In article , Roderick
Stewart writes
In article , Eiron wrote:
tony sayer wrote:

Come on Roderick it isn't that bad, theres still FM and with a good
Tuner and live broadcast it can still be very good.

You think there's a difference between live and recorded these days?
It's all digital until the FM transmitter.

Broadcast programming is an unlimited mixture. Some of it is from
published recordings, occasionally old analogue ones from the archive,
and some is from the broadcasters' own recordings or from live events,
so it won't all be digital in origin.

No course not, thats accepted..

At its best it can be very good,
but if you want the best possible audio source, anything that has been
through an FM transmission system won't be a match for the best that can
be put on a CD.

Rod.

Well having listened the Choir this week and the Two and a half hour
Messiah, that had sufficient dynamic range to annoy a few people
here).

However I !!DO!! wish they'd sort out that fecking rumble on the
continuity studio mic....
--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Come on Roderick it isn't that bad, theres still FM and with a good
Tuner and live broadcast it can still be very good.

Why a 'live' broadcast, Tony? We're not in the age of LPs or analogue tape
recording anymore. And perhaps most live music broadcasts are OBs
involving links back to the transmission centre which may well not be to
the same standard as the main chain. A decent local recording should be
better - and certainly not worse.

Yes I do agree with you re the digital offerings from the BBC very poor
show!. Have you seen the bitrates on German satellite?.

Pity the BBC didn't have a few more Tonemiester's and less management
bull****ters!.....

Hmm. I'd not put Tonemiesters above any other properly trained sound
person. Which the BBC were very good at. And some management are also
concerned with quality. Accountants are likely a different matter...

--
*I don't have a license to kill, but I do have a learner's permit.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:42:18 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

Indeed, and I must say that I am greatly encouraged by the apparent
return of the 'old' Audiolab range, properly engineered with top
quality at a reasonable price as the design goal.

Who's doing that then?....

Derek and Phil got bored in their retirement?....

IAG (owners of Quad and Mission) bought Audiolab, and one of the
original designers (not Swift) is back in charge, unravelling the TAG
design philosophy and getting back to the original concept. At least,
that's what it says in the blurb......

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Come on Roderick it isn't that bad, theres still FM and with a good
Tuner and live broadcast it can still be very good.

Why a 'live' broadcast, Tony?

Actually perhaps I'd better re define that as yes, a live performance as
it happened warts and all that could also have been recorded!..

We're not in the age of LPs or analogue tape
recording anymore. And perhaps most live music broadcasts are OBs
involving links back to the transmission centre which may well not be to
the same standard as the main chain. A decent local recording should be
better - and certainly not worse.

Sometimes yes they can be a bit suspect but that of course depends on
the link. I hear that satellite unlinking is getting more common...


Yes I do agree with you re the digital offerings from the BBC very poor
show!. Have you seen the bitrates on German satellite?.

Pity the BBC didn't have a few more Tonemiester's and less management
bull****ters!.....

Hmm. I'd not put Tonemiesters above any other properly trained sound
person. Which the BBC were very good at. And some management are also
concerned with quality. Accountants are likely a different matter...

Agreed. You get my drift!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Stewart
Pinkerton writes
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:42:18 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

Indeed, and I must say that I am greatly encouraged by the apparent
return of the 'old' Audiolab range, properly engineered with top
quality at a reasonable price as the design goal.

Who's doing that then?....

Derek and Phil got bored in their retirement?....

IAG (owners of Quad and Mission) bought Audiolab, and one of the
original designers (not Swift) is back in charge, unravelling the TAG
design philosophy and getting back to the original concept. At least,
that's what it says in the blurb......

That'll be scottie then won't it?.

What blurb where?.......


--
Tony Sayer

Andy: If you want to make such assertions about what Stewart has said,
then please specify the time and date of posting of the statements you
are
referring to, and quote them in context. This would then allow Stewart
*and others* to make their own assessments of your assertions Said
Jim.

Jim, if you seriously think that Stewart is capable of making an
"assessment" of anything, you haven't been reading this newsgroup for
several years.

In article . com,
Andy
Evans wrote:
Andy: If you want to make such assertions about what Stewart has said,
then please specify the time and date of posting of the statements you
are referring to, and quote them in context. This would then allow
Stewart *and others* to make their own assessments of your assertions
Said Jim.

Jim, if you seriously think that Stewart is capable of making an
"assessment" of anything, you haven't been reading this newsgroup for
several years.

Alas, you respond in a manner that does not address my actual points.

1) You don't give any details of time and date of posting, etc. Hence offer
no evidence for your *specific* assertions about Stewart (which you have
now snipped so we have lost context).

2) I was asking you to provide evidence for *your* assertions. Not asking
your opinions about his ability to make and "assement".

The point I was making was that *others* may prefer to judge your claims on
the basis of any *evidence* you offer. Alas, your posting does not do this,
and the removal of context means that others may now find it harder to
know what led to your posting.

The context was that you were, IIRC, claiming he had stated that "*all*
amplifiers sound the same". I can't recall him saying this. He seems
to also say he has not. Your response above gives no info that would
show that you know of any instance when he has...


Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Jim - you are bringing this onto your territory, which may not be the
territory I am standing on. I am arguing from the standpoint that
'assessment' in the broad sense requires an open mind, flexibility,
sympathy with the subject matter and any human elements associated with
it, observation and a willingness to learn new skillsets. It is up to
me to judge what does or doesn't fit this profile. You've spent many
years examining evidence in detail, I've spent many years profiling
people. I don't have to see things from your perspective and you don't
have to see them from mine.

On 13 Feb 2006 14:25:59 -0800, "Andy Evans"
wrote:

Andy: If you want to make such assertions about what Stewart has said,
then please specify the time and date of posting of the statements you
are
referring to, and quote them in context. This would then allow Stewart
*and others* to make their own assessments of your assertions Said
Jim.

Jim, if you seriously think that Stewart is capable of making an
"assessment" of anything, you haven't been reading this newsgroup for
several years.

Interesting comment, coming from someone who has difficulty knowing
what day of the week it is.......................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:39:48 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Stewart
Pinkerton writes
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:42:18 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

Indeed, and I must say that I am greatly encouraged by the apparent
return of the 'old' Audiolab range, properly engineered with top
quality at a reasonable price as the design goal.

Who's doing that then?....

Derek and Phil got bored in their retirement?....

IAG (owners of Quad and Mission) bought Audiolab, and one of the
original designers (not Swift) is back in charge, unravelling the TAG
design philosophy and getting back to the original concept. At least,
that's what it says in the blurb......

That'll be scottie then won't it?.

No, he was mostly marketing. I'm talking about Nick Clarke, who's been
with the company through all its iterations.

What blurb where?.......

There's a booklet enclosed with this month's What Hi-Fi.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering