Opinions Needed Please [Archive]

Arny Krueger

September 21st 04, 08:28 PM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message

> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.

Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably fit your
description better than the engineers do.

> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
> of lps and CDs.

And the URL for downloading is??

> In response to my equipment

> Fisher 500C
> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
> at this time)

> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said

> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver

Seems more than a little bigoted.

> 2) Bozaks are antequated.

Indeed. While there are speakers of the 60s era that are not thoroughly
anteguated (e.g. Quad 57s), most are. Lots of good things have happened with
speaker technology in the last 40 years. Arguably speakers weren't even
designed, but rather cut-and-tried until about 25 years ago.

> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
> everybody)

He's probabably something like half right. I was about 16 when I was selling
Fisher 500Cs, and I'm now pushing 60. The basic design of the 500C would be
called "mid fi" by modern standards. That's not utter damnation but its not
the best that could have been done with the technology at hand in the day..
Without steady mantenance, a 500C would probably be pretty sorry if it were
in continuous use (or even storage) for the past 45 years or so.

I guess I'd have to listen to the 500C with appropriate speakers before
making a final judgement.

> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
> or because of incompetence.

Pleasing the masses is the better explanation.

>With statements like the above I lean
> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane

IME recordings of the 50s and the 60s have held their sheen a lot better
than the home audio gear of that time.

ansermetniac

September 21st 04, 08:39 PM

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message

>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>
>Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably fit your
>description better than the engineers do.
>
>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>> of lps and CDs.
>
>And the URL for downloading is??
http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd

>
>> In response to my equipment
>
>> Fisher 500C
>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>> at this time)
>
>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>
>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>
>Seems more than a little bigoted.
>
>> 2) Bozaks are antequated.
>
>Indeed. While there are speakers of the 60s era that are not thoroughly
>anteguated (e.g. Quad 57s), most are. Lots of good things have happened with
>speaker technology in the last 40 years. Arguably speakers weren't even
>designed, but rather cut-and-tried until about 25 years ago.

If modern speakers are to be judged by B & W 802s then you can have
them HP and I still prefer AR 2as

Abbedd
>
>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>> everybody)
>
>He's probabably something like half right. I was about 16 when I was selling
>Fisher 500Cs, and I'm now pushing 60. The basic design of the 500C would be
>called "mid fi" by modern standards. That's not utter damnation but its not
>the best that could have been done with the technology at hand in the day..
>Without steady mantenance, a 500C would probably be pretty sorry if it were
>in continuous use (or even storage) for the past 45 years or so.
>
>I guess I'd have to listen to the 500C with appropriate speakers before
>making a final judgement.
>
>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>> or because of incompetence.
>
>Pleasing the masses is the better explanation.
>
>>With statements like the above I lean
>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>
>IME recordings of the 50s and the 60s have held their sheen a lot better
>than the home audio gear of that time.
>
>

Sylvan Morein DDS

September 21st 04, 08:45 PM

On Sep 20 2004 11:26:29, in article
, "ansermetniac"
> wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:19:42 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> > wrote:
>
>> Jeff,
>> You raise a good question. I'm sure you'll get some responses here. For
>> in-depth, may I suggest reposting to rec.audio.opinion and rec.audio.pro.
>>
> Bob
>
> Thanks. What about your opinion?

My sick son Bob won't offer an opinion until he can figure out which side of
the issue is wrong. Then he'll wade in full force, so that he can **** off
the maximum number of people, Jeffrey. He's what we called in my day an
"asshole know-it-all". So his opinions mean little.

Facts about my Son, Robert Morein

Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS
--

Bob Morein History
--
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/4853918.htm

> Doctoral student takes intellectual property case to Supreme Court
> By L. STUART DITZEN
> Philadelphia Inquirer
>
> PHILADELPHIA -Even the professors who dismissed him from a doctoral program
> at Drexel University agreed that Robert Morein was uncommonly smart.
>
> They apparently didn't realize that he was uncommonly stubborn too - so much
> so that he would mount a court fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court
> to challenge his dismissal.

The Supremes have already rejected this appeal, btw.
>
> "It's a personality trait I have - I'm a tenacious guy," said Morein, a
> pleasantly eccentric man regarded by friends as an inventive genius. "And we
> do come to a larger issue here."

An "inventive genius" that has never invented anything. And hardly
"pleasantly" eccentric.

> A five-year legal battle between this unusual ex-student and one of
> Philadelphia's premier educational institutions has gone largely unnoticed
> by the media and the public.

Because no one gives a **** about a 50 year old loser.
>
> But it has been the subject of much attention in academia.
>
> Drexel says it dismissed Morein in 1995 because he failed, after eight
> years, to complete a thesis required for a doctorate in electrical and
> computer engineering.

Not to mention the 12 years it took him to get thru high school!
BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>
> Morein, 50, of Dresher, Pa., contends that he was dismissed only after his
> thesis adviser "appropriated" an innovative idea Morein had developed in a
> rarefied area of thought called "estimation theory" and arranged to have it
> patented.

A contention rejected by three courts. From a 50 YEAR OLD that has
done NOTHING PRODUCTIVE with his life.

>
> In February 2000, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Esther R. Sylvester
> ruled that Morein's adviser indeed had taken his idea.

An idea that was worth nothing, because it didn't work. Just like
Robert Morein, who has never worked a day in his life.

>
> Sylvester held that Morein had been unjustly dismissed and she ordered
> Drexel to reinstate him or refund his tuition.

Funnily enough, Drexel AGREED to reinstate Morein, who rejected the
offer because he knew he was and IS a failed loser. Spending daddy's
money to cover up his lack of productivity.
>
> That brought roars of protest from the lions of academia. There is a long
> tradition in America of noninterference by the courts in academic decisions.
>
> Backed by every major university in Pennsylvania and organizations
> representing thousands of others around the country, Drexel appealed to the
> state Superior Court.
>
> The appellate court, by a 2-1 vote, reversed Sylvester in June 2001 and
> restored the status quo. Morein was, once again, out at Drexel. And the
> time-honored axiom that courts ought to keep their noses out of academic
> affairs was reasserted.
>
> The state Supreme Court declined to review the case and, in an ordinary
> litigation, that would have been the end of it.
>
> But Morein, in a quixotic gesture that goes steeply against the odds, has
> asked the highest court in the land to give him a hearing.

Daddy throws more money down the crapper.

> His attorney, Faye Riva Cohen, said the Supreme Court appeal is important
> even if it fails because it raises the issue of whether a university has a
> right to lay claim to a student's ideas - or intellectual property - without
> compensation.
>
> "Any time you are in a Ph.D. program, you are a serf, you are a slave," said
> Cohen. Morein "is concerned not only for himself. He feels that what
> happened to him is pretty common."

It's called HIGHER EDUCATION, honey. The students aren't in charge,
the UNIVERSITY and PROFESSORS are.

> Drexel's attorney, Neil J. Hamburg, called Morein's appeal - and his claim
> that his idea was stolen - "preposterous."
>
> "I will eat my shoe if the Supreme Court hears this case," declared Hamburg.
> "We're not even going to file a response. He is a brilliant guy, but his
> intelligence should be used for the advancement of society rather than
> pursuing self-destructive litigation."

No **** sherlock.

> The litigation began in 1997, when Morein sued Drexel claiming that a
> committee of professors had dumped him after he accused his faculty adviser,
> Paul Kalata, of appropriating his idea.
>
> His concept was considered to have potential value for businesses in
> minutely measuring the internal functions of machines, industrial processes
> and electronic systems.
>
> The field of "estimation theory" is one in which scientists attempt to
> calculate what they cannot plainly observe, such as the inside workings of a
> nuclear plant or a computer.

My estimation theory? There is NO brain at work inside the head of
Robert Morein, only sawdust.

>
> Prior to Morein's dismissal, Drexel looked into his complaint against Kalata
> and concluded that the associate professor had done nothing wrong. Kalata,
> through a university lawyer, declined to comment.
>
> At a nonjury trial before Sylvester in 1999, Morein testified that Kalata in
> 1990 had posed a technical problem for him to study for his thesis. It
> related to estimation theory.
>
> Kalata, who did not appear at the trial, said in a 1998 deposition that a
> Cherry Hill company for which he was a paid consultant, K-Tron
> International, had asked him to develop an alternate estimation method for
> it. The company manufactures bulk material feeders and conveyors used in
> industrial processes.
>
> Morein testified that, after much study, he experienced "a flash of
> inspiration" and came up with a novel mathematical concept to address the
> problem Kalata had presented.
>
> Without his knowledge, Morein said, Kalata shared the idea with K-Tron.
>
> K-Tron then applied for a patent, listing Kalata and Morein as co-inventors.
>
> Morein said he agreed "under duress" to the arrangement, but felt "locked
> into a highly disadvantageous situation." As a result, he testified, he
> became alienated from Kalata.
>
> As events unfolded, Kalata signed over his interest in the patent to K-Tron.
> The company never capitalized on the technology and eventually allowed the
> patent to lapse. No one made any money from it.

Because it was bogus. Even Kalata was mortified that he was a victim
of this SCAMSTER, Robert Morein.

> In 1991, Morein went to the head of Drexel's electrical engineering
> department, accused Kalata of appropriating his intellectual property, and
> asked for a new faculty adviser.

The staff at Drexel laughed wildly at the ignorance of Robert Morein.

> He didn't get one. Instead, a committee of four professors, including
> Kalata, was formed to oversee Morein's thesis work.
>
> Four years later, the committee dismissed him, saying he had failed to
> complete his thesis.

So Morein ****s up his first couple years, gets new faculty advisers
(a TEAM), and then ****s up again! Brilliant!

>
> Morein claimed that the committee intentionally had undermined him.

Morein makes LOTS of claims that are nonsense. One look thru the
usenet proves it.

>
> Judge Sylvester agreed. In her ruling, Sylvester wrote: "It is this court's
> opinion that the defendants were motivated by bad faith and ill will."

So much for political machine judges.
>
> The U.S. Supreme Court receives 7,000 appeals a year and agrees to hear only
> about 100 of them.
>
> Hamburg, Drexel's attorney, is betting the high court will reject Morein's
> appeal out of hand because its focal point - concerning a student's right to
> intellectual property - was not central to the litigation in the
> Pennsylvania courts.

> Morein said he understands it's a long shot, but he feels he must pursue it.

Just like all the failed "causes" Morein pursues. Heck, he's been
chasing another "Brian McCarty" for years and yet has ZERO impact on
anything.

Failure. Look it up in Websters. You'll see a picture of Robert
Morein. The poster boy for SCAMMING LOSERS.

>
> "I had to seek closure," he said.
>
> Without a doctorate, he said, he has been unable to pursue a career he had
> hoped would lead him into research on artificial intelligence.

Who better to tell us about "artificial intelligence".
BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>
> As it is, Morein lives at home with his father and makes a modest income
> from stock investments. He has written a film script that he is trying to
> make into a movie. And in the basement of his father's home he is working on
> an invention, an industrial pump so powerful it could cut steel with a
> bulletlike stream of water.

FAILED STUDENT
FAILED MOVIE MAKER
FAILED SCREENWRITER
FAILED INVESTOR
FAILED DRIVER
FAILED SON
FAILED PARENTS
FAILED INVENTOR
FAILED PLAINTIFF
FAILED HOMOSEXUAL
FAILED HUMAN
FAILED
FAILED

> But none of it is what he had imagined for himself.
>
> "I don't really have a replacement career," Morein said. "It's a very
> gnawing thing.

Robert Morein

September 21st 04, 10:01 PM

Jeff,
I haven't heard your setup, but it does seem you're missing something
with the Fisher. Component matching is important. The wrong amp/speaker
combination can create alot of extraneous sizzle. Your speakers may not be
the most accurate in the world, because there have been alot of advances in
speaker design.

Most recordings are close-miked. Because air absorbs high frequencies,
the close proximity of the microphone and the sound source results in a
treble boost relative to the perspective of a listener at a typical distance
from a live ensemble. Engineers usually choose to leave a little of the
boost in the mix, for the sake of popular taste and assumptions about the
playback equipment.

Assumptions about the playback equipment are almost always wrong, but
implicitly necessary. It is likely that your dissatisfaction is the
consequence of multiple assumptions that simply are wrong for your system
and your ears. You are constantly exposed to a reference, but the majority
of listeners are not. In the absence of a reference, listeners gravitate
toward what gives them the most pleasure.

I suggest you consider replacement of your amp with a MOSFET based unit.
Such amps have much more subtle voicing than the Fisher you're using.

Bob

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:19:42 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> > wrote:
>
> >Jeff,
> > You raise a good question. I'm sure you'll get some responses here.
For
> >in-depth, may I suggest reposting to rec.audio.opinion and rec.audio.pro.
> >
> Bob
>
> Thanks. What about your opinion?
>
> Abbedd
> >
> >"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> >> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> >> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> >> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> >> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
> >> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
> >>
> >>
> >> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> >> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
> >> of lps and CDs.
> >>
> >> In response to my equipment
> >>
> >> Fisher 500C
> >> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
> >> at this time)
> >>
> >> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
> >>
> >> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
> >> 2) Bozaks are antequated
> >>
> >> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
> >> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
> >> everybody)
> >>
> >> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
> >> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
> >> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
> >> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
> >> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
> >>
> >> Opinions please
> >>
> >> Jeffrey "Abbedd" Powell
> >> Chief Engineer/Acoustician
> >> Dave Guardala Mouthpieces, Inc.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

ansermetniac

September 21st 04, 10:32 PM

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:01:52 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> wrote:

>Jeff,
> I haven't heard your setup, but it does seem you're missing something
>with the Fisher. Component matching is important. The wrong amp/speaker
>combination can create alot of extraneous sizzle. Your speakers may not be
>the most accurate in the world, because there have been alot of advances in
>speaker design.
>
> Most recordings are close-miked. Because air absorbs high frequencies,
>the close proximity of the microphone and the sound source results in a
>treble boost relative to the perspective of a listener at a typical distance
>from a live ensemble. Engineers usually choose to leave a little of the
>boost in the mix, for the sake of popular taste and assumptions about the
>playback equipment.
>
> Assumptions about the playback equipment are almost always wrong, but
>implicitly necessary. It is likely that your dissatisfaction is the
>consequence of multiple assumptions that simply are wrong for your system
>and your ears. You are constantly exposed to a reference, but the majority
>of listeners are not. In the absence of a reference, listeners gravitate
>toward what gives them the most pleasure.
>
> I suggest you consider replacement of your amp with a MOSFET based unit.
>Such amps have much more subtle voicing than the Fisher you're using.
>
>Bob

Bob

Thanks. I will stick with tubes. And New England sounding speakers

Abbedd
>
>
>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:19:42 -0400, "Robert Morein"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Jeff,
>> > You raise a good question. I'm sure you'll get some responses here.
>For
>> >in-depth, may I suggest reposting to rec.audio.opinion and rec.audio.pro.
>> >
>> Bob
>>
>> Thanks. What about your opinion?
>>
>> Abbedd
>> >
>> >"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>> >> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>> >> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>> >> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>> >> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>> >> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>> >> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>> >> of lps and CDs.
>> >>
>> >> In response to my equipment
>> >>
>> >> Fisher 500C
>> >> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>> >> at this time)
>> >>
>> >> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>> >>
>> >> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>> >> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>> >>
>> >> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>> >> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>> >> everybody)
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>> >> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>> >> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>> >> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>> >> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>> >>
>> >> Opinions please
>> >>
>> >> Jeffrey "Abbedd" Powell
>> >> Chief Engineer/Acoustician
>> >> Dave Guardala Mouthpieces, Inc.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Arny Krueger

September 21st 04, 10:44 PM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message

> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>>
>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
>>> like.
>>
>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably fit
>> your description better than the engineers do.

>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
>>> highs of lps and CDs.

>> And the URL for downloading is??
> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd

I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high fidelity.

When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound nasal,
raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not enough deep
bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were mastered based on
listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite a bit different.

ansermetniac

September 21st 04, 11:08 PM

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:44:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message

>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
>>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
>>>> like.
>>>
>>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably fit
>>> your description better than the engineers do.
>
>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
>>>> highs of lps and CDs.
>
>>> And the URL for downloading is??
>> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd
>
>I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high fidelity.
>
>When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound nasal,
>raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not enough deep
>bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were mastered based on
>listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite a bit different.
>
>

Arny

You have been listening to recorded music so long you don't know what
instruments sound like. Because you said " Lacking in presence" I know
I have been sucessful.

And how can you make a judgement of my remastering if you never heard
the source?

Modern speakers You mean like B & W 802s(pos). My partner had either
duntech or dunleavy towers(The worse of the two brands) and when the
tweeter blew it sounded better

Sound is built from the fundamental up not the other way around.
Almost all recordings have the harmonics out of proportion to the
fundamental.

BTW they are first mastered using Beyer 990 Pros. It takes a while to
get used to real sound after years of juiced mids and highs.

Long live Rudy Bozak

Abbedd

MINe 109

September 21st 04, 11:35 PM

In article >,
ansermetniac > wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:44:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>
> >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> >>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> >>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> >>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> >>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
> >>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
> >>>> like.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably fit
> >>> your description better than the engineers do.
> >
> >>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> >>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
> >>>> highs of lps and CDs.
> >
> >>> And the URL for downloading is??
> >> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd
> >
> >I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high fidelity.
> >
> >When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound nasal,
> >raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not enough deep
> >bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were mastered based on
> >listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite a bit different.
> >
> >
>
> Arny
>
> You have been listening to recorded music so long you don't know what
> instruments sound like. Because you said " Lacking in presence" I know
> I have been sucessful.
>
> And how can you make a judgement of my remastering if you never heard
> the source?

Good point. What happened to the tape hiss?

To me, your eq sounds a bit 'my-fi' (not that there's anything wrong
with that). The original recording may be forcing you to choose between
fattening up the solo instruments and preserving an orchestral recorded
timbre that probably wasn't so great to start with.

> Modern speakers You mean like B & W 802s(pos). My partner had either
> duntech or dunleavy towers(The worse of the two brands) and when the
> tweeter blew it sounded better

Must be Duntech.

> Sound is built from the fundamental up not the other way around.
> Almost all recordings have the harmonics out of proportion to the
> fundamental.

Perhaps you could suggest a recording that you feel has a good balance
so that we can hear for ourselves? Otherwise, one might think you're the
only one who knows what good sound is.

> BTW they are first mastered using Beyer 990 Pros. It takes a while to
> get used to real sound after years of juiced mids and highs.

How do you know this?

> Long live Rudy Bozak

For people who think Quads have a excessively large sweet spot...

Stephen

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 12:06 AM

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:35:08 GMT, MINe 109 >
wrote:

>In article >,
> ansermetniac > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:44:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>>
>> >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>> >>>
>> >>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>> >>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>> >>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>> >>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>> >>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
>> >>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
>> >>>> like.
>> >>>
>> >>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably fit
>> >>> your description better than the engineers do.
>> >
>> >>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>> >>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
>> >>>> highs of lps and CDs.
>> >
>> >>> And the URL for downloading is??
>> >> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd
>> >
>> >I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high fidelity.
>> >
>> >When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound nasal,
>> >raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not enough deep
>> >bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were mastered based on
>> >listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite a bit different.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Arny
>>
>> You have been listening to recorded music so long you don't know what
>> instruments sound like. Because you said " Lacking in presence" I know
>> I have been sucessful.
>>
>> And how can you make a judgement of my remastering if you never heard
>> the source?
>
>Good point. What happened to the tape hiss?
>
>To me, your eq sounds a bit 'my-fi' (not that there's anything wrong
>with that). The original recording may be forcing you to choose between
>fattening up the solo instruments and preserving an orchestral recorded
>timbre that probably wasn't so great to start with.
>
>> Modern speakers You mean like B & W 802s(pos). My partner had either
>> duntech or dunleavy towers(The worse of the two brands) and when the
>> tweeter blew it sounded better
>
>Must be Duntech.
>
>> Sound is built from the fundamental up not the other way around.
>> Almost all recordings have the harmonics out of proportion to the
>> fundamental.
>
>Perhaps you could suggest a recording that you feel has a good balance
>so that we can hear for ourselves? Otherwise, one might think you're the
>only one who knows what good sound is.
>
Try Giants of the Tenor Sax Prez Commodore CCD 7002. 78s from the late
30s. Other than that I have not heard a balanced CD yet. This is not
due to digital or my equipment.Yes it is due to digital. The digital
domain is unforgiving and the pandering and/or incompetence of the
recording engineers are there for all to hear. I call my Bozaks Bad cd
exposers. For the opposite of good sound get Giant Steps by Trane in
the Bill Inglot remastering on Atlantic/Rhino. What a phoney he is. I
assume he uses a RTA instead of his perfect ears (NO Holes)

Abbedd
>> BTW they are first mastered using Beyer 990 Pros. It takes a while to
>> get used to real sound after years of juiced mids and highs.
>
>How do you know this?
It took me a while :-)
>
>> Long live Rudy Bozak
>
>For people who think Quads have a excessively large sweet spot...
>
>Stephen

Arny Krueger

September 22nd 04, 12:17 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message

> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:44:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
>>>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
>>>>> like.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably
>>>> fit your description better than the engineers do.
>>
>>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
>>>>> highs of lps and CDs.
>>
>>>> And the URL for downloading is??
>>> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd
>>
>> I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high
>> fidelity.
>>
>> When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound
>> nasal, raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not
>> enough deep bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were
>> mastered based on listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite
>> a bit different.
>>
>>
>
> Arny
>
> You have been listening to recorded music so long you don't know what
> instruments sound like. Because you said " Lacking in presence" I know
> I have been sucessful.

Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices just about
every weekend.

MINe 109

September 22nd 04, 12:36 AM

In article >,
ansermetniac > wrote:

Me:
> >Perhaps you could suggest a recording that you feel has a good balance
> >so that we can hear for ourselves? Otherwise, one might think you're the
> >only one who knows what good sound is.
> >
> Try Giants of the Tenor Sax Prez Commodore CCD 7002. 78s from the late
> 30s. Other than that I have not heard a balanced CD yet.

This is the only one? You don't have an Arcam CD92, do you?

> This is not
> due to digital or my equipment.Yes it is due to digital. The digital
> domain is unforgiving and the pandering and/or incompetence of the
> recording engineers are there for all to hear. I call my Bozaks Bad cd
> exposers.

Could the high end be tipped up on your system? You may have the
equivalent of a mastering studio monitor that increases glare in order
to expose editing flaws, etc.

> For the opposite of good sound get Giant Steps by Trane in
> the Bill Inglot remastering on Atlantic/Rhino. What a phoney he is. I
> assume he uses a RTA instead of his perfect ears (NO Holes)

I assume he has reasons for his eq choices: recreating his idea of the
original lps/45s (as opposed to the master tape), reducing deep bass to
increase overall level, etc.

Inglot is responsible for the rock reissue from original tapes market.
If he would add 'no eq/no compression' to the equation, I'd be happier.

Stephen

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 22nd 04, 02:21 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>
>
> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
> of lps and CDs.
>
> In response to my equipment
>
> Fisher 500C
> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
> at this time)
>
> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>
> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>
> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
> everybody)
>
> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>
> Opinions please
>

Hi Jeffrey,

Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more or less
agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's what
I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our collective
leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many lemmings
would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
but... there you go.

Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the files on
my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was driving
Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through Genelec
S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of Avantgarde
Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more or less
designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the setups
varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my impressions were
overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.

* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
* No deep bass whatsoever
* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't count!)
* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried for
kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy and
muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's for a
couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the signal
to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing was
missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it wasn't
half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)

I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone tells me
that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up to
snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with very high
powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a bad
source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.

I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt Fisher
800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these days
with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.

I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere near
as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to drive
the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.

As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my Avantgardes
with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.

Thanks for the cool post.

Cheers,

Margaret

Robert Morein

September 22nd 04, 02:38 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:01:52 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> > wrote:
>
> >Jeff,
> > I haven't heard your setup, but it does seem you're missing something
> >with the Fisher. Component matching is important. The wrong amp/speaker
> >combination can create alot of extraneous sizzle. Your speakers may not
be
> >the most accurate in the world, because there have been alot of advances
in
> >speaker design.
> >
> > Most recordings are close-miked. Because air absorbs high
frequencies,
> >the close proximity of the microphone and the sound source results in a
> >treble boost relative to the perspective of a listener at a typical
distance
> >from a live ensemble. Engineers usually choose to leave a little of the
> >boost in the mix, for the sake of popular taste and assumptions about the
> >playback equipment.
> >
> > Assumptions about the playback equipment are almost always wrong, but
> >implicitly necessary. It is likely that your dissatisfaction is the
> >consequence of multiple assumptions that simply are wrong for your system
> >and your ears. You are constantly exposed to a reference, but the
majority
> >of listeners are not. In the absence of a reference, listeners gravitate
> >toward what gives them the most pleasure.
> >
> > I suggest you consider replacement of your amp with a MOSFET based
unit.
> >Such amps have much more subtle voicing than the Fisher you're using.
> >
> >Bob
>
> Bob
>
> Thanks. I will stick with tubes. And New England sounding speakers
>
> Abbedd
> >
Abbedd,
I humbly suggest you do a little inexpensive experimentation. Hafler
DH-200 amps, in particular, sometimes go for $100 or so on eBay. Judging by
your preferences, I'm optimistic you might like them.

Bob

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 02:52 AM

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:21:24 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> wrote:

>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>
>>
>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>> of lps and CDs.
>>
>> In response to my equipment
>>
>> Fisher 500C
>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>> at this time)
>>
>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>>
>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>>
>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>> everybody)
>>
>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>>
>> Opinions please
>>
>
>Hi Jeffrey,
>
>Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more or less
>agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's what
>I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our collective
>leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many lemmings
>would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
>but... there you go.
>
>Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the files on
>my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was driving
>Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through Genelec
>S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of Avantgarde
>Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more or less
>designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the setups
>varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my impressions were
>overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.
>
>* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
>* No deep bass whatsoever
>* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't count!)
>* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
>* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
>* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried for
>kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
>* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy and
>muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
>exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
>compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's for a
>couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
>* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the signal
>to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing was
>missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it wasn't
>half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)
>
>I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone tells me
>that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up to
>snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with very high
>powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a bad
>source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.
>
>I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt Fisher
>800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
>mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
>gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these days
>with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.
>
>I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere near
>as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
>loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
>Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to drive
>the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.
>
>As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
>anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my Avantgardes
>with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.
>
>Thanks for the cool post.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Margaret
>
>
How can you judge my work without hearing the source. And what are
your qualifications.
BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.

Abbedd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 02:54 AM

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:38:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> wrote:

>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:01:52 -0400, "Robert Morein"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Jeff,
>> > I haven't heard your setup, but it does seem you're missing something
>> >with the Fisher. Component matching is important. The wrong amp/speaker
>> >combination can create alot of extraneous sizzle. Your speakers may not
>be
>> >the most accurate in the world, because there have been alot of advances
>in
>> >speaker design.
>> >
>> > Most recordings are close-miked. Because air absorbs high
>frequencies,
>> >the close proximity of the microphone and the sound source results in a
>> >treble boost relative to the perspective of a listener at a typical
>distance
>> >from a live ensemble. Engineers usually choose to leave a little of the
>> >boost in the mix, for the sake of popular taste and assumptions about the
>> >playback equipment.
>> >
>> > Assumptions about the playback equipment are almost always wrong, but
>> >implicitly necessary. It is likely that your dissatisfaction is the
>> >consequence of multiple assumptions that simply are wrong for your system
>> >and your ears. You are constantly exposed to a reference, but the
>majority
>> >of listeners are not. In the absence of a reference, listeners gravitate
>> >toward what gives them the most pleasure.
>> >
>> > I suggest you consider replacement of your amp with a MOSFET based
>unit.
>> >Such amps have much more subtle voicing than the Fisher you're using.
>> >
>> >Bob
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> Thanks. I will stick with tubes. And New England sounding speakers
>>
>> Abbedd
>> >
>Abbedd,
> I humbly suggest you do a little inexpensive experimentation. Hafler
>DH-200 amps, in particular, sometimes go for $100 or so on eBay. Judging by
>your preferences, I'm optimistic you might like them.
>
>Bob
>

There is nothing wrong with a Fisher 500C. Unless you having something
about tubes

Hafler? had a Dynaco 80. It was garbage.

Abbedd

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 22nd 04, 03:21 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:21:24 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>>
>>>
>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>>> of lps and CDs.
>>>
>>> In response to my equipment
>>>
>>> Fisher 500C
>>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>>> at this time)
>>>
>>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>>>
>>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>>> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>>>
>>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>>> everybody)
>>>
>>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>>> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>>>
>>> Opinions please
>>>
>>
>>Hi Jeffrey,
>>
>>Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more or
>>less
>>agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's
>>what
>>I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our collective
>>leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many lemmings
>>would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
>>but... there you go.
>>
>>Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the files
>>on
>>my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was
>>driving
>>Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through
>>Genelec
>>S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of Avantgarde
>>Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more or
>>less
>>designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the setups
>>varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my impressions
>>were
>>overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.
>>
>>* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
>>* No deep bass whatsoever
>>* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't
>>count!)
>>* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
>>* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
>>* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried for
>>kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
>>* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy and
>>muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
>>exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
>>compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's for a
>>couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
>>* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the signal
>>to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing was
>>missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it wasn't
>>half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)
>>
>>I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone tells
>>me
>>that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up to
>>snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with very
>>high
>>powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a bad
>>source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.
>>
>>I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt Fisher
>>800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
>>mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
>>gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these
>>days
>>with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.
>>
>>I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere near
>>as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
>>loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
>>Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to drive
>>the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.
>>
>>As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
>>anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my
>>Avantgardes
>>with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.
>>
>>Thanks for the cool post.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Margaret
>>
>>
> How can you judge my work without hearing the source.

Having a digital and vinyl library of 4000-5000 recordings, I'm betting on
the fact that it cannot get worse than your butchered mix.

>And what are your qualifications.

Unlike you, I own a few systems that ARE HIGH FIDELITY.

> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>

I'm sure they sound bad if fed that cluster**** mix of yours. But it is not
B&W's that are ****, your "work" is!

> Abbedd
>>

Why don't you stick that horn up your ass for a while and chill out. It is
not my fault you embarrassed yourself. You asked for opinions, and you're
getting them.

Cheers,

Margaret

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 03:30 AM

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:21:49 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> wrote:

>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:21:24 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>>>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>>>> of lps and CDs.
>>>>
>>>> In response to my equipment
>>>>
>>>> Fisher 500C
>>>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>>>> at this time)
>>>>
>>>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>>>>
>>>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>>>> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>>>>
>>>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>>>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>>>> everybody)
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>>>> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>>>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>>>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>>>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>>>>
>>>> Opinions please
>>>>
>>>
>>>Hi Jeffrey,
>>>
>>>Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more or
>>>less
>>>agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's
>>>what
>>>I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our collective
>>>leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many lemmings
>>>would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
>>>but... there you go.
>>>
>>>Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the files
>>>on
>>>my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was
>>>driving
>>>Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through
>>>Genelec
>>>S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of Avantgarde
>>>Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more or
>>>less
>>>designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the setups
>>>varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my impressions
>>>were
>>>overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.
>>>
>>>* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
>>>* No deep bass whatsoever
>>>* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't
>>>count!)
>>>* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
>>>* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
>>>* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried for
>>>kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
>>>* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy and
>>>muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
>>>exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
>>>compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's for a
>>>couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
>>>* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the signal
>>>to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing was
>>>missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it wasn't
>>>half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)
>>>
>>>I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone tells
>>>me
>>>that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up to
>>>snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with very
>>>high
>>>powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a bad
>>>source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.
>>>
>>>I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt Fisher
>>>800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
>>>mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
>>>gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these
>>>days
>>>with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.
>>>
>>>I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere near
>>>as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
>>>loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
>>>Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to drive
>>>the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.
>>>
>>>As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
>>>anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my
>>>Avantgardes
>>>with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.
>>>
>>>Thanks for the cool post.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Margaret
>>>
>>>
>> How can you judge my work without hearing the source.
>
>Having a digital and vinyl library of 4000-5000 recordings, I'm betting on
>the fact that it cannot get worse than your butchered mix.
>
>>And what are your qualifications.
>
>Unlike you, I own a few systems that ARE HIGH FIDELITY.
>
>> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>>
>
>I'm sure they sound bad if fed that cluster**** mix of yours. But it is not
>B&W's that are ****, your "work" is!
>
>> Abbedd
>>>
>
>Why don't you stick that horn up your ass for a while and chill out. It is
>not my fault you embarrassed yourself. You asked for opinions, and you're
>getting them.

Opinions form pompous putzes like you. You did not even hear the
original and you are judgeing by an MP3. You own records. I design
instruments that get recorded.

B & W 802s are a joke.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Margaret
>
>
>

MINe 109

September 22nd 04, 03:41 AM

In article >,
ansermetniac > wrote:

> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.

Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as classical
music monitors isn't a plus!

I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to be
near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.

Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?

Stephen

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 22nd 04, 03:44 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:21:49 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:21:24 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>>>>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>>>>> of lps and CDs.
>>>>>
>>>>> In response to my equipment
>>>>>
>>>>> Fisher 500C
>>>>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>>>>> at this time)
>>>>>
>>>>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>>>>> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>>>>>
>>>>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>>>>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>>>>> everybody)
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>>>>> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>>>>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>>>>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>>>>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>>>>>
>>>>> Opinions please
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hi Jeffrey,
>>>>
>>>>Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more or
>>>>less
>>>>agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's
>>>>what
>>>>I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our
>>>>collective
>>>>leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many
>>>>lemmings
>>>>would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
>>>>but... there you go.
>>>>
>>>>Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the files
>>>>on
>>>>my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was
>>>>driving
>>>>Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through
>>>>Genelec
>>>>S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of
>>>>Avantgarde
>>>>Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more or
>>>>less
>>>>designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the
>>>>setups
>>>>varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my impressions
>>>>were
>>>>overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.
>>>>
>>>>* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
>>>>* No deep bass whatsoever
>>>>* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't
>>>>count!)
>>>>* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
>>>>* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
>>>>* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried for
>>>>kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
>>>>* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy and
>>>>muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
>>>>exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
>>>>compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's for
>>>>a
>>>>couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
>>>>* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the
>>>>signal
>>>>to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing was
>>>>missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it
>>>>wasn't
>>>>half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)
>>>>
>>>>I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone
>>>>tells
>>>>me
>>>>that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up to
>>>>snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with very
>>>>high
>>>>powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a
>>>>bad
>>>>source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.
>>>>
>>>>I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt
>>>>Fisher
>>>>800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
>>>>mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
>>>>gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these
>>>>days
>>>>with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.
>>>>
>>>>I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere
>>>>near
>>>>as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
>>>>loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
>>>>Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to
>>>>drive
>>>>the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.
>>>>
>>>>As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
>>>>anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my
>>>>Avantgardes
>>>>with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for the cool post.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>Margaret
>>>>
>>>>
>>> How can you judge my work without hearing the source.
>>
>>Having a digital and vinyl library of 4000-5000 recordings, I'm betting on
>>the fact that it cannot get worse than your butchered mix.
>>
>>>And what are your qualifications.
>>
>>Unlike you, I own a few systems that ARE HIGH FIDELITY.
>>
>>> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>>>
>>
>>I'm sure they sound bad if fed that cluster**** mix of yours. But it is
>>not
>>B&W's that are ****, your "work" is!
>>
>>> Abbedd
>>>>
>>
>>Why don't you stick that horn up your ass for a while and chill out. It is
>>not my fault you embarrassed yourself. You asked for opinions, and you're
>>getting them.
>
> Opinions form pompous putzes like you. You did not even hear the
> original and you are judgeing by an MP3. You own records. I design
> instruments that get recorded.
>

I sell to NASA so that makes me an astronaut. I see. Gotta update my CV.
Speaking of pompous...

> B & W 802s are a joke.
>>

No baby, the joke is on you both professionally and intellectually. Luckily
for you, you're so handsome ;-)

I think you're just ****ed 'cause you cannot afford the B&W's or any other
decent gear...

Cheers,

Margaret

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 03:49 AM

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:41:55 GMT, MINe 109 >
wrote:

>In article >,
> ansermetniac > wrote:
>
>> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>
>Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as classical
>music monitors isn't a plus!
>
>I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
>is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to be
>near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
>integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.
>
>Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
>How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?
>
>Stephen

I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
mastered the 3 3/4 open reel

Abbedd

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 03:54 AM

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:44:42 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> wrote:

>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:21:49 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:21:24 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>>>>>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
>>>>>> of lps and CDs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In response to my equipment
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fisher 500C
>>>>>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>>>>>> at this time)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>>>>>> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>>>>>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>>>>>> everybody)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>>>>>> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>>>>>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>>>>>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>>>>>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Opinions please
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Jeffrey,
>>>>>
>>>>>Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more or
>>>>>less
>>>>>agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's
>>>>>what
>>>>>I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our
>>>>>collective
>>>>>leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many
>>>>>lemmings
>>>>>would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
>>>>>but... there you go.
>>>>>
>>>>>Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the files
>>>>>on
>>>>>my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was
>>>>>driving
>>>>>Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through
>>>>>Genelec
>>>>>S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of
>>>>>Avantgarde
>>>>>Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more or
>>>>>less
>>>>>designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the
>>>>>setups
>>>>>varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my impressions
>>>>>were
>>>>>overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.
>>>>>
>>>>>* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
>>>>>* No deep bass whatsoever
>>>>>* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't
>>>>>count!)
>>>>>* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
>>>>>* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
>>>>>* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried for
>>>>>kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
>>>>>* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy and
>>>>>muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
>>>>>exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
>>>>>compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's for
>>>>>a
>>>>>couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
>>>>>* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the
>>>>>signal
>>>>>to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing was
>>>>>missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it
>>>>>wasn't
>>>>>half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone
>>>>>tells
>>>>>me
>>>>>that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up to
>>>>>snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with very
>>>>>high
>>>>>powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a
>>>>>bad
>>>>>source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt
>>>>>Fisher
>>>>>800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
>>>>>mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
>>>>>gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these
>>>>>days
>>>>>with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.
>>>>>
>>>>>I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere
>>>>>near
>>>>>as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
>>>>>loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
>>>>>Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to
>>>>>drive
>>>>>the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.
>>>>>
>>>>>As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
>>>>>anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my
>>>>>Avantgardes
>>>>>with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for the cool post.
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>>Margaret
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> How can you judge my work without hearing the source.
>>>
>>>Having a digital and vinyl library of 4000-5000 recordings, I'm betting on
>>>the fact that it cannot get worse than your butchered mix.
>>>
>>>>And what are your qualifications.
>>>
>>>Unlike you, I own a few systems that ARE HIGH FIDELITY.
>>>
>>>> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'm sure they sound bad if fed that cluster**** mix of yours. But it is
>>>not
>>>B&W's that are ****, your "work" is!
>>>
>>>> Abbedd
>>>>>
>>>
>>>Why don't you stick that horn up your ass for a while and chill out. It is
>>>not my fault you embarrassed yourself. You asked for opinions, and you're
>>>getting them.
>>
>> Opinions form pompous putzes like you. You did not even hear the
>> original and you are judgeing by an MP3. You own records. I design
>> instruments that get recorded.
>>
>
>I sell to NASA so that makes me an astronaut. I see. Gotta update my CV.
>Speaking of pompous...
>
>> B & W 802s are a joke.
>>>
>
>No baby, the joke is on you both professionally and intellectually. Luckily
>for you, you're so handsome ;-)
>
>I think you're just ****ed 'cause you cannot afford the B&W's or any other
>decent gear...
>
I have Bozak Symphonies . I don't need modern hi end **** speakers. I
can get an eq and boost the mids and highs much cheaper Listen to your
juiced CDS. I don't care. And when you figure out the role of a
design engineer and acoustician get off you mountain and call me.

Abbedd

p.s. B & W 802s are **** yesterday today and tomorrow.
>Cheers,
>
>Margaret
>

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 22nd 04, 04:08 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:44:42 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:21:49 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:21:24 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>>>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>>>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>>>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>>>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
>>>>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
>>>>>>> highs
>>>>>>> of lps and CDs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In response to my equipment
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fisher 500C
>>>>>>> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
>>>>>>> at this time)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
>>>>>>> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This person is Tom Deacon the executive producer of the entire Great
>>>>>>> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
>>>>>>> everybody)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
>>>>>>> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
>>>>>>> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
>>>>>>> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
>>>>>>> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Opinions please
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Jeffrey,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now you've done it! I never thought it possible but I've got to more
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>less
>>>>>>agree with Krueger. Pthhhhhttt! Now that that's out of the way, here's
>>>>>>what
>>>>>>I think about your recordings. I think that you're pulling our
>>>>>>collective
>>>>>>leg here. I think you purposely screwed up the eq to see how many
>>>>>>lemmings
>>>>>>would jump on your wagon. Seriously. I really don't want to insult you
>>>>>>but... there you go.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just in case you are serious let me elaborate a little. Played the
>>>>>>files
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>my laptop feeding the digital output to a Grace 901 DAC/amp that was
>>>>>>driving
>>>>>>Sennheiser HD 600 and Grado RS-1 headphones. I also listened through
>>>>>>Genelec
>>>>>>S30D monitors in "midfield" configuration and through a pair of
>>>>>>Avantgarde
>>>>>>Trio horn speakers driven by Nagra tube amps in a room that was more
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>less
>>>>>>designed around the speakers. So I think it is fair to say that the
>>>>>>setups
>>>>>>varied enough to give your mixes a fair chance. However, my
>>>>>>impressions
>>>>>>were
>>>>>>overwhelmingly similar regardless of the setup I used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>* Overwhelming and ill-defined, boomy mid-bass
>>>>>>* No deep bass whatsoever
>>>>>>* I've probably never heard strings honk as bad (DSP'd SWL doesn't
>>>>>>count!)
>>>>>>* No highs whatsoever - actually not unlike Bose 901's
>>>>>>* Unrefined and screechy upper mids
>>>>>>* Actually sounded best through a large portable radio that I tried
>>>>>>for
>>>>>>kicks (Grundig Satellit 650)
>>>>>>* It absolutely amazes me that someone can mix this kind of a boomy
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>muddy soup with the DT990's as these phones have characteristically
>>>>>>exaggerated midbass and unrefined highs. I would expect someone to
>>>>>>compensate for those traits, not to build on them. (I owned DT990's
>>>>>>for
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>couple of years before I switched to Sennheisers).
>>>>>>* Perhaps the most telling conclusion was that when I converter the
>>>>>>signal
>>>>>>to FM in order to check it out with the Sat 650, absolutely nothing
>>>>>>was
>>>>>>missing. Did you perhaps do this as a portable radio mix 'cause it
>>>>>>wasn't
>>>>>>half bad as such (the midrange honk aside)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm sorry if I offended you but your comment on the B&W 802's alone
>>>>>>tells
>>>>>>me
>>>>>>that something's wrong here. They CAN sound bad if the room is not up
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>snuff, if they are not set up properly or if they are not fed with
>>>>>>very
>>>>>>high
>>>>>>powered SS amps. And they will sound bad regardless if they are fed a
>>>>>>bad
>>>>>>source material. Don't own them but hear them frequently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't know about your equipmeent specifically but I use a rebuilt
>>>>>>Fisher
>>>>>>800C in my shack to amplify the signal from various radios. It is very
>>>>>>mellow sounding and does a good job dealing with the various digital
>>>>>>gremlins put out by modern DSP receivers. But I'll try it one of these
>>>>>>days
>>>>>>with my Avantgardes out of curiosity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I haven't heard the Bozaks but given their age, if they were anywhere
>>>>>>near
>>>>>>as good as the 802's, Bozak would now have a monopoly in high fidelity
>>>>>>loudspeakers! However, if they sound better to YOU than the B&W's or
>>>>>>Dunlavy's then it is perfectly OK with me. In any case don't try to
>>>>>>drive
>>>>>>the 802's with the Fisher 'cause it'll blow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As far as my idea of a good classical recording goes, try just about
>>>>>>anything by Ondine or Reference Recordings. I also often demo my
>>>>>>Avantgardes
>>>>>>with the Phillips Misa Criolla disc with Carreras.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks for the cool post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Margaret
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> How can you judge my work without hearing the source.
>>>>
>>>>Having a digital and vinyl library of 4000-5000 recordings, I'm betting
>>>>on
>>>>the fact that it cannot get worse than your butchered mix.
>>>>
>>>>>And what are your qualifications.
>>>>
>>>>Unlike you, I own a few systems that ARE HIGH FIDELITY.
>>>>
>>>>> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I'm sure they sound bad if fed that cluster**** mix of yours. But it is
>>>>not
>>>>B&W's that are ****, your "work" is!
>>>>
>>>>> Abbedd
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Why don't you stick that horn up your ass for a while and chill out. It
>>>>is
>>>>not my fault you embarrassed yourself. You asked for opinions, and
>>>>you're
>>>>getting them.
>>>
>>> Opinions form pompous putzes like you. You did not even hear the
>>> original and you are judgeing by an MP3. You own records. I design
>>> instruments that get recorded.
>>>
>>
>>I sell to NASA so that makes me an astronaut. I see. Gotta update my CV.
>>Speaking of pompous...
>>
>>> B & W 802s are a joke.
>>>>
>>
>>No baby, the joke is on you both professionally and intellectually.
>>Luckily
>>for you, you're so handsome ;-)
>>
>>I think you're just ****ed 'cause you cannot afford the B&W's or any other
>>decent gear...
>>
> I have Bozak Symphonies . I don't need modern hi end **** speakers. I
> can get an eq and boost the mids and highs much cheaper Listen to your
> juiced CDS. I don't care. And when you figure out the role of a
> design engineer and acoustician get off you mountain and call me.
>

You're certainly not a recording engineer of any merit. Not even a competent
amateur.

> Abbedd
>
> p.s. B & W 802s are **** yesterday today and tomorrow.

I'm sorry you are so incompetent.

Given your fragile ego and obvious insecurity perhaps you should change the
title from "opinions needed please" to "praise and recognition needed to
build confidence and self-esteem"

>>Cheers,
>>
>>Margaret
>>

Cheers,

Margaret

PS. I think you're all hair and no balls, baby.

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 22nd 04, 04:23 AM

There we go.

Attention: Everybody be extra nice to Abdul in this thread so he can feel
like a man and won't have to resort to little blue pills ;-)

I'll start.

You're so handsome, Abdul. Will you take me out for a spin on your camel?

With admiration,

Margaret

Clyde Slick

September 22nd 04, 04:33 AM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
>
> > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:44:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> >>>>
> >>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> >>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> >>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> >>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> >>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
> >>>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
> >>>>> like.
> >>>>
> >>>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably
> >>>> fit your description better than the engineers do.
> >>
> >>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> >>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
> >>>>> highs of lps and CDs.
> >>
> >>>> And the URL for downloading is??
> >>> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd
> >>
> >> I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high
> >> fidelity.
> >>
> >> When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound
> >> nasal, raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not
> >> enough deep bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were
> >> mastered based on listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite
> >> a bit different.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Arny
> >
> > You have been listening to recorded music so long you don't know what
> > instruments sound like. Because you said " Lacking in presence" I know
> > I have been sucessful.
>
> Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices just
about
> every weekend.
>
>

That doesn't mean you do them well.

Robert Morein

September 22nd 04, 04:47 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:38:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:01:52 -0400, "Robert Morein"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
[snip]
> >> >
> >Abbedd,
> > I humbly suggest you do a little inexpensive experimentation. Hafler
> >DH-200 amps, in particular, sometimes go for $100 or so on eBay. Judging
by
> >your preferences, I'm optimistic you might like them.
> >
> >Bob
> >
>
> There is nothing wrong with a Fisher 500C. Unless you having something
> about tubes

Tubes can be good, but there are a lot better tubes. I concur with Arny that
you should look for something better, either tube or solid state. I'm
recommending you look at the Hafler because the build quality is excellent,
it's much cheaper than good tubes, and the sound is in the direction of what
you're saying you like.

You shouldn't be so certain about your Fisher. As Arny says, it's very old,
and even at the time of manufacture, it was somewhat compromised. All I'm
saying is, you need to do some comparisons. Then, if you like your Fisher,
stick with it.
>
> Hafler? had a Dynaco 80. It was garbage.
>
> Abbedd

Dynaco 80 was garbage. I had one too.
When David Hafler started his own company, he was finally able to build
equipment the way he wanted to. It's totally different.

Carl Valle

September 22nd 04, 04:58 AM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> >
> > > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:44:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> > >>
> > >>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> "ansermetniac" > wrote in message
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> > >>>>> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> > >>>>> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> > >>>>> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> > >>>>> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music
> > >>>>> for so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound
> > >>>>> like.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Perhaps. These days music is made to sell to people who probably
> > >>>> fit your description better than the engineers do.
> > >>
> > >>>>> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> > >>>>> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and
> > >>>>> highs of lps and CDs.
> > >>
> > >>>> And the URL for downloading is??
> > >>> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd
> > >>
> > >> I like the music as music, but not as an example of good high
> > >> fidelity.
> > >>
> > >> When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound
> > >> nasal, raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not
> > >> enough deep bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were
> > >> mastered based on listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite
> > >> a bit different.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Arny
> > >
> > > You have been listening to recorded music so long you don't know what
> > > instruments sound like. Because you said " Lacking in presence" I know
> > > I have been sucessful.
> >
> > Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices just
> about
> > every weekend.
> >
> >
>
> That doesn't mean you do them well.
>
>

What label do your recordings appear on Arny?

MINe 109

September 22nd 04, 05:05 AM

In article >,
ansermetniac > wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:41:55 GMT, MINe 109 >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > ansermetniac > wrote:
> >
> >> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
> >
> >Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as classical
> >music monitors isn't a plus!
> >
> >I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
> >is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to be
> >near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
> >integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.
> >
> >Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
> >How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?

> I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
> mastered the 3 3/4 open reel

Well, the shoe's on the other foot now. How do *you* know what the
source material really was?

Stephen

Carl Valle

September 22nd 04, 05:48 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...

> I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
> mastered the 3 3/4 open reel
>
>

Abbedd,

I think you basically said it all right there...
There is simply no way a 3.75ips tape can even be called a 'master'
what was on that tape was all you had and then you filtered some out
you have something less than a consumer mass produced tape now...
Not only that, but the wow and flutter of your copy is simply awful
either the tape is bad or you have a bad deck. It is very difficult to get
past that defect.

The idea of re-mastering, which is actually what you did, even from a bad
original, is to preserve everything that is there. Then you can apply some
equalization at playback, maybe some filtering to cut hiss...
Your Mp3 file certainly is worse sounding than most nonesuch tapes I have.

The idea of criticizing, broad band, CD recordings, SS amps, and BW's to me
makes absolutely no sense. Perhaps you think they are overkill, but
certainly I can make my (or anybody else's for that matter) system sound
just as bad as your file by squashing the dynamics with a Behringer and
setting my equalizer to a bell curve. I cannot as easily reproduce your wow
and flutter however because my tape decks are all direct drive...

I listened to only the first of the Mp3 on a extigy usb and a pair of tried
and true koss phones. Your other files may sound better. I feel that you
need to re-think what you are doing and back off a bit on your editorial
opinions on the state of the art. I agree with most of the other posters on
here that your equipment may be leading you astray. Perhaps you should go
out and listen to something a little better.

Carl

Carl Valle

September 22nd 04, 05:49 AM

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Carl Valle said:
>
> > > > Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices
just about
> > > > every weekend.
>
> > What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
>
> They're on LatrineT Records. You can find them everywhere you'd never
> think to look.
>
>
>
>
No ****?
Carl

Robert Morein

September 22nd 04, 06:08 AM

Carl Valle

September 22nd 04, 06:10 AM

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> ansermetniac > wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:41:55 GMT, MINe 109 >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >In article >,
> > > ansermetniac > wrote:
> > >
> > >> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
> > >
> > >Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as
classical
> > >music monitors isn't a plus!
> > >
> > >I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
> > >is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to
be
> > >near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
> > >integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.
> > >
> > >Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
> > >How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?
>
> > I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
> > mastered the 3 3/4 open reel
>
> Well, the shoe's on the other foot now. How do *you* know what the
> source material really was?
>
> Stephen

Mastering is making the original session recording into a production piece.
It is NOT copying a high speed duplicated consumer tape onto a computer....
This is just about as far from the source material as you can get
Not only that, the copy tape is probably 20 years old or better, probably
not correctly stored, and sourced on a consumer reel machine.
The LP version would probably give you a hint of what this thing is supposed
to sound like...
And it's probably available on CD anyway
I think this guy needs to get a CD player, a decent amp and a pair of
speakers, Energy Veritas, Infinity Intermezzo, Martin Logan Statement,
Monitor Audio Silver, Paradigm Monitor 90, Polk RT5000, PSB Stratus all come
to mind actually. Any one would blow those bozaks into the basement
ratskeller.... and you can get em all used.... oh I forgot Vandersteen 3A

Carl

Carl

ansermetniac

September 22nd 04, 07:54 AM

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 04:05:23 GMT, MINe 109 >
wrote:

>In article >,
> ansermetniac > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:41:55 GMT, MINe 109 >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> > ansermetniac > wrote:
>> >
>> >> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>> >
>> >Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as classical
>> >music monitors isn't a plus!
>> >
>> >I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
>> >is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to be
>> >near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
>> >integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.
>> >
>> >Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
>> >How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?
>
>> I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
>> mastered the 3 3/4 open reel
>
>Well, the shoe's on the other foot now. How do *you* know what the
>source material really was?
>
>Stephen

Because I know what instruments sound like and the capabilities of
mics and tape decks. If record companies presented flat recordings
there would be a revolt. Look at thre **** I am gettting. It is
unfortunate that by coincidence my mp3s of the week featured poor
sources.

Believe me, whatever "Music" was on that open reel, I found it.

Abbedd

Arny Krueger

September 22nd 04, 10:56 AM

"Carl Valle" > wrote in message
. com
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> Carl Valle said:
>>
>>>>> Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices
>>>>> just about every weekend.
>>
>>> What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
>>
>> They're on LatrineT Records. You can find them everywhere you'd never
>> think to look.

Nothing like a little class envy to start the day, eh Carl?

Clyde Slick

September 22nd 04, 12:44 PM

"Carl Valle" > wrote in message
om...
> >
> >
>
> What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
>
>

Sharmin

MINe 109

September 22nd 04, 01:14 PM

In article >,
ansermetniac > wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 04:05:23 GMT, MINe 109 >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > ansermetniac > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:41:55 GMT, MINe 109 >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article >,
> >> > ansermetniac > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
> >> >
> >> >Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as classical
> >> >music monitors isn't a plus!
> >> >
> >> >I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
> >> >is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to be
> >> >near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
> >> >integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.
> >> >
> >> >Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
> >> >How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?
> >
> >> I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
> >> mastered the 3 3/4 open reel
> >
> >Well, the shoe's on the other foot now. How do *you* know what the
> >source material really was?
> >
> >Stephen
>
> Because I know what instruments sound like and the capabilities of
> mics and tape decks. If record companies presented flat recordings
> there would be a revolt. Look at thre **** I am gettting. It is
> unfortunate that by coincidence my mp3s of the week featured poor
> sources.

Some folks around here might prefer fidelity to the recording rather
than hear someone else's view of what it should have sounded like. We're
the ones who own those nutty preamps with no tone controls: Pearl vs
Dutton.

> Believe me, whatever "Music" was on that open reel, I found it.

How about a short sample of the original for comparison?

Stephen

Clyde Slick

September 22nd 04, 01:15 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Carl Valle" > wrote in message
> . com
> > "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >>
> >> Carl Valle said:
> >>
> >>>>> Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices
> >>>>> just about every weekend.
> >>
> >>> What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
> >>
> >> They're on LatrineT Records. You can find them everywhere you'd never
> >> think to look.
>
> Nothing like a little class envy to start the day, eh Carl?
>
>

Arny's got one of those cushiony soft toilet seats we all
wish we could afford.

MINe 109

September 22nd 04, 01:22 PM

In article >,
"Carl Valle" > wrote:

> I think this guy needs to get a CD player, a decent amp and a pair of
> speakers, Energy Veritas, Infinity Intermezzo, Martin Logan Statement,
> Monitor Audio Silver, Paradigm Monitor 90, Polk RT5000, PSB Stratus all come
> to mind actually. Any one would blow those bozaks into the basement
> ratskeller.... and you can get em all used.... oh I forgot Vandersteen 3A

But then his eq's files wouldn't sound good anymore! :-)

Remember, everyone, he's not here for equipment recommendations. He
wants to be told his Fisher/Bozak is good enough to support his
arguments about recorded sound quality.

Stephen

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 22nd 04, 02:37 PM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 04:05:23 GMT, MINe 109 >
> wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> ansermetniac > wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:41:55 GMT, MINe 109 >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In article >,
>>> > ansermetniac > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> BTW the B & W 802s are Musical ****.
>>> >
>>> >Well, if you think all cds sound bad, then their reputation as
>>> >classical
>>> >music monitors isn't a plus!
>>> >
>>> >I listened to the first mvmt of the Koncertstucke and I think the re-eq
>>> >is sincere. The solo horns probably sound more like what it's like to
>>> >be
>>> >near real horns (really near!) than the raw tape, but at the cost of
>>> >integrity in a recording that didn't have much to spare.
>>> >
>>> >Losing the high end to eliminate tape hiss is a nose-spite-face deal.
>>> >How does it help harmonic balance to eliminate those higher partials?
>>
>>> I only eliminated the partials that were boosted by the guy who
>>> mastered the 3 3/4 open reel
>>
>>Well, the shoe's on the other foot now. How do *you* know what the
>>source material really was?
>>
>>Stephen
>
> Because I know what instruments sound like

BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Obviously not!

> and the capabilities of
> mics and tape decks.

You haven't got a clue. That mp.3 destroyed you for good.

>If record companies presented flat recordings
> there would be a revolt.

Not many people use obsolete equipment like yours anymore. Have you checked
whether there's any foam left in your driver surrounds? It probably rotted
away 10 years ago and that would explain your horrible "mix".

> Look at thre **** I am gettting.

BAAAHHH! Poor little baby. Comes here looking for support but decides to
disguise it as "need opinions please" hoping that the link to his website
will convince everyone of his status as a major player in the biz and
consequently give an automatic heads up. Too bad houses built of hair don't
hold up in the wind.

That other guy was right on the money. You're an incompetent charlatan with
substandard equipment.

>It is
> unfortunate that by coincidence my mp3s of the week featured poor
> sources.

It is not coincidence, you dunce. You "re-engineered" it. You claimed it was
something "better" when in fact it is laughably bad compared to anything
besides SW radio. You are clearly incompetent and people recognize it. If I
was that boss of yours, I'd kick the crap outta you for unveiling the
company skeletons that have resided in the closet since the get-go. Surely
your bosses little mouthpiece operation needs a better mouthpiece than you.

>
> Believe me, whatever "Music" was on that open reel, I found it.
>

I agree. You found it and ****ed it up.

I think that your entire mouthpiece operation must be what people call
"snakeoil" and "flooby dust" in these circles.

Cheers,

Margaret

Tim Brown

September 22nd 04, 02:51 PM

ansermetniac > wrote in message >...
> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces

I'd really like to try your mouthpieces, but I can't affor them. My
setup is a Yamaha YTS-62, a Brillhart Ebolin (the size escapes me
right now) for concert band and a Berg Larsen 100-2 stainless steel
for jazz. VanDoren reeds. For jazz I like flexiblity and mellowness,
ala Ben Webster.

> it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. So much so that
> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.

Yeah, it's the producers too. The media and the hardware are not the
problem.

> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>
> Opinions please

I think it's producers who care more about the bottom line than music.
They go for shock value, first impressions. These days they're under
pressure, with falling sales due to file sharing, etc.

TB

Tim Brown

September 22nd 04, 03:48 PM

ansermetniac > wrote in message >...
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:28:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> >> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
> >> of lps and CDs.
> >
> >And the URL for downloading is??
> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd

I listened to some of these and, frankly, I couldn't get past (what I
hope were) the mp3 artifacts.

TB

Sander deWaal

September 22nd 04, 04:48 PM

(Tim Brown) said:

>ansermetniac > wrote in message >...

>> http://members.aol.com/abbedd/abbedd

>I listened to some of these and, frankly, I couldn't get past (what I
>hope were) the mp3 artifacts.

I can understand and even appreciate differences in mastering, but
what's with the wow and flutter?

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Carl Valle

September 22nd 04, 09:42 PM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Carl Valle" > wrote in message
> > . com
> > > "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Carl Valle said:
> > >>
> > >>>>> Try again. I do live recording of acoustic instruments and voices
> > >>>>> just about every weekend.
> > >>
> > >>> What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
> > >>
> > >> They're on LatrineT Records. You can find them everywhere you'd never
> > >> think to look.
> >
> > Nothing like a little class envy to start the day, eh Carl?
> >
> >
>
> Arny's got one of those cushiony soft toilet seats we all
> wish we could afford.
>
>

I have no idea what you mean by class envy arny
but how about answering my question. Have you actually recorded anything
that has been released that I can listen to? Or do you mean amateur? It's
not an insult.
Carl

Robert Morein

September 23rd 04, 03:54 PM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Carl Valle" > wrote in message
> om...
> > >
> > >
> >
> > What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
> >
> >
>
> Sharmin
>
Part of the Latrino Group?

Bruce J. Richman

September 23rd 04, 04:25 PM

Robert Morein wrote:
'

>"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Carl Valle" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > What label do your recordings appear on Arny?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Sharmin
>>
>Part of the Latrino Group?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

They can also be used when $ 1000 bills for wiping are not available.

Bruce J. Richman

Howard Ferstler

September 23rd 04, 05:45 PM

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote:

> They can also be used when $ 1000 bills for wiping are not available.

Another mid-morning post. Do you have a job?

Howard Ferstler

Bruce J. Richman

September 23rd 04, 06:27 PM

Howard Ferstler demonstrates his short-term memory problems:

>"Bruce J. Richman" wrote:
>
>> They can also be used when $ 1000 bills for wiping are not available.
>
>Another mid-morning post. Do you have a job?
>
>Howard Ferstler
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Did you forget that you already made a fool of yourself by asking me this
question. Look up the word "perseveration" with particular reference to
thought disorders and organic brain disease. At your age, both syndromes are
quite likely to be operative.

Bruce J. Richman

Howard Ferstler

September 23rd 04, 06:43 PM

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote:
>
> Howard Ferstler demonstrates his short-term memory problems:

> >Another mid-morning post. Do you have a job?

> Did you forget that you already made a fool of yourself by asking me this
> question. Look up the word "perseveration" with particular reference to
> thought disorders and organic brain disease. At your age, both syndromes are
> quite likely to be operative.

Hey, get a job. Stop living on welfare.

Howard Ferstler

Carl Valle

September 23rd 04, 09:33 PM

"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...

> Hey, get a job. Stop living on welfare.
>
> Howard Ferstler

Howard
I checked around and three of your tomes are out of print, the other is not
available.
Besides the copies you bought yourself, how many of these audio bibles
exist?
Do you have a job?
Carl

Bruce J. Richman

September 23rd 04, 10:00 PM

Carl Valle wrote:

>"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Hey, get a job. Stop living on welfare.
>>
>> Howard Ferstler
>
>Howard
>I checked around and three of your tomes are out of print, the other is not
>available.
>Besides the copies you bought yourself, how many of these audio bibles
>exist?
>Do you have a job?
>Carl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

His "job" appears to be as a spokesman/representative of the mentally ill on
Usenet newsgroups.

Bruce J. Richman

Carl Valle

September 23rd 04, 11:24 PM

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Carl Valle wrote:
>
>
> >"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Hey, get a job. Stop living on welfare.
> >>
> >> Howard Ferstler
> >
> >Howard
> >I checked around and three of your tomes are out of print, the other is
not
> >available.
> >Besides the copies you bought yourself, how many of these audio bibles
> >exist?
> >Do you have a job?
> >Carl
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> His "job" appears to be as a spokesman/representative of the mentally ill
on
> Usenet newsgroups.
>
>
> Bruce J. Richman
>
>
>

Hi Bruce

You know, Howard sells his books and his articles to the same type of people
who read Psychology Today and assume they are well informed. His books are
like the medium coke at McDonalds. I mean how many do you need? There is so
much crap published today that has been reviewed for sales rather than
content. Howard's work is like that except that it has an really unappealing
side of lower middle class nastiness. Kind of like a Rush Limbaugh of audio.

On this forum that name calling, unimaginative, noisy, rude, pig-headed,
class biased, narrow minded, boorish, nasty, vile, pit-bull, last man
standing, talks loud in restaurants, leaves a cell phone on in concerts,
farts in public, and belches at church personality of his is amplified.

He spews his opinions on imaging and recording and soundstage while at the
same time trying to, in his own words, "bring an end to SOTA and high
fidelity as a passion. He is like a coyote caught in a bear trap, trying to
chew off his hindquarters to make his self-importance known.

It is in a way sad, but ever more disgusting with each word he regurgitates
from some other persons long lost diatribe. It would not be quite as bad if
his vomit were at least original... Alas it is not.

Even if I were to need to be told that a '70's Pioneer receiver sounds like
a Krell, which I am not, Howard's book would be, based on his posts here,
the last I would look at. He is so into himself that he doesn't even realize
that everyone who posts on this newsgroup either politely disagrees with
him, or thinks of him as a clown, or worse.

I stand by John Atkinson and Stereophile's review of Howard's work. That
piece was an imaginative, informed, well written, and completely accurate
assessment of Howard's Leagcy tome. This review is in fact why I say I don't
need to read Howie's work to know it is tripe. I mean if someone you trust
tells you there is dog **** on your shoe, you don't have to lick it do you?

Does this post indicate clearly enough how I feel about Mr. Ferstler's work?

Carl

Carl Valle

September 24th 04, 01:06 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...

> Opinions please
>
> Jeffrey "Abbedd" Powell
> Chief Engineer/Acoustician
> Dave Guardala Mouthpieces, Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>

Below is a direct downloadable link to a MP3 music file
I created this file from a 3.75 ips commercial recording similar to what
Abbedd says he did
It is Columbia DT 779 - Eugene Ormandy, Philadelphia - Trumpet Voluntary
4Track/2Channel 3.75
Equipment is a AKAI 747, Extigy Soundcard, Sony DTC-700 DAT used to
digitize, Burwen Research DNF1200A used to reduce tape hiss.
MP3 is 192 written with Sony Sound Forge 7.0b
No effects were used after the fact.
This is the best I could do from the tape
It demonstartes how bad open reel mass produced tapes really are
But ...
I extracted the music from the file without filters and re-eq. It is warts
and all, as they say.
It does not suffer from a bad response curve, has about 55db of S/N, and
virtually no flutter.
I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one submitted
for
opinion by Abbedd

http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/bc/40dba242_3a2/bc/Audio+Test+NR+Demo/Trumpet+Voluntary+-+Philadelphia+-+Ormandy+-+Columbia+DT779.mp3?bfNO2UBB0nwwhGWM

Carl

Bruce J. Richman

September 24th 04, 05:17 AM

Carl Valle wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Carl Valle wrote:
>>
>>
>> >"Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >> Hey, get a job. Stop living on welfare.
>> >>
>> >> Howard Ferstler
>> >
>> >Howard
>> >I checked around and three of your tomes are out of print, the other is
>not
>> >available.
>> >Besides the copies you bought yourself, how many of these audio bibles
>> >exist?
>> >Do you have a job?
>> >Carl
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> His "job" appears to be as a spokesman/representative of the mentally ill
>on
>> Usenet newsgroups.
>>
>>
>> Bruce J. Richman
>>
>>
>>
>
>Hi Bruce
>
>You know, Howard sells his books and his articles to the same type of people
>who read Psychology Today and assume they are well informed. His books are
>like the medium coke at McDonalds. I mean how many do you need? There is so
>much crap published today that has been reviewed for sales rather than
>content. Howard's work is like that except that it has an really unappealing
>side of lower middle class nastiness. Kind of like a Rush Limbaugh of audio.
>
>On this forum that name calling, unimaginative, noisy, rude, pig-headed,
>class biased, narrow minded, boorish, nasty, vile, pit-bull, last man
>standing, talks loud in restaurants, leaves a cell phone on in concerts,
>farts in public, and belches at church personality of his is amplified.
>
>He spews his opinions on imaging and recording and soundstage while at the
>same time trying to, in his own words, "bring an end to SOTA and high
>fidelity as a passion. He is like a coyote caught in a bear trap, trying to
>chew off his hindquarters to make his self-importance known.
>
>It is in a way sad, but ever more disgusting with each word he regurgitates
>from some other persons long lost diatribe. It would not be quite as bad if
>his vomit were at least original... Alas it is not.
>
>Even if I were to need to be told that a '70's Pioneer receiver sounds like
>a Krell, which I am not, Howard's book would be, based on his posts here,
>the last I would look at. He is so into himself that he doesn't even realize
>that everyone who posts on this newsgroup either politely disagrees with
>him, or thinks of him as a clown, or worse.
>
>I stand by John Atkinson and Stereophile's review of Howard's work. That
>piece was an imaginative, informed, well written, and completely accurate
>assessment of Howard's Leagcy tome. This review is in fact why I say I don't
>need to read Howie's work to know it is tripe. I mean if someone you trust
>tells you there is dog **** on your shoe, you don't have to lick it do you?
>
>Does this post indicate clearly enough how I feel about Mr. Ferstler's work?
>
>Carl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

It certainly is far more interesting and valid then any of the delusional
sewage that has seeped from Ferstler's computer. I think you've nicely
summarized how most RAO participants feel about this unethical, dishonest, and
libel-spreading creep.

Bruce J. Richman

jeffc

September 24th 04, 05:31 AM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...

> As a designer of the highest quality of sex mouthpieces

Now that is interesting - I'd like to hear more about that.

Joseph Oberlander

September 24th 04, 09:19 AM

Bruce J. Richman wrote:

> Dave Guadela wrote:
>
>
>
>>As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
>>acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
>>engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
>>Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
>>engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
>>so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>>
>>
>
>
> For whatever reason, whether it is overemphasis of midrange and treble in the
> recording or mastering stages, I think your perception of what many CDs sound
> like is correct.

I have a simpler theory. Most of these engineers are middle-aged and
their upper frequency response is shot.

Joseph Oberlander

September 24th 04, 09:21 AM

Sander deWaal wrote:

> (Bruce J. Richman)said:
>
>
>>You must be psychic. I just posted a response in which I point out that I used
>>to run a pair of ESL 57's with a Fisher 400 receiver and the sound was truly
>>excellent.
>
>
> I *am* a little psychic.
> I predict some nasty ****storm from north-Florida and/or the Michigan
> area already :-)

Their loss. I remember hearing one of those old tanks. It's
really not voodoo to build a good amplifier if you put enough
mass into the main components.(heavy was an understatement - lol)

Joseph Oberlander

September 24th 04, 09:25 AM

Arny Krueger wrote:

> When reproduced over a modern system, these recordings tend to sound nasal,
> raspy, lacking in presence, with too much upper bass and not enough deep
> bass. I can't help but suspect that were they were mastered based on
> listening with modern speakers, they'd sound quite a bit different.

It also could be that they kludged the micing and/or the mics are
just not very good at lower frequencies. I've seen some awful
equipment in studios.

ansermetniac

September 24th 04, 10:26 AM

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
wrote:

>I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one submitted
>for
>opinion by Abbedd

I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
cds are juiced

Abbedd

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 24th 04, 04:45 PM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
> wrote:
>
>>I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one submitted
>>for
>>opinion by Abbedd
>
> I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
> cds are juiced
>
> Abbedd
>

Dear Mr. "Lights Out":

1.Your MP3 demonstrated that your audio equipment is laughably bad.
Regardless of the quality of the original.

2. Your failure to notice that your equipment suck amply demonstrated that
you are highly incompetent and don't know what you are talking about.

3. Therefore, your inane ramblings on the qualities of CD's are irrelevant
and worthless.

4. With your moronic boasting you also managed to broadcast to the entire
Usenet that Dave Guardala mouthpieces is build on a really shaky foundation
with a "chief engineer" and "acoustician" who is deaf as a door knob. And
not as smart.

Cheers,

Margaret

MINe 109

September 24th 04, 04:57 PM

In article >,
ansermetniac > wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
> wrote:
>
> >I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one submitted
> >for
> >opinion by Abbedd
>
> I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
> cds are juiced

If all cds but one sound bad to me, I'd take another look at my
equipment. Digital had some growing pains, but one surprise for me when
I substantially upgraded my system was how good certain early cds sound.
You haven't mentioned your source, but it could be you are using a
computer and sound card. This can work, but there are inherent drawbacks
that have to be overcome, fan noise and the like.

As for pop and jazz,learn who the 'good guys' are. These names aren't
guarantees of great sound but you stand a better chance when you see
Steve Hoffman, Vic Anesini, Fine, et al, just as I think twice about an
Inglot or Peter Mew or Jon Astley.

On the other hand, you may have succeeded in eq'ing to your satisfaction
on your system. Bravo, but don't expect the results to translate to
other systems.

Stephen

ansermetniac

September 24th 04, 05:47 PM

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:45:58 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> wrote:

>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one submitted
>>>for
>>>opinion by Abbedd
>>
>> I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
>> cds are juiced
>>
>> Abbedd
>>
>
>Dear Mr. "Lights Out":
>
>1.Your MP3 demonstrated that your audio equipment is laughably bad.
>Regardless of the quality of the original.
>
>2. Your failure to notice that your equipment suck amply demonstrated that
>you are highly incompetent and don't know what you are talking about.
>
>3. Therefore, your inane ramblings on the qualities of CD's are irrelevant
>and worthless.
>
>4. With your moronic boasting you also managed to broadcast to the entire
>Usenet that Dave Guardala mouthpieces is build on a really shaky foundation
>with a "chief engineer" and "acoustician" who is deaf as a door knob. And
>not as smart.
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>Margaret

So Branford Marsalis Michael Brecker Tom Scott et al play my pieces
because I am an idiot. Good theory Peggy

Abbedd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 24th 04, 05:55 PM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:45:58 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one
>>>>submitted
>>>>for
>>>>opinion by Abbedd
>>>
>>> I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
>>> cds are juiced
>>>
>>> Abbedd
>>>
>>
>>Dear Mr. "Lights Out":
>>
>>1.Your MP3 demonstrated that your audio equipment is laughably bad.
>>Regardless of the quality of the original.
>>
>>2. Your failure to notice that your equipment suck amply demonstrated that
>>you are highly incompetent and don't know what you are talking about.
>>
>>3. Therefore, your inane ramblings on the qualities of CD's are irrelevant
>>and worthless.
>>
>>4. With your moronic boasting you also managed to broadcast to the entire
>>Usenet that Dave Guardala mouthpieces is build on a really shaky
>>foundation
>>with a "chief engineer" and "acoustician" who is deaf as a door knob. And
>>not as smart.
>>
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Margaret
>
> So Branford Marsalis Michael Brecker Tom Scott et al play my pieces
> because I am an idiot. Good theory Peggy
>
> Abbedd
>>

Apparently so. Some idiots get lucky.

Cheers,

Margaret

ansermetniac

September 24th 04, 06:19 PM

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:55:40 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> wrote:

>
>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:45:58 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one
>>>>>submitted
>>>>>for
>>>>>opinion by Abbedd
>>>>
>>>> I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
>>>> cds are juiced
>>>>
>>>> Abbedd
>>>>
>>>
>>>Dear Mr. "Lights Out":
>>>
>>>1.Your MP3 demonstrated that your audio equipment is laughably bad.
>>>Regardless of the quality of the original.
>>>
>>>2. Your failure to notice that your equipment suck amply demonstrated that
>>>you are highly incompetent and don't know what you are talking about.
>>>
>>>3. Therefore, your inane ramblings on the qualities of CD's are irrelevant
>>>and worthless.
>>>
>>>4. With your moronic boasting you also managed to broadcast to the entire
>>>Usenet that Dave Guardala mouthpieces is build on a really shaky
>>>foundation
>>>with a "chief engineer" and "acoustician" who is deaf as a door knob. And
>>>not as smart.
>>>
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Margaret
>>
>> So Branford Marsalis Michael Brecker Tom Scott et al play my pieces
>> because I am an idiot. Good theory Peggy
>>
>> Abbedd
>>>
>
>Apparently so. Some idiots get lucky.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Margaret
>
>

Piggy

Can't argue with you anymore. Mom says I can't argue with idiots

Abbedd

johnebravo836

September 24th 04, 09:09 PM

ansermetniac wrote:

> As a designer of the highest quality of sax mouthpieces(I am the
> acoustician and manufacturing engineer , my partner the mechanical
> engineer) it appals me that CDs are eqd so badly. SO much so that
> Digital is given the bad rap and not the incompetent mastering
> engineers . These engineers have been listening to recorded music for
> so long they haven't a clue as to what instruments realy sound like.
>
>
> I offer mp3s of the week of rare classical records and concerts
> remastered by me in sound that does not have the juiced mids and highs
> of lps and CDs.
>
> In response to my equipment
>
> Fisher 500C
> Bozak Rhapsodys(I don't have the large room needed for my Symphonies
> at this time)
>
> a member of the rec.music.classical.recording group said
>
> 1) Fisher never made a good receiver
> 2) Bozaks are antequated
>
> This person is Tom Deacon

Anyone who regularly reads both rec.audio.opinion and
rec.music.classical.recordings is likely to have a sudden "oh, ****",
nauseous, deja vu feeling right about this point . . .

> the executive producer of the entire Great
> Pianists of the century set from Phillips(They licensed from
> everybody)
>
> I am not sure whether CDs sound the way they do to please the masses
> or because of incompetence. With statements like the above I lean
> toward incompetence. How else could Bill Inglot become tops in his
> field His R n R stuff is abominable but did you hear his Jazz for
> Atlantic. Giant Steps of mids and highs. Not Trane
>
> Opinions please
>
> Jeffrey "Abbedd" Powell
> Chief Engineer/Acoustician
> Dave Guardala Mouthpieces, Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>

Howard Ferstler

September 24th 04, 11:38 PM

Carl Valle wrote:
>
> "Howard Ferstler" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Hey, get a job. Stop living on welfare.

> Howard
> I checked around and three of your tomes are out of print, the other is not
> available.
> Besides the copies you bought yourself, how many of these audio bibles
> exist?
> Do you have a job?
> Carl

I'm retired. The books have all sold out and are now OP. The
publishers have always given me ten free copies, so there
has never been a need for me to buy any more.

I think that you can purchase used copies by going to a used
book web site. Try AddALL or Bibliofind.

Howard Ferstler

Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt

September 24th 04, 11:53 PM

"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:55:40 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:45:58 GMT, "Margaret von Busenhalter-Butt"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"ansermetniac" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Carl Valle" >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I submit that this file sounds considerably better than the one
>>>>>>submitted
>>>>>>for
>>>>>>opinion by Abbedd
>>>>>
>>>>> I never asked for an opionion of my mp3. I asked for an opinion on why
>>>>> cds are juiced
>>>>>
>>>>> Abbedd
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Dear Mr. "Lights Out":
>>>>
>>>>1.Your MP3 demonstrated that your audio equipment is laughably bad.
>>>>Regardless of the quality of the original.
>>>>
>>>>2. Your failure to notice that your equipment suck amply demonstrated
>>>>that
>>>>you are highly incompetent and don't know what you are talking about.
>>>>
>>>>3. Therefore, your inane ramblings on the qualities of CD's are
>>>>irrelevant
>>>>and worthless.
>>>>
>>>>4. With your moronic boasting you also managed to broadcast to the
>>>>entire
>>>>Usenet that Dave Guardala mouthpieces is build on a really shaky
>>>>foundation
>>>>with a "chief engineer" and "acoustician" who is deaf as a door knob.
>>>>And
>>>>not as smart.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>Margaret
>>>
>>> So Branford Marsalis Michael Brecker Tom Scott et al play my pieces
>>> because I am an idiot. Good theory Peggy
>>>
>>> Abbedd
>>>>
>>
>>Apparently so. Some idiots get lucky.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Margaret
>>
>>
>
> Piggy
>
> Can't argue with you anymore. Mom says I can't argue with idiots
>
> Abbedd

There never was any argument. Just your pompous attempt to establish some
credibility with your multitude of mickey mouse titles and name dropping
that all went up in smoke with a single piece of actual evidence of your
presumed ability - namely the laughable MP3. I merely pointed out that you
were an incompetent windbag just like several other people here did. Your
low self-esteem could not deal with the fact and you started to act like
many men of your stature and appearance do.

I'm glad you keep in touch with your mom, only a mom could love a fat little
furball like you.

Cheers,

Margaret