On 21/01/2017 16:42, Iain Churches wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news I found the problems when they attempted to stereofy things like old
Tornados recordiings makde by Joe Meek. Absolutely awful, as were emis
best of Ruby Murray. and Polidors spicks and specks by the bee giees
originaly made in oz. Then there was the unfortunate lp Capitol put out
of Magical Mystery tour by the beatles with reprocessed mono of Penny
lane etc, which had stereo mixes already.

Agreed. One wonders why electronic stereo versions of any of these were
made. Maybe at the time, it seemed like a good idea? :-)

Money. Or at least, the belief of some of the people at some of the
companies that fiddling about would return more of it. Hence, for example,
the differences between early Beatles LP releases in the USA and the UK.

New 'versions' are seen as money-spinners, which is as I suspect MQA will
be seen in some quarters.


How right you are. Not just record companies but every
company worldwide is there to turn a profit. That's the
raison d'etre of business. But at least those who buy
CDs, DVDs and go to theatre or concerts can choose
what they buy or go to see. Caveat emptor.-

A pal of mine in the UK told me earlier today that the
standard TV licence is now UKP145 and payable in
advance. Can that be correct?


Has been for several years (and has always been payable in advance).


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Huge said:
On 2017-01-21, Eiron wrote:
On 21/01/2017 16:51, Huge wrote:
On 2017-01-21, Iain Churches wrote:

[31 lines snipped]

A pal of mine in the UK told me earlier today that the
standard TV licence is now UKP145

Actually £145.50.

and payable in
advance.

It always was.

Can that be correct?

Absolute bargain. The Beeb has to be paid for somehow and I'd rather
that than advertising.

The BBC produces absolute ****e.

Sigh. I can't be arsed to argue with someone who "thinks" in absolutes.

*plonk*

The bit about carrying advertising for its own products is right, though,
and I'd rather it was free of adverts.

But I only listen to its radio output, so I don't contribute to its upkeep
either way.


--
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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
As there wasn't such a demand for such a device in my particular
field as there obviously was in yours.

Did you have close co-operation with BBC Radio?

Given I worked for ITV, unlikely.

You have mentioned being at Thames for a short
time.

In another current thread you talk about your
knowledge of what was being made by BBC TV
when you were there. So my assumption that you
had contacts at BH was natural.

We went to BH several times to discuss ideas.
They had a number of cryptically-numbered black
boxes which they demonstrated to us, and some very
clever people. They could have easily done it for you.

Are you saying BBC radio regularly produced 'stereo' from mono? I'd be
surprised.

Please read again.
Like many others BBC Radio were experimenting
to see what could be done in the field of mono to
stereo conversion. As a result of our meetings at
BH a colleague and I were invited by Desmond Briscoe
to visit the BBC Radiophonic Workshop at Maida Vale.
He was surprised to meet people from outside the Beeb
who had both a technical and musical background (like himself)
and who were familiar with the wonderful ARP 2500 synthesizer.

Iain







Iain

"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:-)

Iain

In article ,
Richard Robinson wrote:
The bit about carrying advertising for its own products is right, though,
and I'd rather it was free of adverts.

I'd rather not have adverts in the cinema either. But, like the BBC, they
only run them before the programme starts. Not several times within it.

But I only listen to its radio output, so I don't contribute to its
upkeep either way.

Very surprising the numbers who claim to never watch TV. ;-)

--
*I wished the buck stopped here, as I could use a few*

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

On 21-01-17 18:14, Iain Churches wrote:

We can see via satelite some ten or so news channels
BBC World is by far the best, the most in depth and the
most neutral.

Indeed. Beats pretty much anything here in Holland, and definitely
beats everything I remember from Finland, and is much more factual
than most of the stuff in the US.

Julf

(the expat swedish-speaking Finn, living in Amsterdam, married to an
American)

Dave Plowman (News) said:
In article ,
Richard Robinson wrote:
The bit about carrying advertising for its own products is right, though,
and I'd rather it was free of adverts.

I'd rather not have adverts in the cinema either. But, like the BBC, they
only run them before the programme starts. Not several times within it.

True. It increases the likelihood of my turning it off rather than seeing
what comes next ...

But I only listen to its radio output, so I don't contribute to its
upkeep either way.

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.

I've met people who tell me it's "fashionable¨ to claim not to own one, at
the moment. I wouldn't know, these fashion things change so fast ...

I *did* own a telly, once. I had it plugged^Hsoldered into the output of a
Sinclair Spectrum.


--
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

Iain Churches wrote:

"Phil Allison"



A LOT of LPs were sold as "mono-stereo compatible" - meaning the vertical
modulation
had been supressed, at least at low frequencies, so the mono PUs would not
miss track or badly damage the grove.

I don't know how records were cut in Oz, but in the
UK the LF was not supressed, but summed as L+R (lateral).


** Read what I wrote slowly.

It says vertical modulation was supressed at low frequencies.

So out of phase or single channel bass was not cut into the groove - summing L and R at low frequencies before cutting did the trick.


Anecdote:

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.

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.



..... Phil

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.

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.

Personally, I think my 50p a day is well spent just to get such things.

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 ,
Iain Churches wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
As there wasn't such a demand for such a device in my particular
field as there obviously was in yours.

Did you have close co-operation with BBC Radio?

Given I worked for ITV, unlikely.

You have mentioned being at Thames for a short
time.

I was staff at Thames for longer than staff at the BBC. I've no idea where
you got the idea this was a 'short time'.

In another current thread you talk about your
knowledge of what was being made by BBC TV
when you were there. So my assumption that you
had contacts at BH was natural.

You have rather obviously no conception of the size of the BBC. ;-)

We went to BH several times to discuss ideas.
They had a number of cryptically-numbered black
boxes which they demonstrated to us, and some very
clever people. They could have easily done it for you.

Are you saying BBC radio regularly produced 'stereo' from mono? I'd be
surprised.

Please read again.
Like many others BBC Radio were experimenting
to see what could be done in the field of mono to
stereo conversion. As a result of our meetings at
BH a colleague and I were invited by Desmond Briscoe
to visit the BBC Radiophonic Workshop at Maida Vale.
He was surprised to meet people from outside the Beeb
who had both a technical and musical background (like himself)
and who were familiar with the wonderful ARP 2500 synthesizer.

Ah. Right. You mentioned Broadcasting House only, inferring it was
something in regular use. A standard production tool.

The Radiophonic Workshop could well have made use of all sorts of weird
and wonderful devices. That was what they did.

--
*Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder...

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