How Loud is Loud?

[JackA]

A question with no real answer!!

I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed, enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software aids in "loudness wars" detection.

Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say, let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that stereo was/is impressive!!

I try to add some stereo thrills, especially to Paul McCartney (& Wings) songs. Even reviews of his CDs still mentions songs like, "Jet" still sounds ill. I have fun mixing these, because, every so often something unusual appears, like the ending of this cool song! Hit it, maestro!...

http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/helenwheels.mp3

Jack

[geoff]

On 9/03/2015 1:28 p.m., JackA wrote:

> Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a
> slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say,
> let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that
> stereo was/is impressive!!

Um - those are the exact ones you are moaning about everywhere else.

geoff

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"geoff" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> On 9/03/2015 1:28 p.m., JackA wrote:

>> Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a
>> slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say,
>> let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that
>> stereo was/is impressive!!

> Um - those are the exact ones you are moaning about everywhere else.

Henrik Steen Nielsen, roadie for Alrune Rod, taught me two simple things
about mixing and mixer operation for rock music around 1975:

1) it is all about the center

2) statics to the left and movables to the right

> geoff

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[polymod]

"Peter Larsen" wrote in message
eb.com...

"geoff" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> On 9/03/2015 1:28 p.m., JackA wrote:

>> Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a
>> slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say,
>> let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that
>> stereo was/is impressive!!

> Um - those are the exact ones you are moaning about everywhere else.

Henrik Steen Nielsen, roadie for Alrune Rod, taught me two simple things
about mixing and mixer operation for rock music around 1975:

1) it is all about the center

2) statics to the left and movables to the right
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes.....
Clowns to left of me, jokers to the right. Here I am, stuck in the middle
with you.

Poly

[JackA]

On Sunday, March 8, 2015 at 8:28:38 PM UTC-4, JackA wrote:
> A question with no real answer!!
>
> I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed, enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software aids in "loudness wars" detection.
>
> Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say, let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that stereo was/is impressive!!
>
> I try to add some stereo thrills, especially to Paul McCartney (& Wings) songs. Even reviews of his CDs still mentions songs like, "Jet" still sounds ill. I have fun mixing these, because, every so often something unusual appears, like the ending of this cool song! Hit it, maestro!...
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/helenwheels.mp3

That is too intense; too much bass and drums. This is toned down...
http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/helenwheels1.mp3

One thing I really like about Audacity is that you can save a [mixing] project and when reopened, it's right where you left it (settings)!!!

Jack
>
> Jack

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
JackA > wrote:
> I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed,
> enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because
> there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software
> aids in "loudness wars" detection.

Odd. All of my sounds systems have a control to set the 'loudness'.

Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?

--
*When chemists die, they barium.*

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

[JackA]

On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 6:50:55 AM UTC-4, polymod wrote:
> "Peter Larsen" wrote in message
> eb.com...
>
> "geoff" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
>
> > On 9/03/2015 1:28 p.m., JackA wrote:
>
> >> Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a
> >> slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say,
> >> let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that
> >> stereo was/is impressive!!
>
> > Um - those are the exact ones you are moaning about everywhere else.
>
> Henrik Steen Nielsen, roadie for Alrune Rod, taught me two simple things
> about mixing and mixer operation for rock music around 1975:
>
> 1) it is all about the center
>
> 2) statics to the left and movables to the right
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> Yes.....
> Clowns to left of me, jokers to the right. Here I am, stuck in the middle
> with you.

That song is a stereo joke. Really, clapping in one stereo channel!
Must have overdubbed a lot.
But, what am I saying, radio still plays THAT song!

Jack
>
> Poly

[JackA]

On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 5:38:55 AM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
> "geoff" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
>
> > On 9/03/2015 1:28 p.m., JackA wrote:
>
> >> Anyway, I still have a gripe with (Popular) music recorded with a
> >> slew of recording tracks, and I hear near monophonic mixes! I say,
> >> let's return to the days of three tape track days, at least that
> >> stereo was/is impressive!!
>
> > Um - those are the exact ones you are moaning about everywhere else.
>
> Henrik Steen Nielsen, roadie for Alrune Rod, taught me two simple things
> about mixing and mixer operation for rock music around 1975:
>
> 1) it is all about the center
>
> 2) statics to the left and movables to the right

I guess it all has to do with pride.

Jack

>
> > geoff
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

David Plowman (News) wrote: "Odd. All of my sounds systems have a control to set the 'loudness'.

Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?

--
*When chemists die, they barium.* "

If you are referring to the volume control, that still
won't fix a dynamically giga-compresssed hyper-
limited makeup-gained sausage-shaped piece of
TURD. Whether you turn it up or down it's still a
TURD.

[JackA]

On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 7:12:44 AM UTC-4, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> In article >,
> JackA > wrote:
> > I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed,
> > enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because
> > there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software
> > aids in "loudness wars" detection.
>
> Odd. All of my sounds systems have a control to set the 'loudness'.
>
> Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?

That's a different type of Loudness, alters frequencies at lower volumes. Generally, the volume control has a tap on it where Loudness begins to vary.

Jack


>
> --
> *When chemists die, they barium.*
>
> Dave Plowman London SW
> To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[John Williamson]

On 09/03/2015 12:15, JackA wrote:
> On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 7:12:44 AM UTC-4, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
>> In article >,
>> JackA > wrote:
>>> I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed,
>>> enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because
>>> there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software
>>> aids in "loudness wars" detection.
>>
>> Odd. All of my sounds systems have a control to set the 'loudness'.
>>
>> Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?
>
> That's a different type of Loudness, alters frequencies at lower volumes. Generally, the volume control has a tap on it where Loudness begins to vary.
>
If it's done right, it introduces a slight "smile" EQ at low volume
settings. Some of the better amplifiers used to have a volume control to
set the maximum listening level, and a loudness control with a
continuously variable EQ attached for setting the listening level, while
applying the appropriate EQ for the volume.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
> wrote:
> David Plowman (News) wrote: "Odd. All of my sounds systems have a
> control to set the 'loudness'.

> Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?

Perhaps you need to understand the use of parenthesis?

--
*Husband and cat lost -- reward for cat

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

[JackA]

On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 10:02:10 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> On 09/03/2015 12:15, JackA wrote:
> > On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 7:12:44 AM UTC-4, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> >> In article >,
> >> JackA > wrote:
> >>> I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed,
> >>> enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because
> >>> there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software
> >>> aids in "loudness wars" detection.
> >>
> >> Odd. All of my sounds systems have a control to set the 'loudness'.
> >>
> >> Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?
> >
> > That's a different type of Loudness, alters frequencies at lower volumes. Generally, the volume control has a tap on it where Loudness begins to vary.
> >
> If it's done right, it introduces a slight "smile" EQ at low volume
> settings. Some of the better amplifiers used to have a volume control to
> set the maximum listening level, and a loudness control with a
> continuously variable EQ attached for setting the listening level, while
> applying the appropriate EQ for the volume.
>
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!
>
> John.

[JackA]

On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 10:02:10 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> On 09/03/2015 12:15, JackA wrote:
> > On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 7:12:44 AM UTC-4, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> >> In article >,
> >> JackA > wrote:
> >>> I think we all agree music has always been tampered with, compressed,
> >>> enhanced, you name it! Today, it's probably louder than ever, because
> >>> there is greater control over sound with audio software. Audio software
> >>> aids in "loudness wars" detection.
> >>
> >> Odd. All of my sounds systems have a control to set the 'loudness'.
> >>
> >> Perhaps you need to read the instructions for yours?
> >
> > That's a different type of Loudness, alters frequencies at lower volumes. Generally, the volume control has a tap on it where Loudness begins to vary.
> >
> If it's done right, it introduces a slight "smile" EQ at low volume
> settings. Some of the better amplifiers used to have a volume control to
> set the maximum listening level, and a loudness control with a
> continuously variable EQ attached for setting the listening level, while
> applying the appropriate EQ for the volume.

Indeed. Has to do with these curves....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson%E2%80%93Dadson_curves

Hmm, a dip at 3kHz.

Jack


>
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!
>
> John.

[John Williamson]

On 09/03/2015 14:43, JackA wrote:
> On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 10:02:10 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
>> If it's done right, it introduces a slight "smile" EQ at low volume
>> settings. Some of the better amplifiers used to have a volume control to
>> set the maximum listening level, and a loudness control with a
>> continuously variable EQ attached for setting the listening level, while
>> applying the appropriate EQ for the volume.
>
> Indeed. Has to do with these curves....
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson%E2%80%93Dadson_curves
>
> Hmm, a dip at 3kHz.
>
I learnt it as Fletcher-Munson, and it's not just a simple 3kHz dip.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher–Munson_curves

They're normally held to be more accurate than the Robinson-Dadson
curves, and are closer to the current ISO standard.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[None]

< thedum****retches @ gmail.com> wrote in message
...
> If you are referring to the volume control, that still
> won't fix a dynamically giga-compresssed hyper-
> limited makeup-gained sausage-shaped piece of
> TURD. Whether you turn it up or down it's still a
> TURD.

What is it with you and sausages? Do you like gladiator movies? Have
you ever been in a Turkish prison? Or is it just sausage-shaped turds
that fascinate you?

[[email protected]]

6:03 PMJeff Henig wrote
"- show quoted text -
Hahah! Nice.

--
---Jeff "

Don't encourage him, Jeff! Or else you will be considered no
better than him.

[JackA]

On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 12:15:19 PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> On 09/03/2015 14:43, JackA wrote:
> > On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 10:02:10 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> >> If it's done right, it introduces a slight "smile" EQ at low volume
> >> settings. Some of the better amplifiers used to have a volume control to
> >> set the maximum listening level, and a loudness control with a
> >> continuously variable EQ attached for setting the listening level, while
> >> applying the appropriate EQ for the volume.
> >
> > Indeed. Has to do with these curves....
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson%E2%80%93Dadson_curves
> >
> > Hmm, a dip at 3kHz.
> >
> I learnt it as Fletcher-Munson, and it's not just a simple 3kHz dip.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher-Munson_curves
>
> They're normally held to be more accurate than the Robinson-Dadson
> curves, and are closer to the current ISO standard.

Thanks, John. Many here make fun of me since I found 3kHz unusual when enhancing audio. WinAmp has a 3kHz band on its equalizer. Maybe a couple years wondering why 3kHz was valued by me, I found a video by an audio expert (criticizing Pono) and it was there where he said human hearing is most sensitive 2kHz-4kHz. I was right in the middle!

Jack

>
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!
>
> John.

[[email protected]]

5:30 AMJeff Henig wrote:
> wrote:
> 6:03 PMJeff Henig wrote
> "- show quoted text -
> Hahah! Nice.


Your father was a hamster, and your mother reeks of elderberries.
--
---Jeff "


Don't make insulting statements about the deceased, you low-life
piece of SCUM.

[John Williamson]

On 10/03/2015 02:21, JackA wrote:

> Thanks, John. Many here make fun of me since I found 3kHz unusual when enhancing audio. WinAmp has a 3kHz band on its equalizer. Maybe a couple years wondering why 3kHz was valued by me, I found a video by an audio expert (criticizing Pono) and it was there where he said human hearing is most sensitive 2kHz-4kHz. I was right in the middle!
>
The important thing with the loudness control is to know that the ear's
frequency response varies with volume. Just boosting the hell out of
everything at 3kHz is a good recipe for a bad sounding mix, which will
make you feel as if your eardrums are being shredded after a short time.

Of course, if your headphones have a dip at 3kHz, then you'll naturally
boost it too much.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[[email protected]]

12:19 AMJeff Henig
> wrote:


So sez duh troll. LOL


--
---Jeff "

As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
drag your parents(dead or living) into it.

And as far as "trolls" go, there seems to be a general
concensus on R.A.P that anyone with a dissenting or
alternate point of view is one. How f__ing good ol' boys
clubby is that?!

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

>
>As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
>drag your parents(dead or living) into it.

For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.

d

[Scott Dorsey]

> wrote:
>
>And as far as "trolls" go, there seems to be a general
>concensus on R.A.P that anyone with a dissenting or
>alternate point of view is one. How f__ing good ol' boys
>clubby is that?!

Lots of people here have dissenting or alternate views. That's fine.
People don't always agree.

Trolling is the process of deliberately promoting those views (often by
people who don't actually hold them) specifically in an attempt to create
a flame war. That is, for the troll, the flame war is the point, the views
are not and often a trolling person will claim to hold views he does not
actually believe in, specifically to create dissention.

Now... you don't actually fit this model at all, really. Most people here
actually agree with you on the whole about loudness, they just wish you
could talk about something else and stop bringing the subject up every day.
Because there are so many other interesting things in this world.

Jack Agnew, on the other hand, does fit this model very well... he comes
into the newsgroup with guns blaring, in nearly his first post talking
about how anybody can mix and how we don't actually need skilled engineers.
Which, in a group of engineers, is pretty much calculated to create flames.

In both cases, though, you guys are here just to promote one idea and not
engage in normal social activity, though.
--scott

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

[[email protected]]

Don Pearce wrote:
"On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

>
>As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
>drag your parents(dead or living) into it.

For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.

d "


I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
quote from every major film of that franchise.


In the context of the recent interchange between myself and Henig, the
specific quote used would have been better left unused.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
> wrote:
> I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
> quote from every major film of that franchise.

Python was a UK TV series. The films merely a spin off. And in general,
not so good.

--
*Bigamy is having one wife too many - monogamy is the same

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

[hank alrich]

Don Pearce > wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
> >
> >As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
> >drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
>
> For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
> by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
>
> d

Apparently a few of the lumberjacks are not okay, after all.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:55:05 -0500, (hank alrich)
wrote:

>Don Pearce > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
>> >drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
>>
>> For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
>> by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
>>
>> d
>
>Apparently a few of the lumberjacks are not okay, after all.

Maybe he puts on ladies' clothing, panties and a bra.

Could have been sailing a little too close to home.

d

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 3/11/2015 11:58 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:55:05 -0500, (hank alrich)
> wrote:
>
>> Don Pearce > wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
>>>> drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
>>>
>>> For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
>>> by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
>>>
>>> d
>>
>> Apparently a few of the lumberjacks are not okay, after all.
>
> Maybe he puts on ladies' clothing, panties and a bra.

[ "… not that there's anything wrong with that" -- Seinfeld ]
>
> Could have been sailing a little too close to home.
>
> d
>

8-)
==
Later...
Ron C
--

[JackA]

On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 9:54:12 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> Don Pearce wrote:
> "On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
> >
> >As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
> >drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
>
> For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
> by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
>
> d "
>
>
> I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
> quote from every major film of that franchise.
>
>
> In the context of the recent interchange between myself and Henig, the
> specific quote used would have been better left unused.

I used to like Benny Hill! At least the UK had someone with comedy talent!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJC4HvpWewM

Funny!!

Jack

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:00:59 -0700 (PDT), JackA
> wrote:

>On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 9:54:12 AM UTC-4, wrote:
>> Don Pearce wrote:
>> "On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
>> >drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
>>
>> For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
>> by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
>>
>> d "
>>
>>
>> I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
>> quote from every major film of that franchise.
>>
>>
>> In the context of the recent interchange between myself and Henig, the
>> specific quote used would have been better left unused.
>
>I used to like Benny Hill! At least the UK had someone with comedy talent!!
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJC4HvpWewM
>
>Funny!!
>
>Jack

Good grief. The man was an embarrassment here in the UK. Lowest of the
low comedy-wise.

d

[JackA]

On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 4:40:13 PM UTC-4, Don Pearce wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:00:59 -0700 (PDT), JackA
> > wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 9:54:12 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> >> Don Pearce wrote:
> >> "On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
> >> >drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
> >>
> >> For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
> >> by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
> >>
> >> d "
> >>
> >>
> >> I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
> >> quote from every major film of that franchise.
> >>
> >>
> >> In the context of the recent interchange between myself and Henig, the
> >> specific quote used would have been better left unused.
> >
> >I used to like Benny Hill! At least the UK had someone with comedy talent!!
> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJC4HvpWewM
> >
> >Funny!!
> >
> >Jack
>
> Good grief. The man was an embarrassment here in the UK. Lowest of the
> low comedy-wise.

I understand your boy George Martin started out in comedy! But, really, the UK follows the US. The blind leading the blind!!!

Jack
>
> d

[None]

> wrote in message
...
> And as far as "trolls" go, there seems to be a general
> concensus on R.A.P that anyone with a dissenting or
> alternate point of view is one. How f__ing good ol' boys
> clubby is that?!

Apparently, it doesn't matter how many times it's explained to you,
you're just too much of a dumb**** for it to ever sink in. Haven't you
noticed that no matter where you go, you're always a dumb****? And you
keep pretending it's everyone else's fault. Do you have your name
tattoed on your hand, so you can remember who the **** you are?

[hank alrich]

Jeff Henig > wrote:

> > wrote:
> > Don Pearce wrote:
> > "On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 06:15:25 -0700 (PDT),
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> As low as you have sunk in my eyes Jeff, I would NEVER
> >> drag your parents(dead or living) into it.
> >
> > For goodness sake he was doing no such thing. Monty Python quotes are
> > by now a part of the vernacular of jest, not statements of fact.
> >
> > d "
> >
> >
> > I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
> > quote from every major film of that franchise.
> >
> >
> > In the context of the recent interchange between myself and Henig, the
> > specific quote used would have been better left unused.
>
> So would yo...
>
> Nah. Not gonna' go there.
>
> STAHP tempting me.

Perhpas you do not realize how very sensitive are hamsters. They are far
more than just a miniscule, caged, power source!

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Luxey]

To me, looks more like that (not)dead parrot.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
JackA > wrote:
> > I also am a huge Python fan, but I don't know every single memorable
> > quote from every major film of that franchise.
> >
> >
> > In the context of the recent interchange between myself and Henig, the
> > specific quote used would have been better left unused.

> I used to like Benny Hill! At least the UK had someone with comedy
> talent!!

That you mention Hill in the same post as Python says much about you.

--
*I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

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