![]() |
Intelligence and RIAA
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
i.fi "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Iain Churches" wrote in message I can enjoy tubes for what they are - a technological sentimental journey, and a technological backwater for people who can't master the more difficult art of building SS power amps. Who would bother to do such a thing? Obviously, people who are interested in taking a sentimental journey, and want to have the fun of building amps without having to be really adept. SS amps are as cheap as chips. The Chinese seem to be doing their part for tubed amps... Has the reason why people build tube amps totally escaped you? One thing is for sure, nobody builds tubed amps because they are the best way to achieve sonic accuracy. Tubed amps fit into three categories (1) Basically EFX boxes, examples: most SETs and guitar amps. Note that these are both major areas of interest in tubes, and remain niche markets with some substance to them. (2) Wannabee, barely-are sonically transparent amps - leading example would be the Dyna 70. Kinda of marginally built on the best day of its life, but can get the job done under more ideal circumstances. (3) Honest-to-goodness solidly sonically transparent tube amps - I'll leave the examples up to the reader. I'm thinking of amps by CJ, AR, Mc, Manley, etc. Stewart used the term "spearing fish in a barrel" and you stated that it was your duty to keep Patrick Turner under control (rather a sad deluded statement, as the level of Patrick's knowledge is at least 60dB above your own!) In your dreams Iain, even your alleged level of technical knowlege is 144 db above mine. db? (Both letters lower case) There you go again:-) It's a good thing you are not a musician Arny. You could not write Gb dim and expect people to know that you meant Gb Aug. Nahh Iain, you just like to whine. Both of you, as I recall used the term "feet of clay" to describe others on the group. Oh come on Iain don't be shy. I used "feet of clay" to describe you. You replied, I am told, to my BBC pal in identical terms earlier. I presume that you got the term from Stewart - it is unlikely you could have thought it up on your own. Hint: it orginated in the Bible. But whatever your agenda, together with Stewart, you succeeded in driving away some good people, before Stewart's rather sudden demise. Prove it. I correspond regularly with people who have left Usenet because of their aversion to "John the Baptist" (that's you Arny:-) Some ten names come to mind in just a few seconds. That's something for a true Christian to be proud of! Given your propensity to lying and hyperbole Iain, that's just noise and rumor. Prove it. Simply reading the posts is all the proof required. See my former comment. And now you talk about "harm and discomfort in others" A phrase that trolled you quite effectively, Iain. Thanks for indicting yourself again! Your choice of phrase illustrates how well you live up to your reputation as a sanctimonious born-again hypocrite. Simply reading your posts is all the proof that is needed, Iain. But, I must admit you *are* consistent:-) Further discussion with you on this matter is pointless. Iain, then stop whining, already. No, you like to spew bile. That's why you just keep on being you. |
Intelligence and RIAA
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote: Another of those bitchy comments you say you hate so much in others. Including boasting on how much you earn. How very juvenile. As you well know. Dave, levels of pay in our industry are skill related. Sorry to be late in replying. You don't work in my industry, Iain. -- *Toilet stolen from police station. Cops have nothing to go on. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Intelligence and RIAA
In article i,
Iain Churches wrote: Another of those bitchy comments you say you hate so much in others. Including boasting on how much you earn. How very juvenile. Dave. I have just remembered, I have an e-mail from you written some time ago, in which you were very keen indeed to know the rates of pay for your kind of work in this part of the EBU region. I think the info I was able to supply came as a bit of a shock to you. You did not think it juvenile then:-))) A private enquiry about general pay rates is rather a different matter than boasting about how much one earns etc on a newsgroup. However I'd guess that too subtle for you. I am told that "the problem in the UK is that there are few staff jobs in broadcast, and a large number of people are competing for the same work as freelances at a standard-rate on a take-it-or-leave-it basis." As is the case in any industry employing a largely freelance workforce. Individual bargaining for each one would be impossible. -- *We are born naked, wet, and hungry. Then things get worse. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Intelligence and RIAA
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Iain Churches" wrote in message i.fi "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Iain Churches" wrote in message I can enjoy tubes for what they are - a technological sentimental journey, and a technological backwater for people who can't master the more difficult art of building SS power amps. Who would bother to do such a thing? Obviously, people who are interested in taking a sentimental journey, and want to have the fun of building amps without having to be really adept. Arny. Your dyslexia gets worse by the day. I was asking: "who would bother to build SS amps?" Discussion with you is pointless. I would rather spend my time with Emma Kirkby - a much more attractive proposition.:-) Iain |
Intelligence and RIAA
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article , Iain Churches wrote: Another of those bitchy comments you say you hate so much in others. Including boasting on how much you earn. How very juvenile. As you well know. Dave, levels of pay in our industry are skill related. Sorry to be late in replying. You don't work in my industry, Iain. I have probably mixed and edited music for more TV documentaries and corporate programmes than you would imagine. The transition from music recording/editing to TV post is interesting and not difficult. A transition in the opposite direction is not so easy. Iain |
Intelligence and RIAA
In article i,
Iain Churches wrote: You don't work in my industry, Iain. I have probably mixed and edited music for more TV documentaries and corporate programmes than you would imagine. The transition from music recording/editing to TV post is interesting and not difficult. A transition in the opposite direction is not so easy. You really are a patronising git, Iain. You wouldn't have a clue how to set up the comms for even a minor sporting event TV coverage, for example. There's a lot more to TV sound than simple music balancing. Kids on computers do that these days. With no training. *My* industry is basically all aspects of 'live' TV. And you've just proved you know nothing about it. Or perhaps you don't realise that music plays only a small part in TV. And that the background music you've been involved with is usually hated by the viewer. ;-) -- *All those who believe in psychokinesis, raise my hand * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Intelligence and RIAA
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article i, Iain Churches wrote: Another of those bitchy comments you say you hate so much in others. Including boasting on how much you earn. How very juvenile. Dave. I have just remembered, I have an e-mail from you written some time ago, in which you were very keen indeed to know the rates of pay for your kind of work in this part of the EBU region. I think the info I was able to supply came as a bit of a shock to you. You did not think it juvenile then:-))) A private enquiry about general pay rates is rather a different matter than boasting about how much one earns etc on a newsgroup. However I'd guess that too subtle for you. No boast on my part , no subtlety on yours:-) I simply stated that you might find the pay slip very much to your liking. Those working in a sector of the industry where supply exceeds demand, don't seem to get a fair deal. I am told that "the problem in the UK is that there are few staff jobs in broadcast, and a large number of people are competing for the same work as freelances at a standard-rate on a take-it-or-leave-it basis." As is the case in any industry employing a largely freelance workforce. Individual bargaining for each one would be impossible. Not so. Producers, directors, editors, writers, also freelance, are treated as individuals, as are many of those involved in post production. They are picked for their skills, as the best possible person for that particular production. Why cannot a sound recordist be deserving of the same notice? The legendary Gus Dudgeon, a talented man who became highly successful, made some interesting comments on just this situation within our industry. He stressed the importance of knowing your own value. Some years ago, a good friend of mine in the UK who was rushed off his feet, but was reluctant to turn anyone down, decided to raise his rate by 35%. This resulted in a reduction of hours worked of 12%. I will leave you to do the maths and see the benefit:-) The jobs that he did not get were those he would have liked to turn down anyway:-) Iain |
Intelligence and RIAA
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article i, Iain Churches wrote: You don't work in my industry, Iain. I have probably mixed and edited music for more TV documentaries and corporate programmes than you would imagine. The transition from music recording/editing to TV post is interesting and not difficult. A transition in the opposite direction is not so easy. You really are a patronising git, Iain. If it "were" easy, then many people would do it, as it is generally seen as a considerable step forward. I wonder why TV companies "hire in" a music editor if a freelance TV sound recordist could do the job much more cheaply? You wouldn't have a clue how to set up the comms for even a minor sporting event TV coverage, for example. Comms for a minor sporting event? Sounds like an excellent cure for insomnia:-) There's a lot more to TV sound than simple music balancing. Kids on computers do that these days. With no training. Not symphony or jazz orchestras they don't:-)) *My* industry is basically all aspects of 'live' TV. And you've just proved you know nothing about it. Or perhaps you don't realise that music plays only a small part in TV. And that the background music you've been involved with is usually hated by the viewer. ;-) I am talking about music composed for the production and recorded to picture. Most people in TV sound seem to regard the role of music as paramount. There is no better way to "set the atmosphere" for a sequence. One of my tutors, Bernard Hermann, who wrote the music for most of the Hitchcock films, illustrated this on many many occasions. Is there any film buff who does not instantly recognise the "Eeek, Eeek, Eeek" strings from the shower sequence in Psycho? Another classic example is the film "The White Deer", with music by Einar Englund. What I *do* realise, Dave, is that for the most part, people working in TV live sound are playing second fiddle to the camera crew, and so do not and can not get the best possible results. Not too satisfying:-(( But most TV programmes are viewed once only, so maybe it doesn't matter too much. Iain .. |
Intelligence and RIAA
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote: "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article i, Iain Churches wrote: You don't work in my industry, Iain. I have probably mixed and edited music for more TV documentaries and corporate programmes than you would imagine. The transition from music recording/editing to TV post is interesting and not difficult. A transition in the opposite direction is not so easy. You really are a patronising git, Iain. If it "were" easy, then many people would do it, as it is generally seen as a considerable step forward. I wonder why TV companies "hire in" a music editor if a freelance TV sound recordist could do the job much more cheaply? They hire in IT people too. And of course most production managers don't know the total skills of the people they employ. But pigeon hole them. It's one major thin I dislike about being freelance - you tend to get asked back for the same sort of prog you've been working on. Takes will to refuse and branch out - even although you've got the experience for other things. You wouldn't have a clue how to set up the comms for even a minor sporting event TV coverage, for example. Comms for a minor sporting event? Sounds like an excellent cure for insomnia:-) You didn't quite get the bit about patronising, did you, regardless of the smiley? Lets put it this way. I'd make a fair fist of any music recording such that the average punter would be happy. You wouldn't know where to start with the sound facilities for even a small current affairs or sport programme, etc, so the average punter wouldn't be able to judge your results as it simply couldn't be made. There's a lot more to TV sound than simple music balancing. Kids on computers do that these days. With no training. Not symphony or jazz orchestras they don't:-)) Most can sling a stereo pair and get acceptable results from a symphony ork in a good hall. Jazz is often quite simple too as the band is internally balanced. Of course you like to surround it with mystery... *My* industry is basically all aspects of 'live' TV. And you've just proved you know nothing about it. Or perhaps you don't realise that music plays only a small part in TV. And that the background music you've been involved with is usually hated by the viewer. ;-) I am talking about music composed for the production and recorded to picture. Most people in TV sound seem to regard the role of music as paramount. There is no better way to "set the atmosphere" for a sequence. One of my tutors, Bernard Hermann, who wrote the music for most of the Hitchcock films, illustrated this on many many occasions. Is there any film buff who does not instantly recognise the "Eeek, Eeek, Eeek" strings from the shower sequence in Psycho? Ah - right. So suddenly your corporates have become feature films? But it again shows your lack of knowledge of TV - most use library music. Another classic example is the film "The White Deer", with music by Einar Englund. What I *do* realise, Dave, is that for the most part, people working in TV live sound are playing second fiddle to the camera crew, and so do not and can not get the best possible results. Not too satisfying:-(( But most TV programmes are viewed once only, so maybe it doesn\'t matter too much. And I\'d guess if you were recording a live gig you\'d play second fiddle to the front of house boys. So what? Even you will not produce perfection every time, and getting a decent result in spite of not being the priority of a production in some circumstances is still very satisfying professionally. If you\'d ever worked on radio drama *and* location TV or film you\'d soon realise that. -- *You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:57 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk