"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:4a03ef10.1217657687@localhost...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:09:54 +0100, "Keith G"

I would have liked to have seen Pepe Martinez and Segovia also, but the
likes of Jeff Beck and that tit Eric Clapton - no thenkue....




Knock yourself out and give this a listen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbhngojbrzQ

d



Nope, too *self indulgent* for me - it's like he's auditioning for PF!

Have a scratch about in these for an 'OK' current (jazz) guitar I would much
prefer to see:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...ar tin+taylor


......and I'll see if I can be arsed to transcribe a bit of Pepe Martinez for
later!

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:4a02ee4e.1217463031@localhost...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:09:54 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:4a01e3d0.1214777515@localhost...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:31:36 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Then you won't be jealous that I just got four tickets for Jeff Beck
at the Albert Hall in July?


Nope! Definitely not - if you gave them to me I'd eBay them! :-)

I'd struggle if it had been Frank Zappa, but even so...

??

Zappa would be struggling too, these days. That's a concert I'd want
to see too...


Oy oy, such a smartzer....

*Had been* Don *had been*....


Yup - that reads the way I interpreted it.

I would have liked to have seen Pepe Martinez and Segovia also, but the
likes of Jeff Beck and that tit Eric Clapton - no thenkue....



With you re Clapton, but Beck? No - an entirely different matter. You
want to hear John Williams (guitar, not film) talking about him - just
runs out of superlatives.

I'm not his greatest fan either - always preferred Julian Bream

But then I found this whilst looking for a JB clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2BOA...eature=related

Wah!! That's more like it! (Count the strings!)

Then dammit, I found Pepe Martinez (there's loads of them) and here's one of
my very favourites:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGTA6...eature=related

(Note he doesn't rely on endless rasguados.....)

Ain't the Web (Youtube) wonderful! :-)

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:01:47 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:4a02ee4e.1217463031@localhost...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:09:54 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:4a01e3d0.1214777515@localhost...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:31:36 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Then you won't be jealous that I just got four tickets for Jeff Beck
at the Albert Hall in July?


Nope! Definitely not - if you gave them to me I'd eBay them! :-)

I'd struggle if it had been Frank Zappa, but even so...

??

Zappa would be struggling too, these days. That's a concert I'd want
to see too...


Oy oy, such a smartzer....

*Had been* Don *had been*....


Yup - that reads the way I interpreted it.

I would have liked to have seen Pepe Martinez and Segovia also, but the
likes of Jeff Beck and that tit Eric Clapton - no thenkue....



With you re Clapton, but Beck? No - an entirely different matter. You
want to hear John Williams (guitar, not film) talking about him - just
runs out of superlatives.

I'm not his greatest fan either - always preferred Julian Bream

But then I found this whilst looking for a JB clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2BOA...eature=related

Wah!! That's more like it! (Count the strings!)

Nope - can't be doing with open tuning and tapping. Sounds flash but
is really pretty easy.

Then dammit, I found Pepe Martinez (there's loads of them) and here's one of
my very favourites:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGTA6...eature=related

(Note he doesn't rely on endless rasguados.....)

Ain't the Web (Youtube) wonderful! :-)

That's more like it. Love the cigar.

d

"Keith G" wrote

.....and I'll see if I can be arsed to transcribe a bit of Pepe Martinez
for later!


Feck! I don't have to - he's on Youtube!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5oz1...eature=related

!!

The only album of his I have is dated 1964 and was brand new when I bought
it - one of my lifelong favourites!!

:-)

In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote


Those proper Tannoy's or the newer ones?...


Newer ones - triangular cabinets.

Not proper ones then like GRF's ...
--
Tony Sayer

In article 49ffc915.1207934406@localhost, Don Pearce
wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:51:41 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:


My finding on this is that the sweet spot can be enlarged usefully if
you stop worrying about symmetry, but instead concentrate on creating
diffuse reflections rather than specular ones, particularly from the
walls beside the speakers. With that taken care of, pointing the
speakers a little straighter into the room rather than crossing
exactly at the seating position can make them cover three seats with
solid imaging.

My experience with that is that it also 'blurs out' the images for
specific instruments/voices. So you end up moving towards the old
'Sonab' experience where you got etherial noises from around you
wherever you went. They regarded that as 'stereo', but I don't.


That happens if you try to angle the speakers too far from crossing, but
if you just make it a few degree, so the beams hit the listening
position roughly midway between two listeners, all is well.

I was really referring to the first part of what you wrote above. I do
agree with the second part, but find it requires a larger room than I have.
:-)

You don't get a huge sweet spot, but certainly three people on one
settee is quite possible.

Never found that possible in the rooms of houses I've lived in TBH.

And it is dead easy to realign them properly when you are listening
alone, of course.

Again, I've not found that. It is easy enough to place the *speakers*
symmetrically wrt the listener. But the results do still depend on the
surroundings. These can be less easy to get optimised. My experience is
that it takes me a few weeks to get the system optimised if I setup in a
new room, even when the room is primarily dedicated to stereo listening.
But I may be ultra-fussy about this having found out just how good the
results can be in you are willing to work at it for that long, etc. :-)

Above said, I do find that you can get excellent results with the ESLs
quite quickly in many rooms. Given quick symmetry the results do tend to
beat cone-and-box speakers with ease, but I've found that continued
experiment generally provides improvements.

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

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G


The impressive thing was that Led Zep sounded the same with a couple
of feet of flames emerging from the center of the speaker - for a
while...
:-)


That would certainly be a sight to behold, but I've never deliberately
listened to Led Zep and don't know their stuff, so I can't say it would
have been an improvement!

I was using them purely as an expletive loud test signal. Interestingly,
the result sounded much the same even when squared off by clipping. :-)

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

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...


I've also seen that. Also that they would drive two ESLs in antiphase
to check they could null the two outputs at the mic to confirm the two
speakers were near identical in performance.

How is that so hard - I would expect that with Lowthers?

Try it. Put the mic at the same distance (say 2m) from both, and drive the
pair in antiphase at the same level. Try doing this in your listening room
and if possible compare with doing it outside.

The problems a

A) most 'pairs' of speakers aren't actually that well matched in
sensitivity, frequency response, etc.

B) most chuck the power all over the room with a very poorly controlled
directionality pattern.

I was seeing the quads doing this 'on the factory floor'.

if you can play antiphase music, sit in the listening position and hear
nothing (or very faint) until you switch back to inphase mono, then your
system probably can give very good imaging. But if not, then you may find
the imaging isn't what it could be. Depends on the details, though, so
isn't that simple to assess.

This is one of the tests I tend to do when fiddling with speaker/room setup
to assess if I am close to a good arrangement. Can be quite revealing.

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

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote


Those proper Tannoy's or the newer ones?...


Newer ones - triangular cabinets.

Not proper ones then like GRF's ...


They are '609's I believe.

I had a pair of those GRF monsters given to me when we moved in, but I put
them in a skip when someone here posted here that 'all old Tannoys were
crap' or summat similar - a pity as they looked to be in perfect
condition....

;-)

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote


Those proper Tannoy's or the newer ones?...


Newer ones - triangular cabinets.

Not proper ones then like GRF's ...

The 'proper' ones were called Autographs - with the signature on the
grille of the designer (and founder of Tannoy) Guy Fountain - and stood
the best part of 5 foot tall. The 'common' GRF was again a corner horn but
about a foot smaller. There was also a rectangular box version of the GRF,
but I've never seen one.

--
*Laugh alone and the world thinks you're an idiot.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.