"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:26:50 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Who said anything about sound stage? I said 'depth' - not quite the same
thing. What sound stage would you expect from the 20-30% *mono* records
that
I play?

your quote: 'depth' in the sound (3D imaging)

I'll give you "depth" as pretty non-specific. But only Humpty could
twist "3D imaging" in an audio context away from referring to a stereo
sound stage.



OK, you describe it better then when, say, a solo instrument stands so well
forward of the backgound that you can 'picture' it and you are way out at
the 'patio door' effectively 3 rooms away and the sound has been mono'd by
a couple of doorways? Or you walk away from the music and it doesn't appear
to change as you go?

See also above, re the mono stuff - Jazz mostly, but not entirely.

Possibly '3D imaging' is a poor choice phrase as it seems to imply the rigid
soundstage that audiophiles have to have, to me it just means a solid (as in
side to side/front to back) quality of the sound that helps separate the
various instruments, not portraying the *layout* of the various sounds.

Can't think of a better way to describe it, sorry. Don't sweat it. It
matters not.

Incidentally, I'm well aware that 'stereo' means 'solid', btw - not 'two
channel' as a lot of people seem to think....

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:53:55 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Possibly '3D imaging' is a poor choice phrase as it seems to imply the rigid
soundstage that audiophiles have to have, to me it just means a solid (as in
side to side/front to back) quality of the sound that helps separate the
various instruments, not portraying the *layout* of the various sounds.

Yup, definitely a Humpty!

I don't think you can wriggle '3D imaging' into merely IMPLYING a
stereo soundstage (which for some reason you choose to rubbish?) It
clearly states it.

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:53:55 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Possibly '3D imaging' is a poor choice phrase as it seems to imply the
rigid
soundstage that audiophiles have to have, to me it just means a solid (as
in
side to side/front to back) quality of the sound that helps separate the
various instruments, not portraying the *layout* of the various sounds.

Yup, definitely a Humpty!

I don't think you can wriggle '3D imaging' into merely IMPLYING a
stereo soundstage (which for some reason you choose to rubbish?) It
clearly states it.



Well it most definitely makes you a Dumpty - I suspect you know what I mean
but, like one or two others here, like to continue the debate...??

Once again: where's the soundstage on the mono disks I play where the sax
player, for example, is sounding he 'is in the room' - ie 'solid/real'...??
Eh? Eh? Anyway, enough about me, what do you have for the pot, Lozzer?
Anything of interest? - It hasn't taken long to get into this 'Attack Pack
chasing after lil' ole me' situation again and I'm actually the one who
don't give a fart in a paper bag what people think of what I do, my kit or
my preferences!

While I was offline I had people (Bob Latham last time) wailing about how
pointless a silent forum is and yet they don't ****ing post anything!
Despite I might look like the only one on the planet actually doing anything
(You Tube videos at present) I can't keep pulling fascinating, new and
strictly 'on topic' audio out of arse - not with the Attack Pack looking for
their chance all time time...

Time was there were plenty of people up to stuff here - anybody remember
these:

http://www.lurcher.org/ukra/


??

****ing state that page is in an' all....

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:53:03 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Well it most definitely makes you a Dumpty - I suspect you know what I mean
but, like one or two others here, like to continue the debate...??

Once again: where's the soundstage on the mono disks I play where the sax
player, for example, is sounding he 'is in the room' - ie 'solid/real'...??
Eh? Eh? Anyway, enough about me, what do you have for the pot, Lozzer?
Anything of interest? - It hasn't taken long to get into this 'Attack Pack
chasing after lil' ole me' situation again and I'm actually the one who
don't give a fart in a paper bag what people think of what I do, my kit or
my preferences!


Well yes...where IS the soundstage on a mono disk? There's much
enjoyment to be got from a good mono recording. But it doesn't have
everything a stereo recording has and one of those things is a
"soundstage".

You'll get attacked in this sort of forum if you talk rubbish. Live
with it. At least you're not as bad as Arnie :-)

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:53:03 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Well it most definitely makes you a Dumpty - I suspect you know what I mean
but, like one or two others here, like to continue the debate...??

Yup, I'll play as long as you will!

That's another Humpty from you. You've learnt about Humpty Dumpty,
and apparently appreciated the term. Then immediately used it to mean
something quite different! Maybe you'll claim you were being ironic?
Wriggle, worm, wriggle :-)

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:53:03 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Well it most definitely makes you a Dumpty - I suspect you know what I
mean
but, like one or two others here, like to continue the debate...??

Once again: where's the soundstage on the mono disks I play where the sax
player, for example, is sounding he 'is in the room' - ie
'solid/real'...??
Eh? Eh? Anyway, enough about me, what do you have for the pot, Lozzer?
Anything of interest? - It hasn't taken long to get into this 'Attack Pack
chasing after lil' ole me' situation again and I'm actually the one who
don't give a fart in a paper bag what people think of what I do, my kit or
my preferences!


Well yes...where IS the soundstage on a mono disk? There's much
enjoyment to be got from a good mono recording. But it doesn't have
everything a stereo recording has and one of those things is a
"soundstage".



You've no idea #1, Laurence: I've had people round here who have been
thrilled by the 'soundstage' on one or two mono disks I've got. ;-)

(Got an ex poster/ex lurker due here this Thursday and a current poster
Wednesday next week even as I type!)



You'll get attacked in this sort of forum if you talk rubbish. Live
with it. At least you're not as bad as Arnie :-)


You've no idea #2, Laurence: I've been posting here *years* before you ever
showed up, so you needn't bother to try and tell me how this place works -
no doubt someone (Arny) will come back with the snitty on that.

Now, what do you have for discussion, other than being unable to understand
my point and being quite happy to dismiss it in my face as me talking
'rubbish'....??

Hmm?

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:53:03 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Well it most definitely makes you a Dumpty - I suspect you know what I
mean
but, like one or two others here, like to continue the debate...??

Yup, I'll play as long as you will!



Well, I'm chained to the door waiting for a flip-top USB DVD drive from
Amazon 'today' (??) - what's keeping you indoors, typing meaningless ****e
into a computer? :-)



That's another Humpty from you. You've learnt about Humpty Dumpty,
and apparently appreciated the term. Then immediately used it to mean
something quite different! Maybe you'll claim you were being ironic?


WTF *are* you going on about? You'll have to explain!


Wriggle, worm, wriggle :-)


Love to, if I had half a clue what you are referring to!

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

While I was offline I had people (Bob Latham last time) wailing about
how pointless a silent forum is and yet they don't post anything!

Hang on a mo.

I emailed you after your disappearance to see if you had a problem or if I
could help in any way. I said to you that I missed your colourful and
slightly eccentric posts and thought it a shame you'd left.

To then accuse me of "wailing on" is ever so slightly ridiculous. Thanks a
bunch.



Streuth! You lot are never very far away, are you?

Bob, I apologise (publically) - you didn't 'wail' as such, but others have;
what you actually said was the best bit: "I can't see the point of a near
silent group."

(And then proceded to advise me, as did Laurence, how this group operates
like I hadn't been here for *years* longer than either of you! ;-)

Anyhow, a week or so after you emailed on the 9th June, life took a funny
old turn for me and I could see myself with more 'keyboard time' than I
would ordinarily choose, so I hooked up through Eternal Wotsit and monitered
procedings here for a few weeks. Sho' Nuff it was as dead as a dodo's dick
until a vinyl storm blew up. I resisted the temptation to spring into the
fray (think Mony Python's Spanish Inquisition) as Rob was doing so much
better than me on his, so I held off.

Then I bowled a gennuine question in and the rest, as they say, is history!
:-)

Let me say one more thing, Bob - seeing a few more posts from you and the
myriad other infrequent posters and lurkers here will do more to keep me
interested in hanging around than being chivvied from arsehole to breakfast
by the Attack Pack! ;-)

Except, WTF is there to talk about that is purely 'audio' all the time...??

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

While I was offline I had people (Bob Latham last time) wailing about
how pointless a silent forum is and yet they don't post anything!

Hang on a mo.

I emailed you after your disappearance to see if you had a problem or if
I
could help in any way. I said to you that I missed your colourful and
slightly eccentric posts and thought it a shame you'd left.

To then accuse me of "wailing on" is ever so slightly ridiculous. Thanks
a
bunch.



Streuth! You lot are never very far away, are you?

Bob, I apologise (publically) - you didn't 'wail' as such, but others
have; what you actually said was the best bit: "I can't see the point of a
near silent group."

(And then proceded to advise me, as did Laurence, how this group operates
like I hadn't been here for *years* longer than either of you! ;-)

Anyhow, a week or so after you emailed on the 9th June, life took a funny
old turn for me and I could see myself with more 'keyboard time' than I
would ordinarily choose, so I hooked up through Eternal Wotsit and
monitered


'monitered'..??

:-)

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

Bob, I apologise (publically) - you didn't 'wail' as such, but others
have; what you actually said was the best bit: "I can't see the point
of a near silent group."

OK fair enough.



Last thing I wanted to do was upset you - it was very decent of you to email
me in the first place!




[Snip]

Let me say one more thing, Bob - seeing a few more posts from you and
the myriad other infrequent posters and lurkers here will do more to
keep me interested in hanging around than being chivvied from arsehole
to breakfast by the Attack Pack! ;-)

I'm sure like a good many others I'm seriously put put off posting by
people who enjoy belittling others and being oh so superior. I thought you
were immune to such treatment, sorry about that.


It's not a question of being immune to it but more of being bored by it and
the effort of trying to keep up responses - which invariably ends up with
mistakes being made (typos, skimming posts) which adds even more fuel to the
flames!

I got into the thankless 'champion of the oppressed' position a long time
ago and made enemies trying to fend off the boorish behaviour but, tbh,
there is still the fact that they never posted anything! So **** it, let the
chips fall where they may - my OP remains the same as ever: I pay in the
same coin I am paid in!

I still need to see a lot more posts from other people here....