[[email protected]]

I belong in an asylum like the one in Cuckoos Nest!

[Scott Dorsey]

In article ,
wrote:
I belong in an asylum like the one in Cuckoos Nest!

Good to see you here, Mr. Spector.
--scott

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

[Ron Capik[_3_]]

On 9/6/2012 6:01 PM, wrote:
I belong in an asylum like the one in Cuckoos Nest!

Oh my, have you been watching those political conventions?
==

[[email protected]]

RCapik et al:

I just said that because I feel that is how I am perceived on r.a.p.

smh!

[hank alrich]

wrote:

RCapik et al:

I just said that because I feel that is how I am perceived on r.a.p.

So you feel how you are perceived... hmmmm...

smh!

You're right - Serotonin May Help.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[[email protected]]

Well you know what Henry? I don't CARE if you all think I'm nuts. I'll keep on posting about topics I believe in, because if I reach through to just ONE person, it was worth ALL the ridicule and turned backs I get on this "professional" audio board!!

[hank alrich]

wrote:

Well you know what Henry? I don't CARE if you all think I'm nuts. I'll
keep on posting about topics I believe in, because if I reach through to
just ONE person, it was worth ALL the ridicule and turned backs I get on
this "professional" audio board!!


Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean we don't love you.

Why would you be surprised that in a professional audio setting people
have a professional audio focus?

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[[email protected]]

Hank: I post legitimate audio-related items here, like my demands that AC/DC's unremastered back catalog be made available again, and no one has any input!

That's what makes me ask: "Do folks think I'm nuts on here?"

[Scott Dorsey]

In article ,
wrote:
Hank: I post legitimate audio-related items here, like my demands that AC/DC's unremastered back catalog be made available again, and no one has any input!

That's what makes me ask: "Do folks think I'm nuts on here?"

I think anyone that expects a record label to do anything related to
improving sound quality is probably nuts, yes.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 7 Sep 2012 09:46:41 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
Hank: I post legitimate audio-related items here, like my demands that AC/DC's unremastered back catalog be made available again, and no one has any input!

That's what makes me ask: "Do folks think I'm nuts on here?"

I think anyone that expects a record label to do anything related to
improving sound quality is probably nuts, yes.
--scott

There's also a greater than zero chance that nobody here gives a toss
about AC/DC's back catalogue.

d

[[email protected]]

On Friday, September 7, 2012 9:54:09 AM UTC-4, Don Pearce wrote:
On 7 Sep 2012 09:46:41 -0400, .com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


I think anyone that expects a record label to do anything related to

improving sound quality is probably nuts, yes.

--scott
__________________________________
TWO-PART reply:
Dorsey:

What if you multiply the factor of what I am doing by 1,000? Or by 1,000,000?
It might just make a dent and the record labels and production houses will start to notice it.
__________________________________




There's also a greater than zero chance that nobody here gives a toss

about AC/DC's back catalogue.



d
__________________________________
Pearce:

This is personal: Suppose it's happening to the back-log of an act that YOU are a strong admirer of? Huh? What are you gonna do now? Fold up and just settle for an inaccurate representation of their works?

Or write some letters, make some phone-calls that neither you or anyone you know will, effective as of now, NO LONGER PURCHASE ANY MUSIC, IN ANY FORM, FROM LABELS WHO ENGAGE IN THIS DIGITAL-REMASTERING SCAM.

Well, will you take the low road(the former), or the high road(the latter)?
__________________________________

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

[hank alrich]

wrote:

Hank: I post legitimate audio-related items here, like my demands that
AC/DC's unremastered back catalog be made available again,

That's a consumer-oriented issue, having nothing to do with audio
production or professionalism.

and no one has any input!

I have all the inputs I routinely need, and if I need more, I hire a
larger studio.

This is not a very effective platform for that kind of "demand".
Collectively "we" have no real leverage on that issue, and in fact,
musical tastes of the participants here are sufficiently varied that
some of us neither own nor care to listen to recorded AC/DC, great as
they are, and they are. (I presented them in concert in Austin a long
time ago at AWHQ. The recordings suck in comparison to the live
delivery. Cue Mr. Dorsey...)

That's what makes me ask: "Do folks think I'm nuts on here?"

1. Why do you even care? 2. See above. 3. Why do you think you can
accomplish your mission via this venue?

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[John Williamson]

wrote:

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

Almost everybody who posts in this group is involved in the professional
audio field. A lot of them are well respected and have often posted as
being not in favour of the loudness wars.

However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any
group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not recording.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[[email protected]]

On Friday, September 7, 2012 11:40:04 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:


However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any

group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not recording.



--

Tciao for Now!


John.
__________________

Do I look like I have STUPID written on my forehead? Of course I know "rec" in this case does not stand for recording!

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:39:55 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

wrote:

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

Almost everybody who posts in this group is involved in the professional
audio field. A lot of them are well respected and have often posted as
being not in favour of the loudness wars.

However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any
group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not recording.

And the pro part stands for production

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 07:53:30 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, September 7, 2012 9:54:09 AM UTC-4, Don Pearce wrote:
On 7 Sep 2012 09:46:41 -0400, .com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


I think anyone that expects a record label to do anything related to

improving sound quality is probably nuts, yes.

--scott
__________________________________
TWO-PART reply:
Dorsey:

What if you multiply the factor of what I am doing by 1,000? Or by 1,000,000?
It might just make a dent and the record labels and production houses will start to notice it.
__________________________________




There's also a greater than zero chance that nobody here gives a toss

about AC/DC's back catalogue.



d
__________________________________
Pearce:

This is personal: Suppose it's happening to the back-log of an act that YOU are a strong admirer of? Huh? What are you gonna do now? Fold up and just settle for an inaccurate representation of their works?

Or write some letters, make some phone-calls that neither you or anyone you know will, effective as of now, NO LONGER PURCHASE ANY MUSIC, IN ANY FORM, FROM LABELS WHO ENGAGE IN THIS DIGITAL-REMASTERING SCAM.

Well, will you take the low road(the former), or the high road(the latter)?
__________________________________

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

Suer it's personal. You regret the absence of original AC/DC masters.
Nobody else appears to be bothered that much. If it were an act I was
concerned with, I certainly wouldn't be bleating about it here. I'd be
down at Abbey Road (or wherever) demanding to see the boss. Or in my
case, my old school friend John Leckie.

d

[Steve King]

wrote in message
...
On Friday, September 7, 2012 11:40:04 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:


However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any

group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not
recording.



--

Tciao for Now!


John.
__________________

Do I look like I have STUPID written on my forehead? Of course I know
"rec" in this case does not stand for recording!

I have no idea what you look like. However, my guess is that STUPID is not
written on your forehead. However, it very well might be on a sticky note
on the back of your shirt.

Steve KIng

[Tobiah]

On 09/07/2012 08:54 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:39:55 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

wrote:

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

Almost everybody who posts in this group is involved in the professional
audio field. A lot of them are well respected and have often posted as
being not in favour of the loudness wars.

However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any
group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not recording.

And the pro part stands for production

d

People keep saying that, but the faq then, is misleading:

rec.audio.pro Issues pertaining to professional audio
rec.audio.marketplace Buying and trading of consumer equipment
rec.audio.tech Technical discussions about consumer audio
rec.audio.opinion Everyone's $0.02 on consumer audio
rec.audio.high-end High-end consumer audio discussions
rec.audio.misc Everything else
alt.music.4-track Deals with smaller home based recording
rec.music.makers.marketplace A music related for sale forum,
with some high end gear

[Steve King]

"Tobiah" wrote in message
...
On 09/07/2012 08:54 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:39:55 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

wrote:

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end
of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

Almost everybody who posts in this group is involved in the professional
audio field. A lot of them are well respected and have often posted as
being not in favour of the loudness wars.

However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any
group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not
recording.

And the pro part stands for production

d

People keep saying that, but the faq then, is misleading:

rec.audio.pro Issues pertaining to professional audio
rec.audio.marketplace Buying and trading of consumer equipment
rec.audio.tech Technical discussions about consumer audio
rec.audio.opinion Everyone's $0.02 on consumer audio
rec.audio.high-end High-end consumer audio discussions
rec.audio.misc Everything else
alt.music.4-track Deals with smaller home based recording
rec.music.makers.marketplace A music related for sale forum,
with some high end gear

It may be misleading, but it is what it is. A few people, what, 20 years
ago, decided to form these groups. In their mind, at the time, they decided
that the 'pro' stood for production. Today, you can decide whatever you
want it to mean to you. The sad thing is that the whole Usenet idea is
being replaced by what are, in my opinion, much klunkier, harder to use,
slower, web-page based forums. So, the issue of pro for professional or for
production ranks pretty low on my list of things to worry about.

Steve King

[hank alrich]

wrote:

On Friday, September 7, 2012 9:54:09 AM UTC-4, Don Pearce wrote:
On 7 Sep 2012 09:46:41 -0400, .com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


I think anyone that expects a record label to do anything related to

improving sound quality is probably nuts, yes.

--scott
__________________________________
TWO-PART reply:
Dorsey:

What if you multiply the factor of what I am doing by 1,000? Or by
1,000,000?

Then you get a significant contribution to global warming.

It might just make a dent and the record labels and production
houses will start to notice it.

rec.audio.pro participants and lurkers combined probably don't buy
enough product en toto to make a dent in a label's so-called
consciousness. Lady Gaga sells enough to let them overlook us, and you,
too.

__________________________________




There's also a greater than zero chance that nobody here gives a toss

about AC/DC's back catalogue.



d
__________________________________
Pearce:

This is personal: Suppose it's happening to the back-log of an act that
YOU are a strong admirer of? Huh? What are you gonna do now? Fold up
and just settle for an inaccurate representation of their works?

Or write some letters, make some phone-calls that neither you or anyone
you know will, effective as of now, NO LONGER PURCHASE ANY MUSIC, IN ANY
FORM, FROM LABELS WHO ENGAGE IN THIS DIGITAL-REMASTERING SCAM.

Well, will you take the low road(the former), or the high road(the
latter)?

Yo, Don Quixote, we've already gone there and been doing/not doing that.
Glad you finally caught on.

__________________________________

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of
this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!

You're several years plus a decade years late to this discussion. Folks
here have been talking about ****ty sound quality for a good long time.

Look for clean reissues of hits recorded on a Wollensak, and get back to
us.

**** off if you think I don't give a hoot. My hoot shows up in my work.
Show yours. Talk is cheap.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2012 9:54:09 AM UTC-4, Don Pearce wrote:
On 7 Sep 2012 09:46:41 -0400, .com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


I think anyone that expects a record label to do anything related to

improving sound quality is probably nuts, yes.

--scott
__________________________________
TWO-PART reply:
Dorsey:

What if you multiply the factor of what I am doing by 1,000? Or by 1,000,000?
It might just make a dent and the record labels and production houses will start to notice it.
__________________________________




There's also a greater than zero chance that nobody here gives a toss

about AC/DC's back catalogue.



d
__________________________________
Pearce:

This is personal: Suppose it's happening to the back-log of an act that YOU are a strong admirer of? Huh? What are you gonna do now? Fold up and just settle for an inaccurate representation of their works?

Or write some letters, make some phone-calls that neither you or anyone you know will, effective as of now, NO LONGER PURCHASE ANY MUSIC, IN ANY FORM, FROM LABELS WHO ENGAGE IN THIS DIGITAL-REMASTERING SCAM.

Well, will you take the low road(the former), or the high road(the latter)?
__________________________________

General: I think it's time to start questioning the "pro" at the end of this news group's name. It seems like no one gives a hoot - period!



"pro" stands for "production".

--
Les Cargill

[hank alrich]

Les Cargill wrote in apt response to
"themanrants":

"pro" stands for "production".

I'm about to go with "prophylactic".

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[hank alrich]

wrote:

On Friday, September 7, 2012 11:40:04 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:


However, it may surprise you to learn that the rec in the name of any

group in the rec.xxxx usenet heirarchy stands for recreation, not recording.



--

Tciao for Now!


John.
__________________

Do I look like I have STUPID written on my forehead?

Be careful what you ask, because this forum is not inclined to pad the
cell. And yes, to some of you us are starting to look like STUPID is
your operating mode.

Of course I know "rec" in this case does not stand for recording!

Congrats.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[Tobiah]

The sad thing is that the whole Usenet idea is
being replaced by what are, in my opinion, much klunkier, harder to use,
slower, web-page based forums.

I agree about the web forums. What a shame.

Tobiah

[[email protected]]

Hank:

I am lucky to be alive at this point in history. It allowed me to be exposed to great music of many genres, and to be able to hear it the way it was meant to be.

All I'm trying to do is to make sure "the way it was meant to be heard" remains available for future generations. When I meet someone whose kid - born after 2000 - has developed an appetite for their parents turntable and LP collection, it tickles me with joy and hope.

When I spot original CD releases of my favorite artists in the bin at Goodwill or the used section at the library, I feel "my gain, someone elses loss!"

I recently scored, online, a copy of the very first ever CD release of Van Halen's 1984 album(made in Germany!) With that CD I intend to make sure the unborn will be able to hear 1984 as I did back in '84 for the first time! Same goes for my original CDs of "brothers in Arms" and Mac's "Rumours". Are they the same as the LPS? No. But damn close.

This matters to not just me, and I intend to get the word out as much as possible.

[Neil Gould]

wrote:
Hank:

I am lucky to be alive at this point in history. It allowed me to be
exposed to great music of many genres, and to be able to hear it the
way it was meant to be.

[...]
Some of us are old enough to relate to rock and roll "as it was meant to be"
heard, which often times meant out of a 4" speaker on a mono, portable,
pre-transistor radio as we sat in the park or on the beach. Those 45s were
played on shabby phonographs with pennies to weight the arm down so that it
wouldn't skip over the scratches. Same technique for warped albums.

I suspect the music was just "meant to be heard", no matter how low the
fidelity. Which might help to explain your dilemma. ;-)

--
best regards,

Neil

[[email protected]]

Well Neil - how does it feel to meet someone who actually gives a care about our legacy acts(pre 1995 music)?

I'll listen to a first release record(or CD) of Dire Straits over a 4" 3watt speaker before I EVER listen to a "digitally remastered" reissue of them over a pair of 10" Boston Acoustics towers at 100watts! Because I'm that f___ing PRINCIPLED about the matter, got it?

[Neil Gould]

wrote:
Well Neil - how does it feel to meet someone who actually gives a
care about our legacy acts(pre 1995 music)?

Well, my notion of "legacy acts" is more like pre 1960 music... ;-)

I'll listen to a first release record(or CD) of Dire Straits over a
4" 3watt speaker before I EVER listen to a "digitally remastered"
reissue of them over a pair of 10" Boston Acoustics towers at
100watts! Because I'm that f___ing PRINCIPLED about the matter, got
it?

I don't understand the significance of "digitally remastered" versions of
digitally recorded material, which is most of what has been going on since
1980 or so. I'd call them "retakes", so how do "principles" fit in? I take
it your objection is to the "retake" as though that's always a bad thing,
and if so, I disagree. I like Kate Bush's retakes on "Director's Cut" as
much or better than some of her originals. They're just different, IMO.

--
best regards,

Neil

[None]

wrote in message
...
Well Neil - how does it feel to meet someone who actually gives a care
about our legacy acts(pre 1995 music)?

There's no reason to think you give a ****. You're just a whining troll. And
you're
doing bugger all to resolve this latest whine you have. You're just whining.


I'll listen to a first release record(or CD) of Dire Straits over a 4"
3watt speaker before I EVER listen to a "digitally remastered" reissue of
them over a pair of 10" Boston Acoustics towers at 100watts! Because I'm
that f___ing PRINCIPLED about the matter, got it?

So that's what passes for "principled" in that tiny trolling pea-brain of
yours?
Do you really think any gives a **** about your imaginary protests by using
crappy speakers?

Well, there's definitely a pattern to your trolling. Either in this
newsgroup, or
somewhere else, you post a complaint. Typically, the complaint involves
abject
cluelessness and/or whining. Nobody gives a ****, and you may get no reply.
Then you get petulant and impatient, and you either repeat your troll, or
whine
that nobody's answering your trolling. Because nobody gives a ****. After a
little
more kookdancing, you get a response, and the real purpose for your trolling
is
revealed. You want people to agree with you. You have some gripe, or some
gross
misunderstanding of something, and all you want is for people to tell you
you're right.
You apparently have a very low level of self-worth, and you want others to
validate
your kookery. You don't really care about whatever the **** it is you're
whining about.
You didn't really care to figure out your imaginary file problem, for
instance. When
anyone with the understanding you lack, suggested real ways to evaluate and
troubleshoot, you gave them ****, told them you were right and they were
wrong,
insulted them, and then came more whining about your imaginary problem.

There's nobody here that will get old AC/DC recordings released in whatever
format
you prefer. Many people here couldn't give a ****, and many others just
aren't the
right people to whine to. But you don't give a ****; you're not trying to
get the music
rereleased, you're trying to whine and have your ass kissed. When that
doesn't
happen, more kookish whiny trolling will ensue, no doubt.

Why don't you **** off and find some other sandbox to **** in, and grow a
sense
of self worth so you won't be annoying complete strangers who don't give a
****
by demanding validation from them? This is not rec.kisskmanswhineyass.troll.

You're full of ****. You're a ****-head troll.

[[email protected]]

Neil do you have DAW software so you can both hear and see graphically the effects of so-called remastering.

As far as I know, when an album first goes to CD it is not considered a "remaster" - whether it be originally from LP or entirely native digital. Taking a scratchy acetate from 1947, importing into digital, and removing the clicks and pops, and EQing it is not remastering either - it is digital RESTORATION.

Remastering - whether done in the analog or digital domains - means changing the character of a piece - whether done dramatically or subtlely, in whatever combination of EQ, dynamics, removal or addition of reverb or echo, etc. Such manipulation can be done globally(to an existing finished song), or to the individual tracks which are then remixed together into the finished product. In effect you are creating a NEW master - hence "remaster".

It is the activity in the paragraph above that I vehemently oppose, especially since most of what is done is to increase the average level of the song, which implies that much of the original dynamics must be lost in order to achieve that.

[Neil Gould]

wrote:
Neil do you have DAW software so you can both hear and see
graphically the effects of so-called remastering.

I've recorded, mixed and mastered many records and CDs in several different
genres for over 40 years. You?

Remastering - whether done in the analog or digital domains - means
changing the character of a piece - whether done dramatically or
subtlely, in whatever combination of EQ, dynamics, removal or
addition of reverb or echo, etc. Such manipulation can be done
globally(to an existing finished song), or to the individual tracks
which are then remixed together into the finished product. In effect
you are creating a NEW master - hence "remaster".

What about "remixing"... ever heard of that? Do you know the difference
between mixing and mastering? Do you know what mastering *is*, for that
matter?

It is the activity in the paragraph above that I vehemently oppose,
especially since most of what is done is to increase the average
level of the song, which implies that much of the original dynamics
must be lost in order to achieve that.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Bye.
--
best regards,

Neil

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

hank alrich wrote:
Les Cargill wrote in apt response to
"themanrants":

"pro" stands for "production".

I'm about to go with "prophylactic".


SARAN WRAP.

--
Les Cargill

[Scott Dorsey]

Les Cargill wrote:
hank alrich wrote:
Les Cargill wrote in apt response to
"themanrants":

"pro" stands for "production".

I'm about to go with "prophylactic".

SARAN WRAP.

When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag?
--scott

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

[[email protected]]

SD: "- show quoted text -
When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag"

Scott I've known you for occasional irreverence, but not for irrelevance! smh

[[email protected]]

Thanks for clarifying "scumbag" Les. The kind with a horse on the pkg. lol!

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Les Cargill wrote:
hank alrich wrote:
Les Cargill wrote in apt response to
"themanrants":

"pro" stands for "production".

I'm about to go with "prophylactic".

SARAN WRAP.

When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag?
--scott


That's only the one use case. There are others.

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

wrote:
SD: "- show quoted text -
When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag"

Scott I've known you for occasional irreverence, but not for irrelevance! smh


Scott is simply following up on a long-ago post. Perfectly on-topic.
Yes. Quite.

--
Les Cargill

[Scott Dorsey]

In article ,
wrote:
SD: "- show quoted text -
When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag"

Scott I've known you for occasional irreverence, but not for irrelevance! smh

Not irrelevant at all, it's the first line of "Saran Wrap" by the Fugs.
One of those pieces of music that has become an archetype in our cosmic
consciousness of tastelessness.
--scott


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

[david gourley[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) :

Les Cargill wrote:
hank alrich wrote:
Les Cargill wrote in apt response to
"themanrants":

"pro" stands for "production".

I'm about to go with "prophylactic".

SARAN WRAP.

When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag?
--scott


LOL, I love that group.

david

[None]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Les Cargill wrote:
hank alrich wrote:
Les Cargill wrote in apt response to
"themanrants":

"pro" stands for "production".

I'm about to go with "prophylactic".

SARAN WRAP.

When it's after the prom and you ain't got no scumbag?
--scott

I used to really like the Fugs in their early days, but unless I can hear
the original first cold pressing of the stereo vinyl album on a monophonic
Grundig TV/Am/FM/Phonograph console, with a 5-record changer, and a
jen-you-wine Eisenhower silver half-dollar on the tone arm (equipped with a
needle, not one a them modren stylus pieces of crap), I will refuse to
listen. I have PRINCIPAL. Ya hafta agree with me; it makes me feel like a
man. I wil never listen these classics on compact disc until they can
guarantee that the CD will not spontaneously burst into flames, releasing
the indelible green ink, as soon as I try to "rip" the audio to my Advent
cassette deck. Always with Dolby B for recording but NO DOLBY for playback,
because I am PRINCIPALED. What are you, dilettantes who don't support tha
integrity of tha original recordings? If so, delete the "rec" in the name of
this froup, because you're definitely wrecked. And only with auction free
thirty-ott-six-gauge speaker wires, with tha auction sucked outa tha copper
by certified underage virgins (I know you're used to sixteen or more, sorry
we only have eight) from Memphis, Woodstock, Greenwich Village, Laurel
Canyon, or Liverpool. I have PRINCIPALS. By the hour.