Brian-Gaff
May 18th 15, 10:25 AM
Well, certainly the cheap vinyl turntables are as much rubbish as you say,
but you can still get good ones
However, I beg to differ on digital. a good cd is still good, and making any
kind of lossy copy of it is effectively making like a cassette version. The
effects to my ears of mp3 are a fast cycling of phase information, and aloss
of detail. Its amazing, though just what can be done to music and it still
sounds acceptable, which is different to sounding right of course. There is
room for all things, I just despair at the apparent popularity of mp3, when
better lossless or minimal loss compression systems have existed for many
years.
As for the old systems, SP25/Amstrad/ Celestion rigs, these could sound
very acceptable and good value at the prices. The problem often is finding
the right room and speaker and listener placement to accentuate the good
bits.
I have here a pretty cheap goodmans system. Its problem is crap speakers
and tape deck, but if you connect it up to decent speakers it actually
sounds pretty good.
Brian
--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Eiron" > wrote in message
...
> On 18/05/2015 00:22, RJH wrote:
>> On 17/05/2015 16:43, Jim Lesurf wrote:
>>> In article >, Sumatriptan
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> But I agree that, apart from Jim, there isn't much activity here.
>>>
>>> Sadly, probably true. I assume many have gone to 'forums'. I could do
>>> the
>>> same but.
>>>
>>
>> Possibly, but as mentioned down-thread, I don't think 'hifi' has the
>> hobbyist interest it once had. And even then, IME it was a minority
>> sport. Most of my peers just wanted 'playback', with very little
>> interest in how the music came about, or was reproduced.
>>
>> However, the means of listening to music did often require a degree of
>> engagement - whether it was cleaning tape heads, aerials,
>> cables/earthing or aligning cartridges for example. But the
>> commodification of music and the digital age seems to have turned
>> discussions to a kind of binary - it either works or it doesn't
>>
>> Loosely relevant, I have some faith in the resurgence of vinyl and the
>> analogue intrigue. I went to a benefit gig this evening (ostensibly
>> LGBT) when a chunk was set aside to this woman:
>>
>> http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/jul/08/beryl-ritchie-obituary
>
> Cutting a bagpipe LP backwards. As if anyone would notice!
> It might improve Philip Glass too.
> My copy of 'No Pussyfooting' has a second CD with one track reversed and
> one at half-speed.
> Legend has it that John Peel played it backwards on the radio.
> I wonder how he did it. Did they have tape decks that could run in
> reverse?
> Or two-track stereo decks?
>
> Hifi always was a minority interest. For every SME/V15/Quad/Tannoy setup
> there were hundreds of SP25/Amstrads and thousands of portables.
>
> But I'd wager that my hifi from the seventies would sound a lot better
> than
> a typical modern vinyl revival setup (if I still had it.)
>
> --
> Eiron.
>
but you can still get good ones
However, I beg to differ on digital. a good cd is still good, and making any
kind of lossy copy of it is effectively making like a cassette version. The
effects to my ears of mp3 are a fast cycling of phase information, and aloss
of detail. Its amazing, though just what can be done to music and it still
sounds acceptable, which is different to sounding right of course. There is
room for all things, I just despair at the apparent popularity of mp3, when
better lossless or minimal loss compression systems have existed for many
years.
As for the old systems, SP25/Amstrad/ Celestion rigs, these could sound
very acceptable and good value at the prices. The problem often is finding
the right room and speaker and listener placement to accentuate the good
bits.
I have here a pretty cheap goodmans system. Its problem is crap speakers
and tape deck, but if you connect it up to decent speakers it actually
sounds pretty good.
Brian
--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Eiron" > wrote in message
...
> On 18/05/2015 00:22, RJH wrote:
>> On 17/05/2015 16:43, Jim Lesurf wrote:
>>> In article >, Sumatriptan
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> But I agree that, apart from Jim, there isn't much activity here.
>>>
>>> Sadly, probably true. I assume many have gone to 'forums'. I could do
>>> the
>>> same but.
>>>
>>
>> Possibly, but as mentioned down-thread, I don't think 'hifi' has the
>> hobbyist interest it once had. And even then, IME it was a minority
>> sport. Most of my peers just wanted 'playback', with very little
>> interest in how the music came about, or was reproduced.
>>
>> However, the means of listening to music did often require a degree of
>> engagement - whether it was cleaning tape heads, aerials,
>> cables/earthing or aligning cartridges for example. But the
>> commodification of music and the digital age seems to have turned
>> discussions to a kind of binary - it either works or it doesn't
>>
>> Loosely relevant, I have some faith in the resurgence of vinyl and the
>> analogue intrigue. I went to a benefit gig this evening (ostensibly
>> LGBT) when a chunk was set aside to this woman:
>>
>> http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/jul/08/beryl-ritchie-obituary
>
> Cutting a bagpipe LP backwards. As if anyone would notice!
> It might improve Philip Glass too.
> My copy of 'No Pussyfooting' has a second CD with one track reversed and
> one at half-speed.
> Legend has it that John Peel played it backwards on the radio.
> I wonder how he did it. Did they have tape decks that could run in
> reverse?
> Or two-track stereo decks?
>
> Hifi always was a minority interest. For every SME/V15/Quad/Tannoy setup
> there were hundreds of SP25/Amstrads and thousands of portables.
>
> But I'd wager that my hifi from the seventies would sound a lot better
> than
> a typical modern vinyl revival setup (if I still had it.)
>
> --
> Eiron.
>