Here we go again!
 

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" foamed at the mouth and said:


No Jenn you've got it all wrong. We're accusing vinyl fans of
distorting
established scientific facts to support their delusional position
that the
best sounding LPs sound more lifelike than a well-made CD.


Note the 'we' again - not one of these *types* has got the ******** to
stand up and speak only for himself...



You've missed the point yet again. My point is that I've distorted
NOTHING. You and Mr. T can keep distorting my statements any way you
wish to. I "pity the fools" who can read simple posts.


Twisting what you have said, putting words into your mouth and ascribing
false claims to general, subjective remarks (opinions, usually) you have
made are the well-known SOP of these *rabid* vinyl-bashers. Their
'scientific arguments' fly out off the window when it comes to the
simple task of listening to the *music* - here's a little test I would
like to see carried out (but CBA to do myself):

Select a number of 'innocent parties' - people who like music but have
no interest in *audio*.

Ask their preference in music or get them to choose or bring a CD.

Sit them in a room (one at a time) with a CD setup, the CD of their
choice, some refreshments and a remote control, tell them they've got
all the time they want and shut the door on them.

Secretly observe them.

Report how many of them listened to the whole disk without skipping/fast
fowarding tracks....

Then, for bonus points, play them the CD and SACD tracks (blind) of the
same music and ask which they thought *better*....

(I make no predictions, but I have my own suspicions... ;-)

Here we go again!
 

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Says it all and I will not add to this thread again
other than to say, having been cornered into the
position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the
recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few*
should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible audio
topic' - no-one ever said it was *compulsory*....

But vinyl has NOT been banned.

Agreed. Although the trite "I just bought a new LP"
posts should be were that to be possible.


If you are talking about me I would be interested to see
such a post -

Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is.

I get excited about finding good music well recorded. I've posted maybe
5 or six such posts. I've also commented on finding good sounding CDs.
If you don't want to read about music, then don't. It's very simple.

Here we go again!
 

"Rob" wrote in message
...
Mr.T wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
To me the real killer point is if you take any decent source -
analogue or
digital - and copy to digital in the CD format and to vinyl, there
were be
a *very* noticeable difference between that master and the vinyl but
not
between it and the digital copy. Of course *some* will prefer the
vinyl
sound. But then come up with all sorts of bull**** as to why.

Yep it's been happening for 25 years and no sign of stopping.

My take is that they PREFER the so called "euphonic distortions",

Prefer the sound, OK. I think you just have to take a deep breath,
relax, and get over it. Until then -

but can't
possibly accept the fact that they may PREFER something not actually
as
technically accurate.

I don't think 'they' know or care, in general.

They then have to come up with stupid explanations
plausible to themselves,

Really? Again, generally people just prefer the sound. The 'why' isn't
particularly important. Knowing why might be interesting, but it's
hardly requisite.

and once they have convinced themselves, feel the
need to be evangelical and convert the rest of the world, just like
most
religions :-)


Unlike digitypes? ;-)


****ing hard to stay out of all this crap, ain't it?

:-)

Here we go again!
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Says it all and I will not add to this thread again
other than to say, having been cornered into the
position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the
recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few*
should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible audio
topic' - no-one ever said it was *compulsory*....

But vinyl has NOT been banned.

Agreed. Although the trite "I just bought a new LP"
posts should be were that to be possible.


If you are talking about me I would be interested to see
such a post -

Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is.


OK, I saw myself quoted above and it appeared to relate to what I had
said, so I made an assumption (unsurprisingly) - you will note it
triggered my *aggressive defence* circuits elsewhere, despite a promise
to not get into any 'vinyl debate' as I really couldn't GAS who listens
to what and what they prefer or what medium may or not be superior to
another in any way that may or may not be in any way relevant.

My only problems are to do with oppression and the restrictions some
people want to place on others in this public forum. If it makes a noise
(from MP3 to Bluray) it's all on the menu, AFAIAC - nobody has to like
it *all*....


Those funny black CDs tricked up to look like 45s are an interesting
trip down memory lane...


No, as I've said recently elsewhere, I'm heartily sick of seeing the
words 'valvelike' and 'analogue sound' being applied to SS kit and
digital music by silly *hip* magazine writers. If it comes to it, I'll
take 'turgid' over 'florid' any day - I can work the rest out for
myself...

Here we go again!
 

Jenn said to MusicHaterBorg:

If you don't want to read about music, then don't. It's very simple.

Rumor has it that a future release of Arnii's SnotWare™ will include a
logic loop that will allow him to ignore mentions of music. Until that
happens, though, the Beast will continue to react with violent revulsion
to all posts containing direct references to music.


--


"Music is irrelevant to audio."
A. Krooger (1998, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006)

Here we go again!
 

On Aug 31, 7:45?am, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com
wrote:
The recording is made up of noughts and ones.
An LP has two sides, a CD only one. 50% difference.
Some LP's had three sides.

LOL, you guys kill me. :-)

Shhh!

There are serious insults being sprayed around ...

Happy Ears!
Al

Here we go again!
 

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Says it all and I will not add to this thread again
other than to say, having been cornered into the
position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the
recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few*
should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible
audio topic' - no-one ever said it was
*compulsory*....

But vinyl has NOT been banned.

Agreed. Although the trite "I just bought a new LP"
posts should be were that to be possible.


If you are talking about me I would be interested to see
such a post -

Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is.

I get excited about finding good music well recorded.

So do I. OK, so that precludes anything on vinyl because any recording on
vinyl is by definition not well recorded. No skin off my nose.

Here we go again!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message


No, as I've said recently elsewhere, I'm heartily sick of
seeing the words 'valvelike' and 'analogue sound' being
applied to SS kit and digital music by silly *hip*
magazine writers.


Agreed, no reason to slander good SS kit and good digital recordings that
way.

Here we go again!
 

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Says it all and I will not add to this thread again
other than to say, having been cornered into the
position of 'Sole Defender Of Vinyl' in UKRA in the
recent past, all I ever sought was that a *small few*
should not have had it banned as an 'inadmissible
audio topic' - no-one ever said it was
*compulsory*....

But vinyl has NOT been banned.

Agreed. Although the trite "I just bought a new LP"
posts should be were that to be possible.


If you are talking about me I would be interested to see
such a post -

Not you, Keith. The offender knows who she is.

I get excited about finding good music well recorded.

So do I.

Great, what is a recent find?

OK, so that precludes anything on vinyl because any recording on
vinyl is by definition not well recorded. No skin off my nose.

Great, so shut up about it.

Here we go again!
 

On Aug 31, 7:11 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message

ups.com

The Ampex units are total overkill for domestic use. I'd
take a Revox A700 over an Ampex any day. For speed
stability, that direct drive Pabst capstan motor
combined with the electronic servo tensioning, was just
unbeatable. And the electronics were modern and quiet.
Plus, unlike the Ampex, the whole package doesn't take
up an entire room.
What's better about a Revox than an AG440 or a 351?

The A77 had a number of advantages over those old Ampexes especially the
351- size, weight, price, reliability, and availability. All that and
equivalent or better performance.

The 351 has big synchronous motors that run on AC and are
mechanically foolproof if the rubber parts are available.


Unlike you Bret, I've actually seen and touched a 351. The thing is about
the size of a washing machine and about as portable. People who carted 351s
around to record live performances were heroes!


For house use, the heavier the better.