1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

Out of thread because I couldn't send it:


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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Why don't you telephone John Gilby and advise him
to use a Roland keyboard instead, Arny?

He might not like the touch of the keyboard. He surely
knows what exists and what he wants.

I am sure you could get him a good deal
from Walmart.

Iain's ignorance of the US professional audio market
demonstrated yet again. WalMart is far from being a
Roland dealer.

Since when has any knowledge of the 'US professional
audio market' been a requirement or even a legitimate
expectation of any poster to this *UK recreational*
newsgroup?

When they pretend they have expertise but post total ********.


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the expertise? His
highly detailed and fact-rich responses here go far beyond (and are too
quick for) the usual 'Googlemeister' BS we see from a certain quarter...??

Almost all of the recording industry 'lantern swinging' (memoirs) we see
here goes over my head but I do find quite a lot of it quite interesting.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
When they pretend they have expertise but post total ********.


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the expertise? His
highly detailed and fact-rich responses here go far beyond (and are too
quick for) the usual 'Googlemeister' BS we see from a certain
quarter...??

No one could ever accuse Iain of not having a high opinion of himself - by
his posts, at least. ;-)

--
*Dance like nobody's watching.

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
When they pretend they have expertise but post total ********.


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the expertise? His
highly detailed and fact-rich responses here go far beyond (and are too
quick for) the usual 'Googlemeister' BS we see from a certain
quarter...??

No one could ever accuse Iain of not having a high opinion of himself - by
his posts, at least. ;-)


That's not quite the same as expressing disbelief in what he posts, is it?

FWIW, I don't think *anyone* here goes out of their way to post anything
they didn't know for certain or at least didn't believe to be the truth and
it's been a good long time since we saw the word 'liar' being hurled about
in here.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G"

No one could ever accuse Iain of not having a high opinion of himself -
by
his posts, at least. ;-)

** The arrogant fool is a total egomaniac.


That's not quite the same as expressing disbelief in what he posts, is it?

** The fool is a pseudo technical nincompoop.

The problem is YOU have no way of telling.


FWIW, I don't think *anyone* here goes out of their way to post anything
they didn't know for certain or at least didn't believe to be the truth
and it's been a good long time since we saw the word 'liar' being hurled
about in here.

** ROTFLMAO !!

Nearly EVERYONE here constantly posts their ignorant, emotional OPINIONS
as IF they are facts.

Presenting opinion as fact is both aggressive and more than a little crazy.

Just like Iain.


..... Phil

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


Out of thread because I couldn't send it:


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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Why don't you telephone John Gilby and advise him
to use a Roland keyboard instead, Arny?

He might not like the touch of the keyboard. He surely
knows what exists and what he wants.

I am sure you could get him a good deal
from Walmart.

Iain's ignorance of the US professional audio market
demonstrated yet again. WalMart is far from being a
Roland dealer.

Since when has any knowledge of the 'US professional
audio market' been a requirement or even a legitimate
expectation of any poster to this *UK recreational*
newsgroup?

When they pretend they have expertise but post total ********.


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the expertise?



Morning Keith.

Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

Working as a church volunteer is highly commendable
in itself, so why try to make it into something which it is
not? To anyone who sings in Arny's choir, the recordings
are of "internal" interest. To anyone else, particular someone
who is musical or knows something about recording they
are dismal beyond words:-(

Most people of my acquaintance who have heard "Domine"
stare blankly in disbelief.

The other point is that it must be very difficult indeed to take
part in a British (or Australian) group, while having no concept
of their humour. In all probabiluty, Arny could not see that I
was pulling his chain re Roland/Bosendorfer/Walmart. Over on
the Oz group, they had him running round in circles, and on RAO
the excellent (and *very* English) John Atkinson, eloquent,
intellectual, talented producer, fine musician, skilled engineer,
respected journalist and magazine editor, had Arny changing
between dunce and clown cap with remarkable rapidity.

Arny has taken exception to amost everyone whom I hold in
high regard appearing on the groups to which he has access,
so I am flattered to be on his list:-) Jenn Martin is a very good
example - teacher, composer, arranger, musician, charming
lady and very capable sound recordist (in a very modest and
endearing way:-) Arny's exchanges with her make interesting
reading.

Almost all of the recording industry 'lantern swinging' (memoirs) we see
here goes over my head but I do find quite a lot of it quite interesting.


The "good old days" were in many ways more eventful and interesting.
There were far more "characters" in the business than there are now,
and you found yourself flying by the seat of your pants much more
so than you do these days. Digital techniques, editing in particular,
have made things quicker and much easier. I still keep a 2"
analogue tape editing block on my desk to remind me:-)


Iain

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Phil Allison" wrote in message


"Keith G"

No one could ever accuse Iain of not having a high
opinion of himself - by
his posts, at least. ;-)

** The arrogant fool is a total egomaniac.

That's not quite the same as expressing disbelief in
what he posts, is it?

** The fool is a pseudo technical nincompoop.

The problem is YOU have no way of telling.

Agreed.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the
expertise?

Because I've been reading his posts for several years.

And, I've been reading your posts for several years more and know that you
lack what it takes to make valid judgements in this area.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

But then you judge everything by your own very narrow experience. To the
extent of 'telling' pros in other branches of the industry how they should
be doing their jobs. All of which simply shows tunnel vision.

Just how one particular branch of the industry has arrived at a way of
working doesn't make it necessarily the best way for everyone. It just
works for them. And if you'd taken any real interest in all those tours of
other facilities you claim to have been on, you'd have observed and
learned.

--
*Do they ever shut up on your planet?

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

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


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the
expertise?

Because I've been reading his posts for several years.

And, I've been reading your posts for several years more and know that you
lack what it takes to make valid judgements in this area.


Don't make the mistake of believing a lifetime's experience (real or
imagined) of 'practical audio' and/or a degree of technical 'knowledge' are
any substitute for common sense and good instincts....

;-)


P.S. Note I don't subscribe/post to any of the 'pro', 'technical' or 'high
end' audio groups.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote


Since when has any knowledge of the 'US professional
audio market' been a requirement or even a legitimate
expectation of any poster to this *UK recreational*
newsgroup?

When they pretend they have expertise but post total ********.


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has the expertise?



Morning Keith.



Afternoon Iain!



Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

sneep


I think it's to Arny's credit that he has so steadfastly 'walked the walk'
as he puts it for so long as a volunteer but it's my experience in life that
a ton of 'volunteer' doesn't make an ounce of the real thing in the
professional world.

Mind you, that said in light of recent events, my fairly low opinion of even
well-meaning 'experts' has only been reinforced!



The other point is that it must be very difficult indeed to take
part in a British (or Australian) group, while having no concept
of their humour. In all probabiluty, Arny could not see that I
was pulling his chain re Roland/Bosendorfer/Walmart. Over on
the Oz group, they had him running round in circles, and on RAO
the excellent (and *very* English) John Atkinson, eloquent,
intellectual, talented producer, fine musician, skilled engineer,
respected journalist and magazine editor, had Arny changing
between dunce and clown cap with remarkable rapidity.


It's a fact that Yanks don't do 'irony'! I've lost count of the number of
times my little attempts at humour appear to have gone right over his head!




Almost all of the recording industry 'lantern swinging' (memoirs) we see
here goes over my head but I do find quite a lot of it quite interesting.


The "good old days" were in many ways more eventful and interesting.
There were far more "characters" in the business than there are now,
and you found yourself flying by the seat of your pants much more
so than you do these days. Digital techniques, editing in particular,
have made things quicker and much easier. I still keep a 2"
analogue tape editing block on my desk to remind me:-)


One day Joe Ordinaire will wake up to the fact that 'digital' has done him
no real favours - especially when it comes to music.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
One day Joe Ordinaire will wake up to the fact that 'digital' has done
him no real favours - especially when it comes to music.

That comment simply says you have no grasp of the issues.

Digital recording made a huge difference to vinyl - for a start. Ended the
need for direct cut recordings where the very best results were required.

You seem to think analogue means perfection. Perhaps you don't remember
just how poor the average cassette recording was.

--
*Local Area Network in Australia : The LAN down under*

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

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


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has
the expertise?

Because I've been reading his posts for several years.

And, I've been reading your posts for several years more
and know that you lack what it takes to make valid
judgements in this area.


Don't make the mistake of believing a lifetime's
experience (real or imagined) of 'practical audio' and/or
a degree of technical 'knowledge' are any substitute for
common sense and good instincts....
;-)

I wouldn't claim any unique grounding in common sense or good instincts, if
I were you.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

Iain is impossible to convince that volunteer work is only part of what I do
in professional audio.

I think it's to Arny's credit that he has so steadfastly
'walked the walk' as he puts it for so long as a
volunteer but it's my experience in life that a ton of
'volunteer' doesn't make an ounce of the real thing in
the professional world.

The volunteer work hasn't worked against me except on audio conferences
where people often spew mounds of BS, anyway.

Mind you, that said in light of recent events, my fairly
low opinion of even well-meaning 'experts' has only been
reinforced!


The other point is that it must be very difficult indeed
to take part in a British (or Australian) group, while having no
concept of their humour.

Americans haven't made millionaires out of certain British comedians because
they don't get British humor.

In all probabilty, Arny could not see that I was pulling his chain re
Roland/Bosendorfer/Walmart.

As usual Iain, you were just being as objectionable as possible.

Over on the Oz group, they had him running round in circles,

LOL! The Oz group had their hands full simply keeping the group alive.

and on RAO

A group that managed to largely talk themselves out of existence. Iain
clearly has no idea what it was like in its glory days.

the excellent (and *very* English) John Atkinson,
eloquent, intellectual, talented producer, fine
musician, skilled engineer, respected journalist and

More like: ...widely reviled journalist and apologist for a wide variety of
pseudo science for fun and quite a bit of profit...

magazine editor, had Arny changing between dunce and clown cap with
remarkable rapidity.

All figments of Iain's imagination.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
One day Joe Ordinaire will wake up to the fact that 'digital' has done
him no real favours - especially when it comes to music.

That comment simply says you have no grasp of the issues.


And yours that you don't see the bigger picture - i.e. past 'plentiful,
cheap crap' which has no real value or long-lasting appeal.



Digital recording made a huge difference to vinyl - for a start. Ended the
need for direct cut recordings where the very best results were required.


Like in photography these days, you can 'Photoshop' any crap into some
semblance of respectability?

See: "But the gain in sound quality was considered worth the trouble. (As
typical commercial Lp releases were cut from fourth-generation analog tape
copies, the improvement in sound offered by eliminating all those layers of
tape and electronics was not illusory.)"

he

http://www.auldworks.com/AESDD/dd1.htm



You seem to think analogue means perfection.


No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything which
interacts with the human senses.


Perhaps you don't remember
just how poor the average cassette recording was.


No, not really - I never got into them and what I did hear was only on a car
radio/cassette or the kids' cheapo portable cassette decks.

NP. Senor Coconut And His Orchestra 'Behind The Mask' at 45rpm - ********y
'disco' music really, but *stunning* sound quality! :-)

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

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

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

Iain is impossible to convince that volunteer work is only part of what I
do in professional audio.


So what work in 'professional audio' do you do or have you done?

Perhaps if you make it crystal clear Iain will be convinced...??

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

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

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


If you are referring to Iain, why do you doubt he has
the expertise?

Because I've been reading his posts for several years.

And, I've been reading your posts for several years more
and know that you lack what it takes to make valid
judgements in this area.


Don't make the mistake of believing a lifetime's
experience (real or imagined) of 'practical audio' and/or
a degree of technical 'knowledge' are any substitute for
common sense and good instincts....
;-)

I wouldn't claim any unique grounding in common sense or good instincts,
if I were you.


Hmm, doubly naughty - first he *presumes* I am claiming to have common sense
and good instincts and secondly he introduces the word 'unique' like I am
claiming to be the *only* one (here?) with common sense and good
instincts...???

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote

No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything which
interacts with the human senses.


Do you? what leads you to that conclusion? (apart from blind prejudice, that
is)

I also notice that your post contains a familiar theme of yours, that if
something is easy, popular or cheap it *cannot* be any good. Sounds rather
like snobbery to me.

David.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
One day Joe Ordinaire will wake up to the fact that 'digital' has done
him no real favours - especially when it comes to music.

That comment simply says you have no grasp of the issues.


And yours that you don't see the bigger picture - i.e. past 'plentiful,
cheap crap' which has no real value or long-lasting appeal.

Don't get what you mean. Although it's certainly true a cheap and cheerful
music centre with a CD will knock spots off a valve Dansette...



Digital recording made a huge difference to vinyl - for a start. Ended
the need for direct cut recordings where the very best results were
required.


Like in photography these days, you can 'Photoshop' any crap into some
semblance of respectability?

Eh?

See: "But the gain in sound quality was considered worth the trouble.
(As typical commercial Lp releases were cut from fourth-generation
analog tape copies, the improvement in sound offered by eliminating all
those layers of tape and electronics was not illusory.)"

he

http://www.auldworks.com/AESDD/dd1.htm

If that's an extract from the URL you've given it's not worth even
glancing at.




You seem to think analogue means perfection.


No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything which
interacts with the human senses.


Perhaps you don't remember
just how poor the average cassette recording was.


No, not really - I never got into them and what I did hear was only on a
car radio/cassette or the kids' cheapo portable cassette decks.

NP. Senor Coconut And His Orchestra 'Behind The Mask' at 45rpm -
********y 'disco' music really, but *stunning* sound quality! :-)

Wonder what you're on tonight?

--
*You can't have everything, where would you put it?*

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
"Keith G" wrote

No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything
which interacts with the human senses.


Do you? what leads you to that conclusion? (apart from blind prejudice,
that is)

My guess is 'analogue' to Keith is purely vinyl. But then he's constantly
said how much better 'SET' valve amps sound than others - so perhaps those
others are classed as digital too by him? A sort of catch all expression
for uncoloured sound reproduction?

I also notice that your post contains a familiar theme of yours, that if
something is easy, popular or cheap it *cannot* be any good. Sounds
rather like snobbery to me.

Could be. Certainly in my experience high cost doesn't necessarily equate
to quality.

--
*I believe five out of four people have trouble with fractions. *

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

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

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

Iain is impossible to convince that volunteer work is only part of what I
do in professional audio.


So what work in 'professional audio' do you do or have you done?

Perhaps if you make it crystal clear Iain will be convinced...??


Perhaps Arny is referring to the schools' music festivals,
about which he made such a song and dance over on RAO.
It turned out that he recorded something like ten esembles an
hour - no rehearsals, no editing.

Professional? Err....
'Nuff said:-)

Iain

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

On 22/02/2011 00:00, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
David wrote:
"Keith wrote

No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything
which interacts with the human senses.


Do you? what leads you to that conclusion? (apart from blind prejudice,
that is)

My guess is 'analogue' to Keith is purely vinyl. But then he's constantly
said how much better 'SET' valve amps sound than others - so perhaps those
others are classed as digital too by him? A sort of catch all expression
for uncoloured sound reproduction?

I also notice that your post contains a familiar theme of yours, that if
something is easy, popular or cheap it *cannot* be any good. Sounds
rather like snobbery to me.

Could be. Certainly in my experience high cost doesn't necessarily equate
to quality.

You silly, silly little twerp.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
hunter wrote:
Could be. Certainly in my experience high cost doesn't necessarily
equate to quality.

You silly, silly little twerp.

Very useful comment.

Perhaps you'd like some examples of where high cost doesn't equate to
quality? The 'Hi-Fi' world is full of them...

--
*There are 3 kinds of people: those who can count & those who can't.

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
hunter wrote:
Could be. Certainly in my experience high cost doesn't necessarily
equate to quality.

You silly, silly little twerp.

Very useful comment.

Perhaps you'd like some examples of where high cost doesn't equate to
quality? The 'Hi-Fi' world is full of them...

--

Don't feed the troll Dave.

David.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote

No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything which
interacts with the human senses.


Do you? what leads you to that conclusion? (apart from blind prejudice,
that is)

I also notice that your post contains a familiar theme of yours, that if
something is easy, popular or cheap it *cannot* be any good.


No, you are *fabricating* here - try 'if it's easy, popular or cheap the
chances are there will be something to better it which probably won't be as
easy or cheap' and I'll let you off.

Do try to shake off that habit of yours - putting your words into other
people's mouths.


Sounds rather
like snobbery to me.


Possibly....

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

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

No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in anything
which interacts with the human senses.


Do you? what leads you to that conclusion? (apart from blind prejudice,
that is)

My guess is 'analogue' to Keith is purely vinyl.


Nope. Holds up for TV, radio, watches, photography, some meters &c. but I
can't ignore the 'cheap, quick and convenient' aspects of digital
photography and sound recording which are both good enough for my purposes.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
hunter wrote:
Could be. Certainly in my experience high cost doesn't necessarily
equate to quality.

You silly, silly little twerp.

Very useful comment.

Perhaps you'd like some examples of where high cost doesn't equate to
quality? The 'Hi-Fi' world is full of them...


It might help if you weren't trying to twist the words 'high quality is
usually expensive' (or similar) into what you said..??

(Or do you really think the rest of the world is unaware of the existence of
overpriced crap? ;-)

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
One day Joe Ordinaire will wake up to the fact that 'digital' has done
him no real favours - especially when it comes to music.

That comment simply says you have no grasp of the issues.


And yours that you don't see the bigger picture - i.e. past 'plentiful,
cheap crap' which has no real value or long-lasting appeal.

Don't get what you mean.


It doesn't matter.


Although it's certainly true a cheap and cheerful
music centre with a CD will knock spots off a valve Dansette...


OSAF



snip


NP. Senor Coconut And His Orchestra 'Behind The Mask' at 45rpm -
********y 'disco' music really, but *stunning* sound quality! :-)

Wonder what you're on tonight?


What do you mean?

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

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

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

Iain is impossible to convince that volunteer work is only part of what
I
do in professional audio.


So what work in 'professional audio' do you do or have you done?

Perhaps if you make it crystal clear Iain will be convinced...??


Perhaps Arny is referring to the schools' music festivals,
about which he made such a song and dance over on RAO.
It turned out that he recorded something like ten esembles an
hour - no rehearsals, no editing.

Professional? Err....
'Nuff said:-)


If Arny has experience of the *professional audio* world it shouldn't be to
hard to list it.

(Unpaid, volunteer work doesn't count.)

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

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

One day Joe Ordinaire will wake up to the fact that
'digital' has done him no real favours - especially
when it comes to music.

That comment simply says you have no grasp of the issues.

Totally agreed. Joe Oridinaire wants to listen to music, not obsess over the
means for doing so.

And yours that you don't see the bigger picture - i.e.
past 'plentiful, cheap crap' which has no real value or
long-lasting appeal.

The real value of any music playback system lies in the enjoyment it brings
from providing pleasureable music to listen to.

The most prized lasting value comes from the music, not the media or the
hardware for playing it back.

Digital recording made a huge difference to vinyl - for
a start. Ended the need for direct cut recordings where
the very best results were required.

Digital generally provided better sound quality that actually lasted past a
few playings.

Like in photography these days, you can 'Photoshop' any
crap into some semblance of respectability?

Kieth proves himself to be the same out-of-touch pseudo elitist we've always
known.

The real value of any photograph lies in the enjoyment it brings from
providing rewarding images to view and share.


See: "But the gain in sound quality was considered worth
the trouble. (As typical commercial Lp releases were cut
from fourth-generation analog tape copies, the
improvement in sound offered by eliminating all those
layers of tape and electronics was not illusory.)"

Good point. However especially in the later days, the degradation due to the
layers of tape and (by modern standards) mediocre electronics paled compared
to the massive trashing of music that happened in the mass distribution
step.

he

http://www.auldworks.com/AESDD/dd1.htm

The equipment list makes me smile, particularly the Altec A7. Anybody who
hears them in a residential setting understands the massive trashing of
sound that we actually accepted in those days.

You seem to think analogue means perfection.

It actually guarantees substandard reproduction. The analog parts of the
current reproduction chain are the seat of virtually all of the audible
problems.

No, but I certainly think good analogue beats digital in
anything which interacts with the human senses.

How out of it can one be?

Perhaps you don't remember
just how poor the average cassette recording was.

Indeed. I never thought that cassette could really hold a candle to the LP
at least until we had really good metal tapes and equipment that exploited
it.

No, not really - I never got into them and what I did
hear was only on a car radio/cassette or the kids' cheapo
portable cassette decks.

I did all my taping on a Revox A77 during most of the cassette era. In the
last 5 years or so I had a Sony home machine that made Dolby B metal
cassettes that I played back on a Sony WM-D3 portable when I was flying.
Then I shifted to digital, never to look back.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

In article ,
hunter wrote:

Could be. Certainly in my experience high cost doesn't
necessarily equate to quality.

You silly, silly little twerp.

Very useful comment.

Obviously, a high end fanboy/true believer.

Perhaps you'd like some examples of where high cost
doesn't equate to quality? The 'Hi-Fi' world is full of
them...

The leader would arguably be the Sansa Clip+. It is the equivalent of a
very good stereo receiver (including analog FM) and CD player with a
built-in music library of up to 32 GB that has an entry price of less than
$30 in the US. The electronics/display package is only a little larger than
its built-in clip for attaching it to your clothing for convenient listening
and to keep it from being lost. It plays for up to 15 hours on its built in
battery and can be run from the power line to play indefinately. It plays
FLAC files so the whole issue of lossy audio files is finessed.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message

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

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Two things here.

It is difficult for our amateur church recordist to
come to terms with the fact that there are people
out there who do the job professionally (with formal
training and a lifetime of experience far greater than
his own) and that his church activities are worlds away
from "real" professional commercial recording.

Iain is impossible to convince that volunteer work is
only part of what I do in professional audio.

So what work in 'professional audio' do you do or have
you done?

Asked and answered. But to remind those with impaired memories I'll remind
you that I do a goodly number of band and choir festival recordings for
educational institutions.

Perhaps if you make it crystal clear Iain will be
convinced...??

Iain reads what he wants to read. Because some major US cities have serious
problems with education and even basic things like literacy, he fantasizes
that the whole country is a bunch of illiterates. He forgets that
Scandanavia was unable to defend itself successfully against the Nazis and
the Communists in WW2. The US used the UK as a proxy to kick their butts.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Perhaps Arny is referring to the schools' music festivals,
about which he made such a song and dance over on RAO.
It turned out that he recorded something like ten
esembles an hour - no rehearsals, no editing.

Shows again that the truth and Iain are strangers.

Professional? Err.... 'Nuff said:-)

At this time Iain's professional work pales in comparison. In all time Iain
never actually did all of the work it takes to bring a recording from
performance to its market.

His silly claims above are sour grapes, and nothing better.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Keith G" wrote in message


If Arny has experience of the *professional audio* world
it shouldn't be to hard to list it.

Keith if you weren't suffering from memory loss, you'd know better.

(Unpaid, volunteer work doesn't count.)

Its the quality of work that makes it professional, not the size of the cash
renumeration.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote

. He forgets that Scandanavia was unable to defend itself successfully
against the Nazis and the Communists in WW2. The US used the UK as a proxy
to kick their butts.

Without in any way wishing to defend or support Iain's comments, I must say
that above paragraph appears to be based on ignorance and prejudice, rather
than any actual understanding of the history of WW2.

David.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote

. He forgets that Scandanavia was unable to defend
itself successfully against the Nazis and the Communists
in WW2. The US used the UK as a proxy to kick their
butts.

Without in any way wishing to defend or support Iain's
comments, I must say that above paragraph appears to be
based on ignorance and prejudice, rather than any actual
understanding of the history of WW2.

UK chauvinsm noted.

Churchill sold the UK to Roosevelt as the largest aircraft carrier in the
world, and stood behind it. A brilliant idea.

If it wasn't for the US, the number of people in the world speaking German
would be vastly increased. Yah vol? ;-)

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
My guess is 'analogue' to Keith is purely vinyl.


Nope. Holds up for TV, radio, watches, photography, some meters &c. but
I can't ignore the 'cheap, quick and convenient' aspects of digital
photography and sound recording which are both good enough for my
purposes.


You couldn't be more wrong.

Of course some implementations of 'digital' may be way less than perfect
for commercial reasons - but that is a different ball game.

You seem to confuse pretty looking but flawed analogue devices with
performance - or more like your own personal preferences. And we all know
about those...

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote

. He forgets that Scandanavia was unable to defend
itself successfully against the Nazis and the Communists
in WW2. The US used the UK as a proxy to kick their
butts.

Without in any way wishing to defend or support Iain's
comments, I must say that above paragraph appears to be
based on ignorance and prejudice, rather than any actual
understanding of the history of WW2.

UK chauvinsm noted.

Since I did not refer to the UK or it's role in WW2 in any way in my post
*that* comment shows how little you care about truth.

Churchill sold the UK to Roosevelt as the largest aircraft carrier in the
world, and stood behind it. A brilliant idea.

If it wasn't for the US, the number of people in the world speaking German
would be vastly increased. Yah vol? ;-)

We cannot know for certain how history would have panned out since 1940 had
the US not become involved in the European theatre during WW2. Certainly
Russia (with a good deal of help from the weather and Hitler's own egomania,
but little from the Western allies) was able to stop, and then reverse,
Hitler's eastern expansion. One probable scenario is that most of Europe
would have ended up under Soviet, rather than German, domination.

Either way, though, the suggestion that German occupied countries would now
be speaking German is, of course, ridiculous.

David.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
Churchill sold the UK to Roosevelt as the largest aircraft carrier in
the world, and stood behind it. A brilliant idea.

That suggests money flowed from the US to the UK. Whilst this was true in
the short term, the US made a *very* large profit out of anything supplied
to the UK, when the final sums were done.

The US also waited until well after the Battle of Britain before joining
in. Makes sense to be on the winning side, I suppose. But were very sadly
missing at the times of true peril. Like when there was a very real danger
of the UK being invaded.

--
*Xerox and Wurlitzer will merge to market reproductive organs.

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

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote

. He forgets that Scandanavia was unable to defend
itself successfully against the Nazis and the
Communists in WW2. The US used the UK as a proxy to
kick their butts.

Without in any way wishing to defend or support Iain's
comments, I must say that above paragraph appears to be
based on ignorance and prejudice, rather than any actual
understanding of the history of WW2.

UK chauvinsm noted.

Since I did not refer to the UK or it's role in WW2 in
any way in my post *that* comment shows how little you
care about truth.

Churchill sold the UK to Roosevelt as the largest
aircraft carrier in the world, and stood behind it. A
brilliant idea. If it wasn't for the US, the number of people in the
world speaking German would be vastly increased. Yah
vol? ;-)

We cannot know for certain how history would have panned
out since 1940 had the US not become involved in the
European theatre during WW2.

That's a truism that can be applied to just about anything that happened or
didn't happen in history.

Take out the "for sure" and at least you have a possibility of a discussion.

Here are the facts:

A total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $759 billion at 2008 prices) worth
of supplies were shipped: $31.4 billion to Britain, $11.3 billion to the
Soviet Union, $3.2 billion to France and $1.6 billion to China.

The $31.4 billion in US direct aid was about 15% of the UK's annual GNP at
that time. However, the US provided far more than just direct aid. We had
100.000s of troops on the ground in the UK until most of them left to tour
europe.

Certainly Russia (with a
good deal of help from the weather and Hitler's own
egomania, but little from the Western allies) was able to
stop, and then reverse, Hitler's eastern expansion.

The $11.3 billion in US direct aid to the Soviet Union was about 4% of the
USSR's annual GNP at that time.

One probable scenario is that most of Europe would have ended
up under Soviet, rather than German, domination.

Either way, though, the suggestion that German occupied
countries would now be speaking German is, of course,
ridiculous.

Not at all. Had Germany not ever attacked Russia (really stupid and
arrogant) and the US not helped the UK (a very smart move on our part), its
pretty much a slam dunk: You're all talking German.

By 1944 the US production of munitions pretty well matched that of all the
other parties to the war combined including Germany. Leave out Germany and
we were marching up on doubling that of all the other allies combined.

1 of 2 'unpostables!
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article
, Arny
Krueger wrote:
Churchill sold the UK to Roosevelt as the largest
aircraft carrier in the world, and stood behind it. A
brilliant idea.

That suggests money flowed from the US to the UK. Whilst
this was true in the short term, the US made a *very*
large profit out of anything supplied to the UK, when the
final sums were done.

The US also waited until well after the Battle of Britain
before joining in. Makes sense to be on the winning side,
I suppose. But were very sadly missing at the times of
true peril. Like when there was a very real danger of the
UK being invaded.

The US had a serious problem with pacifism at the time. Or, perhaps many
people anticipated how little our massive efforts would be appreciated once
the war was won. I have to admit that I am impressed with the UK's efforts
which percentage-wise dwarfed ours.