Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Neil Young and DSD music format
21 views
Skip to first unread message
Darryl Johnson
Feb 6, 2012, 10:11:56 AM2/6/12
to
"Direct Stream Digital, a technology developed by Sony and Philips ...
that uses pulse-density modulation encoding. The format uses 1-bit
sampling at 2.8224 MHz, which is 64 times higher than the 44.1 KHz
used by CDs. The result are huge audio files, about 300 MB for five
minutes of audio. There are very few music publishers offering DSD
files at all."
Apparently Neil isn't happy with MP3 music and thinks we could do a
lot better.
I've never heard of this particular format, myself, but perhaps some
of you have.
As the article I found this in mentions, it wouldn't be a good format
for music downloads. Not at current bandwidth limitations. And it
would take Terabyte-sized drives to store a decent music collection.
My ears would, undoubtedly, not be able to discern any difference,
even through good speakers, but people with young and healthy ears
probably could.
--
Darryl
that uses pulse-density modulation encoding. The format uses 1-bit
sampling at 2.8224 MHz, which is 64 times higher than the 44.1 KHz
used by CDs. The result are huge audio files, about 300 MB for five
minutes of audio. There are very few music publishers offering DSD
files at all."
Apparently Neil isn't happy with MP3 music and thinks we could do a
lot better.
I've never heard of this particular format, myself, but perhaps some
of you have.
As the article I found this in mentions, it wouldn't be a good format
for music downloads. Not at current bandwidth limitations. And it
would take Terabyte-sized drives to store a decent music collection.
My ears would, undoubtedly, not be able to discern any difference,
even through good speakers, but people with young and healthy ears
probably could.
--
Darryl
hank alrich
Feb 6, 2012, 11:27:26 AM2/6/12
to
used natively in a few high-end audio workstations/DAW's, and there are
some titles available.
Here's one thing that usually gets overlooked by folks talking big about
it: contemporary ADC's run at the same very high sampling rates and then
the result is decimated to the desired depth and rate.
Direct editing of DSD is difficult, technologically, and most systems
for DSD editing convert to high bitrate PCM (such as 384Mhz/24bit) to
manage it.
This technology can be excellent and it is available at fairly low cost
in a line of recorders from (wait for it...) Korg. These are excellent
recorders. The pro model runs at 2x sampling rate.
http://www.korg.com/products.aspx?ct=97
I believe the MR1000 is no longer in production, but when found used is
an outstanding deal.
A few producer/engineers with long, deep, and wide discographies, such
as Terry Maning, are using the pro models as mix destination devices,
using ProTools for a giant multitrack machine with serious editing
capability, playing out ot the PT rig into their analog console and
outboard kit, and laying the mix into the Korg.
I appreciate Neil's concern for excellent sound quality, but one must be
careful when he gets to talking about digital audio. For example he has
often stated as fact things that were never the case, such as that music
played from digital systems exhibits a stairstep in the waveforms due to
the sampling process. This is false and always has been.
--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri
Darryl Johnson
Feb 6, 2012, 12:31:01 PM2/6/12
to
I am not, in any way, knowledgeable about recording/recorded sound.
But I find the various discussions of some interest.
Although I tend to keep my music on a ... cough ... iPod which I
either listen to via reasonably good in-ear speakers, or through my
car's radio USB port, it is, I admit, nice to listen to my son's setup
whereby he plays files on his computer through a Denon amp and a pair
of good desktop speakers. (I know they're good: his mother and I
bought them for him as a Christmas present a couple of years ago.
They're worth a couple of car payments! And it was a very reputable
audio shop that let us spend a day A/B-ing sets of speakers until we
were happy.)
I guess, as they say about art: I don't know much about it, but I know
what I like.
--
Darryl
Les Cargill
Feb 6, 2012, 1:42:30 PM2/6/12
to
"archives" project, which will be the Mother Of All Box Sets
and include both unreleased material and material which was
in limited release ( like "Time Fades Away ).
Also SFAIK, you cannot rip DSD, so it would put the piracy
issue off to the side ( or at least to the analog hole ).
We dunno if DSD will be better than 44.1kHz/16bit yet. Some say
yes, some say no, but there's no general reason it should be that
I've been able to find yet.
--
Les Cargill
Kevin Hall
Feb 7, 2012, 11:59:25 AM2/7/12
to
"Darryl Johnson" <Darryl_...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:jgoqjt$9jq$1...@dont-email.me...
able to sing on key and who, at this stage in his life no doubt has his
hearing seriously clipped relative to where it was in his 20s. Could it be
possible that Brother Neil, a notoriously sharp businessman, has an
alternate agenda here? You know what they say about marketing; " Be
careful not to step in any". ;-)
KH
hank alrich
Feb 7, 2012, 12:11:55 PM2/7/12
to
I admire that part of his biz acumen that disavows sponsorships. It's
written right into performance contracts that no brand advertising will
be displayed at his shows. When that clause got ignored at a huge show
he sued for breach and won. He ain't gonna be sellin' soda and other
crap.
Les Cargill
Feb 7, 2012, 1:47:44 PM2/7/12
to
Kevin Hall wrote:
> "Darryl Johnson"<Darryl_...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:jgoqjt$9jq$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Direct Stream Digital, a technology developed by Sony and Philips ...
>> that uses pulse-density modulation encoding. The format uses 1-bit
>> sampling at 2.8224 MHz, which is 64 times higher than the 44.1 KHz used by
>> CDs. The result are huge audio files, about 300 MB for five minutes of
>> audio. There are very few music publishers offering DSD files at all."
>>
>> Apparently Neil isn't happy with MP3 music and thinks we could do a lot
>> better.
>>
>> I've never heard of this particular format, myself, but perhaps some of
>> you have.
>>
>> As the article I found this in mentions, it wouldn't be a good format for
>> music downloads. Not at current bandwidth limitations. And it would take
>> Terabyte-sized drives to store a decent music collection.
>>
>> My ears would, undoubtedly, not be able to discern any difference, even
>> through good speakers, but people with young and healthy ears probably
>> could.
>>
>> --
>> Darryl
>
> Seems a touch ironic coming from a guy in his late 60s who has never been
> able to sing on key
I have never bought that argument. YMMV. Pitch with Neil, especially
> "Darryl Johnson"<Darryl_...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:jgoqjt$9jq$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Direct Stream Digital, a technology developed by Sony and Philips ...
>> that uses pulse-density modulation encoding. The format uses 1-bit
>> sampling at 2.8224 MHz, which is 64 times higher than the 44.1 KHz used by
>> CDs. The result are huge audio files, about 300 MB for five minutes of
>> audio. There are very few music publishers offering DSD files at all."
>>
>> Apparently Neil isn't happy with MP3 music and thinks we could do a lot
>> better.
>>
>> I've never heard of this particular format, myself, but perhaps some of
>> you have.
>>
>> As the article I found this in mentions, it wouldn't be a good format for
>> music downloads. Not at current bandwidth limitations. And it would take
>> Terabyte-sized drives to store a decent music collection.
>>
>> My ears would, undoubtedly, not be able to discern any difference, even
>> through good speakers, but people with young and healthy ears probably
>> could.
>>
>> --
>> Darryl
>
> Seems a touch ironic coming from a guy in his late 60s who has never been
> able to sing on key
Neil and Crazy Horse is hard to pin down, but it's not that "out". It's
"sour". It's very low-pH pitch, but it's there.
Seriously, when I first really listened to this music when a young'un,
it was the treatment of pitch and timbre that most made me think all
my music teachers were telling me very little....
> and who, at this stage in his life no doubt has his
> hearing seriously clipped relative to where it was in his 20s.
"Neil has his own private P.A and a Yamaha mixer. He has a separate
microphone that's not connected to the house for each amp, and he can
mix these to any level he wants. He mainly hears Deluxe, a lot of
Baldwin, and very little Magnatone. Out front and on record, you can
hear mostly Deluxe and Magnatone. Inside the big speaker cabinet to the
audience's right are 2 two-way Maryland Sound P.A. cabinets with 2 15s
and a horn apiece. These cabinets have 2000 watts of biamped power, and
gets turned excruciatingly loud. It just kills me to go out there-I
just about get knocked over. And that's what Neils hearing. This
produces the feedback, and if we didn't have that on, the sound
wouldn't be the same. Neil doesn't wear ear protection, and he's had a
problem with that recently. I doubt if we'll be seeing this again soon.
Right now he's gone into total acoustic. "
http://thrasherswheat.org/friends/amps.htm
That's from 20 years ago...
> Could it be
> possible that Brother Neil, a notoriously sharp businessman, has an
> alternate agenda here? You know what they say about marketing; " Be
> careful not to step in any". ;-)
>
come out...
> KH
>
>
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
Feb 7, 2012, 1:50:27 PM2/7/12
to
long and it's worked *EXTREMELY* well. It's impossible to impugn his
integrity with the music, but he's made out very well. This is the
single hardest trick in the biz.
he claims he mainly lives in fear of, and in service of, The Muse.
--
Les Cargill
Larry Pattis
Feb 7, 2012, 1:56:28 PM2/7/12
to
Kevin Hall <timbe...@webhart.net> wrote:
> Seems a touch ironic coming from a guy in his late 60s who has never been
> able to sing on key and who, at this stage in his life no doubt has his
> hearing seriously clipped relative to where it was in his 20s. Could it be
> possible that Brother Neil, a notoriously sharp businessman, has an
> alternate agenda here? You know what they say about marketing; " Be
> careful not to step in any". ;-)
>
> KH
One might think that (Young having an alternate agenda), and it might
> Seems a touch ironic coming from a guy in his late 60s who has never been
> able to sing on key and who, at this stage in his life no doubt has his
> hearing seriously clipped relative to where it was in his 20s. Could it be
> possible that Brother Neil, a notoriously sharp businessman, has an
> alternate agenda here? You know what they say about marketing; " Be
> careful not to step in any". ;-)
>
> KH
be true. I honestly don't know. I do get the curmudgeon-approach to
this thing, and I am wary of motives...however....
...It's clearly true that standard downloadable (and storable) music
files suck-big-time, audio-quality-wise.
We have all this great technology to *improve* the quality of what we
listen to, and cheap-ass ear-buds with low bit-rate & compressed files
are what has become the norm.
I'm not into the norm, and whoever or whatever brings a voice and/or
technology to the forefront to make a diference, well, I'm all for
that.
--
LP
http://www.LarryPattis.com
American Guitar Masters
http://www.AmericanGuitarMasters.com
Paul L
Feb 8, 2012, 10:23:38 AM2/8/12
to
On 2/7/2012 9:59 AM, Kevin Hall wrote:
> Seems a touch ironic coming from a guy in his late 60s who has never been
> able to sing on key and who, at this stage in his life no doubt has his
> hearing seriously clipped relative to where it was in his 20s. Could it be
> possible that Brother Neil, a notoriously sharp businessman, has an
> alternate agenda here? You know what they say about marketing; " Be
> careful not to step in any". ;-)
>
> KH
What alternate agenda? There is no mass market for a better sounding
> Seems a touch ironic coming from a guy in his late 60s who has never been
> able to sing on key and who, at this stage in his life no doubt has his
> hearing seriously clipped relative to where it was in his 20s. Could it be
> possible that Brother Neil, a notoriously sharp businessman, has an
> alternate agenda here? You know what they say about marketing; " Be
> careful not to step in any". ;-)
>
> KH
product. People love their mp3s and these days high quality sound is a
fringe market at best. Neil has always gone on about his disappointment
regarding the sound quality of his commercial releases relative to what
he hears on his masters. I recall he was very encouraged by DVD-audio
... He knows exactly the stone wall that technology received in the
marketplace. I'm sure he understands the realistic prospects of market
share in this new technology. He's not after the next big thing, just
the best sound possible for those that want it.
Paul
Mike Brown
Feb 8, 2012, 11:06:47 PM2/8/12
to
In article <070220121056286077%Neve...@spam.invalid>,
I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
marketed.
Of course, by the time that happens my ears will be worse than they are
now and it won't matter any more.
MJRB
CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
marketed.
Of course, by the time that happens my ears will be worse than they are
now and it won't matter any more.
MJRB
Wilbur
Feb 9, 2012, 12:33:00 AM2/9/12
to
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:36:47 +1030, Mike Brown
<rock...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
>CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
>afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
>marketed.
They've tried. Both DVD-Audio and SACD were higher quality than
<rock...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
>CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
>afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
>marketed.
16-bit 44.1Khz, but hardly anybody thought the difference was worth
paying the extra price. I don't know that you can even buy anything
in either format anymore.
Mike Brown
Feb 9, 2012, 5:22:59 AM2/9/12
to
In article <agm6j7db9aiarctna...@4ax.com>,
It will happen one day in a completely different format, something we
haven't thought of yet.
MJRB
haven't thought of yet.
MJRB
Wilbur
Feb 9, 2012, 9:56:35 AM2/9/12
to
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:52:59 +1030, Mike Brown
information moves to the cloud and off of local media (distributed
hard media like vinyl, tapes, cd, etc), to format of the information
(16 bit, 44.1KHz, etc) will become more flexible. Someone (like
Apple, Google, or whoever's next) can write software that will play
various compressed music (MP3's, etc), 16bit 44.1KHz music, 24 bit
96KHz music, MIDI files, Finale files, whatever you have. And then,
the end user can get whatever fidelity they want. Several formats can
co-exist, providing a path for evolution, an therefore less of a
barrier to entry for new formats. You won't have to re-purchase your
whole catalog of music, you can just upgrade the pieces you want and
leave the others in the old format.
<rock...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>In article <agm6j7db9aiarctna...@4ax.com>,
> Wilbur <wil...@sliceathome.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:36:47 +1030, Mike Brown
>> <rock...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> >I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
>> >CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
>> >afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
>> >marketed.
>>
>> They've tried. Both DVD-Audio and SACD were higher quality than
>> 16-bit 44.1Khz, but hardly anybody thought the difference was worth
>> paying the extra price. I don't know that you can even buy anything
>> in either format anymore.
>
>It will happen one day in a completely different format, something we
>haven't thought of yet.
>
>MJRB
Yeah, sort of. I think what will happen is, as all this digital
>In article <agm6j7db9aiarctna...@4ax.com>,
> Wilbur <wil...@sliceathome.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:36:47 +1030, Mike Brown
>> <rock...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> >I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
>> >CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
>> >afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
>> >marketed.
>>
>> They've tried. Both DVD-Audio and SACD were higher quality than
>> 16-bit 44.1Khz, but hardly anybody thought the difference was worth
>> paying the extra price. I don't know that you can even buy anything
>> in either format anymore.
>
>It will happen one day in a completely different format, something we
>haven't thought of yet.
>
>MJRB
information moves to the cloud and off of local media (distributed
hard media like vinyl, tapes, cd, etc), to format of the information
(16 bit, 44.1KHz, etc) will become more flexible. Someone (like
Apple, Google, or whoever's next) can write software that will play
various compressed music (MP3's, etc), 16bit 44.1KHz music, 24 bit
96KHz music, MIDI files, Finale files, whatever you have. And then,
the end user can get whatever fidelity they want. Several formats can
co-exist, providing a path for evolution, an therefore less of a
barrier to entry for new formats. You won't have to re-purchase your
whole catalog of music, you can just upgrade the pieces you want and
leave the others in the old format.
hank alrich
Feb 9, 2012, 2:20:14 PM2/9/12
to
formats, if we're going to base price on production costs. It does not
cost appreciably more to deliver higher resolution files on a physical
disc. When we mastered Carry Me Home we walked out with 44.1/16, 96/24,
and a range of MP3 rates.
Search term: buy dvd-a music
http://tinyurl.com/7gxmh77
2.75 million hits
ST: buy sacd music
http://tinyurl.com/6nvvfld
7 million hits
(Okay, kidding, but you _can_ still buy quite a few titles in either or
both formats.)
JimLowther
Feb 9, 2012, 5:55:48 PM2/9/12
to
On Feb 7, 11:11 am, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:
> Kevin Hall <timberl...@webhart.net> wrote:
> > "Darryl Johnson" <Darryl_John...@rogers.com> wrote in message
With all due respect (and I have lots) form Kevin I confess I have
always been a NY fan. His voice definitely is quirky, but I agree
with David Crosby that for all this quirkiness it seems to connect on
an emotional level. (Perhaps something similar could be said about
his electric guitar work.)
Given his disdain for brand advertising I found it ironic recently to
hear NY's harmonic pings from Stephen Still's Buffalo Springfield "For
What It's Worth" on some TV commercial (which I can't remember now).
I still have vinyl LPs.
Best wishes,
Dr. Jim Lowther
> Kevin Hall <timberl...@webhart.net> wrote:
> > "Darryl Johnson" <Darryl_John...@rogers.com> wrote in message
always been a NY fan. His voice definitely is quirky, but I agree
with David Crosby that for all this quirkiness it seems to connect on
an emotional level. (Perhaps something similar could be said about
his electric guitar work.)
Given his disdain for brand advertising I found it ironic recently to
hear NY's harmonic pings from Stephen Still's Buffalo Springfield "For
What It's Worth" on some TV commercial (which I can't remember now).
I still have vinyl LPs.
Best wishes,
Dr. Jim Lowther
hank alrich
Feb 9, 2012, 10:48:22 PM2/9/12
to
> With all due respect (and I have lots) form Kevin I confess I have
> always been a NY fan. His voice definitely is quirky, but I agree
> with David Crosby that for all this quirkiness it seems to connect on
> an emotional level. (Perhaps something similar could be said about
> his electric guitar work.)
His voice kept Shaidri from appreciating him for a long time, but now
> always been a NY fan. His voice definitely is quirky, but I agree
> with David Crosby that for all this quirkiness it seems to connect on
> an emotional level. (Perhaps something similar could be said about
> his electric guitar work.)
she gets it, via the songs. He is genuiniely great and he positively
connects emotionally with a huge noumber of folks.
> Given his disdain for brand advertising I found it ironic recently to
> hear NY's harmonic pings from Stephen Still's Buffalo Springfield "For
> What It's Worth" on some TV commercial (which I can't remember now).
nor the sole purview over that material.
> I still have vinyl LPs.
--
MKR
Feb 10, 2012, 1:32:24 PM2/10/12
to
On Feb 9, 1:20 pm, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:
> Wilbur <wil...@sliceathome.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:36:47 +1030, Mike Brown
> > <rocko...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>
> > >I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
> > >CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
> > >afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
> > >marketed.
>
> > They've tried. Both DVD-Audio and SACD were higher quality than
> > 16-bit 44.1Khz, but hardly anybody thought the difference was worth
> > paying the extra price. I don't know that you can even buy anything
> > in either format anymore.
>
> The catch is that there is no justification for a higher price for those
> formats, if we're going to base price on production costs. It does not
> cost appreciably more to deliver higher resolution files on a physical
> disc. When we mastered Carry Me Home we walked out with 44.1/16, 96/24,
> and a range of MP3 rates.
>
Well, that's mostly true. But I think the SACD discs actually did
> Wilbur <wil...@sliceathome.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:36:47 +1030, Mike Brown
> > <rocko...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
>
> > >I certainly won't bother with any files that are of lower quality than
> > >CDs. CDs are good enough for the stereo systems that most of us can
> > >afford, but if money was no object I'm sure that a better system can be
> > >marketed.
>
> > They've tried. Both DVD-Audio and SACD were higher quality than
> > 16-bit 44.1Khz, but hardly anybody thought the difference was worth
> > paying the extra price. I don't know that you can even buy anything
> > in either format anymore.
>
> The catch is that there is no justification for a higher price for those
> formats, if we're going to base price on production costs. It does not
> cost appreciably more to deliver higher resolution files on a physical
> disc. When we mastered Carry Me Home we walked out with 44.1/16, 96/24,
> and a range of MP3 rates.
>
cost a bit more because they were generally "hybrid" discs - that is,
they had multiple layers, and I think the manufacturing process for
that is probably somewhat more expensive. But not enough to account
for the price difference that was being charged. Once you make the
master stamper, it doesn't cost any more to stamp out discs if they
have 20 minutes of music or 60 minutes, or if the format is 24bit
96KHz or 16 bit 44.1Khz. It's all just stamping at that point.
JimLowther
Feb 11, 2012, 4:02:00 PM2/11/12
to
HALF MOON BAY, Calif.--"Hey hey, my my, the state of PC music quality
makes me wanna die."
So said singer-songwriter, Neil Young--though not in those exact
words--to wrap up the Fortune Brainstorm conference today. Young's
earnest entreaty to the technology execs gathered here didn't mince
words as he pushed for more sophisticated digital-to-analog converters
in PCs that deliver better sound quality.
Young said he was distressed at the short shrift the tech business has
devoted to making music more "high res," his shorthand for richer and
higher quality.
"The thing with music is you can't view it," lamenting how society has
become accustomed to what he called "low-res music."
"People's understanding has been skewed by MP3s and convenience. It's
important to get music out there...but not at the expense of quality,"
he said.
Young acknowledged having held a discussion with Michael Dell about
what PC makers might be able to do. He said Dell was "checking with
some folks that could give him an understanding of what their
capabilities are."
At another point, he noted that "all my life, I heard the best sound
possible." Then he added what comes out of most computers was a
"dumbed down" sound he likened to toy quality.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10787_3-9997977-60.html?tag=bl
Dated July, 2008, so it does seem this is an on-going issue for NY.
Wilbur
Feb 11, 2012, 4:21:54 PM2/11/12
to
compressed MP3's played on crappy PC speakers or little earbuds. Well,
yeah, that stuff doesn't sound great - but it does sound "good
enough".
It's just that it appears like he's railing against the kids of my
youth listening to Buffalo Springfield songs on mono AM transistor
radios - sometimes with the one earbud. Yeah, the sound quality
sucked, but it was good enough for the purpose, and more importantly,
it was what was *possible* (and affordable) at the time. I listened
to a lot of music on my crappy ols AM clock radio as a teen. It
sounded far worse than today's MP3's. An as memory gets still cheaper
and streaming throughput gets higher, the quality of the music will
get even better than it is today.
There have always been more expensive technologies that provide the
best technically possible sound, but they are always well beyond the
reach of most people - especially kids. So what? Neil Youg hear
sounds in the finest studios in the world, recorded on the most
expensive equipment available. And he's pissed because we don't all
hear what he does?
But does he also complain about CD-Quality music (like Dylan does)?
Does he lament 96Khz 24-bit recording, just because it's digital?
Mike Brown
Feb 11, 2012, 6:14:20 PM2/11/12
to
In article
<14e9afce-e4e5-414f...@f14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
He is absolutely right. I use WAV files on my Mac but the sound is still
very poor quality. Of course the quality of the amps and speakers
doesn't help, but it isn't worth running the sound through an external
amp and speakers for the small improvement that I get (I have tried it).
MJRB
<14e9afce-e4e5-414f...@f14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
very poor quality. Of course the quality of the amps and speakers
doesn't help, but it isn't worth running the sound through an external
amp and speakers for the small improvement that I get (I have tried it).
MJRB
Lettuce Prey
Feb 12, 2012, 10:22:49 AM2/12/12
to
just grabbed his balls and squeezed real hard.
Les Cargill
Feb 12, 2012, 11:29:58 AM2/12/12
to
See ISBN-13: 978-0679427728 ("Shakey", Jimmy McDonough) for details....
--
Les Cargill
0 new messages