"Iain Churches" wrote


Alas, the closest I can get to either is recalling that I like the tea
with
fresh pineapple which they served on Moloka'i. :-)

Not sure if it was digital or analog, though...


If there were tea leaves in the bottom of the cup,
it was analogue.

If it was totally transparent, enabling you to see right
to the bottom, but with little or no flavour, it was digital:-)


:-)

"Don Pearce" wrote


No, I would just suggest you say "I like the sound of vinyl". That way
brooks no argument, and doesn't result in nonsensical terms like
"superior" being bandied around.


See below....


Nor need it be true that "Nobody know" if you are talking about "can"
since
in specific cases the reasons may be known.


Indeed - I don't know that 'nobody knows', I just think they can't prove
it. The specific case being - an LP and CD from the same master. The LP
sounds better to some people. Why?

Because it sounds different - it has no choice, that is what LPs do.
If it sounds different then of course some people will prefer it. That
is the nature of people.



People who prefer vinyl (to digital) are hardly likely to do so if they
think it sounds *inferior* - the main cause of CD vs. LP here is that a
small few here want to dictate how vinyilists express themselves and their
preferences. Other than for the specific purposes of *argument* here, I
don't think any vinylist could really be arsed to express a strong view on
CD or its use - many (if not most) have CDs also and will play them from
time to time!

(No, really...!! :-)

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 16:19:10 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


No, I would just suggest you say "I like the sound of vinyl". That way
brooks no argument, and doesn't result in nonsensical terms like
"superior" being bandied around.


See below....


Nor need it be true that "Nobody know" if you are talking about "can"
since
in specific cases the reasons may be known.


Indeed - I don't know that 'nobody knows', I just think they can't prove
it. The specific case being - an LP and CD from the same master. The LP
sounds better to some people. Why?

Because it sounds different - it has no choice, that is what LPs do.
If it sounds different then of course some people will prefer it. That
is the nature of people.



People who prefer vinyl (to digital) are hardly likely to do so if they
think it sounds *inferior* - the main cause of CD vs. LP here is that a
small few here want to dictate how vinyilists express themselves and their
preferences. Other than for the specific purposes of *argument* here, I
don't think any vinylist could really be arsed to express a strong view on
CD or its use - many (if not most) have CDs also and will play them from
time to time!

(No, really...!! :-)



And exactly the same applies the other way for we who prefer CD. In
fact I was listening to some vinyl myself earlier - an absolutely
appalling record by some friends of mine from the sixties, a group
called Justine. I'm 100% certain it never made the journey to CD.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:26:22 GMT, (Don Pearce)
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 16:19:10 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


No, I would just suggest you say "I like the sound of vinyl". That way
brooks no argument, and doesn't result in nonsensical terms like
"superior" being bandied around.


See below....


Nor need it be true that "Nobody know" if you are talking about "can"
since
in specific cases the reasons may be known.


Indeed - I don't know that 'nobody knows', I just think they can't prove
it. The specific case being - an LP and CD from the same master. The LP
sounds better to some people. Why?

Because it sounds different - it has no choice, that is what LPs do.
If it sounds different then of course some people will prefer it. That
is the nature of people.



People who prefer vinyl (to digital) are hardly likely to do so if they
think it sounds *inferior* - the main cause of CD vs. LP here is that a
small few here want to dictate how vinyilists express themselves and their
preferences. Other than for the specific purposes of *argument* here, I
don't think any vinylist could really be arsed to express a strong view on
CD or its use - many (if not most) have CDs also and will play them from
time to time!

(No, really...!! :-)



And exactly the same applies the other way for we who prefer CD. In
fact I was listening to some vinyl myself earlier - an absolutely
appalling record by some friends of mine from the sixties, a group
called Justine. I'm 100% certain it never made the journey to CD.

d

Which goes to show what bollix I talk. Just did a rapid search and
found this

http://www.musicstack.com/item/58591064/justine/justine

God that takes me back

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote


And exactly the same applies the other way for we who prefer CD. In
fact I was listening to some vinyl myself earlier - an absolutely
appalling record by some friends of mine from the sixties, a group
called Justine. I'm 100% certain it never made the journey to CD.

d

Which goes to show what bollix I talk. Just did a rapid search and
found this

http://www.musicstack.com/item/58591064/justine/justine

God that takes me back



They don't look so bad - I'da shagged at least *three* of them back
then...?? ;-)

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 16:38:32 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


And exactly the same applies the other way for we who prefer CD. In
fact I was listening to some vinyl myself earlier - an absolutely
appalling record by some friends of mine from the sixties, a group
called Justine. I'm 100% certain it never made the journey to CD.

d

Which goes to show what bollix I talk. Just did a rapid search and
found this

http://www.musicstack.com/item/58591064/justine/justine

God that takes me back



They don't look so bad - I'da shagged at least *three* of them back
then...?? ;-)


As I remember, you probably could'a. ;-)

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:10:36 +0100, Rob
wrote:

No, I would just suggest you say "I like the sound of vinyl". That way
brooks no argument, and doesn't result in nonsensical terms like
"superior" being bandied around.

Superior is not a nonsensical term. here is the definition.
Main Entry: 1su·pe·ri·or
Function: adjective
Pronunciation: su-'pir-e-&r
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French superieur, from Latin
superior, comparative of superus upper, from super over, above -- more
at OVER
1 : situated higher up : UPPER
2 : of higher rank, quality, or importance
3 : courageously or serenely indifferent (as to something painful or
disheartening)
4 a : greater in quantity or numbers escaped by superior speed b :
excellent of its kind : BETTER her superior memory
5 : being a superscript
6 a of an animal structure : situated above or anterior or dorsal to
another and especially a corresponding part a superior artery b of a
plant structure : situated above or near the top of another part: as
(1) of a calyx : attached to and apparently arising from the ovary (2)
of an ovary : free from the calyx or other floral envelope
7 : more comprehensive a genus is superior to a species
8 : affecting or assuming an air of superiority :

So, in cases where all else is equal, if vinyl is prefered to CD
playback vinyl is superior to CD for that person. in any case where a
recording artist compares his or her work on both formats and claims
that the vinyl does a better job of expressing their intentions as
artists it is fair to say the vinyl is the supeior version.




Indeed - I don't know that 'nobody knows', I just think they can't prove
it. The specific case being - an LP and CD from the same master. The LP
sounds better to some people. Why?

Because it sounds different - it has no choice, that is what LPs do.
If it sounds different then of course some people will prefer it. That
is the nature of people.


And yet many a recording and mastering engineer have claimed to prefer
the vinyl versions of their work because they sounded more like the
original master tape or in some cases more like the original live
performance. So to claim that some people like vinyl because it sounds
"different" is a pretty wild asertion. Care to support it with some
proof?


Scott

On 3 Sep 2006 09:06:59 -0700, wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:10:36 +0100, Rob
wrote:

No, I would just suggest you say "I like the sound of vinyl". That way
brooks no argument, and doesn't result in nonsensical terms like
"superior" being bandied around.

Superior is not a nonsensical term. here is the definition.
Main Entry: 1su·pe·ri·or
Function: adjective
Pronunciation: su-'pir-e-&r
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French superieur, from Latin
superior, comparative of superus upper, from super over, above -- more
at OVER
1 : situated higher up : UPPER
2 : of higher rank, quality, or importance
3 : courageously or serenely indifferent (as to something painful or
disheartening)
4 a : greater in quantity or numbers escaped by superior speed b :
excellent of its kind : BETTER her superior memory
5 : being a superscript
6 a of an animal structure : situated above or anterior or dorsal to
another and especially a corresponding part a superior artery b of a
plant structure : situated above or near the top of another part: as
(1) of a calyx : attached to and apparently arising from the ovary (2)
of an ovary : free from the calyx or other floral envelope
7 : more comprehensive a genus is superior to a species
8 : affecting or assuming an air of superiority :

So, in cases where all else is equal, if vinyl is prefered to CD
playback vinyl is superior to CD for that person. in any case where a
recording artist compares his or her work on both formats and claims
that the vinyl does a better job of expressing their intentions as
artists it is fair to say the vinyl is the supeior version.


Stop talking, Scott. Please, just stop now. It really, really hurts.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote


Which goes to show what bollix I talk. Just did a rapid search and
found this

http://www.musicstack.com/item/58591064/justine/justine

God that takes me back



They don't look so bad - I'da shagged at least *three* of them back
then...?? ;-)


As I remember, you probably could'a. ;-)



***BLOG ALERT***

Higher priorites these days - got Swim's new veggie plot finished this
morning. Here it is half planted (seeded?):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...0Patch%205.JPG

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...0Patch%206.JPG


There is a *waiting list* for allotments here apparently and the mention of
the liberal use of 'Round Up' by the allomenteer we were chatting to didn't
inspire too much confidence - we're totally 'organic' here!! (Woss the point
of growing yer own veggies if you're going to *poison* them..??)

Audio content here? - **** all, it's Sunday - there'll be a disc or two
spinning later on this evening, I don't doubt..!! ;-)

(Actually, leetle bit - now to haul out my RPM9 and put the Aiwa back in -
can't be arsed with all the *tonearm lowering and retrieval*..!! :-)

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:10:36 +0100, Rob
wrote:

Alas, the above statement is confused by including both "inherent" and
"can". If something is inherent then it would be inescapable for that
format. Thus it would not be "can" which indicates variability depending on
the details.

I'm getting quite used to being told how to use English :-)

Something that's inherent is *an* essential attribute. It's not the
*only* attribute. Other attributes in this context include the turntable
and cartridge. I was pointing to something inherent to LP playback (I
don't pretend to know what) that can result in CD-superior sound.

Doubtless Don will correct my English. I'll just ask you to consider my
point.


No, I would just suggest you say "I like the sound of vinyl". That way
brooks no argument, and doesn't result in nonsensical terms like
"superior" being bandied around.


Ta.

Nor need it be true that "Nobody know" if you are talking about "can" since
in specific cases the reasons may be known.

Indeed - I don't know that 'nobody knows', I just think they can't prove
it. The specific case being - an LP and CD from the same master. The LP
sounds better to some people. Why?

Because it sounds different - it has no choice, that is what LPs do.
If it sounds different then of course some people will prefer it. That
is the nature of people.


Nature of people - now that does make sense, that's really tied it down! :-)

What 'natural' attribute(s) were you thinking of?

Perhaps the Donalexicon has stuttered just this once :-)