[Trevor]

On 30/08/2020 5:08 pm, Don Pearce wrote:

There is a great Tom Jones quote from just a few years ago. He said
that women still brought a spare pair of knickers to his shows, but it
was no longer anything to do with him.

HaHa, love it. Hadn't heard that one. :-)

[Trevor]

On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds like
they did the Communists.

[geoff]

On 31/08/2020 7:14 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds like
they did the Communists.



They were encouraged, no ? Even more popular now than ever. Mainstream
even, and they don't even know it, let alone how to spell it.

Kennedy's assassination would have been solved in an instant, and
correctly, if the likes of the John Birch Society hadn't been swept
under the carpet.

geoff

[Neil[_9_]]

On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

--
best regards,

Neil

[Chris K-Man]

On Monday, August 31, 2020 at 7:14:15 AM UTC-4, Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

--
best regards,

Neil
_______
Millennials can embrace their tech - but I embrace good writing, good acting, good composition, instrumental arrangement, and good technique at the recording, filming, mixing, mastering, whatever, stages.

Sure, today's mics, formats, and delivery might be better, but all that's being delivered is super hot slammed-to-**** music, and 'reboots of movies and TV from, again, the GREATEST AGE... the mid-60s to mid-80s. All in glorious 7.1 digital barfospheric surround. So... what!

[Ralph Barone[_3_]]

Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of
material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


In my opinion, the €œbest music€� always seems to have been produced when
ones hormonal production was also at its peak. Weird coincidence...

[Neil[_9_]]

On 8/31/2020 10:32 AM, Ralph Barone wrote:
Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of
material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


In my opinion, the €œbest music€� always seems to have been produced when
ones hormonal production was also at its peak. Weird coincidence...

Interesting observation! Certainly true for "mindless music", but there
are other genres that aren't driven by impulse. I miss the explorative
nature of classical electronic music, such as used for the soundtrack of
"Forbidden Planet" and the social criticisms of Pete Seeger, Buffy St.
Marie and others.

--
best regards,

Neil

[Scott Dorsey]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 15:09:35 -0500, Tatonik
wrote:

On 8/29/20 9:35 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

The Beatles... they were a phenomenon unto themselves. They weren't rock,
they weren't pop, they weren't blues, they were all three at the same time
but really they weren't anything but the Beatles. I fear we shall not see
their like again.

My father said they destroyed American music and they certainly transformed it.

My great-uncle said the Beatles were part of a Communist plot, though to
put this in context, he said the same of fluoridated water and a number
of other things.

Ah, the "reds under the bed" mob. That was a dark period in US history
that still lingers in the oath of allegiance. Time the real version
was restored.

It's weird. I grew up listening to everybody talking about the threat of
Communist Russians. Then the Soviet Union fell and now we have Capitalist
Russians. And the funny thing is, Capitalist Russians don't seem much
different than Communist Russians.
--scott


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

[Scott Dorsey]

Neil wrote:

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

Sure, but it has -always- been pretty rare. It's bad, but don't let anyone
tell you that it was ever any better.

There are a million Salieris for every Mozart.
--scott

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

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 31 Aug 2020 15:49:56 -0000, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 15:09:35 -0500, Tatonik
wrote:

On 8/29/20 9:35 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

The Beatles... they were a phenomenon unto themselves. They weren't rock,
they weren't pop, they weren't blues, they were all three at the same time
but really they weren't anything but the Beatles. I fear we shall not see
their like again.

My father said they destroyed American music and they certainly transformed it.

My great-uncle said the Beatles were part of a Communist plot, though to
put this in context, he said the same of fluoridated water and a number
of other things.

Ah, the "reds under the bed" mob. That was a dark period in US history
that still lingers in the oath of allegiance. Time the real version
was restored.

It's weird. I grew up listening to everybody talking about the threat of
Communist Russians. Then the Soviet Union fell and now we have Capitalist
Russians. And the funny thing is, Capitalist Russians don't seem much
different than Communist Russians.
--scott

Far left and far right are the same thing. The important difference is
between moderate and extreme.

d

[Neil[_9_]]

On 8/31/2020 11:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Neil wrote:

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

Sure, but it has -always- been pretty rare. It's bad, but don't let anyone
tell you that it was ever any better.

There are a million Salieris for every Mozart.
--scott

True, but the differences are pretty similar between the Salieris and
the Mozarts. The Salieris were trying to emulate while the Mozarts were
creating (at least as they've been presented in the media). However, I
don't think the instant marketing success of art is an accurate measure,
as many of the best art pieces didn't achieve that status until long
after the artists' demise.

Today, there isn't much effort, and even less "value" in being creative.
Movies have become a variant of Kabuki theater. Music concerts are more
about the audience than the performers, because the audiences stopped
listening in the early '70s and now spend more time on their phones than
paying attention to what's going on... not that what's going on requires
a lot of attention.

--
best regards,

Neil

[geoff]

On 31/08/2020 11:41 pm, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Monday, August 31, 2020 at 7:14:15 AM UTC-4, Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

--
best regards,

Neil
_______
Millennials can embrace their tech - but I embrace good writing, good acting, good composition, instrumental arrangement, and good technique at the recording, filming, mixing, mastering, whatever, stages.

Sure, today's mics, formats, and delivery might be better, but all that's being delivered is super hot slammed-to-**** music, and 'reboots of movies and TV from, again, the GREATEST AGE... the mid-60s to mid-80s. All in glorious 7.1 digital barfospheric surround. So... what!


The art is the thing. The technology, if not abused, is a bonus !

geoff

[geoff]

On 1/09/2020 2:32 am, Ralph Barone wrote:
Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of
material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


In my opinion, the €œbest music€� always seems to have been produced when
ones hormonal production was also at its peak. Weird coincidence...


When you think of the ages of, say, The Beatles when they were
outputting music that was at least partly instrumental in significant
changes in the world, it makes one (me at least) feel somewhat lightweight.

geoff

[Les Cargill[_5_]]

Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds like
they did the Communists.



Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government. I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist
movement; there was a Communist one. Even American nationalism worked
very differently from European nationalism. Of course there were
nominally roght wing things, but they were quite different - someone
could have fought Nazis and been say, a Bircher without skipping a beat.

--
Les Cargill

[geoff]

On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds like
they did the Communists.



Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government. I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist
movement; there was a Communist one. Even American nationalism worked
very differently from European nationalism. Of course there were
nominally roght wing things, but they were quite different - someone
could have fought Nazis and been say, a Bircher without skipping a beat.


True, but what is pretty 'normal' outlook on life in the USA is
considered to have many right-wing aspects by much of the world. And it
seems anything even vaguely approaching what much of the world would
consider as 'middle-of-the-road' (and that is approaching from the
right-hand side !) gets described as 'far-left' or communist by the
currently most vociferous.

If such labels have any many any more ...

geoff

[Trevor]

On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist
movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist! Wonder
what they thought Hitler was?


there was a Communist one. Even American nationalism worked
very differently from European nationalism. Of course there were
nominally roght wing things, but they were quite different - someone
could have fought Nazis and been say, a Bircher without skipping a beat.


True, but what is pretty 'normal' outlook on life in the USA is
considered to have many right-wing aspects by much of the world. And it
seems anything even vaguely approaching what much of the world would
consider as 'middle-of-the-road' (and that is approaching from the
right-hand side !) gets described as 'far-left' or communist by the
currently most vociferous.

It's always worked a treat for the fascists to call every one else
Communists. Especially since hardly anybody even knows what a socialist
is, thinks they are communists, and thinks Fascism is better than
communism, and by extension socialism.
But I think this may have gone a bit off topic!!! :-)

[Trevor]

On 1/09/2020 1:52 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:

There are a million Salieris for every Mozart.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up, and how little things change.

[polymod]

"geoff" wrote in message
...

major snippage


The art is the thing. The technology, if not abused, is a bonus !


+1. Great line Geoff.


Poly


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Chuck[_14_]]

On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 14:32:05 +1000, Trevor wrote:

On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist
movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist! Wonder
what they thought Hitler was?


there was a Communist one. Even American nationalism worked
very differently from European nationalism. Of course there were
nominally roght wing things, but they were quite different - someone
could have fought Nazis and been say, a Bircher without skipping a beat.


True, but what is pretty 'normal' outlook on life in the USA is
considered to have many right-wing aspects by much of the world. And it
seems anything even vaguely approaching what much of the world would
consider as 'middle-of-the-road' (and that is approaching from the
right-hand side !) gets described as 'far-left' or communist by the
currently most vociferous.

It's always worked a treat for the fascists to call every one else
Communists. Especially since hardly anybody even knows what a socialist
is, thinks they are communists, and thinks Fascism is better than
communism, and by extension socialism.
But I think this may have gone a bit off topic!!! :-)


They believe Hitler was a socialist. maybe because high school European history was taught by gym techers in many U.S. schools if taught at all..

[Les Cargill[_5_]]

geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.



Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government. I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist
movement; there was a Communist one. Even American nationalism worked
very differently from European nationalism. Of course there were
nominally roght wing things, but they were quite different - someone
could have fought Nazis and been say, a Bircher without skipping a beat.


True, but what is pretty 'normal' outlook on life in the USA is
considered to have many right-wing aspects by much of the world.

That is a lot about miscommunication. I've worked with hundreds of
Europeans and it just never was a problem. Er, I was able to refine
some of the terms they'd heard and they were less stressed about it,
anyway.

The USAF and RAF ( among others )just razed a lot of of Yurp and
when they rebuilt, it was different.

And it
seems anything even vaguely approaching what much of the world would
consider as 'middle-of-the-road' (and that is approaching from the
right-hand side !) gets described as 'far-left' or communist by the
currently most vociferous.

If such labels have any many any more ...


They haven't much many at all A whacking great lot of what is
called "conservative" in the US just isn't. Some of it is lunacy.

Mostly this is about "empty buckets make the most noise".

geoff

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_5_]]

Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds under
(some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain, where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Wonder
what they thought Hitler was?


there was a Communist one. Even American nationalism worked
very differently from European nationalism. Of course there were
nominally roght wing things, but they were quite different - someone
could have fought Nazis and been say, a Bircher without skipping a beat.


True, but what is pretty 'normal' outlook on life in the USA is
considered to have many right-wing aspects by much of the world. And
it seems anything even vaguely approaching what much of the world
would consider as 'middle-of-the-road' (and that is approaching from
the right-hand side !) gets described as 'far-left' or communist by
the currently most vociferous.

It's always worked a treat for the fascists to call every one else
Communists. Especially since hardly anybody even knows what a socialist
is,

Exactly. Same problem.

thinks they are communists, and thinks Fascism is better than
communism, and by extension socialism.
But I think this may have gone a bit off topic!!! :-)





--
Les Cargill

[Trevor]

On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter, except
for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker. (we can
yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think Hitler was a
Fascist either then? Everyone has their own definition I guess, but evil
is still evil whatever you want to call it!!

[geoff]

On 2/09/2020 6:59 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter, except
for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker. (we can
yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think Hitler was a
Fascist either then? Everyone has their own definition I guess, but evil
is still evil whatever you want to call it!!



Evil or just extreme ****witery ? Probably both.

If an audio producer he would demand mixes to the lowest common
denominator - compressed to ****, over-loud, over-tempo, EQed both
booming and screeching, illogical irrational and offensive lyrics, and
appealing to the least sophisticated (but significant, sadly ....) audience.

..... just to steer thread towards On Topic !

geoff

[Chris K-Man]

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 3:34:33 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 2/09/2020 6:59 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter, except
for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker. (we can
yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think Hitler was a
Fascist either then? Everyone has their own definition I guess, but evil
is still evil whatever you want to call it!!


Evil or just extreme ****witery ? Probably both.

If an audio producer he would demand mixes to the lowest common
denominator - compressed to ****, over-loud, over-tempo, EQed both
booming and screeching, illogical irrational and offensive lyrics, and
appealing to the least sophisticated (but significant, sadly ....) audience.

.... just to steer thread towards On Topic !

geoff
________

Thank you for saying what when I say it, I get a bot on my tail!

[david gourley[_6_]]

Chris K-Man
:

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 3:34:33 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 2/09/2020 6:59 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort
that's been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the
beds like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the
American government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter,
except for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker.
(we can yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think
Hitler was a Fascist either then? Everyone has their own definition I
guess, but evil is still evil whatever you want to call it!!


Evil or just extreme ****witery ? Probably both.

If an audio producer he would demand mixes to the lowest common
denominator - compressed to ****, over-loud, over-tempo, EQed both
booming and screeching, illogical irrational and offensive lyrics, and
appealing to the least sophisticated (but significant, sadly ....)
audience.

.... just to steer thread towards On Topic !

geoff
________

Thank you for saying what when I say it, I get a bot on my
tail!


I take it that you didn't get the humour of his remark !

david

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Trevor]

On 2/09/2020 5:34 pm, geoff wrote:
On 2/09/2020 6:59 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort
that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the
American government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter,
except for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker.
(we can yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think
Hitler was a Fascist either then? Everyone has their own definition I
guess, but evil is still evil whatever you want to call it!!


Evil or just extreme ****witery ? Probably both.

Definitely both!!! :-(


If an audio producer he would demand mixes to the lowest common
denominator - compressed to ****, over-loud, over-tempo, EQed both
booming and screeching, illogical irrational and offensive lyrics, and
appealing to the least sophisticated (but significant, sadly ....)
audience.

.... just to steer thread towards On Topic !

Very good! :-)

[Les Cargill[_5_]]

Trevor wrote:
On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the American
government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter, except
for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker. (we can
yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think Hitler was a
Fascist either then?

Of course he was. Trump's simply nothing like Hitler.

I can only recommend Shirer's book and move on.

Everyone has their own definition I guess, but evil
is still evil whatever you want to call it!!



--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_5_]]

geoff wrote:
On 2/09/2020 6:59 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 2/09/2020 9:53 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 1/09/2020 1:37 pm, geoff wrote:
On 1/09/2020 2:03 pm, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 31/08/2020 3:35 am, Les Cargill wrote:
The thing that makes it worse is that there really were "reds
under (some) bed(s)." It wasn't as bad in the US as in Britain,
where the
Bloomsbury Group contained at least one asset of the KGB.

HUAC was a deeply anti-Semitic thing and as hapless an effort
that's
been attempted.

Such a shame they never worried about the Fascists under the beds
like they did the Communists.

Fascists weren't on record as having as goal unhorsing the
American government.

Of course they weren't going after themselves!


I'd also say there never was a serious American Fascist movement;

HaHa, only half of the USA would think Trump is not a Fascist!

Count me in that half, then. The guy's a reality TV star that
ran. He's not even a fascist. Then again, practically nobody is.


Trump has copied Hitler's playbook almost exactly to the letter,
except for declaring war on Poland and killing himself in his bunker.
(we can yet hope for the latter though) So I guess you don't think
Hitler was a Fascist either then? Everyone has their own definition I
guess, but evil is still evil whatever you want to call it!!



Evil or just extreme ****witery ? Probably both.

If an audio producer he would demand mixes to the lowest common
denominator - compressed to ****, over-loud, over-tempo, EQed both
booming and screeching, illogical irrational and offensive lyrics, and
appealing to the least sophisticated (but significant, sadly ....)
audience.

.... just to steer thread towards On Topic !

geoff


Them Nazis invented them tape recorders. So there ya go, chief. After
all the traffic here must be in the dozens per week...

( sorry, I've read Trevor for years, and felt I owed him a bit
of perspective. My bad. I worry when people fall into those simple
tropes. )

William Shirer wrote "Rise and Fall" decades ago and it's a worthy book.

--
Les Cargill

[Will StG]

On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 11:57:46 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?

When I asked a credentialed film mixer that question a couple weeks ago, he insisted it was because film is mixed mixed on a calibrated system and I was unfortunate enough to have an uncalibrated consumer system.
He made sure to point out the letters after his name. I did ask him why he didn't check his mixes in his car (metaphorically.)

- WillStG

[Trevor]

On 30/11/2020 7:36 pm, Will StG wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 11:57:46 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?

Yep, action films are the worst where dialog is usually considered
completely unimportant compared to impressive sound effects.


When I asked a credentialed film mixer that question a couple weeks ago, he insisted it was because film is mixed mixed on a calibrated system and I was unfortunate enough to have an uncalibrated consumer system.

So either he expects all consumers to have professionally calibrated
systems, or he simply doesn't care about his ultimate customers.


He made sure to point out the letters after his name.

A sure sign of a ******.

I did ask him why he didn't check his mixes in his car (metaphorically.)

:-)
I'm not sure that is even the problem. It's simply a choice of what is
important in the mix, and sadly the dialog is often considered
secondary, and completely unintelligible for anyone the slightest bit
hard of hearing. However if it's a usual 5.1 mix with dialog directed to
the centre, at home you can at least turn up the centre. If you dont
have a centre speaker then the simple answer is to get one.

[Chris K-Man]

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 2:01:45 AM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:
On 30/11/2020 7:36 pm, Will StG wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 11:57:46 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?
Yep, action films are the worst where dialog is usually considered
completely unimportant compared to impressive sound effects.

When I asked a credentialed film mixer that question a couple weeks ago, he insisted it was because film is mixed mixed on a calibrated system and I was unfortunate enough to have an uncalibrated consumer system.
So either he expects all consumers to have professionally calibrated
systems, or he simply doesn't care about his ultimate customers.
He made sure to point out the letters after his name.
A sure sign of a ******.
I did ask him why he didn't check his mixes in his car (metaphorically.)
:-)
I'm not sure that is even the problem. It's simply a choice of what is
important in the mix, and sadly the dialog is often considered
secondary, and completely unintelligible for anyone the slightest bit
hard of hearing. However if it's a usual 5.1 mix with dialog directed to
the centre, at home you can at least turn up the centre. If you dont
have a centre speaker then the simple answer is to get one.
_______

But are we possibly falling into an old trap here - one of blaming the mixer/engineer for largely fulfilling the studio/director/producer's wishes?

[None]

"Theckmah the Dumb-**** Retard" wrote in message
...
But are we sneck

"We"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket, li'l buddy?

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

Today's music production depends greatly on the engineer and tools to
create sounds and fix problems.

In the olde days, the musicians played well, they had a good
arrangement, maybe did a couple of takes leaving room for some editing,
and the job was acceptable.

The perfect snare sample doesn't make a hit record, it's the perfect
drummer.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com