Re: Discussion - the creation of a new newsgroup for home recording

[LeBaron & Alrich]

killermike > wrote:

> I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> recording.

And why is alt.music.4-track not suitable for your purposes?

What do you figure another group could offer that is not already offered
by existing froups?

There is a certain amount of expertise around; how thinly would you like
it spread?

RAP has no problem with dicussions of home or amateur recording and
production work. We be fine with that.

alt.music.4-track is loaded with people using stuff that has moved
beyond the implied limitations of the group name, and loaded with the
expertise you seek to enjoy.

Why not get to asking questions and skip the new group thing? Aren't
there almost enough groups in Usenet now? <g>

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[George Perfect]

In this place, LeBaron & Alrich was recorded as saying ...
> killermike > wrote:
>
> > I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> > the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> > recording.
>
> And why is alt.music.4-track not suitable for your purposes?
>
> What do you figure another group could offer that is not already offered
> by existing froups?
>
> There is a certain amount of expertise around; how thinly would you like
> it spread?
>
> RAP has no problem with dicussions of home or amateur recording and
> production work. We be fine with that.
>
> alt.music.4-track is loaded with people using stuff that has moved
> beyond the implied limitations of the group name, and loaded with the
> expertise you seek to enjoy.
>
> Why not get to asking questions and skip the new group thing? Aren't
> there almost enough groups in Usenet now? <g>
>

Hank - I think I just heard the sound of a nail being hit on the head ;)

--
George >{ò¿ó}<

Newcastle, England
(please remove leading 'x' from email address to reply, thanks)

Problems worthy of attack
Prove their worth, by hitting back - Piet Hein

[killermike]

In article >,
says...
> killermike > wrote:
>
> > I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> > the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> > recording.
>
> And why is alt.music.4-track not suitable for your purposes?

For the reasons I stated.

> What do you figure another group could offer that is not already offered
> by existing froups?

A decent amount of traffic.

>
> There is a certain amount of expertise around; how thinly would you like
> it spread?

I would like it applied more efficiently than it is now.

> RAP has no problem with dicussions of home or amateur recording and
> production work. We be fine with that.

RAP is difficult to read as it is overloaded with traffic.

> alt.music.4-track is loaded with people using stuff that has moved
> beyond the implied limitations of the group name, and loaded with the
> expertise you seek to enjoy.

It's not 'loaded' it's a very low traffic group.

> Why not get to asking questions and skip the new group thing? Aren't
> there almost enough groups in Usenet now? <g>

So your argument against the a new group of this type is that there are
too many groups at the moment?

--
***Please remove the word not from my email address to reply.

[LeBaron & Alrich]

killermike > wrote:

> says...

> > killermike > wrote:

> > > I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> > > the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> > > recording.

> > And why is alt.music.4-track not suitable for your purposes?

> For the reasons I stated.

Insufficient evidence, IMO.

> > What do you figure another group could offer that is not already offered
> > by existing froups?

> A decent amount of traffic.

Beg pardon? alt.music.4-track & rec.audio.pro together haven't enough
traffic for you?

> > There is a certain amount of expertise around; how thinly would you like
> > it spread?

> I would like it applied more efficiently than it is now.

Good luck.

> > RAP has no problem with dicussions of home or amateur recording and
> > production work. We be fine with that.

> RAP is difficult to read as it is overloaded with traffic.

RAP is easy to read for those who have filter-capable newreaders and can
figure out how to configure them.

> > alt.music.4-track is loaded with people using stuff that has moved
> > beyond the implied limitations of the group name, and loaded with the
> > expertise you seek to enjoy.

> It's not 'loaded' it's a very low traffic group.

Any group that gets Harvey Gerst's participation is _loaded with
expertise_, period. Reality might be that as the available systems have
moved beyond original parameters golkds from am4t have moved over to
RAP, where they are most welcome.

> > Why not get to asking questions and skip the new group thing? Aren't
> > there almost enough groups in Usenet now? <g>

> So your argument against the a new group of this type is that there are
> too many groups at the moment?

My argument is that the forums to talk about what you suggest are right
her in Usenet already; hence, there is little sense in creating another
group. YMMV.

--
ha

[Ian Bell]

George Perfect wrote:
> In this place, LeBaron & Alrich was recorded as saying ...
>
>>killermike > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
>>>the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
>>>recording.
>>
>>And why is alt.music.4-track not suitable for your purposes?
>>
>>What do you figure another group could offer that is not already offered
>>by existing froups?
>>
>>There is a certain amount of expertise around; how thinly would you like
>>it spread?
>>
>>RAP has no problem with dicussions of home or amateur recording and
>>production work. We be fine with that.
>>
>>alt.music.4-track is loaded with people using stuff that has moved
>>beyond the implied limitations of the group name, and loaded with the
>>expertise you seek to enjoy.
>>
>>Why not get to asking questions and skip the new group thing? Aren't
>>there almost enough groups in Usenet now? <g>
>>
>
> Hank - I think I just heard the sound of a nail being hit on the head ;)
>

I disagree. I long ago stopped reading RAP because there was so little
relevant to home recording so it was a pain to wade through a load of
uninteresting stuff, not to mention the regular flame wars. The fact
that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully
support the idea of a home recording group.

Ian

[Brothermark]

> alt.music.4-track is loaded with people using stuff that has moved
> beyond the *implied* limitations of the group name, and loaded with the
> expertise you seek to enjoy. [emphasis added]

There is nothing "implied" about it. It is an explicit reference to a
particular recording tool.
Therefore the vast majority of home-recording question are technically
off-topic in 4-track

[Brothermark]

> The fact
> that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
> demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully
> support the idea of a home recording group.
>
> Ian

I think I just heard the sound of a nail being hit on the head ;) ;)

[David Lemire]

killermike > wrote in
:

> I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> recording. The first step in creating an alt.* hirachy group would be to
> post a proposal message in alt.config. I have written a draft of the
> proposal and included it below.

This subject has been discussed here before (search Google for the subject
"Is this newsgroup still relevant" to see one theread). In that particular
one, I provided some relevant information that you might want to look over;
you can find it here: http://makeashorterlink.com/?V1CA234E5

The most salient point is that it's not that hard to create a new alt...
gropu, but for it to be useful it's got to propagate which may take
considerably more grass level work.

I can still find 4-tracks in the Musician's Friend catalog. Hell, I've
just used my own within the last 2 weeks.

I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I'm skeptical of the value.

Dave L

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Ian Bell > wrote:

> I long ago stopped reading RAP because there was so little
> relevant to home recording so it was a pain to wade through a load of
> uninteresting stuff, not to mention the regular flame wars.

You read a forum but don't ask the questions to which you seek answers?
You just hope someone else asks those so you can learn something?

At this point in time a whole lot of the pros are also recording stuff
at home, and RAP deals with that regularly. But if you have "home"
recording quesitons, why not _ask them_? There are some well informed,
vastly experienced, articulate and generous audio humans here. They
might have an answer or too if you have a quesiton or one.

They may or may not follow you to another group.

> The fact that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
> demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully support
> the idea of a home recording group.

Unless you get some experienced participants it's likely to be one
ignoranti leading another to nowhere worthwhile. If that kind of jabber
appeals to you, groovy, but I can't see how it would lead to a higher
quality of information exchange.

Now, what was your question? <g>

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Brothermark]

> Unless you get some experienced participants it's likely to be one
> ignoranti leading another to nowhere worthwhile.

Obviously, people wil be referred to the new group and in time a decent
membership would be built up. Noone is claiming that it will be instantly
full of brainy folk begging for people to impart their knowledge onto.

[Brothermark]

> Sure glad you cowboys showed up to save usenet from itself. With over
> fifty thousand groups, why not add another one...

why so negative?

[Brothermark]

> Amen, and given the number of home recording posts dealt with in RAP....

Thats exactly the point. Home recordings are generally not "pro" recordings

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Brothermark > wrote:

> > Amen, and given the number of home recording posts dealt with in RAP....

> Thats exactly the point. Home recordings are generally not "pro" recordings

??? _Most_ "pros" nowadays have a recording setup at _home_. Lots of
"pro" work gets done at home, both in terms of livings earned and
quality achieved. Further, every single "home" recordist I know who does
not make their living in audio still aims to achieve professional level
quality. I guess I just don't understand why, if a.m.4-t seems obsolete,
"home" recording questions aren't cool for RAP. RAP gets those all the
time and it's cool. They get dealt with appropriately with good info
distributed cheaply. <g>

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Chris Smalt]

Brothermark wrote:

> There is nothing "implied" about it. It is an explicit reference to a
> particular recording tool.
> Therefore the vast majority of home-recording question are technically
> off-topic in 4-track


Man, I thought *I* was a nitpicker. But you're right in the sense that
you'll rarely see a phone that allows you to dial a number, and that
most Aspirin's aren't. Do you have a problem with the am4t group?


Chris

[Brothermark]

> > > Amen, and given the number of home recording posts dealt with in
RAP....

> > Thats exactly the point. Home recordings are generally not "pro"
recordings

> ??? _Most_ "pros" nowadays have a recording setup at _home_.

We are talking about volume & nature of posts to RAP, not how many pro
recorders have home studios.

RAP has too much traffic so why not reserve RAP for strictly "pro" questions
and have a new home for amateur recording questions?

[John LeBlanc]

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...
>
> > Unless you get some experienced participants it's likely to be one
> > ignoranti leading another to nowhere worthwhile.
>
> Obviously, people wil be referred to the new group and in time a decent
> membership would be built up. Noone is claiming that it will be instantly
> full of brainy folk begging for people to impart their knowledge onto.


Out of curiosity, if you're going to expend the effort anyway, why not just
refer people to alt.music.4-track? It already exists, is carried by just about
all news servers already, and is seeded with people.

There really is no big process involved in newgrouping a Usenet alt group. The
trick is getting all of the news server admins to add it. It ain't easy, believe
me.

John

[dt king]

"John LeBlanc" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Brothermark" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > > Unless you get some experienced participants it's likely to be one
> > > ignoranti leading another to nowhere worthwhile.
> >
> > Obviously, people wil be referred to the new group and in time a decent
> > membership would be built up. Noone is claiming that it will be
instantly
> > full of brainy folk begging for people to impart their knowledge onto.
>
>
> Out of curiosity, if you're going to expend the effort anyway, why not
just
> refer people to alt.music.4-track? It already exists, is carried by just
about
> all news servers already, and is seeded with people.
>
> There really is no big process involved in newgrouping a Usenet alt
group. The
> trick is getting all of the news server admins to add it. It ain't easy,
believe
> me.

As simple as perpetually explaining the secret code to everybody might be,
this discussion is going to come up four or five times a year, forever,
until somebody bites the bullet and finally sets up group with a name that
works for the current state of technology. May as well do it now and start
getting news server admins on board.

We can have an election in the current newsgroups to select and seed it
with one cognoscenti, one curmudgeon, one prolific obsessive+clueless, a
spammer and two political debaters.

dtk

[Josh Snider]

>
> At this point in time a whole lot of the pros are also recording stuff
> at home, and RAP deals with that regularly. But if you have "home"
> recording quesitons, why not _ask them_? There are some well informed,
> vastly experienced, articulate and generous audio humans here. They
> might have an answer or too if you have a quesiton or one.


I agree with this. I also tend to stick to the school of thought that says
there is only recording. That is to say, the principles of how to get a
good recording and how to get a good mix etc are the same regarless of where
you are or what you're using. The _method_ may change, but the _principles_
remain the same. It's like someone saying that they coudlnt ever record a
jazz trio because all they've ever recorded is rock. We're all adaptable
people (we HAVE to be or we'd never survive in this industry), and the
knowledge we gain in the studio is just as important to someone recording at
home. As long as we can answer the questions with the information adapted
to use (which we are mostly all capable of doing).

None of us would say "I can't answer your question about home recording
because I've only worked in a studio"

Usenet already has thousands of groups. Why add another one when the
resource you need is right here and on a.m.4trk??

>Unless you get some experienced participants it's likely to be one
>ignoranti leading another to nowhere worthwhile. If that kind of jabber
>appeals to you, groovy, but I can't see how it would lead to a higher
>quality of information exchange.

This is why _another_ group would be a bad idea. Unless you can get some of
the talent that lies in here and in a.m.4trk to follow you over, it's the
blind leading the blind.

Like David said before I don¹t disagree with the sentiment but I question
the value.

J

--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Chris Smalt > wrote:

> Brothermark wrote:

> > There is nothing "implied" about it. It is an explicit reference to a
> > particular recording tool.
> > Therefore the vast majority of home-recording question are technically
> > off-topic in 4-track


> Man, I thought *I* was a nitpicker. But you're right in the sense that
> you'll rarely see a phone that allows you to dial a number, and that
> most Aspirin's aren't. Do you have a problem with the am4t group?

Dude, four is not enough.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Brothermark > wrote:

> RAP has too much traffic

For what? For whom? I don't read every post; I don't even see some
subjects. I see the threads relating to stuff I've not filtered out and
mark what I want to read; the newsreader goes and gets me those and I'm
good to learn something.

> so why not reserve RAP for strictly "pro" questions
> and have a new home for amateur recording questions?

What's an "amateur recording question"?

All the pros I regard highly have a strong dose of amateur in their
approach to the craft and science of this work, given the roots of the
word. If they're lucky and smart they also make some money at it.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Artie Turner]

LeBaron & Alrich wrote:

> Dude, four is not enough.

Hey, three was enough for Sam Phillips, Johnny Cash and Elvis. Anybody
can make a hit with 8 tracks, it takes real talent to do it with four! ;^)

AT
>
> --
> ha

[Ian Bell]

Brothermark wrote:
>>The fact
>>that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
>>demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully
>>support the idea of a home recording group.
>>
>>Ian
>
>
> I think I just heard the sound of a nail being hit on the head ;) ;)
>
>
>

So why are you holding the hammer?

Ian

[Ian Bell]

LeBaron & Alrich wrote:
> Ian Bell > wrote:
>
>
>>I long ago stopped reading RAP because there was so little
>>relevant to home recording so it was a pain to wade through a load of
>>uninteresting stuff, not to mention the regular flame wars.
>
>
> You read a forum but don't ask the questions to which you seek answers?
> You just hope someone else asks those so you can learn something?
>

Hank, I have a lot of respect for you and all the other helpfull and
experienced posters to RAP and I like to think I have made my own small
contribution there in the past as well. However, as well as asking and
answering questions I like to browse a newsgroup because there are often
topics of interest and you learn lots of stuff. However, as my
interests changed RAP became less and less relevant and alt4t did not
cover them either. I am a member of several yahoo groups to do with
specific home recording products, reel to reel tape and so on, which
cover much of my intersts. Even there though there are many questions
that would be better addressed by a home recording forum of some sort.
I think there are enough like minded individuals to justify a specific
group and I fully support the idea.

Ian

[Ian Bell]

dt king wrote:
> "John LeBlanc" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>>Unless you get some experienced participants it's likely to be one
>>>>ignoranti leading another to nowhere worthwhile.
>>>
>>>Obviously, people wil be referred to the new group and in time a decent
>>>membership would be built up. Noone is claiming that it will be
>
> instantly
>
>>>full of brainy folk begging for people to impart their knowledge onto.
>>
>>
>>Out of curiosity, if you're going to expend the effort anyway, why not
>
> just
>
>>refer people to alt.music.4-track? It already exists, is carried by just
>
> about
>
>>all news servers already, and is seeded with people.
>>
>>There really is no big process involved in newgrouping a Usenet alt
>
> group. The
>
>>trick is getting all of the news server admins to add it. It ain't easy,
>
> believe
>
>>me.
>
>
> As simple as perpetually explaining the secret code to everybody might be,
> this discussion is going to come up four or five times a year, forever,
> until somebody bites the bullet and finally sets up group with a name that
> works for the current state of technology. May as well do it now and start
> getting news server admins on board.
>
Precisely, which is anther reason I fully support the creation of this
group.

Ian

[David Lemire]

"dt king" > wrote in
ink.net:

> "John LeBlanc" > wrote in message
> ...
>>

> As simple as perpetually explaining the secret code to everybody might
> be, this discussion is going to come up four or five times a year,
> forever, until somebody bites the bullet and finally sets up group
> with a name that works for the current state of technology.

I guess I'd have to concede that there is some truth to this.


> May as
> well do it now and start getting news server admins on board.

Maybe. I guess one lingering question is whether it's possible to "retire"
AM4T once the new group is well established.

If I appear to be on both sides of the fence, that's because I see both
sides of the argument and am somewhat ambivalent, overall.

Dave L

[Brothermark]

> >>The fact
> >>that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
> >>demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully
> >>support the idea of a home recording group.

> > I think I just heard the sound of a nail being hit on the head ;) ;)

> So why are you holding the hammer?
> Ian

Huh? I'm not holding any hammers?

[Brothermark]

> > Obviously, people wil be referred to the new group and in time a decent
> > membership would be built up. Noone is claiming that it will be
instantly
> > full of brainy folk begging for people to impart their knowledge onto.

> Out of curiosity, if you're going to expend the effort anyway, why not
just
> refer people to alt.music.4-track? It already exists, is carried by just
about
> all news servers already, and is seeded with people.
> John

You clearly haven't read the whole thread. Your question has been answered
at least 3 times
mark

[Brothermark]

> > May as
> > well do it now and start getting news server admins on board.

> Maybe. I guess one lingering question is whether it's possible to
"retire"
> AM4T once the new group is well established.
> Dave L

No need to retire the 4-track group. It is still relevent because 4-tracks
are still in use by many musicians.
Mark

[Brothermark]

> > RAP has too much traffic
>
> For what? For whom? I don't read every post; I don't even see some
> subjects.

You don't even see some subjects. There's my answer. You might have liked to
participate in that subject that you didn't even see. Threads disappear down
the bottom of the page too quickly so that someone who only visits twice a
week misses out on lots of threads.

> > so why not reserve RAP for strictly "pro" questions
> > and have a new home for amateur recording questions?
>
> What's an "amateur recording question"?

Are you serious?

Amateur:
"our band just made this recording in my bedroom. please let me know how we
can improve it."

Pro:
"A client is coming to my studio next week. he has a big, dirty voice. Which
of these high-end mics that I own should I use?"

Of course there might be a grey dividing line when the 2 worlds of pro & am
meet in the middle but in general its easy to define.

mark

[Ty Ford]

In Article >, killermike
> wrote:
>I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
>the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
>recording. The first step in creating an alt.* hirachy group would be to
>post a proposal message in alt.config. I have written a draft of the
>proposal and included it below.
>
SNIP>
>Charter
>I would like to propose the creation of a group called alt.music.home-
>studio. The group would be for the discussion of home studio based or
>other amateur recording for musicians. The group would be unmoderated
>and naturally, it would discourage spam. The group would not be for
>binaries but posting links to online audio files would be permitted and
>encouraged.
>
>Reason
>There is, as far as I am aware, no current newsgroup for the discussion
>of this topic. Most of the discussion of the subject takes place in two
>somewhat inappropriate newsgroups, namely alt.music.4-track and
>rec.audio.pro.
>
>alt.music.4-track
>Briefly, the '4-track' part of the name of the alt.music.4-track
>newsgroup refers to a tape format which contains four discrete audio
>tracks. In the early 80's manufactures started to produce 'portastudio'
>devices which could record four separate audio tracks to an standard
>audio cassette tape. The technology has now moved on and home studio
>recording is normally done with stand alone HD based recorder or a
>computer with appropriate recording software.
>
>rec.audio.pro
>Question 1.1 of the rec.audio.pro FAQ at
>http://www.recaudiopro.net/FAQ/current.htm defines the purpose of the
>group as:
>
>"This newsgroup exists for the discussion of issues and topics related
>to professional audio engineering. We generally do not discuss issues
>relating to home audio reproduction, though they do occasionally come
>up. The rec.audio.* hierarchy of newsgroups is as follows:"

The current economy and the current state of the art of electronics has
resulted in the devastation of mid-tier audio recording facilities. As a
result, more and more facilities that offer professional services are
"home-studios."

The specific location of the facility is not the issue. The differences are
in the experiental level of the operator, the equipment and the acoustic
environment. Perhaps rec.audio.budgetstudio would be a better name.

Of course my concern there is that, in talking just amongst themselves, they
would not get as much of a chance to know what truly good sound was and how
to get it. Rec.audio.pro has allowed me to learn a lot over the years. As a
result, I've been able to improve the quality of my work.

>The current situation
>I would estimate that around 1/4 of the traffic in rec.audio.pro is
>actually off-topic because it is concerned with amateur or home studio
>based recording. rec.audio.pro gets a large amount of traffic (sometimes
>hitting five hundred messages a day).

I'd say 1/4 of the OT traffic on rec.audio.pro has more to do with things
completely outside of the purview of audio. I do agree that some percentage
is entry level inquiries. They come to rec.audio.pro to find answers from
more experienced folks. I don't see that as being a problem.


>Some people have suggested that alt.music-4-track could be used for the
>discussion of these topics but unfortunately the name is confusing, no
>longer appropriate and consequently, very few people use the group.
>alt.music.4-track often gets around five messages per day. This means
>that a query posted to alt.music.4-track might only produce a small
>handful of responses from the regulars of that group whereas
>rec.audio.pro is actually difficult to read due to the huge amount of
>traffic.
>
>Numerical justification
>It is difficult to provide numerical justification in the accepted way
>in this case due to the nature of the subject. There are not many
>keywords or phrases that can be searched for to provide proof as people
>interested in the subject are apt to discuss topics as diverse (but in
>keeping with subject of home recording) as DIY room modifications,
>computer software, instrument recording, electronics projects,
>mastering, mixing desks, synthesisers, etc so you can't really search
>for it in google.
>
>Lifetime
>Interest in this subject is probably at an all time high due to recent
>technological advancements in the field of computer technology. I
>propose that the name alt.music.home-studio is descriptive and to a
>large extent, future-proof.


Regardles of my comments, I think you're on to something.

Regards,

Ty

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[John LeBlanc]

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...

> You clearly haven't read the whole thread. Your question has been answered
> at least 3 times

Oh yeah, I read the whole thread. I just don't understand why rec.audio.pro is
being asked for an opinion when apparently the decision to make a new group has
already been made.

Here's what I know: when someone gets it in their head to start a new newsgroup,
it's all but impossible to persuade him such a thing is not necessary, whether
it really is or not. Read alt.config for a while and notice how many people went
ahead and created a new group after being given countless valid reasons why it
is unneccessary.

Lest you get the wrong impression, I don't care whether or not you start a new
group. I really don't. The alt hierarchy is set up to allow people just like you
and Mike to avoid the political and concensus processes involved in newgrouping
a Big 8 newsgroup. You don't need anyone's permission, you obviously aren't
interested in an opinion that varies with your own, so why are you asking for
opinions?

Just issue the newgroup control message already. The sooner you do that, the
more time you'll have to pester and beg news admins to add your new group, and
for sending booster messages until the cows come home.

John

[John LeBlanc]

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...

> You don't even see some subjects. There's my answer.

Well, if you don't see subjects that interest you, why not start one yourself?
One of your arguments for starting this thing is that no one is asking a
question you're champing at the bit to answer? Maybe no one is asking because no
one is interested.


> You might have liked to
> participate in that subject that you didn't even see. Threads disappear down
> the bottom of the page too quickly so that someone who only visits twice a
> week misses out on lots of threads.

And, just out of curiosity, what would be your suggestion if
alt.music.multitracking (or whatever) gets so wildly popular that its traffic
exceeds that of r.a.p. today? Can we count on you to resurrect these arguments
and start a new group that doesn't have so much traffic?

As for "threads that disappear" I have three solutions: keep up, use a premium
service (mine currently has over 100,000 rap messages available) or Google
Groups.


> > What's an "amateur recording question"?
>
> Are you serious?
>
> Amateur:
> "our band just made this recording in my bedroom. please let me know how we
> can improve it."
>
> Pro:
> "A client is coming to my studio next week. he has a big, dirty voice. Which
> of these high-end mics that I own should I use?"

An amateur is defined as "a person who engages in an art, science, study, or
athletic activity as a pastime rather than as a profession." Maybe you mean to
use the word "hobbyist" rather than amateur. Although I know lots of hobbyists
who take a professional approach to things.

If you think the bedroom-recroding questions don't get asked here on r.a.p., you
need to do some more Google research. I'd venture a guess that more of those
questions get asked here than anywhere else. And they get answered. By
professionals, often enough.

John

[LeBaron & Alrich]

John LeBlanc wrote:

> "Brothermark" wrote:

> > You clearly haven't read the whole thread. Your question has been answered
> > at least 3 times

> Oh yeah, I read the whole thread. I just don't understand why
> rec.audio.pro is being asked for an opinion when apparently the decision
> to make a new group has already been made.

Bingo. Ask uf RAP thinks this is a good idea; if the answer is "no",
ignore it. Maybe they need a group after all. No real reason for anybody
here to care what answers they get.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Ian Bell > wrote:

> Hank, I have a lot of respect for you and all the other helpfull and
> experienced posters to RAP and I like to think I have made my own small
> contribution there in the past as well. However, as well as asking and
> answering questions I like to browse a newsgroup because there are often
> topics of interest and you learn lots of stuff. However, as my
> interests changed RAP became less and less relevant and alt4t did not
> cover them either. I am a member of several yahoo groups to do with
> specific home recording products, reel to reel tape and so on, which
> cover much of my intersts. Even there though there are many questions
> that would be better addressed by a home recording forum of some sort.
> I think there are enough like minded individuals to justify a specific
> group and I fully support the idea.

Ian,

I'm fine with your statements but I still have a question: what is a
question that would be specific to a "home" recording group?

I have asked that in several different ways and so far none of the folks
promoting a new group, who alledgedly seek "discussion", have
demonstrated _what is such a question_.

So how about it, folks? Are you just showing how your group will work?
You ask for discussion; you get it; the opinions are not to your liking;
you ignore the opinions offered; you get asked a specific question
pertinent to your "discussion" and you don't bother to answer.

Whaddafuk??

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Brothermark > wrote:

> > > RAP has too much traffic

> > For what? For whom? I don't read every post; I don't even see some
> > subjects.

> You don't even see some subjects. There's my answer. You might have liked to
> participate in that subject that you didn't even see. Threads disappear down
> the bottom of the page too quickly so that someone who only visits twice a
> week misses out on lots of threads.

The reason I don't see some types of material is that _I have set my
newsreader to ignore those threads_. By choice I do not see stuff to do
with Windozer machinery, FA, sometimes FS, and a few other things.
Believe me, were I to start chiming in on non-Mac PC recording **** I'd
lose all credibility, because I know _nothing_ about it. And I think I
post enough crap in here to warrant avoiding more. My ignorance is
already well demonstrated. <g>

And I'm not sypmathetic to claims of too many posts. Last time I
returned from Texas there were over six thousand posts in RAP. Didn't
take me long to find out where I could help, make funny, make a mess, or
learn something. So on a daily or weekly basis it would be no trouble at
all for me to see every damned post if I wanted to.

Mind you, MacSOUP is a very handy newsreader that saves me tons of time
and handles Usenet nicely. Yeah, it cost me thirty bucks to license the
shareware, but I've now been here for years and on a per-post basis I
consider that fee fully amortized.

> > > so why not reserve RAP for strictly "pro" questions
> > > and have a new home for amateur recording questions?

> > What's an "amateur recording question"?

> Are you serious?

<j>

Oh, of course not; that's why I am participating in this thread...

</j>

> Amateur:
> "our band just made this recording in my bedroom. please let me know how we
> can improve it."

Answer: How's it sound _to you_? Can you give folks a listen to it? If
not, what do you feel are the shortcomings of your present achievement?

> Pro:
> "A client is coming to my studio next week. he has a big, dirty voice. Which
> of these high-end mics that I own should I use?

Answer: What do you mean by dirty? Does he growl on the bottom or does
he break-up in the midrange? Really, it's a shot in the dark to spec a
mic for something I haven't heard in a room of which I have no
experience, but can you better describe his vocal tone?

> Of course there might be a grey dividing line when the 2 worlds of pro & am
> meet in the middle but in general its easy to define.

Notice that in both cases insufficient information has been provided for
the questioner to get a well informed answer. So the first answers are
questions in reply, trying to spot what is important in context. This is
not because you posted both questions, but because that's how it most
often goes with any of our questions. Like Garth said so wonderfully
recent, if we knew enough to ask the question perfectly we'd already
know the answer.

Recording is recording. Doesn't make a gnat's penis worth of difference
whre it happens, though environmental aspects can apply, such as
location and outdoors work. You gots your input transducers, ways of
raising their level, places and means of storage, devices to mangle,
etc.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Still_Slanted wrote:

> "killermike" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> > the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> > recording. The first step in creating an alt.* hirachy group would be to
> > post a proposal message in alt.config. I have written a draft of the
> > proposal and included it below.
>
> The argument is moot anyway . . . that group (alt.music.home-recording)
> already exists

Whoa, good work!

> and has a post every week or so, mostly off topic.

Well, now, the add-a-groupers can fix that right away.

> So what's the point here . . . obviously there's not much REAL need is
> there or there would be traffic there already? Just my $.02 !

I think the point is that nobody proposing a new group looked to see,
among the 50K+ groups available, if a suitable forum was already up. And
that bangs on my point that it ain't likely another gorup would help
things.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[John LeBlanc]

"LeBaron & Alrich" > wrote in message
.. .
> John LeBlanc wrote:
>
> > "Brothermark" wrote:
>
> > > You clearly haven't read the whole thread. Your question has been answered
> > > at least 3 times
>
> > Oh yeah, I read the whole thread. I just don't understand why
> > rec.audio.pro is being asked for an opinion when apparently the decision
> > to make a new group has already been made.
>
> Bingo. Ask uf RAP thinks this is a good idea; if the answer is "no",
> ignore it. Maybe they need a group after all. No real reason for anybody
> here to care what answers they get.

And have we ever seen this in action on r.a.p.? <g>

John

[killermike]

In article >,
says...
>
> "Brothermark" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > You clearly haven't read the whole thread. Your question has been answered
> > at least 3 times
>
> Oh yeah, I read the whole thread. I just don't understand why rec.audio.pro is
> being asked for an opinion when apparently the decision to make a new group has
> already been made.

Not at all. This thread was created to stimulate discussion about the
subject. Perhaps, we'll have to see how things stand by the end of the
week or so. Maybe longer if productive debate continues.

>
> Here's what I know: when someone gets it in their head to start a new newsgroup,
> it's all but impossible to persuade him such a thing is not necessary, whether
> it really is or not. Read alt.config for a while and notice how many people went
> ahead and created a new group after being given countless valid reasons why it
> is unneccessary.

I think I have made good, reasoned arguments for the creation of the
group. I want to hear counter arguments, statements of agreement and
suggestions from people. Not everyone agrees with your point of view (or
mine).

>
> Lest you get the wrong impression, I don't care whether or not you start a new
> group. I really don't. The alt hierarchy is set up to allow people just like you
> and Mike to avoid the political and concensus processes involved in newgrouping
> a Big 8 newsgroup. You don't need anyone's permission, you obviously aren't
> interested in an opinion that varies with your own, so why are you asking for
> opinions?

Because if the group is created I want it to reflect the opinions and
needs of of the people who are going to use it. I want to create
something on the basis of justification and utility.

I am happy to do the 'work' involved. Although, as I indicated before,
there isn't really much 'work' involved in the process assuming that a
carefully considered and reasoned proposal is presented to alt.config.
Then, if things go smoothly, all that has to be done is the control
message possibly followed by some booster messages. If their is still
work to be done beyond that point and the thing is still worth pursuing,
I'm volunteering for that too.

> Just issue the newgroup control message already. The sooner you do that, the

No. I want the group to be useful and to used.

> more time you'll have to pester and beg news admins to add your new group, and
> for sending booster messages until the cows come home.
>
> John
>
>
>

--
***Please remove the word not from my email address to reply.
www.unmusic.co.uk

[Ian Bell]

Still_Slanted wrote:
> "killermike" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
>>the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
>>recording. The first step in creating an alt.* hirachy group would be to
>>post a proposal message in alt.config. I have written a draft of the
>>proposal and included it below.
>
>
> The argument is moot anyway . . . that group (alt.music.home-recording)
> already exists and has a post every week or so, mostly off topic. So what's
> the point here . . . obviously there's not much REAL need is there or there
> would be traffic there already? Just my $.02 !
>
> Mike
>
>

Not on my news server and it has loads of alt.music.* entries.

Ian

[George Perfect]

In this place, killermike was recorded as saying ...
> Not at all. This thread was created to stimulate discussion about the
> subject. Perhaps, we'll have to see how things stand by the end of the
> week or so. Maybe longer if productive debate continues.

Sheesh - how many people have to say 'boo' before you turn round?

You kicked this idea off in am4t three months ago and took it nowhere.
IIRC you got the same lukewarm reaction you are getting this time round.

Now you've chosen to take up bandwidth in rap, just for good measure
cross-posting to both the groups that fail - in some still unspecified
way - to meet your expectations.

> >
> > Here's what I know: when someone gets it in their head to start a new newsgroup,
> > it's all but impossible to persuade him such a thing is not necessary, whether
> > it really is or not. Read alt.config for a while and notice how many people went
> > ahead and created a new group after being given countless valid reasons why it
> > is unneccessary.

Read the above quoted paragraph.

Then read it again. Maybe even do what is suggested.

People who have already trodden the road you intend to tread are trying
to give you good advice based on their experience.

>
> I think I have made good, reasoned arguments for the creation of the
> group. I want to hear counter arguments, statements of agreement and
> suggestions from people. Not everyone agrees with your point of view (or
> mine).

Each time somebody puts forward a reason for not starting a new group
you recite "but, it's a good idea".

You're obviously convinced so just get on and do it. Start your new
group and invite everyone to join in. It's the only way you'll find your
answer. Maybe it will become as popular and busy as rap - maybe you'll
get less traffic than am4t. Maybe you'll get people to answer the
questions you don't want to post in either of the existing groups. Maybe
you won't.

Nobody's preventing you starting a new group. Nobody has objected to
your choice of name. Nobody is likely to object if you post the
occasional poilte announcement in rap and am4t advertising the new
group.

You say you are willing to do all the work yourself so ... go to it!

>
> Because if the group is created I want it to reflect the opinions and
> needs of of the people who are going to use it. I want to create
> something on the basis of justification and utility.

But you've already put forward your case to justify the new group.
You've had some modest support and some old farts like me who are happy
the way things are.

If you still can't make your mind up whether to do it, flip a coin.

>
> I am happy to do the 'work' involved. Although, as I indicated before,
> there isn't really much 'work' involved in the process assuming that a
> carefully considered and reasoned proposal is presented to alt.config.
> Then, if things go smoothly, all that has to be done is the control
> message possibly followed by some booster messages. If their is still
> work to be done beyond that point and the thing is still worth pursuing,
> I'm volunteering for that too.

If you would just listen for a second, you might hear the good folks who
have been there and done that telling you it ain't that easy.

>
> > Just issue the newgroup control message already. The sooner you do that, the
>
> No. I want the group to be useful and to used.

The very best of luck. Genuinely.

>
> > more time you'll have to pester and beg news admins to add your new group, and
> > for sending booster messages until the cows come home.

Now .. can we please get back to discussing something that might be
relevant to either am4t or rap?

Please?


--
George >{ò¿ó}<

Newcastle, England
(please remove leading 'x' from email address to reply, thanks)

Problems worthy of attack
Prove their worth, by hitting back - Piet Hein

[LeBaron & Alrich]

killermike wrote:

> Perhaps, we'll have to see how things stand by the end of the
> week or so. Maybe longer if productive debate continues.

Did you look to see what recording relted groups were already available?

alt.music.home-recording

Go there; make it serve your purposes. Another week of this is useless,
seeing as how the very thing you seek to establish is already in
existence.

Turns out that the productive aspect of this debate is the discovery of
that group, sitting there waiting for y'all.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

killermike wrote:

> I can't find any mention of this group. It is certainly not in the
> newssrc file from my ISP and google groups has no record of it either.
> Searching the newssrc file shows no mention of any groupname containing
> 'home-studio' or 'homestudio'.

And now you can understand that it might not be so easy to get another
such group out onto all or even most servers? Your efforts would be
better invested in getting _your_ news server to carry that group. Watch
this...

alt.music.home-recording

....that there was copied and pasted from the All Groups List in MacSOUP
from the Earthlink news server.

My point about the number of groups hinges on the reality that news
admins don't necessarily jump on a group just because somebody decicded
it was next to no trouble to creat antoher 'alt" group; at some point
they must weigh server space against traffic, and if a.m.4-t and a.m.h-r
have next to no action, they may be disinclined to carry them, for
sensible reasons.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

killermike wrote:

> I can't find any mention of this group.

My Earthlink server shows over a hundred messages in the group. About
70% are to help you enlarge your penis, 20% are for illegal cable
descramblers, 7% tout forensic software, and the rest might have
something to do with audio, especially if its about MP3's...

Looks like it's wide open for your assault.

<g>

--
ha

[P Stamler]

Dumb question: Can one change a newsgroup's name? If so, can 4track become
homerec?

Peace,
Paul

[Ian Bell]

LeBaron & Alrich wrote:
> Ian Bell > wrote:
>
>
>>Hank, I have a lot of respect for you and all the other helpfull and
>>experienced posters to RAP and I like to think I have made my own small
>>contribution there in the past as well. However, as well as asking and
>>answering questions I like to browse a newsgroup because there are often
>>topics of interest and you learn lots of stuff. However, as my
>>interests changed RAP became less and less relevant and alt4t did not
>>cover them either. I am a member of several yahoo groups to do with
>>specific home recording products, reel to reel tape and so on, which
>>cover much of my intersts. Even there though there are many questions
>>that would be better addressed by a home recording forum of some sort.
>>I think there are enough like minded individuals to justify a specific
>>group and I fully support the idea.
>
>
> Ian,
>
> I'm fine with your statements but I still have a question: what is a
> question that would be specific to a "home" recording group?

Here's a couple of (paraphrased) examples:

My mixes sound fine on my recording system but when I play them on my
hi-fi nor on the car they sound completely different. What am I doing
wrong?

My vocals sound muddy. How can I get that pro sound in my vocals?

I've posted an mp3 of my latest track at http://etcetc, what do you
think of it?

>
> I have asked that in several different ways and so far none of the folks
> promoting a new group, who alledgedly seek "discussion", have
> demonstrated _what is such a question_.
>
> So how about it, folks? Are you just showing how your group will work?
> You ask for discussion; you get it; the opinions are not to your liking;
> you ignore the opinions offered; you get asked a specific question
> pertinent to your "discussion" and you don't bother to answer.
>
> Whaddafuk??
>

I think that is a little unfair. This topic has already provoked a
lively debate. Opinions are just personal expressions and no oone is
*required* to take notice of them.

Ian

[Jim Gilliland]

Ian Bell wrote:
>
> I disagree. I long ago stopped reading RAP because there was so little
> relevant to home recording so it was a pain to wade through a load of
> uninteresting stuff, not to mention the regular flame wars. The fact
> that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
> demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully
> support the idea of a home recording group.

I think that the current groups cover the topic quite well. It seems to
me that the most likely outcome of creating a group specific to "home
recording" is that it would attract the amateurs and not the
professionals. The result would be a group where the blind are leading
the blind. The advantage here in rap is that we amateurs can easily
reach a group of pros who have experience that goes well beyond our own.
I would hate to lose that.

[John LeBlanc]

"killermike" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
> > Perfect example of what happens when someone newgroups a Usenet group that
has
> > no reasonable basis for existence; a bunch of news admins simply won't add
it.
> > Are you starting to see the point a little more clearly?
>
> Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance of this group
> please?

What, now I'm lying about it? Crikey.

Do a Google search, not a Google Groups search, for "alt.music.home-recording"


> If no ISP carries it and even google doesn't list it, I would
> consider it not to exist in any practical way.

Obviously other news servers carry it. The point I'm trying to make is that
premium services, those like Giganews like I use, will add it almost by default.
They just represent a fraction of the total number of news servers.

But news admins like the fellows at AOL -- who are super nice folks to deal
with -- won't add anything unless they get a lot of requests for it. Same goes
for Earthlink. Believe me, I know.

It's been my experience that even if you go through the informal alt.config
process, you still need to hump it to get it added. I'm talking about personally
sending email to news servers all around the world. I say personally, because
most of them automatically delete email sent to undisclosed lists of recipients,
or email sent to more than X number of recipients. That's because of spam.

Have you added up the number of news admins that would include? I can tell you,
it's a bunch.

And once you send the newgroup control message -- properly formed, or it will go
into the wastebin -- and email the admins personally requesting they add the
group, you have to send out booster messages. And remind the admins who haven't
added the group.

> One way in which it is possible to get a group carried by news admins by
> making a well though out and reasoned request to alt.config.

Bull****. Well reasoned requests don't get news admins to add a new group;
existing traffic does.

But, you may ask, how do I get traffic counts up if the group isn't carried by a
lot of news servers? Yeah. Exactly. Sucks to start a new group, trust me.


> > Based on the messages I've seen in this thread, I'm starting to think this
has
> > less to do with having a usable newsgroup as it does someone wanting to have
> > their name associated with a new newsgroup.
>
> If someone with more experience of this sort of thing were to step up
> and offer to create the group, I'd hapily hand it over to them.

The problem is people who are more experienced in doing this are already telling
you they wouldn't do it. But you don't seem to want to hear that.

Really, I wish you the best of luck, Mike. If I were you, and I had it in my
head I was going to do this regardless of what other people are saying (as it
seems you do), I'd just stop asking people for their opinions and just do it. No
one will think less of you for going off and doing what you think you need to
do. Who knows? Maybe you'll prove a lot of us old(er) farts completely wrong. I
actually love it when that happens.

John

[John LeBlanc]

"John LeBlanc" > wrote in message
...
>
> "killermike" > wrote in message
> > One way in which it is possible to get a group carried by news admins by
> > making a well though out and reasoned request to alt.config.
>
> Bull****. Well reasoned requests don't get news admins to add a new group;
> existing traffic does.

I should clarify:

Well reasoned requests don't get news admins to add a new _alt-hierarchy_ group;
existing traffic does.

Back in the Stone Age, news admins could trust control messages. So a newgroup
or rmgroup control message was acted upon. Some news admin who was dumbass
enough to abuse the process may as well have eaten a bullet because the other
admins would have cut him off from the network anyway.

These days, control messages come across constantly and it's just not practical
or prudent to act on each one. This is the reason you have to use alt.config as
a sort of "shot across the bow", and follow up your newgroup message with
personal email to news admins.

And if you haven't bothered with the process of public debate, or ignored the
suggestions of the alt.config folks (who will, most likely, tell you to use an
existing group or start a Yahoo! discussion group instead), you have a much
longer row to hoe in convincing the news admins the world over that you want
them to take time out of their busy day to add your new group.

There's a reasoned practicaility to the way Usenet works and typically the guys
who hold the keys to the kingdom far more often than not can be trusted to make
the right decisions.

John

[Ian Bell]

John LeBlanc wrote:
> "killermike" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>In article >,
says...
>>
>>>Perfect example of what happens when someone newgroups a Usenet group that
>
> has
>
>>>no reasonable basis for existence; a bunch of news admins simply won't add
>
> it.
>
>>>Are you starting to see the point a little more clearly?
>>
>>Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance of this group
>>please?
>
>
> What, now I'm lying about it? Crikey.
>
> Do a Google search, not a Google Groups search, for "alt.music.home-recording"
>
>
>
>>If no ISP carries it and even google doesn't list it, I would
>>consider it not to exist in any practical way.
>
>
> Obviously other news servers carry it. The point I'm trying to make is that
> premium services, those like Giganews like I use, will add it almost by default.
> They just represent a fraction of the total number of news servers.
>
> But news admins like the fellows at AOL -- who are super nice folks to deal
> with -- won't add anything unless they get a lot of requests for it. Same goes
> for Earthlink. Believe me, I know.
>

I find that very hard to believe. My Tiscali news server includes a
whole load of useless empty groups starting alt.hipcrime.* for example

Ian

[Ian Bell]

Jim Gilliland wrote:
> Ian Bell wrote:
>
>>
>> I disagree. I long ago stopped reading RAP because there was so
>> little relevant to home recording so it was a pain to wade through a
>> load of uninteresting stuff, not to mention the regular flame wars.
>> The fact that home recording posts are split between RAP and A4T amply
>> demonstrates that neither group fully fullfills the need. I fully
>> support the idea of a home recording group.
>
>
> I think that the current groups cover the topic quite well. It seems to
> me that the most likely outcome of creating a group specific to "home
> recording" is that it would attract the amateurs and not the
> professionals. The result would be a group where the blind are leading
> the blind. The advantage here in rap is that we amateurs can easily
> reach a group of pros who have experience that goes well beyond our own.
> I would hate to lose that.
>

How would you lose that? Just keep posting to RAP if you want to.

Ian

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Ian Bell wrote:

> Here's a couple of (paraphrased) examples:

> My mixes sound fine on my recording system but when I play them on my
> hi-fi nor on the car they sound completely different. What am I doing
> wrong?

> My vocals sound muddy. How can I get that pro sound in my vocals?

> I've posted an mp3 of my latest track at http://etcetc, what do you
> think of it?

You have paraphrased very well excellent examples of the type of
questions often positied to RAPsters and answered therefrom.

Were I to ask those in a group aimed at home recordists, and if that
group didn't attract the likes of Harvery and many others here, would I
expect to get answers of the dpeth and precision I mgiht receive if I
asked in RAP?

In any case, the group sought exists but isn't (yet) carried by some
folk's servers. I think it's time for them to start the process of
getting that group up on their screens, which is the same work they'd
have to do for a new group, but minus the work of starting another low
profile group.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

John LeBlanc > wrote:

> But news admins like the fellows at AOL -- who are super nice folks to deal
> with -- won't add anything unless they get a lot of requests for it. Same goes
> for Earthlink. Believe me, I know.

Earthlink has it, right now.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

John LeBlanc wrote:

> Do a Google search, not a Google Groups search, for "alt.music.home-recording"

<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=alt.music.home-recor
ding>

--
ha

[Brothermark]

> Lest you get the wrong impression, I don't care whether or not you start a
new
> group. I really don't. [...] The sooner you do that, the
> more time you'll have to pester and beg news admins to add your new group

> John

Erm, its not my idea and I have no intention of starting a newsgroup. You've
got the wrong guy
Mark

[Brothermark]

>> The advantage here in rap is that we amateurs can easily
> > reach a group of pros who have experience that goes well beyond our own.
> > I would hate to lose that.

> How would you lose that? Just keep posting to RAP if you want to.
> Ian

tis true.

[Richard Crowley]

"killermike" wrote ...
> Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance
> of this group please? If no ISP carries it and even google
> doesn't list it, I would consider it not to exist in any practical
> way. If it does exist in some way, it might alter the process
> of creating a group of the same name that can actually be
> accessed by people.

Acually checking for oneself would help avoid asking questions
that make one look silly. Google reports ~175 messages dating
back from at least 1997 and as recent as last week on the live
newsgroup: news:alt.music.home-recording Use it in good health.

[Ian Bell]

Richard Crowley wrote:
> "killermike" wrote ...
>
>>Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance
>>of this group please? If no ISP carries it and even google
>>doesn't list it, I would consider it not to exist in any practical
>>way. If it does exist in some way, it might alter the process
>>of creating a group of the same name that can actually be
>>accessed by people.
>
>
> Acually checking for oneself would help avoid asking questions
> that make one look silly. Google reports ~175 messages dating
> back from at least 1997 and as recent as last week on the live
> newsgroup: news:alt.music.home-recording Use it in good health.
>
>


After much searching I finaly found this group. It is not known to
Google, Google Groups or two out of the three ISPs I am subscribed to
here in the UK (only UKLinux lists it). So I have now asked my main
ISP, Tiscali, to add it to their news server.

Ian

[killermike]

In article >,
says...
> "killermike" wrote ...
> > Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance
> > of this group please? If no ISP carries it and even google
> > doesn't list it, I would consider it not to exist in any practical
> > way. If it does exist in some way, it might alter the process
> > of creating a group of the same name that can actually be
> > accessed by people.
>
> Acually checking for oneself would help avoid asking questions
> that make one look silly. Google reports ~175 messages dating
> back from at least 1997 and as recent as last week on the live
> newsgroup: news:alt.music.home-recording Use it in good health.
>

I am not denying that there is a group called alt.music.home-recording.
I invite anyone to post a quotation in which I did deny it. I had no
idea that the group existed in any form until someone pointed it out
today. When proposing the idea of creating a new group I said that
alt.music.home-studio would be my preference for a name.

alt.music.home-studio is not carried by most servers and it would be my
guess that it was never set up properly. No one has used it becuase, as
far as I can tell, the majority of people cannot access it.

Searching for posts to alt.music.home-studio using google and sorting by
date produces interesting results. I invite other interested parties to
do so, if they want to verify what I am saying.

None of the posts are primarily directed to alt.music.home studio. All
of the posts are crossposted to a list of groups of which
alt.music.home-studio is one. Of the 20 posts, I would judge only one
not to be reasonably on topic. Of those posts, only *one* is cross
posted to alt.music.4-track. I would sugest that this demonstrates that:
given a list of newsgroup names, only one in 19 people who would include
a group called alt.music.home-studio in the header of a message would
also include alt.music.4-track in the header.

Yes, there were 176 posts in all of google which mentioned
alt.music.home-studio in the header but (unless I overlooked one), of
those not one of them is exlusively posted to alt.music.home-studio.
BTW, I don't take this to mean that there is no interest at all in
matters regarding home studio.

You will also notice that, although all of the other other newsgroup
names in the list of crossposted newsgroups is clickable,
alt.music.home-studio is greyed out and cannot be clicked on.

--
***Please remove the word not from my email address to reply.
www.unmusic.co.uk

[Don Cooper]

John LeBlanc wrote:

> There really is no big process involved in newgrouping a Usenet alt group. The
> trick is getting all of the news server admins to add it. It ain't easy, believe
> me.


Also, the newer groups tend to fill up with spam, and the S/N is often unbearable.

A year or two ago, a bunch of people went to that recording web message
board thingy, because that was so cool. Then, many of them went to
another one. After reading all of these groups, R.A.P. is still the one
for me.


Don

[Rob Adelman]

Don Cooper wrote:

> A year or two ago, a bunch of people went to that recording web message
> board thingy, because that was so cool. Then, many of them went to
> another one. After reading all of these groups, R.A.P. is still the one
> for me.


The cool thing about r.a.p. is that it is self-moderating. Well, sort of
(l.o.l.)

[Don Cooper]

The question that remains for me, is what if you own a studio, but you
happen to live there, too? This was the case with the late Kevin
Gilbert. It was a great studio, but he slept on the couch.


Don

[Richard Crowley]

"Ian Bell" <wrote ...
> After much searching I finaly found this group. It is not
> known to Google, Google Groups or two out of the three
> ISPs I am subscribed to here in the UK (only UKLinux lists it).

I just looked it up in groups.google.com within the hour.
It found it instantly. Do you have some other Google?

> So I have now asked my main
> ISP, Tiscali, to add it to their news server.

There are thousands (10s of thousands?) of newsgroups
out there that your favorite news servers/ISPs don't carry.
No great mystery or obscure conspiracy there.

Now all you have to do is gen up some legitimate traffic
there so you can convince news admins to carry it. Good
luck. But at least you are much farther ahead than if you
had to create it in the first place.

Personally, I haven't seen any compelling arguments in
favor of it.

[Rick]

Brothermark wrote:

> We are talking about volume & nature of posts to RAP, not how many pro
> recorders have home studios.
>
> RAP has too much traffic so why not reserve RAP for strictly "pro" questions
> and have a new home for amateur recording questions?


Like this thread is way too long.


Rick

[Rick]

killermike wrote:

> I would like to propose the creation of a new newsgroup explicitly for
> the discusion of amateur/home studio recoring called alt.music.home-
> recording.


Go for it.


Rick

[Richard Crowley]

> > "killermike" wrote ...
> > > Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance
> > > of this group please? If no ISP carries it and even google
> > > doesn't list it, I would consider it not to exist in any practical
> > > way. If it does exist in some way, it might alter the process
> > > of creating a group of the same name that can actually be
> > > accessed by people.

> rcrowley wrote...
> > Acually checking for oneself would help avoid asking questions
> > that make one look silly. Google reports ~175 messages dating
> > back from at least 1997 and as recent as last week on the live
> > newsgroup: news:alt.music.home-recording Use it in good health.

"killermike" wrote ...
> I am not denying that there is a group called alt.music.home-recording.
> I invite anyone to post a quotation in which I did deny it.

"Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance
of this group please?" (from your immediately previous post!)

Took <20 seconds to confirm/deny its existence in Google,
even on my slow, dialup line.

> I had no idea that the group existed in any form until someone
> pointed it out today.

If we're lucky, we all learn something new every day.

> alt.music.home-studio is not carried by most servers and it
> would be my guess that it was never set up properly.

If it was "never set up properly" it wouldn't exist, wouldn't be
carred by ANY nntp servers, and Google wouldn't report 175
postings to it.

> No one has used it becuase, as far as I can tell, the
> majority of people cannot access it.

Chicken-and-egg time. More likely (judging by its longevity)
it was dropped by most news admins because of the low
and/or off-topic traffic. There are thousands of newsgroups
out there exactly like that.

> Searching for posts to alt.music.home-studio using google
> and sorting by date produces interesting results. I invite
> other interested parties to do so, if they want to verify what
> I am saying.

Your subsequent exposition of the traffic on a.m.h-r is a
texbook description of a newsgroup that somebody thought
would be a good idea. But it either never got off the ground,
or else it atrophied/devolved into the "trash newsgroup" you
see today. There are thousands of newsgroups out there
in exactly the same state.

So write a compelling draft charter that clearly differentiates
it from r.a.p and a.m.4-t and maybe you can gen up some
legitimate traffic over there. Good luck. I haven't seen any
compelling arguments yet, IMHO. YMMV TTYL Nanu-Nanu.

[Ian Bell]

Richard Crowley wrote:
> "Ian Bell" <wrote ...
>
>>After much searching I finaly found this group. It is not
>>known to Google, Google Groups or two out of the three
>>ISPs I am subscribed to here in the UK (only UKLinux lists it).
>
>
> I just looked it up in groups.google.com within the hour.
> It found it instantly. Do you have some other Google?

Quite possibly. I am in the Uk and many sites like google redirect you
to a local server based on your URL. I just tried it again to be
certian and got the same blank result.
>
>
>>So I have now asked my main
>>ISP, Tiscali, to add it to their news server.
>
>
> There are thousands (10s of thousands?) of newsgroups
> out there that your favorite news servers/ISPs don't carry.
> No great mystery or obscure conspiracy there.

Never suggested there was. Tiscali does not caryy sci.electronics.* for
example.

>
> Now all you have to do is gen up some legitimate traffic
> there so you can convince news admins to carry it. Good
> luck. But at least you are much farther ahead than if you
> had to create it in the first place.

That is indeed the acid test.

Ian

[Brothermark]

> You have paraphrased very well excellent examples of the type of
> questions often positied to RAPsters and answered therefrom.
>
> Were I to ask those in a group aimed at home recordists, and if that
> group didn't attract the likes of Harvery and many others here, would I
> expect to get answers of the dpeth and precision I mgiht receive if I
> asked in RAP?

That's not the point.
The point is that amateur home-recording people need a "home" within usenet.
They don't currently have one. they are immigrants, legal aliens if you like

mark

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Brothermar wrote:

> The point is that amateur home-recording people need a "home" within usenet.
> They don't currently have one. they are immigrants, legal aliens if you like

That's just ****in' pahtetic, dude, and has nothing at all to do with
sharing of information that leads to better recordings. Is the problem
that you do not have a _life_? Because that's something far different
than the line of jive used to start this thread. And there is already a
group for that:

alt.get.a.life

Check it out.

Other wise what you're suggsting is a crib where people who don't know
much about recording help each other cuddle while they continue making
mediocre recordings. If that's your goal then definitely RAP is the
wrong group for those kinds of puppies. And so is a.m.4-t, and so is
alt.music.home-recording.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Ian Bell > wrote:

> After much searching I finaly found this group. It is not known to
> Google, Google Groups or two out of the three ISPs I am subscribed to
> here in the UK (only UKLinux lists it). So I have now asked my main
> ISP, Tiscali, to add it to their news server.

Right on, Ian! I'm glad somebody clues. It's like the flag is already
sitting there waiting to be captured.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

x-no archive: yes

Don Cooper wrote:

> The question that remains for me, is what if you own a studio, but you
> happen to live there, too? This was the case with the late Kevin
> Gilbert. It was a great studio, but he slept on the couch.

Then I guess somebody's gonna need alt.music.couch-recording, too.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

killermike wrote:

> When proposing the idea of creating a new group I said that
> alt.music.home-studio would be my preference for a name.

I know dancers, potters, sculptors, painters, photographers, and weavers
who have home studios. Did you intend to cover those topics?

--
ha

[Brothermark]

> That's just ****in' pahtetic, dude,

I don't appreciate your tone.
Therefore you do not warrant a reply.

Check yourself "dude"

Mark

[Brothermark]

> One of your arguments for starting this thing is that no one is asking a
> question you're champing at the bit to answer? Maybe no one is asking
because no
> one is interested.

Uhm, I said no such thing. You've got the wrong guy.
Mark

[John LeBlanc]

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...
>
> > One of your arguments for starting this thing is that no one is asking a
> > question you're champing at the bit to answer? Maybe no one is asking
> because no
> > one is interested.
>
> Uhm, I said no such thing. You've got the wrong guy.


Really? Then who said this:

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...
>
> You don't even see some subjects. There's my answer. You might have liked to
> participate in that subject that you didn't even see.

[dt king]

"John LeBlanc" > wrote in message
...
>
> "LeBaron & Alrich" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > killermike wrote:
> >
> > > When proposing the idea of creating a new group I said that
> > > alt.music.home-studio would be my preference for a name.
> >
> > I know dancers, potters, sculptors, painters, photographers, and
weavers
> > who have home studios. Did you intend to cover those topics?
>
> Hey, this could turn out pretty good; my wife does custom computer
embroidery.

I guess if they somehow do it alt.music(ally) they'd be right on topic.

dtk

[Roger W. Norman]

Personally, I fail to see how the addition of this person's newsgroup would
affect any of us that didn't see any reason to join yet another group.
Conversely, I don't see how it could hurt any other group, as people here
are on tons of boards and newsgroups. In the old days, it was pretty much a
closed society, not so much because of lack of computer users but simply
because the internet didn't have the normal mode of access it does today.
Getting on to the web or usenet was virtually impossible from the mainstream
Compuserve or Biznet or even AOL. So the adjunct requirements for newsgroup
names meant something different to people with 28 k baud modems.

Since the requirements aren't really the same, the need is mostly to express
a desire for a new newsgroup to alt.config. Discussion isn't necessary one
way or the other.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.




"George Perfect" > wrote in message
.. .
> In this place, killermike was recorded as saying ...
> > Not at all. This thread was created to stimulate discussion about the
> > subject. Perhaps, we'll have to see how things stand by the end of the
> > week or so. Maybe longer if productive debate continues.
>
> Sheesh - how many people have to say 'boo' before you turn round?
>
> You kicked this idea off in am4t three months ago and took it nowhere.
> IIRC you got the same lukewarm reaction you are getting this time round.
>
> Now you've chosen to take up bandwidth in rap, just for good measure
> cross-posting to both the groups that fail - in some still unspecified
> way - to meet your expectations.
>
> > >
> > > Here's what I know: when someone gets it in their head to start a new
newsgroup,
> > > it's all but impossible to persuade him such a thing is not necessary,
whether
> > > it really is or not. Read alt.config for a while and notice how many
people went
> > > ahead and created a new group after being given countless valid
reasons why it
> > > is unneccessary.
>
> Read the above quoted paragraph.
>
> Then read it again. Maybe even do what is suggested.
>
> People who have already trodden the road you intend to tread are trying
> to give you good advice based on their experience.
>
> >
> > I think I have made good, reasoned arguments for the creation of the
> > group. I want to hear counter arguments, statements of agreement and
> > suggestions from people. Not everyone agrees with your point of view (or
> > mine).
>
> Each time somebody puts forward a reason for not starting a new group
> you recite "but, it's a good idea".
>
> You're obviously convinced so just get on and do it. Start your new
> group and invite everyone to join in. It's the only way you'll find your
> answer. Maybe it will become as popular and busy as rap - maybe you'll
> get less traffic than am4t. Maybe you'll get people to answer the
> questions you don't want to post in either of the existing groups. Maybe
> you won't.
>
> Nobody's preventing you starting a new group. Nobody has objected to
> your choice of name. Nobody is likely to object if you post the
> occasional poilte announcement in rap and am4t advertising the new
> group.
>
> You say you are willing to do all the work yourself so ... go to it!
>
> >
> > Because if the group is created I want it to reflect the opinions and
> > needs of of the people who are going to use it. I want to create
> > something on the basis of justification and utility.
>
> But you've already put forward your case to justify the new group.
> You've had some modest support and some old farts like me who are happy
> the way things are.
>
> If you still can't make your mind up whether to do it, flip a coin.
>
> >
> > I am happy to do the 'work' involved. Although, as I indicated before,
> > there isn't really much 'work' involved in the process assuming that a
> > carefully considered and reasoned proposal is presented to alt.config.
> > Then, if things go smoothly, all that has to be done is the control
> > message possibly followed by some booster messages. If their is still
> > work to be done beyond that point and the thing is still worth pursuing,
> > I'm volunteering for that too.
>
> If you would just listen for a second, you might hear the good folks who
> have been there and done that telling you it ain't that easy.
>
> >
> > > Just issue the newgroup control message already. The sooner you do
that, the
> >
> > No. I want the group to be useful and to used.
>
> The very best of luck. Genuinely.
>
> >
> > > more time you'll have to pester and beg news admins to add your new
group, and
> > > for sending booster messages until the cows come home.
>
> Now .. can we please get back to discussing something that might be
> relevant to either am4t or rap?
>
> Please?
>
>
> --
> George >{ò¿ó}<
>
> Newcastle, England
> (please remove leading 'x' from email address to reply, thanks)
>
> Problems worthy of attack
> Prove their worth, by hitting back - Piet Hein

[LeBaron & Alrich]

John LeBlanc wrote:

> Hey, this could turn out pretty good; my wife does custom computer embroidery.

Wow, I'll bet even Scott Dorsey has never seen an emroidered computer!

--
ha

[John LeBlanc]

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...

> I don't appreciate your tone.

Sheesh, everyone's a critic these days. Since this is rec.audio.pro, what, in
your professional opinion, would you suggest he do to improve his tone?

John

[LeBaron & Alrich]

John LeBlanc wrote:

> "Brothermark" wrote:

> > I don't appreciate your tone.

> Sheesh, everyone's a critic these days. Since this is rec.audio.pro, what, in
> your professional opinion, would you suggest he do to improve his tone?

Yeah, I thought I had the tube thing right in there pretty solid like.

--
ha

[Ben Bradley]

In rec.audio.pro, (LeBaron & Alrich) wrote:

>killermike wrote:
>
>> When proposing the idea of creating a new group I said that
>> alt.music.home-studio would be my preference for a name.
>
>I know dancers, potters, sculptors, painters, photographers, and weavers
>who have home studios. Did you intend to cover those topics?

If they can find shelf/wall space to compete with the lava lamp in
a home studio for recording music, more power to them.

>--
>ha

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

[killermike]

In article >,
says...
> Richard Crowley wrote:
> > "killermike" wrote ...
> >
> >>Can you provide any examples to demontrate the existance
> >>of this group please? If no ISP carries it and even google
> >>doesn't list it, I would consider it not to exist in any practical
> >>way. If it does exist in some way, it might alter the process
> >>of creating a group of the same name that can actually be
> >>accessed by people.
> >
> >
> > Acually checking for oneself would help avoid asking questions
> > that make one look silly. Google reports ~175 messages dating
> > back from at least 1997 and as recent as last week on the live
> > newsgroup: news:alt.music.home-recording Use it in good health.
> >
> >
>
>
> After much searching I finaly found this group. It is not known to
> Google, Google Groups or two out of the three ISPs I am subscribed to
> here in the UK (only UKLinux lists it). So I have now asked my main
> ISP, Tiscali, to add it to their news server.

Great. This might prove to be a valuable shortcut.

> Ian
>
>

--
***Please remove the word not from my email address to reply.
www.unmusic.co.uk

[Willie K.Yee, M.D.]

Time for me to weigh in.

I think the main effect of a new group is that it will make it easier
for newbies to find it. The 4-track designation make the uninitiated
think that that is what it is about, so they may overlook the group
when their question is about 8-tracks or digital. The new group would

1.save us the trouble of constantly explaining am4t.

2. probably attract more folk who were looking for help or flame
victims.

3. divert some traffic from RAP.

And that's about it. A minor improvement IMHO. Worth the effort? Not
mine, but I'll support it once the petition starts circulating.

In the end, like a trade name, it is all a marketing matter. And these
days, marketing makes reality.

--
Willie K. Yee, M.D. http://www.bestweb.net/~wkyee
Developer of Problem Knowledge Couplers for Psychiatry http://www.pkc.com
Webmaster and Guitarist for the Big Blue Big Band http://www.bigbluebigband.org

[David Lemire]

"Brothermark" > wrote in
:


> No need to retire the 4-track group. It is still relevent because
> 4-tracks are still in use by many musicians.

Yes and no. The technology is still in use, but I think the point would be
to consolidate the "amateur" home recording crowd to a single newsgroup,
not distribute them across several.

Dave L

[Brothermark]

> > > One of your arguments for starting this thing is that no one is asking
a
> > > question you're champing at the bit to answer? Maybe no one is asking
> > because no
> > > one is interested.

> > Uhm, I said no such thing. You've got the wrong guy.

> Really? Then who said this:

> > You don't even see some subjects. There's my answer. You might have
liked to
> > participate in that subject that you didn't even see.

Yes *that* was me but you said "one of my arguments for starting this thing
is that no-one is asking a question you're champing at the bit to answer"
That is not me. Again, you've got the wrong guy
mark

[Jim Simon]

That sounds like a great idea.

Jim


>
> "This newsgroup exists for the discussion of issues and topics related
> to professional audio engineering. We generally do not discuss issues
> relating to home audio reproduction, though they do occasionally come
> up. The rec.audio.* hierarchy of newsgroups is as follows:"
>
>
> The current situation
> I would estimate that around 1/4 of the traffic in rec.audio.pro is
> actually off-topic because it is concerned with amateur or home studio
> based recording. rec.audio.pro gets a large amount of traffic (sometimes
> hitting five hundred messages a day).
>
> Some people have suggested that alt.music-4-track could be used for the
> discussion of these topics but unfortunately the name is confusing, no
> longer appropriate and consequently, very few people use the group.
> alt.music.4-track often gets around five messages per day. This means
> that a query posted to alt.music.4-track might only produce a small
> handful of responses from the regulars of that group whereas
> rec.audio.pro is actually difficult to read due to the huge amount of
> traffic.
>
> Numerical justification
> It is difficult to provide numerical justification in the accepted way
> in this case due to the nature of the subject. There are not many
> keywords or phrases that can be searched for to provide proof as people
> interested in the subject are apt to discuss topics as diverse (but in
> keeping with subject of home recording) as DIY room modifications,
> computer software, instrument recording, electronics projects,
> mastering, mixing desks, synthesisers, etc so you can't really search
> for it in google.
>
> Lifetime
> Interest in this subject is probably at an all time high due to recent
> technological advancements in the field of computer technology. I
> propose that the name alt.music.home-studio is descriptive and to a
> large extent, future-proof.

[killermike]

In article >,
says...
> That sounds like a great idea.

Thanks for the encouragement :-)

> Jim
>
>
> >
> > "This newsgroup exists for the discussion of issues and topics related
> > to professional audio engineering. We generally do not discuss issues
> > relating to home audio reproduction, though they do occasionally come
> > up. The rec.audio.* hierarchy of newsgroups is as follows:"
> >
> >
> > The current situation
> > I would estimate that around 1/4 of the traffic in rec.audio.pro is
> > actually off-topic because it is concerned with amateur or home studio
> > based recording. rec.audio.pro gets a large amount of traffic (sometimes
> > hitting five hundred messages a day).
> >
> > Some people have suggested that alt.music-4-track could be used for the
> > discussion of these topics but unfortunately the name is confusing, no
> > longer appropriate and consequently, very few people use the group.
> > alt.music.4-track often gets around five messages per day. This means
> > that a query posted to alt.music.4-track might only produce a small
> > handful of responses from the regulars of that group whereas
> > rec.audio.pro is actually difficult to read due to the huge amount of
> > traffic.
> >
> > Numerical justification
> > It is difficult to provide numerical justification in the accepted way
> > in this case due to the nature of the subject. There are not many
> > keywords or phrases that can be searched for to provide proof as people
> > interested in the subject are apt to discuss topics as diverse (but in
> > keeping with subject of home recording) as DIY room modifications,
> > computer software, instrument recording, electronics projects,
> > mastering, mixing desks, synthesisers, etc so you can't really search
> > for it in google.
> >
> > Lifetime
> > Interest in this subject is probably at an all time high due to recent
> > technological advancements in the field of computer technology. I
> > propose that the name alt.music.home-studio is descriptive and to a
> > large extent, future-proof.
>

--
***Please remove the word not from my email address to reply.
www.unmusic.co.uk

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Brothermark wrote:

> quit cussing. that should do it

With dick being a slang term for cop, now you're a Usenet dick, eh?

How's that a.m.h-s action coming along? You sent out your emails to the
admins yet?

--
ha

[Brothermark]

> > quit cussing. that should do it
>
> With dick being a slang term for cop, now you're a Usenet dick, eh?

My how clever you are.
Isn't it past your bedtime?

[Yuri T.]

my $.02

Between the usenet groups and other website forums like recording.org,
musicplayer, psw, etc. etc. etc. there are more than enough sites for
the info you're looking for. At this point we've reached saturation
and increasing bandwidth won't get us more gain.

[John LeBlanc]

"Brothermark" > wrote in message
...
>
> > > quit cussing. that should do it
> >
> > With dick being a slang term for cop, now you're a Usenet dick, eh?
>
> My how clever you are.
> Isn't it past your bedtime?

At our age, any time gets to be bedtime. So that's not really saying much.

John

[BC]

In article >,
says...
> Time for me to weigh in.
>
> I think the main effect of a new group is that it will make it easier
> for newbies to find it. The 4-track designation make the uninitiated
> think that that is what it is about, so they may overlook the group
> when their question is about 8-tracks or digital. The new group would
>
> 1.save us the trouble of constantly explaining am4t.
>
> 2. probably attract more folk who were looking for help or flame
> victims.
>
> 3. divert some traffic from RAP.
>
> And that's about it. A minor improvement IMHO. Worth the effort? Not
> mine, but I'll support it once the petition starts circulating.
>
> In the end, like a trade name, it is all a marketing matter. And these
> days, marketing makes reality.

My opinion has changed for exactly these reasons.

Enough new folks have come into the "Home Recording" world that they
probably see "alt.music.4-track" and skip over it.

I wish half the home-recording discussion traffic that has been
splintered and siphoned off to the myriad web-based discussion groups
could be directed back to A.M.4T

Call me a luddite but I far prefer usenet over *any* web-based forum
I've come across.

[John LeBlanc]

"BC" > wrote in message
.. .

> Enough new folks have come into the "Home Recording" world that they
> probably see "alt.music.4-track" and skip over it.

But what you may not be taking into consideration is that most people hitting
the Internet these days think "the web" and "the Internet" are the same thing,
even though they are not.

It seems to me someone capable of finding Usenet is capable of a bit more depth
in finding out which Usenet group is appropriate to their interest. On the other
hand, people who think "the web" is the Internet, will easily find all sorts of
websites that deal specifically with their level of interest.

I don't think the name of a Usenet group is all that much of a problem for the
people who capable of figuring out how to get to Usenet.


> Call me a luddite but I far prefer usenet over *any* web-based forum
> I've come across.

So do I. But that's much the same as viewing survey results. What you've found
out is not what your average Joe thinks; it's what your average survey taker
thinks.

John

[Don Cooper]

John LeBlanc wrote:

> Sheesh, everyone's a critic these days. Since this is rec.audio.pro, what, in
> your professional opinion, would you suggest he do to improve his tone?

+2 at about 7.5k


Don

[Ben Bradley]

In rec.audio.pro, Don Cooper > wrote:

>
>
>John LeBlanc wrote:
>
>> Sheesh, everyone's a critic these days. Since this is rec.audio.pro, what, in
>> your professional opinion, would you suggest he do to improve his tone?
>
>+2 at about 7.5k

OUCH! Try cutting instead of boosting. Hank has been screeching way
too much in this thread.

>
>
>Don

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

[LeBaron & Alrich]

x-no archive: yes

Brothermark, lonely and needing a newsgroup, wrote:

> Isn't it past your bedtime?

Got those emails out to the news admins yet, or still sitting on your
neck? Go for the other group, guy; it's calling out to you, but you're
still wasting time here.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

BC wrote:

> Call me a luddite but I far prefer usenet over *any* web-based forum
> I've come across.

I do, too, you Luddite. <g>

--
ha

[killermike]

In article >,
says...

> I wish half the home-recording discussion traffic that has been
> splintered and siphoned off to the myriad web-based discussion groups
> could be directed back to A.M.4T
>
> Call me a luddite but I far prefer usenet over *any* web-based forum
> I've come across.

Yeah. I much prefer usenet to web based forums. Admittedly this is
partially due to the fact that I have a dial up account :-)

--
***Please remove the word not from my email address to reply.
www.unmusic.co.uk

[Brothermark]

> x-no archive: yes

:) lol, rofl. What are you?

[LeBaron & Alrich]

x-no archive: yes


> :) lol, rofl. What are you?


Posting to a.m.h-r, along with Ian Bell and Ben Bradley, so far.

And you?

--
ha

[Don Cooper]

Ben Bradley wrote:

> OUCH! Try cutting instead of boosting. Hank has been screeching way
> too much in this thread.


Actually, a Q-Tip accomplished the same thing.

No, I've been enjoying reading LeBaron and Alrich. Both of 'em.


Don