"Keith G" wrote in message
.. .
"RobH"
wrote


OK, I'm declaring the whole morning a Coffee Break (but I'll have to
stop
for lunch soon........)

Let's have a clear up - shift yer legs, there's a bit under your
chair....


swoosssh....


Comparing recordings with live events is like comparing TV and
films
with
real life........
I agree with you that comparing TV/films with real live is generally
not
a good idea.
But if everybody had this attitude there would not have been any
improvments in any medium.


Yes and no - mostly no. I must admit, I don't think I could handle the
'baggage' you get with 78s. Fun and all that, but wouldn't do me - for
a
start, the material available on 78 don't exactly 'lift my skirt', to
be
honest. (A bit of tinny Caruso in some period Eytie flic is one thing,
but
settling down to an evening of it? - Nah, blx to that, it ain't me....
:-)



Imagine, for example, the first films were B&W. Somebody says "but
it's
not in colour".
Answer: don't be silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.


Very interesting point. Now, there may be an age thing here - I'm old
enough
to remember when TV was only black & white, OK?
Well, it's all I had when I was a kid.



So, at my age, I will say to you that, when a B&W film comes on the
telly it
takes me about 1 minute to forget it's B&W! My enjoyment of that
film - the
usual 'quality' of which more than compensates for any 'technical
shortfall,
I might add - I don't watch any movie unless it's a good 'un, is in no
way
lessened by it being a 'mono'(chrome) number. In fact, if there are
ads
(which are in colour, naturellement), it always comes as a bit of a
shock
for a few moments and when the film resumes there is almost a sense of
relief - takes only a few moments to get back 'with the programme'!

Not like that for you at all. I presume?

Au contraire, I enjoy B&W films and photography. Recently I've seen A
Canterbury Tale (1944), Great Expections (1958), Shichinin No Samurai
(1954) etc and loved every minute of them.
Obviously they also had mono soundtracks ;-)



Another example - mono sound recordings. Somebody says "it sounds
like
the orchestra are all sitting on top of each other". Answer: don't
be
silly you shouldn't compare films with real life.

Ok, now this is a very 'telling' remark.
That's why I included it in the post.


I guess you've never really heard
any 'mono' then? (Or, at least, not mono done well).
You guessed wrong - my favourite recording of all time is a mono
recording.


I suppose mono CDs
don't exist?
I've got a few. Mainly "historical re-issues" of 1950s recordings that
I've already got on LP or compact crapette.



I have dozens (possibly hundreds) of mono discs and I guarantee you
wouldn't
notice when I put one on. In fact I have one disc marked 'original
mono
recordings' which I have used to 'trick' a good number of people with.
The
soundstage is huge, the detail is excellent, the tone is superb and
the
whole experience (if you like Lionel Hampton) is extremely pleasant. A
pair
of speakers here is essential to create 'scale' - a single speaker
would
have to be a bit of a mutha to create the same effect!

Then you are not really talking about mono. I take it you are using a
stereo cartridge?



(I have given Nick G a copy of the very same disc and I am sure it
will do
*exactly* the same stuff on his kit. I don't know if he's tried it on
anyone
yet - perhaps he'll comment.)

Rob, no less than 4 people from this group have had the chance to
compare CD
with vinyl on my kit (which always manages to sound a bit 'off the
fang'
when they're here, I might add!!!). Not one of them has preferred the
CDs.
As I have said oft times before - if you want to drag your CDP and a
few
disks here (Beds/Cambs border on the A1) you are perfectly welcome so
to do.
Unfortunately I don't think that will be practically possible 'cos my
CDP only has a Quadlink output or do you have a 99 Pre-amp?
Thanks for the kind offer though.

Mind you, I suppose I could bring me pre-amp, power amps and speakers.
Humm, no, on seconds thoughts that won't work - I can't fit me speakers
in the car.


If you thought the vinyl sounded ****e you would be equally welcome to
say
so!



Personally, I can't get enough of it - NP: Joan Baez 'Diamonds And
Rust'.
Actually it ain't - it's just ending, now I've got to go and change
it!
(Fakkin' LPs - they're a pain in the arse!). OK, NP: Joni Mtchell
'Mingus'........
Yeah, I've got Diamonds and Rust. Sheer genius.



My loudspeakers don't sound right. Don't be worry you shouldn't
compare
recordings with real life.


OK, OK I get your drift.....

I thought you might eventually.



There is something of a Paradox in my philosophy, I have to say - I
don't
need/seek '100% lifelike accuracy' but I do want the 'best possible
sound'......!

No paradox in mine. Sometimes I want "accurate reproduction", sometimes
I want that classic performance (but most of the time I want both!) and
with CD/vinyl there is no guarantee of either.


(What's the problem with that? - It's my life and I'm paying........!)
Absolutely. Live and let live I say.


Worse - they asked us to remain seated throughout the entire
performance and
I like to shuffle up and down the rows during the quiet bits......
And a bit of a bugger if you need to nip to the loo.


Do NOT mention that.....
Have to sit with crossed legs, did we?


SNIP

So if listening to the Mahler recording from the "digital" master is
"crap" how does transferring the recording to vinyl de-crap it?


F*ck Nose - ask Jim Lesurf, perhaps he's got an explanation?
Well, I'm asking you because you wrote "ALL digital
music is crap compared to vinyl" and the implication that the process of
transferring the digital recording to vinyl magically makes it better is
patently false. Does the expression "rubbish in, rubbish out" ring any
bells?


All I would say
is that 'sharpest and brightest' ain't always best.
I wouldn't disagree.



Ever seen 'soft focus'
used to good effect in the flics?
Course. Used in Photography as well. It's called "artistic effect" but
nobody would claim that it is anyway authentic but why should it be?


I love these slightly 'contentious threads - always bring up something
of
interest. (As opposed to Cable Jerking and people with strange
hardware prob
lems I can't solve...) Like my ''soft troll' in the Subject line'
ploy? -
Keeps the Wanky Yankee out of the equation! (Better'n garlic...!!)

Quite.


--
RobH
The future's dim, the future's mono.