![]() |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote: "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... Have you never lived in the UK, Iain, and bought a TV licence? Yes for many years. If so, you'd know it was still as good value as ever. Well, as it works out at 50p a day I have to agree:-) I'd happily pay that just for R4. -- *7up is good for you, signed snow white* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
Jim Lesurf said:
In article , Richard Robinson wrote: Dave Plowman (News) said: Very surprising the numbers who claim to never watch TV. ;-) Not me. Going on the last 20 years' average (ono), I expect to watch it for about an hour a year, while visiting friends who are into it. I have seen Big Brother, $Somewhere's Got Talent, Springwatch ... More than "never", anyway. Seems a pity to have never been able to watch The Proms, or items like the performance of operas like The Barber of Seville, or ballets like Sleeping Beauty. (The latter items, along with the Vienna New Year Concert, all available in the last few weeks from the BBC.) It's true that the sound quality doesn't always match the 320k aac from Radio 3 via iPlayer. But the 50fps video you can get (if you do it in time) of such things seems pretty enjoyable to me. That doesn't bother me much. High quality is to be had when possible, but if it's a cruddy recording of worthwhile music, I'll listen and enjoy. All that said, yes, listening to sound-only can be very enjoyable. Depends what kind of experience you fancy. Having the choice seems good to me. Sound-only, yes. If I go to a live performance it's "I love work, I can watch people doing it for hours", but it's not often I find the visuals important (is this maybe age-related ? I started listening to music before the pop video became a Thing). Or maybe it's just me, I don't really Do videos or films much, either. Personally, I think my 50p a day is well spent just to get such things. Plus, in my case, the once-off cost of buying the equipment. Yes, I'm aware I'm missing things I'd probably like. But the same is true of many other possibilities. I just don't know how people find the time for it .... -- Richard Robinson "The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
In article ,
Richard Robinson wrote: It's true that the sound quality doesn't always match the 320k aac from Radio 3 via iPlayer. But the 50fps video you can get (if you do it in time) of such things seems pretty enjoyable to me. That doesn't bother me much. High quality is to be had when possible, but if it's a cruddy recording of worthwhile music, I'll listen and enjoy. cf below. All that said, yes, listening to sound-only can be very enjoyable. Depends what kind of experience you fancy. Having the choice seems good to me. Sound-only, yes. If I go to a live performance it's "I love work, I can watch people doing it for hours", but it's not often I find the visuals important (is this maybe age-related ? I started listening to music before the pop video became a Thing). The visuals can be useful for an opera or ballet. I confess I generally had little interest in either *until* I could watch them in decent quality as well as having the sound in decent quality. To me, that made a significant difference even though I prefer closing my eyes when listening to other kinds of music which have no specified relationship to anything that it accompanies. I stopped buying DVDs of classical music when they all went to 'NTSC' which looks much poorer than even 'PAL' ( both labels being misleading, but they are the terms used on the DVDs.) Blue Rays or HD recordings (or see below) can be rather better. Or maybe it's just me, I don't really Do videos or films much, either. I'm happy watching old films. Even if the sound quality is poor. Content is what really matters. Personally, I think my 50p a day is well spent just to get such things. Plus, in my case, the once-off cost of buying the equipment. get_iplayer is your friend. If you have a computer with a decent display you can get a lot of what the BBC broadcast in quite decent vision and sound. For some years now, that has been my main route for BBC TV and Radio 3. We do use a TV set as a display in the living room to watch AV. But nothing fancy. However the bulk of what we watch is now fetched using get_iplayer. That said, the 'real' hi-fi is in another room with no large screen. Just a small monitor out of the line of vision when listening to audio. 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 |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
Huge said:
On 2017-01-22, Jim Lesurf wrote: Content is what really matters. Precisely. Unless the reproduction is so poor that it is distracting. If it's an LP I've known for a long time, I can find a missing scratch distracting :-) -- Richard Robinson "The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
Jim Lesurf said:
In article , Richard Robinson wrote: Sound-only, yes. If I go to a live performance it's "I love work, I can watch people doing it for hours", but it's not often I find the visuals important (is this maybe age-related ? I started listening to music before the pop video became a Thing). The visuals can be useful for an opera or ballet. I confess I generally had little interest in either *until* I could watch them in decent quality as well as having the sound in decent quality. To me, that made a significant difference even though I prefer closing my eyes when listening to other kinds of music which have no specified relationship to anything that it accompanies. Content is what really matters. Hear hear ! Personally, I think my 50p a day is well spent just to get such things. Plus, in my case, the once-off cost of buying the equipment. get_iplayer is your friend. If you have a computer with a decent display you can get a lot of what the BBC broadcast in quite decent vision and sound. For some years now, that has been my main route for BBC TV and Radio 3. Well, yes; it's a lack of motivation rather than ability. -- Richard Robinson "The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
On 22/01/2017 17:08, Richard Robinson wrote:
Huge said: On 2017-01-22, Jim Lesurf wrote: Content is what really matters. Precisely. Unless the reproduction is so poor that it is distracting. If it's an LP I've known for a long time, I can find a missing scratch distracting :-) Luxury. From the days of recording radio with the built in mic of a portable cassette, various domestic 'overdubs' define the original performance for me still. -- Cheers, Rob |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
"Phil Allison" wrote in message ... I once had a customer who owned a small recoding studio ( he was able to cut disks on an old Ampex lathe too) and he had made a short musical tape in stereo to be played on FM radio as a commercial. Did Ampex make a cutting lathe? Perhaps you mean Westrex? Ampex was set up to market the new technology (analogue tape) which the German company AEG with their Magnetophon had shown to be so superior to disc recording. I have always understood that there were three American manufacters were, Scully, Westrex and Presto. There were also firms making portable disc cutters, the size of gramophones - among them Vitaphone in the US and Grampian in the UK In Europe, Neumann and Lyrec were the two major manufacturers of cutting lathes for professional use. He rang me in a panic one day saying the FM station had rejected his tape, claiming is was "out of phase". So I went to the studio, checked his set up and listened to the tape on headphones. When switched to mono it sounded fine, so was not out of phase. I then rang the FM station and eventually go onto the guy who had condemned the tape. He explained that his stereo modulation monitor showed the tape was OOP. When pressed for more detail he grudgingly went on to say that the L channel meter regularly a read higher than the sum meter and this meant it was OOP. The problem was simple: my customer has panned the bass guitar hard left in the mix, the piano hard right and drums in the centre. That would have been OK if the modulation level was not too high. BGtr and Bass Drum (also Floor Tom) would have been safer in the centre or Bass Phased at the console He re-mixed the tape with bass in the CENTRE and it got played on air. The safest and most sensible solution of all:-) But why supply an acetate when a quarter inch stereo tape would have been much easier and cheaper? Many folk groups, (example vox, guitar and string bass) were recorded with the guitar left, vocal centre and bass right. Iain |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
RJH said:
On 22/01/2017 17:08, Richard Robinson wrote: Huge said: On 2017-01-22, Jim Lesurf wrote: Content is what really matters. Precisely. Unless the reproduction is so poor that it is distracting. If it's an LP I've known for a long time, I can find a missing scratch distracting :-) Luxury. From the days of recording radio with the built in mic of a portable cassette, various domestic 'overdubs' define the original performance for me still. Ah, cassette motor noise. I wouldn't miss that. -- Richard Robinson "The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
Iain Churches wrote:
"Phil Allison" Did Ampex make a cutting lathe? Perhaps you mean Westrex? ** The lathe was from the 1950s and incorporated a valve amplifier and PSU underneath. It was a *large* machine. My memory tells me it was Ampex, but that could be mistaken. I was certainly not a major brand like Scully or Neumann. I have always understood that there were three American manufacters were, Scully, Westrex and Presto. ** AFAIK Westrex made cutting heads and amplifiers, not complete lathes. He rang me in a panic one day saying the FM station had rejected his tape, claiming is was "out of phase". So I went to the studio, checked his set up and listened to the tape on headphones. When switched to mono it sounded fine, so was not out of phase. I then rang the FM station and eventually go onto the guy who had condemned the tape. He explained that his stereo modulation monitor showed the tape was OOP. When pressed for more detail he grudgingly went on to say that the L channel meter regularly a read higher than the sum meter and this meant it was OOP. The problem was simple: my customer has panned the bass guitar hard left in the mix, the piano hard right and drums in the centre. He re-mixed the tape with bass in the CENTRE and it got played on air. The safest and most sensible solution of all:-) But why supply an acetate when a quarter inch stereo tape would have been much easier and cheaper? ** My post says he suppled a tape, 1/4 inch two track. His business was called "DemoDisc" so had to be able to make them. ..... Phil |
Reprocessed Stereo (with example)
"Phil Allison" wrote in message ... Iain Churches wrote: "Phil Allison" Did Ampex make a cutting lathe? Perhaps you mean Westrex? ** The lathe was from the 1950s and incorporated a valve amplifier and PSU underneath. It was a *large* machine. My memory tells me it was Ampex, but that could be mistaken. I was certainly not a major brand like Scully or Neumann. I have always understood that there were three American manufacters were, Scully, Westrex and Presto. ** AFAIK Westrex made cutting heads and amplifiers, not complete lathes. Westrex supplied cutter head and electronics that were often fitted to Scully lathes. They also sold complete systems. The studio where I worked in the UK had eight lathes, one of them Westrex (used for RCA). Ampex certainly did not built disc cutting equipment. They were far too busy with better things:-) His business was called "DemoDisc" so had to be able to make them. Good name:-) Iain |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk