rec.audio.tech

[Randy Yates[_2_]]

Hey People,

What's up with rec.audio.tech? There hasn't been a new post there in 9
days! It used to be a nice, active group...
--
Randy Yates
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[[email protected]]

Randy Yates:

It's called Facebook, and ****ter- I mean TWITter. ;)

[Randy Yates[_2_]]

writes:

> Randy Yates:
>
> It's called Facebook, and ****ter- I mean TWITter. ;)

Well why hasn't the same thing happened here?
--
Randy Yates
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 4:37:15 PM UTC-4, Randy Yates wrote:
> writes:
>
> > Randy Yates:
> >
> > It's called Facebook, and ****ter- I mean TWITter. ;)
>
> Well why hasn't the same thing happened here?
> --
> Randy Yates
> Digital Signal Labs
> http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

comp.dsp is also quiet as are a lot of other good groups
this group is somewhat active but not for a good reason
sorry to see it
what can be done?

Mark

[JackA]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 4:16:27 PM UTC-4, Randy Yates wrote:
> Hey People,
>
> What's up with rec.audio.tech? There hasn't been a new post there in 9
> days! It used to be a nice, active group...
> --
> Randy Yates
> Digital Signal Labs
> http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

Nothing new, usenet has been dying. Easynews feared what was going on in the internet as far as file sharing. One owner, maybe both, sold Easynews (News Provider). Godzilla (nickname) was one of the owners.

What turns people off, like here, foul language and fighting.

Jack

[JackA]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 4:30:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Randy Yates:
>
> It's called Facebook, and ****ter- I mean TWITter. ;)

Can't say that; usenet was once a source for apps (programs) and music (MP3s) as well as photos (JPGs), even operating systems.

When I visited both Lite Records and Audioholics forum, you couldn't gain access to the interesting "stuff", you had to PAY$$ or earn points by sharing (I couldn't even post a link example). Actually, at Lite Records, if you post some audio work, that gives them to "rights" to use it, I guess for $$$.

Jack

[[email protected]]

JackA:

Regarding YouTube - Google, since acquiring it a decade
or so ago, is making strides to put the YOU back in
YouTube. You can tell what they're doing by how much
copyrighted material is increasingly "not authorized" for
playback on mobile devices - which 80% of people
nowadays view YT and Vimeo on. smh!

They want a YT that is mostly of home-generated and
personal video content, and eventually no more uploads
of TV episodes, movies, broadcast sports, or music
videos. Mom unclogging toidy after junior jammed rubber
ducky down it? Fine! The lastest Pharrell Williams
video? DENIED(Unless Pharell himself uploads it).

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 1:37:15 PM UTC-7, Randy Yates wrote:
> writes:
>
> > Randy Yates:
> >
> > It's called Facebook, and ****ter- I mean TWITter. ;)
>
> Well why hasn't the same thing happened here?

I think what's different here is regular contributors like Scott, Mike, Hank and many others.

They keep the signal to noise ratio pretty high and make it an interesting group to hang out.

Gary V

[JackA]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 7:26:16 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> JackA:
>
> Regarding YouTube - Google, since acquiring it a decade
> or so ago, is making strides to put the YOU back in
> YouTube. You can tell what they're doing by how much
> copyrighted material is increasingly "not authorized" for
> playback on mobile devices - which 80% of people
> nowadays view YT and Vimeo on. smh!
>
> They want a YT that is mostly of home-generated and
> personal video content, and eventually no more uploads
> of TV episodes, movies, broadcast sports, or music
> videos. Mom unclogging toidy after junior jammed rubber
> ducky down it? Fine! The lastest Pharrell Williams
> video? DENIED(Unless Pharell himself uploads it).

As one person who was into "trading" music told me record companies don't care about this music, since it's so dated. While I didn't agree at first, it is actually true. I see CDs released that would have sold decades earlier, but, now, little interest in them. Was it Van Halen, but an entire album is posted to YouTube; that is common.

Also, outside the USA, US copyrights expire after 50 years. I'm actually glad they do, because as a collector of odd material, I'd probably never hear Buddy Holly on the phone with Decca Records pleading to them to release his material, and as Buddy was told, he couldn't record it for x number of years or else. But, that didn't stop Buddy, he recorded it for Brunswick. What was Decca going to do, sue themselves, since they owned Brunswick? Sorry, getting carried away.

You heard about this, or maybe what you're referring to...

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/03/17/robin-thicke-pharrell-williams-and-a-blurry-copyright-law

Look at DJs, so many times I'd find them (internet) SELLING their (music) radio shows.

Who owns what these days, it's tough to tell! :-)

But, really, with my new tablet, I went search for free streaming movies, I found some, not real old. BUT, who paid for them to be "free"? In the case I saw, it was Toyota, but you had to sit through their only commercials.

Jack

[JackA]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:07:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 1:37:15 PM UTC-7, Randy Yates wrote:
> > writes:
> >
> > > Randy Yates:
> > >
> > > It's called Facebook, and ****ter- I mean TWITter. ;)
> >
> > Well why hasn't the same thing happened here?
>
> I think what's different here is regular contributors like Scott, Mike, Hank and many others.
>
> They keep the signal to noise ratio pretty high and make it an interesting group to hang out.

But I haven't learned anything new yet, except what these people call DAWs. A decent writer, who is tough to find in usenet, will write DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) rather than abbreviate it, like they are some professional.

Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm accused of increasing it here!!

Jack :)

>
> Gary V

[John Williamson]

On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote:
> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm accused of increasing it here!!
>
They are not the only ones. ;-)


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[JackA]

On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:44:50 PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote:
> > Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm accused of increasing it here!!
> >
> They are not the only ones. ;-)

Oh, forgive me, and John Williamson!!! Though, John's idea of great sound transmission is through two cups and a string!!

Jack :)
>
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!
>
> John.

[geoff]

On 18/03/2015 2:33 p.m., JackA wrote:

> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm
> accused of increasing it here!!

Just when we think you've got everything wrong imaginable, you show how
you've got something else totally non-comprehended.

geoff

[John Williamson]

On 18/03/2015 02:12, JackA wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:44:50 PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
>> On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote:
>>> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm accused of increasing it here!!
>>>
>> They are not the only ones. ;-)
>
> Oh, forgive me, and John Williamson!!! Though, John's idea of great sound transmission is through two cups and a string!!
>
There you go, talking about yourself again. ;-)

I'm just about happy with 24 bit recording played back through good
microphones and decent speakers, though I've yet to hear perfection even
in a studio.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

> wrote:
>
>They keep the signal to noise ratio pretty high and make it an interesting group to hang out.

I'm just sitting in my lawn chair watching the trolls going after one another.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

JackA > wrote:
>Also, outside the USA, US copyrights expire after 50 years. I'm actually gl=
>ad they do, because as a collector of odd material, I'd probably never hear=
> Buddy Holly on the phone with Decca Records pleading to them to release hi=
>s material, and as Buddy was told, he couldn't record it for x number of ye=
>ars or else. But, that didn't stop Buddy, he recorded it for Brunswick. Wha=
>t was Decca going to do, sue themselves, since they owned Brunswick? Sorry,=
> getting carried away.

It's much more complicated than that. It turns out that the rest of the
world is actually made up of a lot of different countries that have different
rules.

In the case of a UK-made recording such as the Buddy Holly thing you are
mentioning, the copyright is only 50 years IF it is not published or
communicated to the public within 50 years, but if it's published within
that period, the copyright lasts for 70 years from the time it was first
published.

BUT, if it's not published within 50 years of the time it was made but it
IS communicated to the public (as would be the case for that Buddy Holly
recording), then copyright lasts for 70 years from the year it was first
communicated to the public (which can be difficult to determine).

Note that the rules for written works in the UK are totally different,
so you can get into situations where a recording is in the public domain
but the liner notes are not.

BUT... in the case of the Buddy Holly recording, it also has a bunch of
other constraints because it was a telephone recording, and all the rules
for that changed with the Data Protection Act of 1998.

And this, in short, is what keeps lawyers in business. UMG/Decca has a
whole BUILDING full of people to work this stuff out.
--scott

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

[None]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> I'm just sitting in my lawn chair watching the trolls going after
> one another.

No, you're actively encouraging one of them. You admitted as much, and
said it was lucrative for you.

[Scott Dorsey]

None > wrote:
>"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
>> I'm just sitting in my lawn chair watching the trolls going after
>> one another.
>
>No, you're actively encouraging one of them. You admitted as much, and
>said it was lucrative for you.

At times. Check out this month's _Recording_.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

John Williamson > wrote:

> On 18/03/2015 02:12, JackA wrote: > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:44:50
> PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: >> On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote: >>>
> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm
> accused of increasing it here!! >>> >> They are not the only ones. ;-) > >
> Oh, forgive me, and John Williamson!!! Though, John's idea of great sound
> transmission is through two cups and a string!! > There you go, talking
> about yourself again. ;-)
>
> I'm just about happy with 24 bit recording played back through good
> microphones and decent speakers, though I've yet to hear perfection even
> in a studio.

But, dood, have you heard the BOSE??

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

[John Williamson]

On 23/03/2015 07:20, hank alrich wrote:
> John Williamson > wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2015 02:12, JackA wrote: > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:44:50
>> PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: >> On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote: >>>
>> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm
>> accused of increasing it here!! >>> >> They are not the only ones. ;-) > >
>> Oh, forgive me, and John Williamson!!! Though, John's idea of great sound
>> transmission is through two cups and a string!! > There you go, talking
>> about yourself again. ;-)
>>
>> I'm just about happy with 24 bit recording played back through good
>> microphones and decent speakers, though I've yet to hear perfection even
>> in a studio.
>
> But, dood, have you heard the BOSE??
>
<Grin> I always Buy Other Sound Equipment.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Trevor]

On 23/03/2015 6:20 PM, hank alrich wrote:
>> I'm just about happy with 24 bit recording played back through good
>> microphones...

"Playing back" through microphones is nearly inaudible before they blow
up, and totally inaudible after they do. What a waste of "good
microphones"!:-)

Trevor.

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

(hank alrich) wrote:
> John Williamson > wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2015 02:12, JackA wrote: > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:44:50
>> PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: >> On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote: >>>
>> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm
>> accused of increasing it here!! >>> >> They are not the only ones. ;-) > >
>> Oh, forgive me, and John Williamson!!! Though, John's idea of great sound
>> transmission is through two cups and a string!! > There you go, talking
>> about yourself again. ;-)
>>
>> I'm just about happy with 24 bit recording played back through good
>> microphones and decent speakers, though I've yet to hear perfection even
>> in a studio.
>
> But, dood, have you heard the BOSE??
>

http://dictionary.reverso.net/german-english/b%C3%B6se

--
Les Cargill

[hank alrich]

Les Cargill > wrote:

> (hank alrich) wrote:
> > John Williamson > wrote:
> >
> >> On 18/03/2015 02:12, JackA wrote: > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 9:44:50
> >> PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: >> On 18/03/2015 01:33, JackA wrote: >>>
> >> Yeah, I know Frank and Gareth think my mastering is "noise", so I'm
> >> accused of increasing it here!! >>> >> They are not the only ones. ;-) > >
> >> Oh, forgive me, and John Williamson!!! Though, John's idea of great sound
> >> transmission is through two cups and a string!! > There you go, talking
> >> about yourself again. ;-)
> >>
> >> I'm just about happy with 24 bit recording played back through good
> >> microphones and decent speakers, though I've yet to hear perfection even
> >> in a studio.
> >
> > But, dood, have you heard the BOSE??
> >
>
> http://dictionary.reverso.net/german-english/b%C3%B6se

Les, that is FUNNY!

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