every one I've measured has a voltage
amplitude response that boosts the bass end and cuts
the treble end. The RIAA curve calls for a 19.36dB
boost at 20Hz, and a
19.95dB cut at 21kHz. Both are relative to 1kHz.

Of course it does because it is designed to be fed from
a magnetic pickup which has a rising output with
frequency, that's what the bass boost/top cut are for

No.

The output of a magnetic cartridge itself rises @
6dB/octave wheras the RIAA curve only averages about
4dB/octave.

It's not that at all.

It's part of it, but not all of it.

The RIAA curve was the result of an evolutionary process that considered
several factors, only one of which was the velocity response of magnetic
cardtridges. Another major factor was the power response of the *typical*
recording.

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"John Byrns" wrote in message ...
What sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had as
was used to cut LPs?

I had in mind the sort of cutter you described, which has a constant velocity
characteristic above a certain frequency. Taking that as the reference, it
does makes sense to describe the equalization used to produce an overall
constant amplitude characteristic as "HF preemphasis."

There is some logic to the idea of a "recording curve" that is the complement
to the RIAA "playback curve". But this is more abstract than concrete, since
is necessarily changes depending on the type of pickup you use. I doubt there
is any point in the recording chain where the transfer function from the input
to that point matches the RIAA curve.

Still, the term "phono preemphasis" has been around a long time and I think
it can be used meaningfully if you bear in mind the details of the disk cutting
process.

In the real world, there must be many, many other factors that require extra
equalization on the recording side to arrive at the proper RIAA characteristic.
For instance, cutting head coil inductance, secondary mechanical resonances,
and the cutting properties of the lacquer itself.

If you look back in one of my earlier post I briefly touched on the high
frequency "trackability" and geometric issues, but didn't pursue them
because they don't directly relate to the point I was making, I just
pointed them out as reasons for shelving down the high frequency
recording amplitude.

If you think about it, there is a fixed amount of dynamic range built into the
phono process at each frequency, that being the difference between the
noise floor and the maximum undistorted signal. The causes of noise and
distortion vary with frequency, as do their levels. Whatever you call it, the
purpose of equalization is to adjust the signal level to take best advantage
of the usable dynamic range of the recording medium at each frequency.

It's an oversimplification to say that RIAA playback equalization reduces
the level of surface noise. The SNR is essentially fixed at the point the
record is pressed. Still, the process as a whole is designed to give the
best possible performance in a practical, economical commercial system
of the time. The average consumer, necessarily, is going to have a
simplified understanding of the process. And that's why I can see the
argument both ways.

You can certainly find curves presented the way I have described the
RIAA playback curve if you read any one of a number of vintage articles
describing how to equalize ceramic pickups. I think someone in an
earlier thread may have actually dug out one or more of these articles,
although I think it was probably in a different news group.

Here is an excellent and detailed discussion of this subject:

http://www.smartdev.com/RIAA.html

The author (Gary Galo) seems aligned to your way of thinking.

I think it already exploded into spasms of conflict and indignation several
days ago, and has since settled back down to normal after several of the
brighter lights in the group realized that I was precisely correct, even if
they found my frame of reference unusual, and said it was "not useful"
even if it is correct.

I was thinking of Andre's comments about me, that seemed to have no
purpose other than to provoke an argument. I find him very tiresome.

-Henry

[Arny Krueger]

"John Byrns" wrote in message


The train is leaving the station, Andre, Arny, Chris,
Eiron, and Ian are already on board, you wouldn't want to
be left behind, you don't want to have people thinking
you have an incomplete knowledge of LP cutting. :-)

This is no doubt due to the fact that Iain has never had end-to-end
responsibility for making a recording, even a trivial one.

[Patrick Turner]

Henry Pasternack wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message ...
What sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had as
was used to cut LPs?

I had in mind the sort of cutter you described, which has a constant velocity
characteristic above a certain frequency. Taking that as the reference, it
does makes sense to describe the equalization used to produce an overall
constant amplitude characteristic as "HF preemphasis."

There is some logic to the idea of a "recording curve" that is the complement
to the RIAA "playback curve". But this is more abstract than concrete, since
is necessarily changes depending on the type of pickup you use. I doubt there
is any point in the recording chain where the transfer function from the input
to that point matches the RIAA curve.

Still, the term "phono preemphasis" has been around a long time and I think
it can be used meaningfully if you bear in mind the details of the disk cutting
process.

In the real world, there must be many, many other factors that require extra
equalization on the recording side to arrive at the proper RIAA characteristic.
For instance, cutting head coil inductance, secondary mechanical resonances,
and the cutting properties of the lacquer itself.

But isn't the record cutting head driving amplifier equipped with a lot
of NFB to control
the cutter motion and cut a groove to the wanted RIAA amplitude
variations regardless of the
resonances and load exerted by the materials being cut??



If you look back in one of my earlier post I briefly touched on the high
frequency "trackability" and geometric issues, but didn't pursue them
because they don't directly relate to the point I was making, I just
pointed them out as reasons for shelving down the high frequency
recording amplitude.

If you think about it, there is a fixed amount of dynamic range built into the
phono process at each frequency, that being the difference between the
noise floor and the maximum undistorted signal. The causes of noise and
distortion vary with frequency, as do their levels. Whatever you call it, the
purpose of equalization is to adjust the signal level to take best advantage
of the usable dynamic range of the recording medium at each frequency.

It's an oversimplification to say that RIAA playback equalization reduces
the level of surface noise. The SNR is essentially fixed at the point the
record is pressed.

But whatever noise is added by the whole damn process including the
noise of V1 in the
playback amp is reduced by the pre-emphasised HF above 1kHz.
When the signal is leveled, ie, de-emphasised in amplitude by the RIAA
playback filter,
the noise is also reduced. Noise below 1kHz is increased, but it isn't
as noticeable as
noise above 1 kHz.
Nevertheless input devices in phono amps need to be dead quiet.
Tube noise in first stages of phono amps all too often have a lot of LF
noise;
fets don't seem to have anywhere near as much across the band.



Still, the process as a whole is designed to give the
best possible performance in a practical, economical commercial system
of the time. The average consumer, necessarily, is going to have a
simplified understanding of the process. And that's why I can see the
argument both ways.

You can certainly find curves presented the way I have described the
RIAA playback curve if you read any one of a number of vintage articles
describing how to equalize ceramic pickups. I think someone in an
earlier thread may have actually dug out one or more of these articles,
although I think it was probably in a different news group.

Ah, the wonders of ceramic carts never fail to confuse and befuddle,
and give awful audio responses.

Here is an excellent and detailed discussion of this subject:

http://www.smartdev.com/RIAA.html

Its a good read...


Patrick Turner.

The author (Gary Galo) seems aligned to your way of thinking.

I think it already exploded into spasms of conflict and indignation several
days ago, and has since settled back down to normal after several of the
brighter lights in the group realized that I was precisely correct, even if
they found my frame of reference unusual, and said it was "not useful"
even if it is correct.

I was thinking of Andre's comments about me, that seemed to have no
purpose other than to provoke an argument. I find him very tiresome.

-Henry

[John Byrns]

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Henry Pasternack wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
What sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity
cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had as
was used to cut LPs?

I had in mind the sort of cutter you described, which has a constant
velocity
characteristic above a certain frequency. Taking that as the reference, it
does makes sense to describe the equalization used to produce an overall
constant amplitude characteristic as "HF preemphasis."

There is some logic to the idea of a "recording curve" that is the
complement
to the RIAA "playback curve". But this is more abstract than concrete,
since
is necessarily changes depending on the type of pickup you use. I doubt
there
is any point in the recording chain where the transfer function from the
input
to that point matches the RIAA curve.

Still, the term "phono preemphasis" has been around a long time and I think
it can be used meaningfully if you bear in mind the details of the disk
cutting
process.

In the real world, there must be many, many other factors that require
extra
equalization on the recording side to arrive at the proper RIAA
characteristic.
For instance, cutting head coil inductance, secondary mechanical
resonances,
and the cutting properties of the lacquer itself.

But isn't the record cutting head driving amplifier equipped with a lot
of NFB to control
the cutter motion and cut a groove to the wanted RIAA amplitude
variations regardless of the
resonances and load exerted by the materials being cut??

NFB in in the cutting head driving amplifier doesn't control the cutter
motion in the sense of making it flat with respect to some ideal
response curve, the mechanical resonance still has its effect on the
cutters actual response as it is not included within the amplifiers
feedback loop.

However it is good that you mentioned NFB because many, maybe all,
stereo cutters incorporate an overall NFB loop, from transducers in the
cutting head, which encompasses the mechanical system of the cutter,
this would tend to idealize the cutters response. This is an issue I
forgot to mention so thanks for reminding me. It also brings up
interesting issues relative to the NFB stability compensation schemes
currently being discussed in another thread.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message ...
It's an oversimplification to say that RIAA playback equalization reduces
the level of surface noise. The SNR is essentially fixed at the point the
record is pressed.

But whatever noise is added by the whole damn process including the
noise of V1 in the playback amp is reduced by the pre-emphasised HF
above 1kHz. When the signal is leveled, ie, de-emphasised in amplitude
by the RIAA playback filter, the noise is also reduced. Noise below 1kHz
is increased, but it isn't as noticeable as noise above 1 kHz. Nevertheless
input devices in phono amps need to be dead quiet. Tube noise in first
stages of phono amps all too often have a lot of LF noise; fets don't seem
to have anywhere near as much across the band.

In the quote above, I was careful to say "surface noise". Obviously, the noise
in the preamp itself also contributes to the overall SNR. On the other hand,
the loss in any passive equalization network directly worsens the preamp
noise performance. The extent to which this is true depends on the gain
and noise figure of the circuitry ahead of the lossy network.

-Henry

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message ...
On the other hand, the loss in any passive equalization network directly
worsens the preamp noise performance. The extent to which this is true
depends on the gain and noise figure of the circuitry ahead of the lossy
network.

I should probably qualify that. The loss of the network will worsen the SNR
at any specific frequency, but the overall effect could be to improve SNR.
For instance, if you have a strong 120Hz hum, putting in a steep notch
filter at that frequency will improve the broadband noise performance. It
will do nothing to improve the SNR if the signal of interest is at 120Hz,
though.

-Henry

[The Phantom]

In reviewing Lipschitz's 1979 paper on RIAA equalizers, I noticed that he
said:

"The recent I.E.C. amendment to this (the RIAA) standard, not yet adopted
by the RIAA, adds a further rolloff of time constant, T2 = 7950 uS,
corresponding to a frequency of f2 = 20.02 Hz, which is applied only on
replay."

Does anyone know if the RIAA ever adopted this amendment?

It's interesting that he says "...applied only on replay". Apparently
this means that this time constant is not applied during the recording
process. It's simply an "official" rumble filter.

[Andre Jute]

west wrote:
west
:
Next question, if you don't mind ...what are you using to play your CDs?

"Andre Jute" :
Quad CD66 and CD67, very old, very reliable. Both of mine were on
lease to the BBC, then checked over at the factory before they came to
me about fifteen years ago.

west:
I guess you're not into SACDs or keeping up with the Jones'. Do you use a
high efficiency horn or those ESL 57s? I'm trying to picture your system
from some of your posts. Perhaps you use 2 systems.

west

SACD is an irrelevance, another case the Himalayan Wasting Disease, of
engineers doing something because they can, when, if they had first
put their minds in gear, they would have discovered that it is
unnecessary.

I don't know who these Jones people are who expect me to follow
whatever fashion they have succumbed to this week. I make it a
principle never to do what people expect simply because they expect
it. The expectations of little people are an attempt to drag their
betters down to their level.

I don't have systems in the sense you mean, as in someone having a
listening room with a fixed setup; I don't have time to sit in a
listening room; I listen to music in my study and studio as I work; my
son has his own i-Pod/computer based system and my wife prefers to
read in silence though we could play music on the DVD player in her
room. I have ESL57, ESL63, horns of my own manufacture but built on
the Lowther Fidelio factory-cut wood with Lowther PM6Å, bigger
tractrix horns of my own design, various quarterwave pipes (I have for
instance a pair spefically tuned long to enhance the bass on Gregorian
Chant), Bang & Olufsen S25 (a copy of a very fine Goodmans bentback
bookshelf speaker of the 1960s), little Coral drivers in coconuts that
a Swiss designer sent me as computer speaks, ditto some from Apple,
and probably some more. I just play whichever speakers seem suitable
for whatever amp I want to use; in the middle of the night I often use
Sennheiser or Stax (electrostatic) earphones (I'm using Stax now -- I
have various tube and silicon amps both bought and of my own devising
specifically for driving earphones). In tubes I have SE amps from
about a third of a watt to about 80W, and PP amps from around 10W in
Class Å to over 100W in Class AB, plus of course silicon amps from
c10W to 150W, either of my own design and construction or from Quad
and Audiolab. The only speakers I have permanently rigged are ESL63,
which I use as a reference; the only amp I have permanently rigged is
Quad 405 MkII with an accompanying Quad 34 control amp (the last is
very useful for having a mono-ing button, to test amps of which you
have built only one channel, or a single speaker). I have more CD
players than the Quad 66 and 67 but I never use them; the Quads are
just too good to bother swapping players in and out, so they to are
permanently in use. Stuff I don't use is just packed up in boxes or
stands on the floor; I don't bother with "audiophile" conditioning of
the room -- book and CD lines walls do me fine, together with thick
carpets and throwmats for extra absobency anywhere I am likely to sit;
I live in a Georgian house at least 200 years old so the rooms have
high ceilings and abutments for fireplaces, which are all good, and
the converted attic where I spend most of my time has a sloping roof,
which is even better. I've been threatening for years to hide all the
cables and move the surplus gear out of sight into another room and
get a glass desk and a leather captain's seat (I sit on a cloth
covered high-backed chair office I designed and licensed to a company
which sells ergonomic gear) and become elegant but there is always new
work and no idle time in which to lounge elegantly. Maybe when I'm old
I'll be elegant and have an "audiophile system" and take myself and it
very seriously.

HTH.

Still working my way through my Handel disks. Now playing Fabio
Biondi's world premiere recording of Poro with Europa Galante (Opus
111).

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message oups.com...

...silicon amps from c10W to 150W, either of my own design and
construction...

I'd be interested to see some pictures and schematics, and to hear
design details.

-Henry

[Patrick Turner]

John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Henry Pasternack wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
What sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity
cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had as
was used to cut LPs?

I had in mind the sort of cutter you described, which has a constant
velocity
characteristic above a certain frequency. Taking that as the reference, it
does makes sense to describe the equalization used to produce an overall
constant amplitude characteristic as "HF preemphasis."

There is some logic to the idea of a "recording curve" that is the
complement
to the RIAA "playback curve". But this is more abstract than concrete,
since
is necessarily changes depending on the type of pickup you use. I doubt
there
is any point in the recording chain where the transfer function from the
input
to that point matches the RIAA curve.

Still, the term "phono preemphasis" has been around a long time and I think
it can be used meaningfully if you bear in mind the details of the disk
cutting
process.

In the real world, there must be many, many other factors that require
extra
equalization on the recording side to arrive at the proper RIAA
characteristic.
For instance, cutting head coil inductance, secondary mechanical
resonances,
and the cutting properties of the lacquer itself.

But isn't the record cutting head driving amplifier equipped with a lot
of NFB to control
the cutter motion and cut a groove to the wanted RIAA amplitude
variations regardless of the
resonances and load exerted by the materials being cut??

NFB in in the cutting head driving amplifier doesn't control the cutter
motion in the sense of making it flat with respect to some ideal
response curve, the mechanical resonance still has its effect on the
cutters actual response as it is not included within the amplifiers
feedback loop.

So the signal to the currer has NFB, but the cutter produces no fed back
error signal which is opposed,
similarly to a speaker in some respects.

However it is good that you mentioned NFB because many, maybe all,
stereo cutters incorporate an overall NFB loop, from transducers in the
cutting head, which encompasses the mechanical system of the cutter,
this would tend to idealize the cutters response. This is an issue I
forgot to mention so thanks for reminding me. It also brings up
interesting issues relative to the NFB stability compensation schemes
currently being discussed in another thread.

RDH4 says cutting head amps need NFB or should have low output
resistance
by means of using triodes, so the low Rout, low THD/IMD is the important
thing.

Tremain might have more but I am very unaware
of exactly how records were cut.

Patrick Turner.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[John Byrns]

In article ,
"Henry Pasternack" wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
What sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity
cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had as
was used to cut LPs?

I had in mind the sort of cutter you described, which has a constant velocity
characteristic above a certain frequency. Taking that as the reference, it
does makes sense to describe the equalization used to produce an overall
constant amplitude characteristic as "HF preemphasis."

Or one might describe it as a reduction in the amount and character of
the high frequency de-emphasis used on early electrical recordings.

There is some logic to the idea of a "recording curve" that is the complement
to the RIAA "playback curve". But this is more abstract than concrete, since
is necessarily changes depending on the type of pickup you use. I doubt
there
is any point in the recording chain where the transfer function from the
input
to that point matches the RIAA curve.

I thought the "recording curve", in the form it is most commonly shown,
was a concrete representation of the intended relationship between the
amplitude of the electrical input signal to the cutting system and the
velocity of the signal cut into the grooves of the record?

Still, the term "phono preemphasis" has been around a long time and I think
it can be used meaningfully if you bear in mind the details of the disk
cutting
process.

Exactly, "phono preemphasis" is applied to the low frequencies in record
cutting to boost the amplitude of the low frequencies relative to the
high frequencies cut into the groove.

In the real world, there must be many, many other factors that require extra
equalization on the recording side to arrive at the proper RIAA
characteristic.
For instance, cutting head coil inductance, secondary mechanical resonances,
and the cutting properties of the lacquer itself.

Yes, and probably even the shape of the cutting stylus itself, is
"stylus" the right word here, I am having a bit of brain fade here?

If you look back in one of my earlier post I briefly touched on the high
frequency "trackability" and geometric issues, but didn't pursue them
because they don't directly relate to the point I was making, I just
pointed them out as reasons for shelving down the high frequency
recording amplitude.

If you think about it, there is a fixed amount of dynamic range built into
the
phono process at each frequency, that being the difference between the
noise floor and the maximum undistorted signal. The causes of noise and
distortion vary with frequency, as do their levels. Whatever you call it,
the
purpose of equalization is to adjust the signal level to take best advantage
of the usable dynamic range of the recording medium at each frequency.

It's an oversimplification to say that RIAA playback equalization reduces
the level of surface noise. The SNR is essentially fixed at the point the
record is pressed. Still, the process as a whole is designed to give the
best possible performance in a practical, economical commercial system
of the time. The average consumer, necessarily, is going to have a
simplified understanding of the process. And that's why I can see the
argument both ways.

There are assumptions about the energy content of the source material
vs. frequency built into the choice of equalization. These assumptions
may not remain valid over time as we have learned with the equalization
used in FM broadcasting.

You can certainly find curves presented the way I have described the
RIAA playback curve if you read any one of a number of vintage articles
describing how to equalize ceramic pickups. I think someone in an
earlier thread may have actually dug out one or more of these articles,
although I think it was probably in a different news group.

Here is an excellent and detailed discussion of this subject:

http://www.smartdev.com/RIAA.html

The author (Gary Galo) seems aligned to your way of thinking.

Thanks for the link, Gary's paper makes an interesting read, although I
wouldn't say Gary is aligned to my way of thinking, he simply
understands how the system actually works, although taking a velocity
centric perspective.

I was surprised to read in Gary's discussion of amplitude responsive
pickups that he says ceramic pickups are actually "crystal" pickups. I
had never heard this said before and I don't have a clue one way or the
other myself, so I am curious if there are any materials/chemistry
experts out there that know if this is true? Both the so-called
"crystal" elements and the "ceramic" elements are piezoelectric, but
does that imply that the material used in "ceramic" elements has a
crystalline structure? I never thought about this before and just sort
of assumed in the back of my mind that the "ceramic" material was not
crystalline. Is a crystalline molecular structure necessary for a
material to exhibit the piezoelectric effect, and is the ceramic
material crystalline?

I think it already exploded into spasms of conflict and indignation several
days ago, and has since settled back down to normal after several of the
brighter lights in the group realized that I was precisely correct, even if
they found my frame of reference unusual, and said it was "not useful"
even if it is correct.

I was thinking of Andre's comments about me, that seemed to have no
purpose other than to provoke an argument. I find him very tiresome.

I missed that, at the current time Andre seems more interested in Peter
than in you. Sometimes I think that you are overly obsessed with what
Andre has to say about you, and as a result he controls you to an extent.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[John Byrns]

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Henry Pasternack wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
What sort of cutting head are you talking about, a constant velocity
cutting
head, a constant amplitude cutting head, or a real world cutting had
as
was used to cut LPs?

I had in mind the sort of cutter you described, which has a constant
velocity
characteristic above a certain frequency. Taking that as the
reference, it
does makes sense to describe the equalization used to produce an
overall
constant amplitude characteristic as "HF preemphasis."

There is some logic to the idea of a "recording curve" that is the
complement
to the RIAA "playback curve". But this is more abstract than concrete,
since
is necessarily changes depending on the type of pickup you use. I
doubt
there
is any point in the recording chain where the transfer function from
the
input
to that point matches the RIAA curve.

Still, the term "phono preemphasis" has been around a long time and I
think
it can be used meaningfully if you bear in mind the details of the disk
cutting
process.

In the real world, there must be many, many other factors that require
extra
equalization on the recording side to arrive at the proper RIAA
characteristic.
For instance, cutting head coil inductance, secondary mechanical
resonances,
and the cutting properties of the lacquer itself.

But isn't the record cutting head driving amplifier equipped with a lot
of NFB to control
the cutter motion and cut a groove to the wanted RIAA amplitude
variations regardless of the
resonances and load exerted by the materials being cut??

NFB in in the cutting head driving amplifier doesn't control the cutter
motion in the sense of making it flat with respect to some ideal
response curve, the mechanical resonance still has its effect on the
cutters actual response as it is not included within the amplifiers
feedback loop.

So the signal to the currer has NFB, but the cutter produces no fed back
error signal which is opposed,
similarly to a speaker in some respects.

Only a few special models of speakers produce a "fed back error signal".
Feedback in the cutting amplifier no more insures uniform response from
a disc cutter than does the use of feedback in an amplifier driving a
loudspeaker guarantee that the speaker will produce a uniform acoustic
response. As mentioned below feedback from transducers on the cutter
head can go some distance towards creating a uniform response.

However it is good that you mentioned NFB because many, maybe all,
stereo cutters incorporate an overall NFB loop, from transducers in the
cutting head, which encompasses the mechanical system of the cutter,
this would tend to idealize the cutters response. This is an issue I
forgot to mention so thanks for reminding me. It also brings up
interesting issues relative to the NFB stability compensation schemes
currently being discussed in another thread.

RDH4 says cutting head amps need NFB or should have low output
resistance
by means of using triodes, so the low Rout, low THD/IMD is the important
thing.

Aren't these the same features that are desirable in an amplifier
designed to drive a loudspeaker? That would not be surprising since a
cutter head is not unlike a loudspeaker where the cone has been replaced
by a cutting stylus. The cutter head even has a different response
characteristic below its resonant frequency than above, just like a
loudspeaker, the only difference being that without the heavy cone
attached, the resonance moves up in frequency.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"John Byrns" wrote in message ...
I thought the "recording curve", in the form it is most commonly shown,
was a concrete representation of the intended relationship between the
amplitude of the electrical input signal to the cutting system and the
velocity of the signal cut into the grooves of the record?

Since velocity and output are (ideally) proportional when using a magnetic
pickup, it's hard to know whether the recording curve is referenced to
constant velocity, or to the output of the pickup. In the latter case, the
recording curve would depend on the pickup, and odd dependency. It
is a trivial point.

Exactly, "phono preemphasis" is applied to the low frequencies in record
cutting to boost the amplitude of the low frequencies relative to the
high frequencies cut into the groove.

I meant HF preemphasis (Galo calls it "treble preemphasis"). I don't think
this term as commonly used refers to preemphasis in the bass.

Yes, and probably even the shape of the cutting stylus itself, is
"stylus" the right word here, I am having a bit of brain fade here?

I don't know what the cutter is called. Maybe just the "cutter".

There are assumptions about the energy content of the source material
vs. frequency built into the choice of equalization. These assumptions
may not remain valid over time as we have learned with the equalization
used in FM broadcasting.

True. If real-world recordings had HF, the shelf might be deeper.

Is a crystalline molecular structure necessary for a material to exhibit the
piezoelectric effect, and is the ceramic material crystalline?

I didn't enjoy my materials science classes. I bet Wikipedia could answer
the question.

I missed that, at the current time Andre seems more interested in Peter
than in you. Sometimes I think that you are overly obsessed with what
Andre has to say about you, and as a result he controls you to an extent.

I'm much less sensitive to Andre's provocations now than I was before. He
spends so much time insulting people, I can see how you could lose track
of who his current target is.

Earlier in the week, Andre called me a toe-rag and said you were using me
to wipe the floor. He even started a thread ("i-Geek...") about me. What
in the world could he have been thinking?

I do have a strong opinion about Andre, though. I think it's a tragedy what
he's done to this newsgroup. Others may disagree, partlicuarly since most
of the like-minded people don't post here anymore.

-Henry

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message ...
In the latter case, the recording curve would depend on the pickup, and
odd dependency.

Sorry, meant to write "AN odd dependency..."

-Henry

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message ...
If real-world recordings had HF, the shelf might be deeper.

Wow, I must be losing my mind. I was building a model airplane for my
son this afternoon using cyanoacrylate glue, to which, over the years, I've
developed a strong sensitivity. I have a bad headache, which seems to
have interfered with my concentration.

I meant to say "If real-world recordings had MORE HF..."

Time to get some fresh air.

-Henry

[John Byrns]

In article ,
"Henry Pasternack" wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
I thought the "recording curve", in the form it is most commonly shown,
was a concrete representation of the intended relationship between the
amplitude of the electrical input signal to the cutting system and the
velocity of the signal cut into the grooves of the record?

Since velocity and output are (ideally) proportional when using a magnetic
pickup, it's hard to know whether the recording curve is referenced to
constant velocity, or to the output of the pickup. In the latter case, the
recording curve would depend on the pickup, and odd dependency. It
is a trivial point.

Exactly, that's why I said I thought it was "a concrete representation
of the intended relationship between the amplitude of the electrical
input signal to the cutting system and the velocity of the signal cut
into the grooves of the record?"

Exactly, "phono preemphasis" is applied to the low frequencies in record
cutting to boost the amplitude of the low frequencies relative to the
high frequencies cut into the groove.

I meant HF preemphasis (Galo calls it "treble preemphasis"). I don't think
this term as commonly used refers to preemphasis in the bass.

I know that's what you meant, that's why I pointed out that the actual
amplitude pre-emphasis is applied to the low frequencies.

Yes, and probably even the shape of the cutting stylus itself, is
"stylus" the right word here, I am having a bit of brain fade here?

I don't know what the cutter is called. Maybe just the "cutter".

As far as I know the cutter is called the "cutter" or "cutting head", it
was the cutting stylus that I wasn't sure about, but my memory is
returning and I think maybe cutting stylus was correct.

There are assumptions about the energy content of the source material
vs. frequency built into the choice of equalization. These assumptions
may not remain valid over time as we have learned with the equalization
used in FM broadcasting.

True. If real-world recordings had HF, the shelf might be deeper.

Is a crystalline molecular structure necessary for a material to exhibit
the
piezoelectric effect, and is the ceramic material crystalline?

I didn't enjoy my materials science classes. I bet Wikipedia could answer
the question.

Ignoring the question of whether a material must have a crystalline
structure to exhibit the piezoelectric effect, it does appear that
barium titanate, the ceramic used in phono pickups is a crystal, which
is what I was mainly wondering about. So when Gary says a "ceramic"
pickup is a crystal pickup I guess he is correct, although if one is
going to call pickups using either rochelle salt or barium titanate
elements "crystal" pickups, I think it should be made clear which type
of material is being used asrochelle salt elements are highly
hygroscopic and as a result quickly disintegrate, which is the reason
modern pickups use barium titanate which doesn't have this problem.

I missed that, at the current time Andre seems more interested in Peter
than in you. Sometimes I think that you are overly obsessed with what
Andre has to say about you, and as a result he controls you to an extent.

I'm much less sensitive to Andre's provocations now than I was before.

That's a welcome thing if the result ism that you post more.

He
spends so much time insulting people, I can see how you could lose track
of who his current target is.

Earlier in the week, Andre called me a toe-rag and said you were using me
to wipe the floor. He even started a thread ("i-Geek...") about me. What
in the world could he have been thinking?

I looked up "toe-rag" on Google, and yes once I found it I realized I
had read it, but I know how Andre feels about you and most of his
comments about you go in one ear and out the other. I did not follow
the "i-Geek" thread in the first place, and I didn't bother to read it
now that I looked it up. I only look at maybe half of the threads
posted here, and actually follow even fewer once I find out what the
subject is. I have a complex algorithm that determines whether I will
even take a look at a thread. Generally I will only start with a thread
if it has a subject that interests me. However there are some people
whose posts I won't read even if they post to a thread I am interested
in, this is generally the silly contingent. On the other hand there are
some posters whose posts are generally so interesting, Andre is one of
these, that I will read threads they start that I otherwise wouldn't
read based on the subject, however taking Andre as an example, I won't
read all his threads unless the subject shows at least some promise.
Then there is one person whose posts I will always read without
exception, and that is you, because I know there is a good chance you
will say something controversial which I won't want to miss.

I do have a strong opinion about Andre, though. I think it's a tragedy what
he's done to this newsgroup. Others may disagree, partlicuarly since most
of the like-minded people don't post here anymore.

If the group has gone down hill I don't think it is any one person or
group that caused it, if I was of such a belief I would say that it was
more likely Mike's gang that actually did the damage. However I think
the decline, if there is one, is more the result of the rise of the
internet "forum". Many people have very thin skins and prefer the
sanitized camaraderie of a "forum" where they know their feelings won't
be hurt, even if they are unlikely to actually learn much, and worse may
even be mislead due to the lack of effective peer review which is
replaced by censorship in the "forums".


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Patrick Turner]

Henry Pasternack wrote:

"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message ...
If real-world recordings had HF, the shelf might be deeper.

Wow, I must be losing my mind. I was building a model airplane for my
son this afternoon using cyanoacrylate glue, to which, over the years, I've
developed a strong sensitivity. I have a bad headache, which seems to
have interfered with my concentration.

I meant to say "If real-world recordings had MORE HF..."

Time to get some fresh air.

-Henry

Are not cyanoacrylate glue fumes chemically close to cyanide?

The trouble with doing almost anything today involves chemicals,
and hardly any of them are good for you.

Patrick Turner.

[west[_4_]]

True, there must be someone quite clever behind it... but I seriously
doubt that the persona we observe here is anything at all like that
actual individual. So, whereas I may not *like* you, I must respect
you. McCoy I neither like nor dislike as I do not believe there is an
actual "there" to deserve such efforts. Tweaking it is great fun,
however.

Somehow that paragraph seems internally inconsistent. If "Andre" is
nothing but a chimera as you believe, but as you say "there must be
someone quite clever behind it", then that person would be an
actual "there", deserving of either your like or dislike.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Logic chopping. Your specialty.

I would like to believe that the entity behind "the real McCoy" is
having as much fun as I do, or at least one hopes so. The alternative
is too sad to contemplate... again leaving no room for "like" or
"dislike"... as the entity is simply not worth it.

If my contention is true, perhaps grudging admiration... but not
dislike. Dislike I reserve for those worthy of such efforts.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

Did you forget the email you recently sent me saying how you truly hate me
and McCoy? Realizing that you are totally whipped and undressed for all to
see, you try to temper your loosing position. Now there's only 2 things I
don't like about you ... and that's your face.

UOOContempt