Frequency response of the ear
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

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


The problem with your audible noise and distortion
claims is that they are based on what - a Rega plank
and an M75 or somesuch?

No, they are based on extensive listening to a wide
variety of high end vinyl setups at a variety of
audiphile homes and high end audio shows.

The problem with vinyl is that there is so much detail to
be had

Only if you consider tics, pops, hissing, rumble, flutter, wow, and various
other nasties to be "detail".

Frequency response of the ear
 

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Vinyl only gets bashed here when the likes of you
attribute magical qualities to it.

I haven't posted here or read too much here, but I can
attest to the fact that there is one regular poster here
who is fond of calling people "vinyl bigots" if they
simply state that they like the sound of some LPs.

Lame attempt by Jenn to pretend that her posting history
never existed.

Lame attempt by Arny to pretend that he can show anything
to the contrary.

We've been here before Jenn. I document, you deny, I learn that you aren't
worth the time.

lol Yes, we've been here before. You SAY that you have documented, but
you never have. You're dishonest. Show where you have documented.

Frequency response of the ear
 

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

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


The problem with your audible noise and distortion
claims is that they are based on what - a Rega plank
and an M75 or somesuch?

No, they are based on extensive listening to a wide
variety of high end vinyl setups at a variety of
audiphile homes and high end audio shows.

The problem with vinyl is that there is so much detail to
be had

Only if you consider tics, pops, hissing, rumble, flutter, wow, and
various other nasties to be "detail".


You forgot the *boiled cabbage* smell...

Here, never mind all that - take a pull at these clips which are still on
my webpage (I put them there for some wattock who ran off squealing when I
put him to the test):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-1.mp3

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-2.mp3


One is from the vinyl, the other from the CD and I don't remember which is
which - you tell me!

Then tell what the word is in the phrase 'happy as xxxx' (8 seconds in) - it
could be one of two possibles and I know which I think it is...??

(Or you could just runn orf squealing as well....)

Frequency response of the ear
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

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

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


The problem with your audible noise and distortion
claims is that they are based on what - a Rega plank
and an M75 or somesuch?

No, they are based on extensive listening to a wide
variety of high end vinyl setups at a variety of
audiphile homes and high end audio shows.

The problem with vinyl is that there is so much detail
to be had

Only if you consider tics, pops, hissing, rumble,
flutter, wow, and various other nasties to be "detail".


You forgot the *boiled cabbage* smell...

Here, never mind all that - take a pull at these clips
which are still on my webpage (I put them there for some
wattock who ran off squealing when I put him to the test):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-1.mp3

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-2.mp3

One is from the vinyl, the other from the CD and I don't
remember which is which - you tell me!

Well Keith, as delusional and dishonest as you are, granting an opinon like
this is very risky.

You can easily be your usual contrary self and say that I'm wrong, no matter
what's right.

Not only that, but the clips are badly made - clip 2 was obviously clipped
during transcription from the LP....

Ooops!

They ABX as being different. To me the biggest clue was the better
transient response in the bass on the CD.

But the CD is odd, it has some EMI recorded on it around 15720 Hz.

The music itself sounds odd, like this was an old analog tape transcribed to
CD.

Frequency response of the ear
 

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

Here, never mind all that - take a pull at these clips
which are still on my webpage (I put them there for some
wattock who ran off squealing when I put him to the test):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-1.mp3

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-2.mp3

One is from the vinyl, the other from the CD and I don't
remember which is which - you tell me!

Well Keith, as delusional and dishonest as you are, granting an opinon
like this is very risky.


Given the *idiot reversal* that kicks in when it's you, those childish
insults come back as compliments....



You can easily be your usual contrary self and say that I'm wrong, no
matter what's right.


Your paranoia's dripping, Arny - you might want to put a cloth under it....



Not only that, but the clips are badly made - clip 2 was obviously clipped
during transcription from the LP....


Barely and only very briefly - doesn't bother me and was probably hastily
recorded as a *WTF, I'm playing it anyway*...???

(I get busy hun, and don't always have time to set up properly if the need
isn't there - for instance, right now I'm hassled; I'm halfway through
cutting the grass and then I want a trip out on the bike while the sun's
out!!)



Ooops!

They ABX as being different. To me the biggest clue was the better
transient response in the bass on the CD.


Oh, sure....



But the CD is odd, it has some EMI recorded on it around 15720 Hz.

The music itself sounds odd, like this was an old analog tape transcribed
to CD.


Well, you're right on the money there - look at this snap:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Heartbreak.jpg

That album is 26 years old...

(Note the *barrel distortion* in the pic - it's a fairly extreme wide angle
and I haven't got time to feck about changing lenses - does that make the
lens useless...??)

[To self: **** me, I post more 'Show N Tell' to substantiate my assertions
on this tossy little newsgroup thn anyone in the history of Usenet and this
thick, arrogant **** tells me I'm *dishonest*...!!??]

Anyway, shape up Arny - you haven't answered the main question: What is the
word in 'happy as *what'*??

I think I know what it is and there's only one word really makes sense in
the UK, but (it's an American disc) there's a choice of two it might be....

Anybody?

Frequency response of the ear
 

On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:50:36 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Anyway, shape up Arny - you haven't answered the main question: What is the
word in 'happy as *what'*??

Happy as clams (at high water).

d

Frequency response of the ear
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:49fab7ae.679415750@localhost...
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:50:36 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Anyway, shape up Arny - you haven't answered the main question: What is
the
word in 'happy as *what'*??

Happy as clams (at high water).


OK, that's what it says in the sleeve notes and is a phrase that didn't make
sense to me until we looked it up, but that's not what we *hear*...!!!

I'll have to get Plowie to lend me his milkman....

Frequency response of the ear
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

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

Here, never mind all that - take a pull at these clips
which are still on my webpage (I put them there for some
wattock who ran off squealing when I put him to the
test): http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-1.mp3

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-2.mp3

One is from the vinyl, the other from the CD and I don't
remember which is which - you tell me!

Well Keith, as delusional and dishonest as you are,
granting an opinon like this is very risky.

snip a variety of insults and non-answers.

Keith behaved true to form.

Frequency response of the ear
 

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

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

Here, never mind all that - take a pull at these clips
which are still on my webpage (I put them there for some
wattock who ran off squealing when I put him to the
test): http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-1.mp3

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/Langu...r%20Clip-2.mp3

One is from the vinyl, the other from the CD and I don't
remember which is which - you tell me!

Well Keith, as delusional and dishonest as you are,
granting an opinon like this is very risky.

snip a variety of insults


Oh dear, Arny's just like all long-term Usenet creeps - he can dish it out,
but he can't take it..!!

:-)


and non-answers.

??

'Non-answers' to my own questions, dummy?

Wot sense does that make? Oh, hang on a minute....

(Losing it fast, aren't you...?? ;-)


Keith behaved true to form.


As did *you*, chum.... LOL!!

Now kindly consider any future posts of mine directed to all the cringing
lurkers here but, not to you - you are *excused* henceforth....

Frequency response of the ear
 

In article , Keith G
wrote:


Now kindly consider any future posts of mine directed to all the
cringing lurkers here but, not to you - you are *excused* henceforth....


FWIW Keith, I don't know if you regard me as a 'cringing lurker' or not, but
I don't particularly want your opinions "directed" to me, so count me out.
I gave up trying to discuss various things with you because of the kind
of behaviour you have shown in threads like this. I do sometimes scan
your postings but have decided I'd be wasting my time to respond.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html