[ryo]

i found a lot of articles about the "dorsey mod" for oktava microphones.

i know the 219/319 mod was published in the june/05 edition of recording
magazine.
but the 06/05 recording mag is out of stock...

has anyone a link or a scan of the article?

(btw, i found this for the 012:
http://tinyurl.com/355xq5 )

thanks in advance

--
ryo

[Scott Dorsey]

ryo wrote:
i found a lot of articles about the "dorsey mod" for oktava microphones.

i know the 219/319 mod was published in the june/05 edition of recording
magazine.
but the 06/05 recording mag is out of stock...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

has anyone a link or a scan of the article?

No.

(btw, i found this for the 012:
http://tinyurl.com/355xq5 )

I will see what I can do about having that shut down. Thank you for
pointing it out. I do NOT appreciate pirated copies of my articles
floating around the internet.
--scott


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

[ryo]

"Scott Dorsey" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

it's my honour having a reply from the author.

sharing knowledge is not pirating. pirating is selling others' work.

anyway, the first thing i did was looking on the recording magazine website
if i could order a copy. here it is what they say:
June 2005
SOLD OUT
http://tinyurl.com/3bgzsx

i'll send an email to the editor and i'll ask him to send me a copy and
correct the website.

regards

--
ryo

[Scott Dorsey]

ryo wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

it's my honour having a reply from the author.

Much of the original discussion about the 219 modifications took place
here in r.a.p, in fact.

sharing knowledge is not pirating. pirating is selling others' work.

Nope. That article is under copyright. Passing copies around without
permission is piracy. Share the information as much as you want, but
when you use my words to do it, I want payment.

anyway, the first thing i did was looking on the recording magazine website
if i could order a copy. here it is what they say:
June 2005
SOLD OUT
http://tinyurl.com/3bgzsx

The issue is sold out but the articles in it are still available, if you
look more carefully. The editor can get you a copy.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ray Thomas]

"ryo" wrote in message
...
"Scott Dorsey" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

it's my honour having a reply from the author.

sharing knowledge is not pirating. pirating is selling others' work.

anyway, the first thing i did was looking on the recording magazine
website if i could order a copy. here it is what they say:
June 2005
SOLD OUT
http://tinyurl.com/3bgzsx

i'll send an email to the editor and i'll ask him to send me a copy and
correct the website.

regards

--
ryo
-------------------------------
so, file sharing/"sharing knowledge" is not theft ? What is it
then....democracy in action ?
Please elaborate upon your philosophical stance...inquiring minds are eager
to know.
Ray

[ryo]

"Scott Dorsey" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
ryo wrote:

Nope. That article is under copyright. Passing copies around without
permission is piracy. Share the information as much as you want, but
when you use my words to do it, I want payment.

well,
this one will be my last reply on the topic.

what i think it's that copyright is a concept dead last century. period.
even so, i wrote to rec. mag.'s editor to get a copy, as you advised me to
do.
anyway, if it's true the issue is sold out, you don't lose a cent from an
internet reproduction of an article nobody can't buy.


The issue is sold out but the articles in it are still available, if you
look more carefully. The editor can get you a copy.

uh. you said "No it isn't." replying to my "but the 06/05 recording mag is
out of stock".
maybe my english is not enough refined to understand the differences between
"out of stock" and "sold out".
i'm sorry for this.

i thought to be almost a medium internet user, but it's clear i'm not. i
looked carefully, but i cannot find how to order a single article. i'll wait
the editor's reply.

regards

--
ryo

[ryo]

"Ray Thomas" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

so, file sharing/"sharing knowledge" is not theft ? What is it
then....democracy in action ?
Please elaborate upon your philosophical stance...inquiring minds are
eager to know.

two questions:
please, could you quote where i wrote about file sharing?
which part of the sentence "sold out" it's not clear?

--
ryo

[Richard Crowley]

"ryo" wrote ...
"Ray Thomas" wrote ...
so, file sharing/"sharing knowledge" is not theft ? What is it
then....democracy in action ?
Please elaborate upon your philosophical stance...inquiring minds are
eager to know.

two questions:
please, could you quote where i wrote about file sharing?

"sharing knowledge is not pirating"

which part of the sentence "sold out" it's not clear?

The full copies of that issue are "sold out".
They sell copies of articles on demand.
They have been doing that for years.

Copyright infringers are not well-accepted amongst
people who make their living producing copright-
protected material.

[ryo]

"Richard Crowley" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

two questions:
please, could you quote where i wrote about file sharing?

"sharing knowledge is not pirating"

"knowledge" is not equal to "file".
it's a very basic concept.

anyway i think a lot of you have a general problem with hypocrisy.
so stay well with it.

adieu

--
ryo

[Richard Crowley]

"ryo" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote ...

two questions:
please, could you quote where i wrote about file sharing?

"sharing knowledge is not pirating"

"knowledge" is not equal to "file".
it's a very basic concept.

You provided a link to a file. That was your own expression
of "sharing knowledge".

anyway i think a lot of you have a general problem with hypocrisy.
so stay well with it.

And you appear to have a general problem with the basic
concepts of communication.

adieu

Don't let the door hit you on the backside.

[Federico]

I thought that "sharing knowledge" = School.....
F.

[Boris Lau]

Federico wrote:
I thought that "sharing knowledge" = School.....

Yap. And people get paid to teach...

Boris


--
http://www.borislau.de - computer science, music, photos

[Ben - TheStudioRI.com]

On Apr 27, 10:29 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
ryo wrote:
i found a lot of articles about the "dorsey mod" for oktava microphones.

i know the 219/319 mod was published in the june/05 edition of recording
magazine.
but the 06/05 recording mag is out of stock...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

has anyone a link or a scan of the article?

No.

(btw, i found this for the 012:
http://tinyurl.com/355xq5)

I will see what I can do about having that shut down. Thank you for
pointing it out. I do NOT appreciate pirated copies of my articles
floating around the internet.
--scott

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

I just sent my pair of 012's to oktavamod. I was inspired by the
Dorsey mod, but it was worth the price for someone with much more mic
mod experience to do it for me hehe.

-Ben

[Ben - TheStudioRI.com]

On Apr 27, 11:19 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
ryo wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

it's my honour having a reply from the author.

Much of the original discussion about the 219 modifications took place
here in r.a.p, in fact.

sharing knowledge is not pirating. pirating is selling others' work.

Nope. That article is under copyright. Passing copies around without
permission is piracy. Share the information as much as you want, but
when you use my words to do it, I want payment.

anyway, the first thing i did was looking on the recording magazine website
if i could order a copy. here it is what they say:
June 2005
SOLD OUT
http://tinyurl.com/3bgzsx

The issue is sold out but the articles in it are still available, if you
look more carefully. The editor can get you a copy.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Hmm... do you actually get money from every article sold? I thought
the magazine kept all the residuals.

[Ron Capik]

"Ben - TheStudioRI.com" wrote:

...snip...


The issue is sold out but the articles in it are still available, if you
look more carefully. The editor can get you a copy.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Hmm... do you actually get money from every article sold? I thought
the magazine kept all the residuals.

It's not about money, it's about access. The right to copy is
retained by the author and publisher. The concept, and the details
therein are their property. They may sell (or give away) said property
at ~their~ discretion. If they are not diligent in this effort that risk
loss of their property. In the current society intellectual property
has the status of real property. This may be modified in the future
but for now these "copy rights" have the weight of law on their side.


Later...

Ron Capik
--

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:53:32 +0200, "ryo" wrote:

what i think it's that copyright is a concept dead last century. period.

Scott Dorsey gives away excellent, helpful, positive
and deep advice on this newsgroup almost every day of
the world.

And you want to steal from him? **** you.

Chris Hornbeck
"But of course, when you need it, it ain't headroom any more."
- Don Pearce

[ryo]

my *very* last contribute to this discussion, just to face all the hackneyed
ideas i read in some comments.


"Ron Capik" ha scritto nel messaggio
...

It's not about money, it's about access.

the point was about money, not access. scott wrote: "when you use my words
to do it, I want payment". simple and clear.
how ben - thestudioRI.com pointed out, there is a doubt about getting money
for every article sold. but this is not the point.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
April 25, 2007
EU Parliament passes piracy legislation

Under the new rules, large-scale makers and smugglers of knock-off products
would face up to four years in prison and up to ?300,000 in fines. Maximum
penalties for less serious infringements would include criminal and civil
fines of at least ?100,000. Piracy committed by individuals for nonprofit
purposes - like downloading music files from the Internet - is excluded from
the legislation.

please note:
Piracy committed by individuals for nonprofit purposes - like downloading
music files from the Internet - is excluded from the legislation.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/...ess/piracy.php
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

anyway, please note again that i did not want to steal anything.
the issue was sold out, as to the magazine website.
only replying to an email, the editor said me i can buy the single article,
but i still can't find a place on the recorders mag website where i can read
that i can buy a single article.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Scott got it slightly wrong. The issue is sold out but the article is not.
We have a reprint of the article you can purchase. I will forward this email
to the lady who handles reprint sales and she can help arrange it for you.
Best regards,
mike
--
Mike Metlay, PhD (nuclear physics: no, really!) Associate Editor, RECORDING
Magazine
5408 Idylwild Trail, Boulder, CO 80301 USA phone 303-516-9118 x111 * fax
303-516-9119 * http://www.recordingmag.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

i'm still waiting for the lady.

(i take a bow for the gentle '**** you' got from a childish arse-licker
here.)

--
ryo

[Greg Boboski]

Note , too that Scott often mentions asking Recording mag to publish
a book of all his articles [ which I would like to see ] so how about we
put the energy on Recording mag ! ask for a book

regard Greg


"Ben - TheStudioRI.com" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 27, 10:29 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
ryo wrote:
i found a lot of articles about the "dorsey mod" for oktava microphones.

i know the 219/319 mod was published in the june/05 edition of recording
magazine.
but the 06/05 recording mag is out of stock...

No it isn't. Send a letter to and they will get
you a copy.

has anyone a link or a scan of the article?

No.

(btw, i found this for the 012:
http://tinyurl.com/355xq5)

I will see what I can do about having that shut down. Thank you for
pointing it out. I do NOT appreciate pirated copies of my articles
floating around the internet.
--scott

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

I just sent my pair of 012's to oktavamod. I was inspired by the
Dorsey mod, but it was worth the price for someone with much more mic
mod experience to do it for me hehe.

-Ben

[Mike Rivers]

On Apr 28, 3:22 am, "ryo" wrote:

the point was about money, not access. scott wrote: "when you use my words
to do it, I want payment". simple and clear.
how ben - thestudioRI.com pointed out, there is a doubt about getting money
for every article sold. but this is not the point.

I also write for Recording now and then. I get paid once, when the
article is published (which might be many months after it was
written). It makes no difference in what I get paid if people buy back
issues with my articles in them, or even subscribe because of my
articles (and I know that some did, back when I wrote a monthly column
in Recording).

While I retain the rights to the text (the intellectual property), the
publisher (Music Maker Publications) has the rights to the article as
published. They edit the text to fit the available space, their artist
re-draws the diagrams that I send them drawn on a napkin with a ball
point pen, and they sell the magazines that provides the money to pay
me.

Reproducing a magazine article and giving it away is not (only) a
violation of Scott's rights, it's a violation of the publisher's
copyright. And they have better lawyers than Scott does.

It's not a big deal. Scott has explained here several times what the
modification consists of. Anyone who is pretty clever could modify the
mic based on the description. What you get when you get the magazine
article is something that gives you more confidence that you'll do the
right thing. Isn't that worth paying for?

As far as waiting to hear from the person who handles reprints,
perhaps a phone call is more appropriate than depending on the
sometimes mental telepathy of e-mail.

[Federico]

Come on,
I live in Europe and I will never order a magazine published two years ago
(spending something around 20$ for shipping and magazine) only because I
need to read one article. There's a guy on eBay that sends you the kit and
the original article for much less.....
In your opinion how many Oktavas mods will people do in the next year? Will
they all order the issue of RM?
F.

[Scott Dorsey]

Federico wrote:
I live in Europe and I will never order a magazine published two years ago
(spending something around 20$ for shipping and magazine) only because I
need to read one article. There's a guy on eBay that sends you the kit and
the original article for much less.....

The article reprint can be sent to you in .pdf form for under five dollars.

The guy selling the kits on Ebay is officially sanctioned by me and by
Recording, and he is paying Recording for the article reprints.

In your opinion how many Oktavas mods will people do in the next year? Will
they all order the issue of RM?

I don't know how many people will do, I only know how many order the issue.
When I attempt to sell a new DIY article to the magazine, the only thing
they know is how many issues they sold the last time.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:53:32 -0400, ryo wrote
(in article ) :

"Scott Dorsey" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
ryo wrote:

Nope. That article is under copyright. Passing copies around without
permission is piracy. Share the information as much as you want, but
when you use my words to do it, I want payment.

well,
this one will be my last reply on the topic.

what i think it's that copyright is a concept dead last century. period.
even so, i wrote to rec. mag.'s editor to get a copy, as you advised me to
do.
anyway, if it's true the issue is sold out, you don't lose a cent from an
internet reproduction of an article nobody can't buy.

Maybe when (if) you ever have intellectual property that's plastered around
without your consent you'll feel differently. Copyright means, unless you own
it, you don't have the right to use it for anything, personal or otherwise
unless you have permission to do so. Asking for forgiveness rather than
permission is still a copyright violation.

Regards,

Ty Fordf

--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:27:37 -0400, Ben - TheStudioRI.com wrote
(in article .com):



Hmm... do you actually get money from every article sold? I thought
the magazine kept all the residuals.


Depends on your deal with the publisher. I'm a writer for hire, not an
employee of the publisher. If a manufacturer wants to use any of my articles
published in trade magazines, I offer them licenses for one year or in
perpetuity, but I still own the copyright.

If you are an employee of the publisher, a staff writer, usually the magazine
owns what you write.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:02:18 -0400, Ron Capik wrote
(in article ):

"Ben - TheStudioRI.com" wrote:

...snip...


The issue is sold out but the articles in it are still available, if you
look more carefully. The editor can get you a copy.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Hmm... do you actually get money from every article sold? I thought
the magazine kept all the residuals.

It's not about money, it's about access. The right to copy is
retained by the author and publisher. The concept, and the details
therein are their property. They may sell (or give away) said property
at ~their~ discretion. If they are not diligent in this effort that risk
loss of their property. In the current society intellectual property
has the status of real property. This may be modified in the future
but for now these "copy rights" have the weight of law on their side.


Later...

Ron Capik

I think it's very much about money and access. It's how I make a living. When
the companies about whose gear I write want to use the review for their
marketing, that is Extended Use. It's reasonable that I should be paid for
the new use, especially if its use profits the manufacturer.

My license deal also stipulates that the manufacturer can't cherry pick the
article for the good stuff and leave the more critical comments out.

Regards,

Ty Ford



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Scott Dorsey]

Ben - TheStudioRI.com wrote:

Hmm... do you actually get money from every article sold? I thought
the magazine kept all the residuals.

I don't get points on back issues or reprints, but I _do_ get paid when
things get republished. And once something is out floating around the
net, there is no market for it any more. Also, of course, the more copies
the magazine sells, the more leverage I have to negotiate with them for
future work.

When modification DIY articles get printed, and folks buy them, everybody
wins. The alternative, of course, is for me to give up on opening up the
modifications and take the Stephen Paul route. And I think if I were do to
that, everyone would be losing something important.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

Federico wrote:

Come on,
I live in Europe and I will never order a magazine published two years ago
(spending something around 20$ for shipping and magazine) only because I
need to read one article.

You don't "need" to read that article at all. You want the benefits of
the intellect applied therein.

There's a guy on eBay that sends you the kit and
the original article for much less.....

Scott gets paid for what you buy from that guy. Imagine that. And you
only pay $15 US more than if you just ordered the article as a .pdf
fromt _Recording_. Now you're shopping...

In your opinion how many Oktavas mods will people do in the next year? Will
they all order the issue of RM?
F.

Hopefully, yes, if they haven't kept that issue.

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

[Ben - TheStudioRI.com]

It's not about money, it's about access.

the point was about money, not access. scott wrote: "when you use my words
to do it, I want payment". simple and clear.
how ben - thestudioRI.com pointed out, there is a doubt about getting money
for every article sold. but this is not the point.



Hey hey... I didnt post that to defend you.... As a practicing
attorney, I can tell you that you are absolutely wrong in your
interpretation of the copyright laws. Just because something is "out
of stock" or "out of print" doesnt mean someone doesnt own it, or that
you may use that copyright for your own purposes. The purpose was for
my own knowledge of how the payment system was structured. If Scott
never makes another penny from that article, it doesnt mean that he no
longer owns it, and can no longer protect it.

-Ben

[Richard Crowley]

"ryo" wrote ...
my *very* last contribute to this discussion, just to face all the
hackneyed ideas i read in some comments.

Promises. Promises. It says volumes about you that you
apparently deem copyright laws as "hackneyed". Here's
hoping that you record something with your modified mic
and find youself on the OTHER side of the copyright law.
Let's see if "hackneyed" looks the same from the other side.

the point was about money, not access. scott wrote: "when you use my
words to do it, I want payment". simple and clear.
how ben - thestudioRI.com pointed out, there is a doubt about getting
money for every article sold. but this is not the point.

It is about BOTH.

It is about the *money* because the magazine must sell enough
content (either as printed magazines, or as photocopies reprints,
or as PDF files via email) to make enough profit to pay the
authors like Scott. Cutting into their revenue by making and or
distributing their property makes it less likely that they will publish
any more good articles.

It is about the *access* because the magazine holds the copy-
right. That literally means the *right*to*make*copies*. Nothing
about avaialability, etc. affects that right. The world of sheet-
music is filled with cases of POP (permanently out of print)
titles where the publisher just isn't interested in bringing something
back unless there is promise of significant profits. This doesn't
make do-it-yourself copying any more legal.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
April 25, 2007
EU Parliament passes piracy legislation

Under the new rules, large-scale makers and smugglers of knock-off
products would face up to four years in prison and up to ?300,000 in
fines.
...
Piracy committed by individuals for nonprofit purposes - like
downloading music files from the Internet - is excluded from the
legislation.

You don't really want to know what we think of your ridiculous
EU copyright laws.

anyway, please note again that i did not want to steal anything.

Which proves that your notion of "theft" is seriously faulty.

the issue was sold out, as to the magazine website.

Which has nothing to do with anything. Just because something
is sold out (or even owned by a legal entity that doesn't exist
any more) doesn't make it "public domain".

only replying to an email, the editor said me i can buy the single
article, but i still can't find a place on the recorders mag website
where i can read that i can buy a single article.

If you have a problem with their website or even their customer
service or their business practices, take it up with them. Dunno
why you are discussing it here? It has nothing to do with copyrights.