"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:29:56 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:

Do you think people replace equipment on an annual basis back then?
Are you not aware that a 7 yead old in '54 could well be listening to
the same kit as a 17 year old in '64.....??


Oops, that was poorly worded - I should have said the *same* person could
*still* be listening to the same kit when he was a 17 year old, ie a
listening period of 10 years...



You are aware you're speaking to someone with a pair of Radford Monitor
1s which are probably older than myself ?


OK, so what's your point? (Other than you'll shortly be accused of living in
a timewarp if they are pre-80's as I suspect they are....)

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:39:25 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:29:56 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:

Do you think people replace equipment on an annual basis back then?
Are you not aware that a 7 yead old in '54 could well be listening to
the same kit as a 17 year old in '64.....??

Oops, that was poorly worded - I should have said the *same* person could
*still* be listening to the same kit when he was a 17 year old, ie a
listening period of 10 years...

I've had the same amplifier and speakers for 13 years now, and I've no
intention of replacing them in the near future, so what's your point?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:39:25 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:29:56 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:

Do you think people replace equipment on an annual basis back then?
Are you not aware that a 7 yead old in '54 could well be listening to
the same kit as a 17 year old in '64.....??

Oops, that was poorly worded - I should have said the *same* person could
*still* be listening to the same kit when he was a 17 year old, ie a
listening period of 10 years...

I've had the same amplifier and speakers for 13 years now, and I've no
intention of replacing them in the near future, so what's your point?


Read the thread and work it out (it ain't hard), Molton posted "I wouldnt
pretend I recall the details of many sounds I heard when I was
7" implied to me that when one was no longer 7, the kit was tossed out (and
presumably replaced?), never to be heard again! Didn't happen in 'owr 'ouse
I can tell you - I was probably listening to same radio we had when I was 7,
when I was 20!

Add to that, that even as I type I'm listen to a pair of very nice speakers
dating from 1975, see where I'm going.....???

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:54:46 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:



Read the thread and work it out (it ain't hard), Molton posted "I wouldnt
pretend I recall the details of many sounds I heard when I was
7" implied to me that when one was no longer 7, the kit was tossed out (and
presumably replaced?), never to be heard again!

Thats yer problem, always has been - you assume stuff.

at 17 I moved house.

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:54:46 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:



Read the thread and work it out (it ain't hard), Molton posted "I wouldnt
pretend I recall the details of many sounds I heard when I was
7" implied to me that when one was no longer 7, the kit was tossed out
(and
presumably replaced?), never to be heard again!

Thats yer problem, always has been - you assume stuff.


So? News to me, AFAIK I *never* 'presume' - if you think I do, it shouldn't
be too hard to point me to few examples then?



at 17 I moved house.


Voluntarily?

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:10:24 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:

So? News to me, AFAIK I *never* 'presume' - if you think I do, it
shouldn't be too hard to point me to few examples then?

Whats wrong with the example I just quoted? Here it is again for you:-

You wrote:

"'I wouldnt pretend I recall the details of many sounds I heard
when I was 7' implied to me that when one was no longer 7, the
kit was tossed out (and presumably replaced?)"


Can I draw special attention to 'Implied to me' and 'presumably
replaced' in the above paragraph?

You'll have to try harder that to ask for an example of your own text
which you actually quoted in your reply!

at 17 I moved house.

Voluntarily?

Sorry, 18 not 17 - and yes, voluntarily - I went to uni.

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:10:24 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:

So? News to me, AFAIK I *never* 'presume' - if you think I do, it
shouldn't be too hard to point me to few examples then?

Whats wrong with the example I just quoted? Here it is again for you:-

You wrote:

"'I wouldnt pretend I recall the details of many sounds I heard
when I was 7' implied to me that when one was no longer 7, the
kit was tossed out (and presumably replaced?)"


Can I draw special attention to 'Implied to me' and 'presumably
replaced' in the above paragraph?

You'll have to try harder that to ask for an example of your own text
which you actually quoted in your reply!



Semasiology, Mr Molton - I presume nothing about the activities or
proclivities of others, the use of the word 'presumably' above was an
interrogative not a statement.....



at 17 I moved house.

Voluntarily?

Sorry, 18 not 17 - and yes, voluntarily - I went to uni.


....as well you should know, if 'uni' (I hate that word - it's so
immature....) did you any good at all.....!!

Btw, you are the only person I've ever encountered who considers they 'moved
house' when they went up to university...??? (Very odd phrase, if I may say
so...)

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:39:25 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:29:56 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:


Do you think people replace equipment on an annual basis back then?
Are you not aware that a 7 yead old in '54 could well be listening to
the same kit as a 17 year old in '64.....??

Oops, that was poorly worded - I should have said the *same* person could
*still* be listening to the same kit when he was a 17 year old, ie a
listening period of 10 years...


I've had the same amplifier and speakers for 13 years now, and I've no
intention of replacing them in the near future, so what's your point?

28 years!
Thanks to Mr. Cooke and Mr Linsley Hood.

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:59:05 +0100, Eiron wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:39:25 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:29:56 +0100
"Keith G" wrote:


Do you think people replace equipment on an annual basis back then?
Are you not aware that a 7 yead old in '54 could well be listening to
the same kit as a 17 year old in '64.....??

Oops, that was poorly worded - I should have said the *same* person could
*still* be listening to the same kit when he was a 17 year old, ie a
listening period of 10 years...


I've had the same amplifier and speakers for 13 years now, and I've no
intention of replacing them in the near future, so what's your point?

28 years!
Thanks to Mr. Cooke and Mr Linsley Hood.

Well, I do have a pair of original KEF Crestas circa 1968 (same
drivers as the LS3/5A, but very different cabinet and crossover), and
a Linsley-Hood amp that I built in 1969-70 (with 2N3055s), but I don't
actually use them any more, so they don't really count.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering