Intelligence and RIAA
 

west wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ps.com...

Patrick Turner wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:

Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of
the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that
draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad
enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to
correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right.

Andre Jute
uses only CD and so has time for more music

I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon.

But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd
collections
indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl.
Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on
cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and
other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight,
and
give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to
do.

I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version
and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master
tape
was being played, and we could switch from one to the other,
and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively.

Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge
bodge to.

So is FM stereo mulptiplexing.

Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do
it right, IMHO.

Patrick Turner.

I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold
the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too
time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a
boon.

I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like
Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's
pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred
Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big-
engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my
sound systems. I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and
then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels
are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers -- and CDs, so that
chaniging the music is quick and easy.

There is nothing wrong with CD sound quality; it is better than good
enough. I decided to go over solely to CD on the day Nimbus, who
transfer ancient discs to CD, sent me a box of CDs including one of
Ponselle that was better than anything you could buy on any other
medium, no matter how much money you spent.

Andre Jute
Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when
they will get off their collective fat backside and criminalize
negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by the enemies of
fidelity.

And I am not taking a position on the vinyl vs.CD debate but I am
wondering if the convenience of playing both mediums were equal, which would
you prefer?

That's a good question, West. I would choose CD because it doesn't
wear and it is small. I have 6000 CDs (or so) in a fraction of the
space consumed by 8000 LPs. Vinyl is (for me) simply a nuisance
unjustified by whatever extra audiophiles claim to hear in the
grooves.

Next question, if you don't mind ...what are you using to play your CDs?

Quad CD66 and CD67, very old, very reliable. Both of mine were on
lease to the BBC, then checked over at the factory before they came to
me about fifteen years ago.

Thanks in advance.

west

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Intelligence and RIAA
 

Don Pearce said:

The correct spelling is "kluge" (rhymes with stooge).

There is a separate British word kludge, with its own provenance. I
think the two have become confused over the past few years.

That spelling mandates a short vowel sound, like "fudge" or "nudge".




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

Intelligence and RIAA
 

On Mon, 14 May 2007 13:49:05 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr _ george
@ comcast . net wrote:



Don Pearce said:

The correct spelling is "kluge" (rhymes with stooge).

There is a separate British word kludge, with its own provenance. I
think the two have become confused over the past few years.

That spelling mandates a short vowel sound, like "fudge" or "nudge".

Yup.

d

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

Intelligence and RIAA
 

On Mon, 14 May 2007 13:49:05 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr _ george
@ comcast . net wrote:



Don Pearce said:

The correct spelling is "kluge" (rhymes with stooge).

There is a separate British word kludge, with its own provenance. I
think the two have become confused over the past few years.

That spelling mandates a short vowel sound, like "fudge" or "nudge".

Where bodge would be a makeshift attempt at repair, kludge has more
the flavour of the way the thing is actually made, but looks like a
bodge.

d

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

Intelligence and RIAA
 

Don Pearce said:

Where bodge would be a makeshift attempt at repair, kludge has more
the flavour of the way the thing is actually made, but looks like a
bodge.

Have you Brits adopted "Krooge" yet? ;-)





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

Intelligence and RIAA
 

On Mon, 14 May 2007 15:02:47 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr _ george
@ comcast . net wrote:



Don Pearce said:

Where bodge would be a makeshift attempt at repair, kludge has more
the flavour of the way the thing is actually made, but looks like a
bodge.

Have you Brits adopted "Krooge" yet? ;-)

We haven't even adopted the kilogramme. We got a high court ruling
just a couple of days ago that it will remain legal to sell goods in
pounds and ounces, despite EU membership (which thankfully gets more
tenuous by the day).

d

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

Intelligence and RIAA
 

Patrick Turner wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of
the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that
draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad
enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to
correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right.


I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version
and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master
tape
was being played, and we could switch from one to the other,
and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively.


I myself never could get my vinyl to sound excellent, but I probably
have made some fundamental mistake in setting up my turntable (a Sony
from 1977 and an Empire cart). And some of my records just seem to be
badly manufactured (45 singles seem to be particularly awful, over
modulated more often than not). Some of the music (yes, top 40 pop from
the 60's and 70's) I wanted can be found only on crappy singles until CD
compilations came out. CDs are a lot less fussy (though it is possible
to muck up a CD (dirt, hair, scratches)).

Intelligence and RIAA
 

We haven't even adopted the kilogramme. We got a high court ruling
just a couple of days ago that it will remain legal to sell goods in
pounds and ounces, despite EU membership (which thankfully gets more
tenuous by the day).


And I thought only the USA and some 3rd world country were the only
nations that haven't gone metric. In a sense, the USA is metric, as the
inch and such are defined in terms of the metric system. Like "One inch
is equal to 2.54cm". And nowadays stuff sold in supermarkets have
both english units and metric units. Which I find nice, as I can never
remember exactly if it's 12 oz to a pound, or was it 16? And I was born
here. And how many pints in a gallon, this gets to be a PITA. Coke now
is sold in liter bottles here. Directly, not as "X oz of Coke, which
happens to be a liter".

Intelligence and RIAA
 

On Mon, 14 May 2007 20:13:45 GMT, robert casey
wrote:




We haven't even adopted the kilogramme. We got a high court ruling
just a couple of days ago that it will remain legal to sell goods in
pounds and ounces, despite EU membership (which thankfully gets more
tenuous by the day).


And I thought only the USA and some 3rd world country were the only
nations that haven't gone metric. In a sense, the USA is metric, as the
inch and such are defined in terms of the metric system. Like "One inch
is equal to 2.54cm". And nowadays stuff sold in supermarkets have
both english units and metric units. Which I find nice, as I can never
remember exactly if it's 12 oz to a pound, or was it 16? And I was born
here. And how many pints in a gallon, this gets to be a PITA. Coke now
is sold in liter bottles here. Directly, not as "X oz of Coke, which
happens to be a liter".

This was all about street market traders who wanted to continue
selling in pounds to the old ladies. A couple were prosecuted when we
went metric and the government went a bit ballistic in its enthusiasm.
But their guild took the government to court over the matter, saying
it was restricting their trade and denying customers their rights to
buy however they liked. The court has found in their favour. Pretty
much nothing in the shops has Imperial units marked any more, although
typically liquid measures still show pints as well as litres.

Interestingly, all of Europe and Scandinavia have maintained the
pound, the inch and the foot alongside metres and kilograms throughout
the last five hundred years - they just aren't quite the same as ours.

d

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

Intelligence and RIAA
 

On May 14, 7:08 am, George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast .
net wrote:
Gerry said:

RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge.
What the hell is "bodge"????

It's obviously some bit of Brit slang. I've never heard it before but
the meaning is plain.

My suggestion is to find a 12-year-old child who earns a B average in
school and ask the child to clue you in.


It was not 'obvious' at all. I seriously doubt that any 12-year-old
American child has ever heard or used that word before. What I'm
gathering from others' interpretations is that it would seem to mean
"cobble together", but the meaning was not at all clear in the
original post.