In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Bluray with full-on HD sound, naturlich!)

Wot's HD sound, Kitty?


Uh oh, he's gone again!

(Shame - I thought he was doing so well for a while there! ;-)

I suppose an answer to the question is out then?

Leopard. Spots, I guess....

Didn't realise you'd turned over a new leaf and decided not to be rude to
people. Perhaps you'll let us know next time.

--
*If you think nobody cares about you, try missing a couple of payments *

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

In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
The reason they are mono is because they weren't made in stereo. Twin
track mixdowns were done for production reasons, but weren't stereo.

Agreed. That is why used inverted commas to refer to 'stereo'. They are
just the two tracks from a two track tape recording with vocals on one
track and instruments on the other. However they are of interest as a
comparison with the orginal 'stereo' (note inverted commas again!) LP
version. Also of interest if you want to play with mono and balance
controls to adjust the voice/instrument level balance. :-)

Sadly you can't even do that as it isn't just a backing/lead vocal split
as was the norm. We used to do this all the time in TV for a number of
reasons being

1) It allowed for the possibility of the talent deciding to sing live or
add a 'double track'.
2) Allowed to different mix to be fed to artist foldback.
3) Allowed the vocals/words to be changed at a later session. Only really
used with original material.

I have both mono and 'stereo' versions of the original LPs, and the
stereo ones are of interest only. And it wouldn't be possible to
produce anything approaching even decent pan pot stereo without
re-recording the original sessions.

Indeed. Hence my amusement about a reviewer who moaned that the 'stereo'
was no better than the original LPs. :-)

It was all explained in the notes on the original CDs. Martin was very
against the release of the original 'stereo' LPs which was a marketing
decision - but got his way with the CDs. So nothing new in the production
team being over-ruled by marketing - as per the present mastering debate.
But wonder what changed his mind since he's said to have been involved in
the current releases? Money?


Of course the could have moved the voice track to center. But what would
they have then done with the instrument tracks if they wanted to avoid
simple mono? Hence their decision makes sense to me. Mind you, maybe
people who don't have a mono button on their preamp would argue. ;-

At the time I analysed the track split to try and work out just why
certain things were where they are - and failed. ;-) Doubt we'll ever
know. Of course there might be no logic at all - just recording order.

--
*Whatever kind of look you were going for, you missed.

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
wrote:

[snip vocals on one track with instruments on t'other]

Sadly you can't even do that as it isn't just a backing/lead vocal
split as was the norm. We used to do this all the time in TV for a
number of reasons being

One of the features of the early Beatles that really stands out nowdays is
that they could really sing, in harmony, and in tune. Quite a dramatic
difference to many more modern 'pop arteests'.

I was quite struck by the part of this year's 'Last Night of the Proms'
where a more modern 'singer' I won't name tried to sing 'Long Winding
Road'. Awful breath control and failures to sing anything like in tune.
Painful listening. He looked worried to me. Maybe he had the old stage
maxim in mind, "Audience were with me all the way, but I managed to loose
them at the station!" :-)


Indeed. Hence my amusement about a reviewer who moaned that the
'stereo' was no better than the original LPs. :-)

It was all explained in the notes on the original CDs.

And in the re-release. But I guess the 'reveiwer' either hadn't read them
or realised what they meant.

Martin was very against the release of the original 'stereo' LPs which
was a marketing decision - but got his way with the CDs. So nothing new
in the production team being over-ruled by marketing - as per the
present mastering debate. But wonder what changed his mind since he's
said to have been involved in the current releases? Money?

I'm quite happy with the 'singing one side and instruments the other' as it
was what I became used to from the 'stereo' LP over the years. So I've
never expected any kind of stereo image, even a faked one. Hence I find the
new CDs of interest. But I also listen to the mono version quite happily.

IIRC all the differences between mono and stereo versions of later LP
tracks were documented on the 'Anthology' series of CDs. But a shame if
they aren't also on the 'new' ones.


Of course the could have moved the voice track to center. But what
would they have then done with the instrument tracks if they wanted to
avoid simple mono? Hence their decision makes sense to me. Mind you,
maybe people who don't have a mono button on their preamp would argue.
;-

At the time I analysed the track split to try and work out just why
certain things were where they are - and failed. ;-) Doubt we'll ever
know. Of course there might be no logic at all - just recording order.

Yes. I suspect some instrumental bits appear on the 'vocal' side because
they were actually playing and singing at the same time. Not something
modern pop arteests do I fear. Too complex to walk and chew gum at the same
time.

I also listened to the bank holiday program which got modern musicians to
re-do Sgt Pepper using the orginal methods and equipment. Apparently some
backed out when they realised it was beyond them to even try. And IIRC this
was with the sheer luxury of 4-track tape, not just two. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page 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 ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
I also listened to the bank holiday program which got modern musicians
to re-do Sgt Pepper using the orginal methods and equipment. Apparently
some backed out when they realised it was beyond them to even try. And
IIRC this was with the sheer luxury of 4-track tape, not just two. :-)

IIRC, they used two locked together. But only in that they ran at the same
speed. No chase lock in those days. Must have been fun getting them in
sync. ;-)

--
*El nino made me do it

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Bluray with full-on HD sound, naturlich!)

Wot's HD sound, Kitty?


Uh oh, he's gone again!

(Shame - I thought he was doing so well for a while there! ;-)

I suppose an answer to the question is out then?

Leopard. Spots, I guess....

Didn't realise you'd turned over a new leaf and decided not to be rude to
people. Perhaps you'll let us know next time.



Sorry to deflate your ego Pucci, but dealing endlessly with your insolence
in no way compensates for the lack of real (interesting) traffic in here -
it's still too slow and boring to bother with, so I suggest you just shut
the **** up and maybe you'll get the place all to yourself again.

(And I'll no doubt get a string of emails telling me how dead it is, again!)



--
*If you think nobody cares about you, try missing a couple of payments *

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

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Sorry to deflate your ego Pucci, but dealing endlessly with your
insolence

Insolence? Certainly shows your over inflated ego...

in no way compensates for the lack of real (interesting) traffic in here
- it's still too slow and boring to bother with,

You obviously need constant titillation. In case you didn't know there are
tens of thousands other newsgroups. Ones where even you could stay on
topic.

so I suggest you just shut the **** up and maybe you'll get the place
all to yourself again.

Trying to own the group again, Kitty? I've got news for you - no one does.

But how about telling us about your 'HD' sound?

--
*Great groups from little icons grow *

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Sorry to deflate your ego Pucci, but dealing endlessly with your
insolence

Insolence? Certainly shows your over inflated ego...


You really *are* a thick little ****er ain'tcha! Birdseed, Pucci, birdseed -
I throw it down, you peck it up!! ;-)



in no way compensates for the lack of real (interesting) traffic in here
- it's still too slow and boring to bother with,

You obviously need constant titillation. In case you didn't know there are
tens of thousands other newsgroups.


Probably one called uk.rec.pucci's.job.memoirs - I wonder why you don't ****
off to it and you can decide who can post what without any opposition from
me...??


Ones where even you could stay on
topic.


Now, on or off topic, am I imagining it or have you not been hanging off my
posts all polite-like for a little while now? Pity you couldn't keep it
together....



so I suggest you just shut the **** up and maybe you'll get the place
all to yourself again.

Trying to own the group again, Kitty? I've got news for you - no one does.


Correct. Includes you and I for one don't give a rat's arse what you
consider is permissible here or not - you always have the option to ignore
it; real strange you never do. IOW (spelling it out for the
'judgementalists' here) you never pass up an opportunity to be obnoxious, do
you? How many people have I seen you calling a '******' since I resubscribed
here - half a dozen? More?

You're a **** little act and no mistake!




But how about telling us about your 'HD' sound?


Lazy little ****er as well - start here, moron:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTS-HD_Master_Audio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_TrueHD




--
*Great groups from little icons grow *

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

In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Sorry to deflate your ego Pucci, but dealing endlessly with your
insolence

Insolence? Certainly shows your over inflated ego...


You really *are* a thick little ****er ain'tcha! Birdseed, Pucci,
birdseed - I throw it down, you peck it up!! ;-)

Did you shake your head then, bird brain?

Nice to see you back on form - unable to manage without swearing.


in no way compensates for the lack of real (interesting) traffic in
here - it's still too slow and boring to bother with,

You obviously need constant titillation. In case you didn't know there
are tens of thousands other newsgroups.


Probably one called uk.rec.pucci's.job.memoirs - I wonder why you don't
**** off to it and you can decide who can post what without any
opposition from me...??

Err, you're the one trying to tell me what I can and can't post. But of
course you conveniently snipped that bit.


Ones where even you could stay on
topic.


Now, on or off topic, am I imagining it or have you not been hanging off
my posts all polite-like for a little while now? Pity you couldn't keep
it together....

A warning would have been nice - although of course it wouldn't last.
Kitties don't change their spots.


so I suggest you just shut the **** up and maybe you'll get the place
all to yourself again.

Trying to own the group again, Kitty? I've got news for you - no one
does.


Correct. Includes you and I for one don't give a rat's arse what you
consider is permissible here or not - you always have the option to
ignore it; real strange you never do. IOW (spelling it out for the
'judgementalists' here) you never pass up an opportunity to be
obnoxious, do you? How many people have I seen you calling a '******'
since I resubscribed here - half a dozen? More?

You're making things up again.

You're a **** little act and no mistake!

But how about telling us about your 'HD' sound?


Lazy little ****er as well - start here, moron:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTS-HD_Master_Audio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_TrueHD

So you believe ads. No surprise there.





-

--
*Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote


*Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.


Which was quite funny the first time I heard it - I distictly remember, I
dropped my rusk laughing...!!

The rest was more of the ususal queer, twisty ******** best consigned to the
great recycle bin in the sky....





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

In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote


*Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.


Which was quite funny the first time I heard it - I distictly remember,
I dropped my rusk laughing...!!

The rest was more of the ususal queer, twisty ******** best consigned to
the great recycle bin in the sky....

Dear Kitty - so easy to wind up. Calm down dear - it's only a newsgroup.

--
*Of course I'm against sin; I'm against anything that I'm too old to enjoy.

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