Quadraphonic PINK FLOYD Dark Side of the Moon
 

"Lord Vetinari"
"Iain Churches"
"Phil Allison"
Sylus is a noun of the second declension (m) model dominus.
The plural is styli.

There is a Latin word " stilus " - but " stylus " is a word in
the
English language.

The Oxford Dictionary gives: Stylus (pl: styli)
Origin: Latin - stilus.

I give you, direct from the online OED2:
"Also stilus. Pl. styluses, styli. [a. L. stylus, incorrect form of
stilus: see STYLE n.] "


** Every modern dictionary gives both plurals.

Churches will never admit how ANCIENT his copy of the OED is.


The usual plural of which is " styluses " .

The Oxford dictionary states otherwise.

Either a damned idiot, or a damned liar.....which is it?


** Churches is both things - by virtue of his genetic mental disability.

But I told you that already.



...... Phil

Quadraphonic PINK FLOYD Dark Side of the Moon
 

Lord Vetinari wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
[snip]

IIRC There is now a surround-sound version of DSOTM on DVD. No idea how it
compares with the LP, and don't have a multichannel AV system so can't
check.


I believe you are thinking of the 25th anniversary edition on hybrid
SACD...which I have. From Amazon's description:
"The Super Audio CD (SACD) features two disc layers. One layer contains a
standard version of the album that works on any CD player. The other layer
includes high-resolution stereo and a 5.1 surround version of the recording
that works on SACD-compatible DVD players and home theater systems. Both
layers employ SACD's Direct Stream Digital (DSD) encoding process that
samples the music 64 times faster than CD for unprecedented fidelity."

Sadly, the only SACD machine in my collection has a faulty Sony chipset.
Someday....



I seem to recall from the sleevenotes that the 5.1 version was assembled
from the original multitrack masters, with some difficulty in
identifying which takes were used. Some attempt was made to make the mix
as close to that original quadraphonic version (mixed by the same guy ?).
I must say that I was unimpressed with the surround experience, just too
distracting from the music!
The stereo SACD layer was taken from the original master as I understand
it an d seemed to me ab bit clearer(especially the cymbals) than the CD
layer, but I didn't do any blind tests and the difference if it exists
is marginal.
Playing the front L and R channels of the 5.1 in stereo is different,
but not better.
Roger Thorpe