Music download sites offering CD quality.
Michael Chare
though not all show what bit rate the files are stored in.
Can anyone recommend any sites that have a large selection of music in a CD
quality format, such as WMA Lossless or FLAC 16/44.1
--
Michael Chare
Adrian C
Michael Chare
news:7n9ubqF...@mid.individual.net...
Thanks, there is also Naim. It was the 'large selection' (of back catalogue
items) that I was looking for.
There was a Louis Armstrong record 'Satchmo plays King Oliver' that I have
been looking for.
It was originally an LP and then re-issued on CD I think with a few more
tracks.
The CD version out of print but someone is selling them on Amazon for $35
plus shipping, which is a bit more that I want to spend!
I could also download various MP3 versions but I am not sure of the quality.
With some effort I may be able to find the same tracks on other CDs.
--
Michael Chare
Adrian C
> The CD version out of print but someone is selling them on Amazon for
> $35 plus shipping, which is a bit more that I want to spend!
>
> I could also download various MP3 versions but I am not sure of the
> quality.
Well it's not a download, but it's there on Spotify
http://open.spotify.com/album/6ctQBzTMSyhT2bRlIZRJrZ
Sounds OK compressed 320kbits OGG for me (Premium sub)
--
Adrian C
Jim Lesurf
IIRC Chandos also do this. Although personally I prefer to just buy a CD.
:-)
Slainte,
Jim
--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Woody
news:HrednXurY7wXXJLW...@pipex.net...
Legal Sounds do many mp3s at 192K or higher - and it shows you
the sample rate per track before you commit.
And they are CHEAP!
--
Woody
harrogate three at ntlworld dot com
Adrian C
> Legal Sounds do many mp3s at 192K or higher - and it shows you
> the sample rate per track before you commit.
>
>
> And they are CHEAP!
>
Royalty fees going the wrong place unfortunately.
You may as well download stuff from torrents for all the good signing up
with that russian place.
Thought the 'powers that be' had cracked down on that!
:-(
--
Adrian C
Michael Chare
Thanks I found the music that I was looking for on another web site.
I was in fact able to save a track about 700kb long. The file is .ra and I
can play it with Real Player and winamp (with an additional codec) but as
yet I have been unable to convert the file to a more useful format.
However unfortunately the music has clearly been taken from a some what
scratchy record.
--
Michael Chare
Michael Chare
news:50c0c3c...@audiomisc.co.uk...
> In article <7n9ubqF...@mid.individual.net>, Adrian C
> <em...@here.invalid> wrote:
>> Michael Chare wrote:
>> > There are many web sites that will let you download music in mp3
>> > format, though not all show what bit rate the files are stored in.
>> >
>> > Can anyone recommend any sites that have a large selection of music in
>> > a CD quality format, such as WMA Lossless or FLAC 16/44.1
>> >
>
>> http://www.linnrecords.com/
>
> IIRC Chandos also do this. Although personally I prefer to just buy a CD.
> :-)
>
Thanks, the lossless downloads don't cost much less than the CDs so I take
your point.
--
Michael Chare
Adrian C
> Thanks I found the music that I was looking for on another web site.
>
> I was in fact able to save a track about 700kb long. The file is .ra
> and I can play it with Real Player and winamp (with an additional codec)
> but as yet I have been unable to convert the file to a more useful format.
>
> However unfortunately the music has clearly been taken from a some what
> scratchy record.
>
Yuk, that don't sound good. Er, Real audio, that really WON'T sound good.
Michael, please have a look at installing Spotify and trying it out for
yourself. If you need an invite to try the free* version just ask, I've
got a few to give.
*The free version is limited to 160 kbit/s Ogg Vorbis, but will easily
surpass what you have there.
--
Adrian C
Michael Chare
Thanks for your offer, I will think about it. I have since found
songs.sky.com and they do have the CD that I was looking for.
I can play a short clip and it clearly sounds much better. They say that
all music is either in 192 or 320 kbps MP3 format. What they don't say is
what they use for a a particular album or song.
My impression is that Sky have a large catalogue.
--
Michael Chare
Arny Krueger
Immediate gratification has a lot to do with the popularity of downloads.
Keith G
"Michael Chare" <Munders...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
Which is a ludicrous proposition of course, but that doesn't surprise me in
the least given the sort of person who will be downloading them. What I want
to know is if these are available online presumably anywhere in the world,
how do they apply the usual *Twat Britain* surcharges for 'digital music' -
which have been typically US x 2 and Europe x 1.5 for about the last quarter
of a century....??
Adrian C
>
> Thanks for your offer, I will think about it. I have since found
> songs.sky.com and they do have the CD that I was looking for.
>
> I can play a short clip and it clearly sounds much better. They say
> that all music is either in 192 or 320 kbps MP3 format. What they don't
> say is what they use for a a particular album or song.
>
> My impression is that Sky have a large catalogue.
>
Fair enough. Good you found your tracks!
BTW Today's stats for Spotify for the UK
Albums: 502,025
Artists: 412,012
Tracks: 5,704,792
(Tip: Enter 'year:0-3000' in the search for the above totals)
Which at the moment is round about similar to Sky Songs. However there
will be differences in all these streaming and download services on what
is available.
However IMO Spotify's interface is better worked out, can be taken
portable, (and no funds go towards that nasty man...)
--
Adrian C
Michael Chare
news:ytednaKsI4wcEY3W...@giganews.com...
Yes, I was looking at it a different way!
I can understand it if the record companies don't want to hold atocks of old
CDs in their back catalogues. Sales are no doubt falling.
The CD technolgy will go the way of 78s, Vinyl LPs and cassette tapes. You
can now store more than 1000 CDs on a single disc drive.
So I would like to see record companies making their complete catalogues
available online so that people can download what they want.
--
Michael Chare
David Looser
>
> old CDs in their back catalogues. Sales are no doubt falling.
>
> The CD technolgy will go the way of 78s, Vinyl LPs and cassette tapes.
> You can now store more than 1000 CDs on a single disc drive.
I agree, I see the commercial CD vanishing within a relatively short time.
As sales continue to decline the economics of manufacture and distribution
will make CDs too expensive for the record companies to bother with.
Ironically I see the LP as possibly outliving the CD as it will continue to
appeal to the "fetish" market (i.e. those to whom owning a physical object
is really important). But that market won't be enough to save more than a
handful of record shops, the vast majority of which will disappear off our
high streets within the next decade.
>
> So I would like to see record companies making their complete catalogues
> available online so that people can download what they want.
I'm sure it will happen, download distribution makes it economic to continue
to make slow-moving lines available. Deletion from the catalogue will no
longer make economic or marketing sense. There may be a few recordings which
can't be made available for download, due to rights issues etc. But I'm sure
the vast majority of once deleted commercial recordings will eventually
become available again for purchase by download.
David.
Woody
news:7ndj3nF...@mid.individual.net...
If that does happen then it will immediately disadvantage a large
proportion of the population - those that don't have (or can't
have) Internet access.
What is more the load on the Internet infrastructure that it will
impose - especially for those who want the best quality downloads
(e.g. classical and jazz) - will drag it down to a crawl.
It may happen in time, but a LOT of money will have to be spent
first, and whilst everything is driven by bean-counters and
short-termism I don't see it coming about.
Don Pearce
I think the law of supply and demand will deal with that. Back in the
day, large groups of people were disadvantaged by lack of a record
player or CD player. People catch up. As far as I know the only people
who actually can't have Internet access are convicted terrorists and
paedophiles.
>What is more the load on the Internet infrastructure that it will
>impose - especially for those who want the best quality downloads
>(e.g. classical and jazz) - will drag it down to a crawl.
>
In the early days of broadband, many ISPs went in for local cacheing
of data, to help out their struggling backbone infrastructure. It
didn't work because they underestimated the dynamic nature of web
pages. But whole sites dedicated to serving music and films are a
different ball games, and local caches at the POPs would fix that
issue.
>It may happen in time, but a LOT of money will have to be spent
>first, and whilst everything is driven by bean-counters and
>short-termism I don't see it coming about.
At some point there will be a short (or at least medium) term
advantage and it will happen. That will be a one-way street, I think.
d
Jim Lesurf
<david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Michael Chare" <Munders...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
> >
> > I can understand it if the record companies don't want to hold atocks
> > of old CDs in their back catalogues. Sales are no doubt falling.
> >
> > The CD technolgy will go the way of 78s, Vinyl LPs and cassette
> > tapes. You can now store more than 1000 CDs on a single disc drive.
> I agree, I see the commercial CD vanishing within a relatively short
> time.
That may well be so for 'mass market' audio CDs. But I suspect the future
will be more diverse and so CDDA in some form may persist.
IIRC some small 'serious music' companies are already experimenting with
selling 'CDs' by generating 'on demand' CDRs when a disc is ordered. That
method could easily accompany downloading since writing CDs in that way is
a low-cost option.
I also suspect people will become wary of 'put all your CDs onto a HD' when
they experience HD failures and/or proprietary software interfering with
what they are 'allowed' to play or copy.
An advantage of the CDDA format is that is has become a sort of 'lingua
franca'. You can use CDDA to store musical recordings to plater play or
load into a range of devices. You can snail-mail them to people who have no
broadband connection, etc.
So I won't be suprised if the traditional commerical CD vanishes for mass
markets like pop music. But I have my doubts that it will totally vanish.
Although it may be replaced in time by some other 'lingua franca', as yet I
haven't seen one establish itself. Computer-based formats tend to suffer
from the 'Windows effect' where microsoft try to break/change/control
things and so having a stable format can be disrupted. And devices like DVD
players tend to treat formats other than their primary standard in ways
that vary from one player/brand to another.
BTW I ordered 8 CDs this morning. None of them 'pop' music. :-)
David Looser
>
> If that does happen then it will immediately disadvantage a large
> proportion of the population - those that don't have (or can't have)
> Internet access.
Large? How large is that proportion of the population? IMO is small and
getting smaller all the time. How many people are too far from a record shop
to readily get to one?
>
> What is more the load on the Internet infrastructure that it will impose -
> especially for those who want the best quality downloads (e.g. classical
> and jazz) - will drag it down to a crawl.
>
Trivial compared to the load imposed by video streaming, eg. BBC iPlayer.
> It may happen in time, but a LOT of money will have to be spent first, and
> whilst everything is driven by bean-counters and short-termism I don't see
> it coming about.
It's precisely *because* everything is driven by bean-counters that I see
this happening. Put simply sales by download are much cheaper for the record
companies.
David.
David Looser
> In article <7ndj3nF...@mid.individual.net>, David Looser
> <david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
.
>
>> I agree, I see the commercial CD vanishing within a relatively short
>> time.
>
> That may well be so for 'mass market' audio CDs. But I suspect the future
> will be more diverse and so CDDA in some form may persist.
It was the mass-market that I had in mind.
>
> IIRC some small 'serious music' companies are already experimenting with
> selling 'CDs' by generating 'on demand' CDRs when a disc is ordered. That
> method could easily accompany downloading since writing CDs in that way is
> a low-cost option.
Could well happen, it's similar to what is now being talked about for book
publishing whereby a one-off copy of a book is printed on demand. Modern
printing technology makes that a viable option for slow-moving titles.
>
> I also suspect people will become wary of 'put all your CDs onto a HD'
> when
> they experience HD failures and/or proprietary software interfering with
> what they are 'allowed' to play or copy.
>
The way round that is to keep a back-up! As for the propriety software
problem, I strongly suspect that this will gradually disappear as consumer
demand makes it's voice felt.
David.
Keith G
"Woody" <harro...@ntlworld.spam.com> wrote in message
news:nJqQm.80315$J94....@newsfe24.ams2...
> "David Looser" <david....@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:7ndj3nF...@mid.individual.net...
>> "Michael Chare" <Munders...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
>>>
>>> I can understand it if the record companies don't want to hold atocks of
>>> old CDs in their back catalogues. Sales are no doubt falling.
>>>
>>> The CD technolgy will go the way of 78s, Vinyl LPs and cassette tapes.
>>> You can now store more than 1000 CDs on a single disc drive.
>>
>> I agree, I see the commercial CD vanishing within a relatively short
>> time. As sales continue to decline the economics of manufacture and
>> distribution will make CDs too expensive for the record companies to
>> bother with. Ironically I see the LP as possibly outliving the CD as it
>> will continue to appeal to the "fetish" market (i.e. those to whom owning
>> a physical object is really important). But that market won't be enough
>> to save more than a handful of record shops, the vast majority of which
>> will disappear off our high streets within the next decade.
I also believe that LPs will outlive CDs as well as Tapes, Cassettes,
Minidiscs, SACDs and just about any other form of physical 'digital' music.
Not so sure about the 'handful of record shops' quip though - maybe on the
streets, but a Google search 'LP Records' yields 35,400,00 results worldwide
and 1,370,00 UK only. That is no less than 52 pages of UK results and record
dealers and traders appear to constitute the majority of the entries
returned - all the way through and up to the very last result which is
someone flogging records in Edinburgh:
http://edinburgh.gumtree.com/edinburgh/14/48348114.html
Kinda implies to me there will a fairly healthy traffic in vinyl for long
time to come! (Rest of my days, anyway!! :-)
> If that does happen then it will immediately disadvantage a large
> proportion of the population - those that don't have (or can't have)
> Internet access.
I think the 'powers' already deem a large enough majority of the 'meaningful
population' have at least some form of access to the Internet these days and
it's growing, of course.
>
> What is more the load on the Internet infrastructure that it will impose -
> especially for those who want the best quality downloads (e.g. classical
> and jazz) - will drag it down to a crawl.
That's happening already but it doesn't stop *movies for download* being
advertised here and there now - never mind music....
>
> It may happen in time, but a LOT of money will have to be spent first, and
> whilst everything is driven by bean-counters and short-termism I don't see
> it coming about.
The Internet is all about advertising revenues now and Internet content with
broad appeal like downloadable movies and music sites is virtually
guaranteed.
Me? Call me daft - I don't download anything, but I sent 20 quid off to Wiki
the other day...!! ;-)
Jim Lesurf
<david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Jim Lesurf" <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:50c1c05...@audiomisc.co.uk...
> > IIRC some small 'serious music' companies are already experimenting
> > with selling 'CDs' by generating 'on demand' CDRs when a disc is
> > ordered. That method could easily accompany downloading since writing
> > CDs in that way is a low-cost option.
> Could well happen, it's similar to what is now being talked about for
> book publishing whereby a one-off copy of a book is printed on demand.
> Modern printing technology makes that a viable option for slow-moving
> titles.
Yes. Indeed I am hoping that this kind of approach (along with having
archives on the net) may make many items available that have remained
'scarce'. However there are still, I fear, problems with 'orphan works'
which no-one feels they can publish as they can't trace the copyright
holders.
The problem with relying on downloads is that many people still don't have
reliable broadband.
> >
> > I also suspect people will become wary of 'put all your CDs onto a HD'
> > when they experience HD failures and/or proprietary software
> > interfering with what they are 'allowed' to play or copy.
> >
> The way round that is to keep a back-up!
In theory everyone does, and is never caught out. But in practice...
And of course if your backup was ADFS and you now have a box that only
understands FATxx...
> As for the propriety software problem, I strongly suspect that this will
> gradually disappear as consumer demand makes it's voice felt.
I would love to think you are right. But in reality I note the continued
dominance and behaviour of companies like Microsoft, News International,
etc, etc. Add/admend the list as you prefer.
The point is that they often tend to rely to a significant extent upon
'closed' or 'controlled' or 'proprietary' systems and in churning the
details with all its incompatabilities for their revenue.
I've also noticed in recent years the weird incompatabilities,
inconsistencies, etc, in consumer items like DVD players. Examples like
different players requiring incompatable file names to play the same types
of file.
Why should they care when they are on to 'this year's new model' which is
different by the time anyone points this out? So far as big companies are
concerned, the 'solution' to any problems you experience are to tell you to
buy something newer from them - complete with its own (different) snags.
:-)
And things like, "Want a BD player sir? Sorry you'll also need a new
display. Your old one has SCARTs and the players use HDMI!" Or "Yes, your
TB is 'HD ready' but you'll still need a new one, or another box, to watch
HD broadcasts". Technically, we might know of alternatives. But it does
help the salesman boost his commission, nes pa? ;->
To some extent though, I think you are right. And that was one reason why
the attempts to replace CDDA with DVD-A or SACD foundered. If the makers of
the 'new' systems hadn't tried to keep control of the new formats they
might have succeeded. But of course they could not do that as - in
commercial terms - the advantage of DVD-A and SACD was to have a new
format with its own patent income for the developers now that the patents
on CDDA had run out! :-)
Adrian C
> I think the law of supply and demand will deal with that. Back in the
> day, large groups of people were disadvantaged by lack of a record
> player or CD player.
When a PC becomes as easy to use as a CD player, then yes; otherwise no.
The interweb thing is pure rocket science to a lot of folk of all ages
and abilities, and the current commonly used software out there was
unfortunately designed for business men and game playing geeks.
A nationally understandable internet appliance class set-top box. Think
Prestel or that freely distributed french thing in the 80s.
If the BBC really wants to make something out of their plans to pump the
iPlayer service down the ethernet socket of a FreeSat compliant TV set,
they should add user access to email and TV-optimised web services as
well. And bring the same standards across to FreeView. Maybe that could
happen with the upgrade to DTT HD.
--
Adrian C
Woody
Seconded
Mintel?
David Looser
>
> abilities, and the current commonly used software out there was
> unfortunately designed for business men and game playing geeks.
>
fact is that CD sales are falling whilst download sales are growing,
projecting this forward suggests that, in the not too distant future, CD
sales will have fallen below the point where record companies want to keep
bothering with it.
In my experience very few people, apart from the elderly, are not computer
literate these days. School children and students all have to be these days,
as does anybody with any kind of office-work element to their job. OTOH
plenty of people do not buy recorded music in any format, and generally
people who don't own computers don't buy records either IME.
David.
Michael Chare
> Don Pearce wrote:
>
>> I think the law of supply and demand will deal with that. Back in the
>> day, large groups of people were disadvantaged by lack of a record
>> player or CD player.
>
> When a PC becomes as easy to use as a CD player, then yes; otherwise no.
>
> The interweb thing is pure rocket science to a lot of folk of all ages and
> abilities, and the current commonly used software out there was
> unfortunately designed for business men and game playing geeks.
>
A few years back I recall someone at work suggesting that MS products were
basically designed for home use because that is where many of the users are.
> A nationally understandable internet appliance class set-top box. Think
> Prestel or that freely distributed french thing in the 80s.
>
> If the BBC really wants to make something out of their plans to pump the
> iPlayer service down the ethernet socket of a FreeSat compliant TV set,
> they should add user access to email and TV-optimised web services as
> well. And bring the same standards across to FreeView. Maybe that could
> happen with the upgrade to DTT HD.
I would think that most people with broadband would already have a PC. I
would not like to send an email using my TVs remote control.
Satellite and terrestrial broadcasts are one way. There is no back path
despite the so called 'interactive' services. To send email you need a back
path.
(Sky boxes use the ordinary telephone line for a back path.)
--
Michael Chare
Michael Chare
news:hetlke$3pf$1...@energise.enta.net...
>
>
> Not so sure about the 'handful of record shops' quip though - maybe on the
> streets, but a Google search 'LP Records' yields 35,400,00 results
> worldwide
> and 1,370,00 UK only. That is no less than 52 pages of UK results and
> record
> dealers and traders appear to constitute the majority of the entries
> returned - all the way through and up to the very last result which is
> someone flogging records in Edinburgh:
>
Where I live, in the local town Smiths no longer sell CDs, Woolies has
closed, so that just leaves the local CD/record shop.
What I would like to know is where all the Smiths customers have gone. Are
they just not buying music and spending their money in other things, or are
they all using downloads?
--
Michael Chare
Rob
I'm surprised nobody seems to have looked for an answer to that - must
be worth billions to someone or other.
From my sample of, er, 3 teenagers seem to go for downloads to their
mp3 players/phones.
I won't give housespace to CDs, and mainly download music. Spotify seems
to be popular.
Apart from the wish for a physical thing (plastic case and microtext
notes) I can't see any mainstream reason for CDs.
Rob
David Looser
>
> From my sample of, er, 3 teenagers seem to go for downloads to their mp3
> players/phones.
Exactly. And as teenagers go on to become adults they will stay with that
preference. Whilst the "computer phobic" older people gradually die off.
>
> I won't give housespace to CDs, and mainly download music. Spotify seems
> to be popular.
>
> Apart from the wish for a physical thing (plastic case and microtext
> notes) I can't see any mainstream reason for CDs.
>
If it's a "physical thing" you are after an LP might be better. Though I've
long despised the LP for it's crap audio quality, I do accept that those big
cardboard sleeves have a certain something that nasty plastic jewel cases
don't.
David.
Jim Lesurf
<patchoul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michael Chare wrote:
> > Where I live, in the local town Smiths no longer sell CDs, Woolies
> > has closed, so that just leaves the local CD/record shop.
> >
> > What I would like to know is where all the Smiths customers have gone.
> > Are they just not buying music and spending their money in other
> > things, or are they all using downloads?
> >
> I'm surprised nobody seems to have looked for an answer to that - must
> be worth billions to someone or other.
I have assumed that the trend is for people to buy CDs via the net. I took
to buying that way some years ago. The range 'in stock' is bigger, the
prices tend to be lower. There are also some specialist dealers who can
advise, and give more attentive and knowledgeable service for particular
minority tastes.
I used to buy from a local shop. But that was eventually made impractical
due to the arrogance of the music companies and wholesalers. In particular
their imposing a requirement for a 'minimum order' of many units. If you
ordered 1 CD from the shop they could only get it by buying a batch of many
CDs from the source.
So unless the shop was buying in large numbers from the source that meant
buying a lot of stock on a speculative basis. Then multiply that problem by
the number of small classical/jazz labels...
That might have been OK for bigger shops selling pop music. But for small
classical or jazz shops it became impractical.
I did wonder if the behaviour was an unfair trade practice. But even if
not, it did seem another example of the big music companies treating their
customers arrogantly, and shooting themselves in the foot in the process.
They whined about the net, but were making it harder to buy their CDs.
For a year or two I accepted that the local shop would get things, but that
I might have to wait a month or two until they had collected enough ordered
items for a batch from the relevant wholesaler. But in the end the shop
also said that this was clearly madness and that I might as well buy via
the net. The shop still sells classical CDs and will order - warning you
about the problem. They also now sell art supplies, sheet music, etc. Had
to diversify as selling CDs as the main living became impossible for them
due to the above imposed requirements by wholesalers.
Keith G
"Michael Chare" <Munders...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:hetlke$3pf$1...@energise.enta.net...
>>
>>
>> Not so sure about the 'handful of record shops' quip though - maybe on
>> the
>> streets, but a Google search 'LP Records' yields 35,400,00 results
>> worldwide
>> and 1,370,00 UK only. That is no less than 52 pages of UK results and
>> record
>> dealers and traders appear to constitute the majority of the entries
>> returned - all the way through and up to the very last result which is
>> someone flogging records in Edinburgh:
>>
>
> Where I live, in the local town Smiths no longer sell CDs, Woolies has
> closed, so that just leaves the local CD/record shop.
Where I live (St Neots, Cambs) I don't think we have a Smith's, Woolies
closed down and the ratty little CD/record shop all but fell down! So, I'm
not sure there is actually anywhere you can buy CDs, other than the many
(6,7, or even 8?) Charity Shops where, of course, you can also buy LPs at a
quid a pop or cheaper - according to current stock levels and the need to
clear shelf space at any one time!!
>
> What I would like to know is where all the Smiths customers have gone.
> Are they just not buying music and spending their money in other things,
> or are they all using downloads?
Well, if it's anything like St Neots, I'd say most people actually still
buying CDs do so down the pub of an evening....
Fleetie
>> Are they just not buying music and spending their money in other
>> things, or are they all using downloads?
>
>
> Well, if it's anything like St Neots, I'd say most people actually still
> buying CDs do so down the pub of an evening....
This is completely irrelevant, but I recently had cause to look at the
cover of my (first) vinyl copy of "Rio", to see when I bought it.
When I was a young teenager, I was in the habit of writing on the sleeve
the date and various other details of the purchase.
So it turns out that according to my 13-year-old-teenager's carefully
inscribed-in-rollerball notes, I bought it on the 20-somethingth (forget
now) of March, 1985, from W.H.Smith, in The Pentagon Centre, in Chatham,
Kent.
It was weird seeing my own writing from when I was about a third of my
current age. It was written there in the hope and anticipation that I
would go back and read it again when I was much older, and so I have.
It was like a message to myself in the distant future!
I doubt that that W.H.Smith shop even still exists as such, now.
Martin
Keith G
"Fleetie" <fle...@fleetie.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Lc6dne4_j9OLXI7W...@bt.com...
>>> What I would like to know is where all the Smiths customers have gone.
>>> Are they just not buying music and spending their money in other
>>> things, or are they all using downloads?
>>
>>
>> Well, if it's anything like St Neots, I'd say most people actually still
>> buying CDs do so down the pub of an evening....
>
> This is completely irrelevant, but I recently had cause to look at the
> cover of my (first) vinyl copy of "Rio", to see when I bought it.
Why is that 'irrelevant'....??
Keith G
And how about *starting* a thread for a change, instead of hijacking
somebody else's?
(Only just noticed....!!)
Dave Plowman (News)
> And how about *starting* a thread for a change, instead of hijacking
> somebody else's?
> (Only just noticed....!!)
Yet another example of how you think you own this group...
--
*If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already?
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Keith G
"Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
news:50c26dc...@davenoise.co.uk...
> In article <hf0u6q$25ti$1...@energise.enta.net>,
> Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
>> > Why is that 'irrelevant'....??
>
>
>> And how about *starting* a thread for a change, instead of hijacking
>> somebody else's?
>
>> (Only just noticed....!!)
>
> Yet another example of how you think you own this group...
Wot a seriously queer little fucker you are!
Tell you what sonny, you have the *power* (I grant it you) - you can tell me
to piss off *right now* and I'll go and you can have the place all to
yourself.
(Last time I threw that wide open the only one to tell me to fuck off was a
nonentity who I suspect was Fleetie under an assumed name! :-)
Only say the word, Poochie Poos....
LOL!!
Fleetie
>
> "Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:50c26dc...@davenoise.co.uk...
>> In article <hf0u6q$25ti$1...@energise.enta.net>,
>> Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
>>> > Why is that 'irrelevant'....??
>>
>>
>>> And how about *starting* a thread for a change, instead of hijacking
>>> somebody else's?
>>
>>> (Only just noticed....!!)
>>
>> Yet another example of how you think you own this group...
>
>
>
> Wot a seriously queer little fucker you are!
>
> Tell you what sonny, you have the *power* (I grant it you) - you can
> tell me to piss off *right now* and I'll go and you can have the place
> all to yourself.
>
> (Last time I threw that wide open the only one to tell me to fuck off
> was a nonentity who I suspect was Fleetie under an assumed name! :-)
Eh what?
Stop throwing my name around.
Now.
Martin
Dave Plowman (News)
Fleetie <fle...@fleetie.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > (Last time I threw that wide open the only one to tell me to fuck off
> > was a nonentity who I suspect was Fleetie under an assumed name! :-)
> Eh what?
> Stop throwing my name around.
> Now.
His paranoia gets worse by the minute.
--
*The first rule of holes: If you are in one, stop digging!
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> Tell you what sonny, you have the *power* (I grant it you) - you can
> tell me to piss off *right now* and I'll go and you can have the place
> all to yourself.
Seriously, Keith, seek treatment.
--
*If you don't pay your exorcist you get repossessed.*
Keith G
> In article <hf18gv$2m6m$1...@energise.enta.net>,
> Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Tell you what sonny, you have the *power* (I grant it you) - you can
>> tell me to piss off *right now* and I'll go and you can have the place
>> all to yourself.
>
> Seriously, Keith, seek treatment.
Forget that shit, dummy - I've just told you the same thing. (So, how about
1 out of 10 for originality?)
What you have is a genuine chance to get this place all to yourself. It's
what you want isn't it?
All you need is the bottle to pull the trigger....
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Tell you what sonny, you have the *power* (I grant it you) - you can
> >> tell me to piss off *right now* and I'll go and you can have the place
> >> all to yourself.
> >
> > Seriously, Keith, seek treatment.
> Forget that shit, dummy - I've just told you the same thing. (So, how
> about 1 out of 10 for originality?)
The difference is I mean it. Your behaviour is irrational.
> What you have is a genuine chance to get this place all to yourself.
> It's what you want isn't it?
> All you need is the bottle to pull the trigger....
Don't you think it strange behaviour to say so often as you do that you
won't take any notice of others about off topic postings etc - but then
come out with the above? It completely defies logic.
Or is it you want me to appear to be 'responsible' for you flouncing off -
again - and hope there will be an outcry from others?
But either case you're wasting your time.
--
*Young at heart -- slightly older in other places
Keith G
> In article <hf1pcg$f94$1...@energise.enta.net>,
> Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> Tell you what sonny, you have the *power* (I grant it you) - you can
>> >> tell me to piss off *right now* and I'll go and you can have the place
>> >> all to yourself.
>> >
>> > Seriously, Keith, seek treatment.
>
>
>> Forget that shit, dummy - I've just told you the same thing. (So, how
>> about 1 out of 10 for originality?)
>
> The difference is I mean it.
And you think I didn't?
Your behaviour is irrational.
>
Good coming from you - 'Mr Twisty'....
(Replied to any OT posts lately - after all your whining and bitching about
them?)
>> What you have is a genuine chance to get this place all to yourself.
>> It's what you want isn't it?
>
>> All you need is the bottle to pull the trigger....
>
> Don't you think it strange behaviour to say so often as you do that you
> won't take any notice of others about off topic postings etc - but then
> come out with the above? It completely defies logic.
>
> Or is it you want me to appear to be 'responsible' for you flouncing off -
> again - and hope there will be an outcry from others?
It really does all go on in your little pointy head, doesn't it?
There are no 'others' - your incessant efforts to piss up my legs have seen
to that and who gives a fuck anyway?
It's a simple as it looks - I don't give a fiddler's fart whether I
subscribe here or not; you seem to be obsessed with *ownership* of a public
forum (quite a clue about your state of mind in itself) - I'm happy to give
you the chance to have it all to yourself is all....
>
> But either case you're wasting your time.
Because what? Because you don't have the balls to follow up all your queer
little whining posts about my 'blogging', my 'OT posts', me not liking
'audio', my 'hatred of all things digital', my 'weird choices' and all the
other little quirks of yours that you have the gall to voice, but which I
haven't bothered to remember?
Let's face it, you really a meaningless little blowhard, aren't you?
Well, you had your chance....
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> There are no 'others' - your incessant efforts to piss up my legs have
> seen to that and who gives a fuck anyway?
When will you get it into your thick head that when you start off being
rude to people you often get paid back in the same coin? And you seem to
have fallen out with several on here. Including the likes of Mr Lesurf who
has to be pushed pretty hard to respond in kind. Yet you've managed that.
Congratulations.
> It's a simple as it looks - I don't give a fiddler's fart whether I
> subscribe here or not; you seem to be obsessed with *ownership* of a
> public forum (quite a clue about your state of mind in itself) - I'm
> happy to give you the chance to have it all to yourself is all....
You've still not answered why this appears to be the only 'forum' - btw
it's a newsgroup - you subscribe to and want to take it over as your blog.
Large fish in a small pond syndrome? There are over 30,000 out there
covering every topic you could think of. Including lots to discuss video,
motorbikes or any of the other OT subjects here.
--
*Why is a boxing ring square?
Iain Churches
> "Adrian C" <em...@here.invalid> wrote in message
>>
>> The interweb thing is pure rocket science to a lot of folk of all ages
>> and
>> abilities, and the current commonly used software out there was
>> unfortunately designed for business men and game playing geeks.
>>
> It's no good moaning to me about it, I'm not making this happen. The
> simple fact is that CD sales are falling whilst download sales are
> growing, projecting this forward suggests that, in the not too distant
> future, CD sales will have fallen below the point where record companies
> want to keep bothering with it.
And of course the profit-margin from downloads is many times that of a CD,
which has to be manufactured together with a printed inlay card, and
physically delivered to the retail outlet.
The record industry seem to think that most "mainstream" (pop and rock
catalogue) will disappear from record shops, and those that are left will
specialise in classical and jazz CDs and vinyl.
I don't know what the situation is in the UK, but this is already happening
in Scandinavia. Both Stockholm and Helsinki have excellent specialist
shops, catering for a different clientele, opening in the same area, and
in some cases next door to each other.
Recently in Stockholm I saw an early morning queue outside a record shop.
People were eagerly queuing for the limited edition (300 pressings) of the
vinyl release "Dark Side of the Moon A Capella" .
The shop had secured a delivery and these were being sold on a
first-come-first -serve, one-per-customer basis.They were all sold
when I passed by again on my return journey a couple of hours later.
No need for me to queue - I already had my copy :-)))
http://www.darksidevoices.com/buyvinyl.phtml
Iain
Keith G
"Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:FAaRm.46876$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi...
CD = In stock.
LP = Sold out.
:-)
Keith G
"Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote
<snip crap>
<snip even more *Puccinoia*>
> motorbikes or any of the other OT subjects here.
I just *love* that you are still bitching about OT posts while busily
posting to the OT threads!! :-)
What an idiot!
LOL!!
> --
> *Why is a boxing ring square?
>
> Dave Plowman
Fool
da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
> To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Desperate
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> LOL!!
Just off that chat room for geriatric swingers, again, Kitty?
--
*In "Casablanca", Humphrey Bogart never said "Play it again, Sam" *
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
Keith G
"Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
news:50c34de...@davenoise.co.uk...
> In article <hf3ksd$adk$1...@energise.enta.net>,
> Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
>> LOL!!
>
> Just off that chat room for geriatric swingers, again, Kitty?
G'wannwidja - you encouraging me to *blog*, Pucci?
And 'Geriatric' - I thought you chat room types were all busy pretending to
be teenagers with names like Heidi and Inge? (Do you prefer to be called
'Heidi', Pucci?)
Anyway, sorry to disappoint: I'm just in from running errands out on my
Harrlee and I'll be back out again shortly when I've had a bite and warmed
up a bit - trying out my new 'incontinence pants'! (Waterproof overtrousers
if anyone is really wondering!)
While I'm on - you're obviously at a bit of a loose end, why don't you
confirm some figures for me? As you well know I've been posting almost
anything and everything trying to boost the traffic in here and I've had a
quick count-up of my latest 'OT video' thread ('You can fool the ear...')
and I make it 7 (or 8?) people posted a total of 53 times in that thread,
with no less than 12 of them coming from *you*...??
Am I right?
ROTFFMAO!!
(That's 'Rolling On The Floor Freezing My Arse Off'!)
LOL!!
(That's just for Pucci, er Heidi - I know he likes them!! :-)
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> As you well know I've been posting almost
> anything and everything trying to boost the traffic in here
I'll ask again - why?
FFS, there are loads of newsgroups. Why not leave this one for the
discussion of on topic things? And join the ones for the topics you
obviously prefer to discuss than audio?
I could understand you asking an off topic question if you had a high
regard for the opinions of those who post here...
--
*Elephants are the only mammals that can't jump *
Keith G
> In article <hf5nn4$h55$1...@energise.enta.net>,
> Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
>> As you well know I've been posting almost
>> anything and everything trying to boost the traffic in here
>
> I'll ask again - why?
>
Ok, I'll tell you *again*!
Because I had been told on numerous occasions this group was *stone dead*
when I was unsubscribed. Is this not correct? It was certainly very quiet
when I returned.
Anyway, when two different people (one lurker, one current poster) said so
within the space of a couple of days, I finally hooked it up again; said
hello 'how's things?' to everybody (including you which caught you properly
on the hop and made you squirm all ugly-like, IIRC) and gaily started
throwing posts on and starting threads as and when summat came up I thought
someone would find even a tiny bit interesting, to fill out some of the
silences.
> FFS, there are loads of newsgroups. Why not leave this one for the
> discussion of on topic things?
Not everybody is all over Usenet like a rash, as you are - some people like
their online chitchat on and off topic in the one place with people they
feel they have got to know. I really can't see what all your squealing is
about - no posts in this group are compulsory reading and, especially as
traffic here is almost non-existent, why TF does it bother you so much? What
do you fear?
And join the ones for the topics you
> obviously prefer to discuss than audio?
Actually, I don't like *any* newgroups; like most of the people who frequent
them, they are superfluous, lifespan-wasting and *creepy* and 'forums' are
even creepier. This group is only a silly habit that's goes back a long way
and is all too easy to continue with - probably because you don't seem to be
able to stop replying to my posts?
Trust me, if we had an upstairs and the computer was up there and I had to
trudge up to it to use it, I wouldn't be on it twice in one day!!
(Wiki, IMDB, eBay and Amazon are plenty enough for any sane person..!! :-)
>
> I could understand you asking an off topic question if you had a high
> regard for the opinions of those who post here...
You are quite right in that I have lost my regard for one or two here - my
loss, I'm sure... ;-)
Now, forget all that shit, how about you answer my question and give me the
information I asked for?
"While I'm on - you're obviously at a bit of a loose end, why don't you
confirm some figures for me? As you well know I've been posting almost
anything and everything trying to boost the traffic in here and I've had a
quick count-up of my latest 'OT video' thread ('You can fool the ear...')
and I make it 7 (or 8?) people posted a total of 53 times in that thread,
with no less than 12 of them coming from *you*...??"
@:-)
Jim Lesurf
<da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <hf5nn4$h55$1...@energise.enta.net>, Keith G
> <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> > As you well know I've been posting almost anything and everything
> > trying to boost the traffic in here
> I'll ask again - why?
Dave, just my opinion, but, I really do think you are wasting your time and
just giving Keith more chances to present his own ego-boost that he is
somehow the 'saviour' of this group by generating loads of content-free
argument and irrelevances to what is on-topic. If other people need that,
leave them to it.
For me, the sad thing is that I suspect his behaviour deters some others
from making more informative contributions and engaging in conversations
for constructive reasons. If people respond to him he grabs that as a
reason to continue. If they don't and people have been deterred by his
behaviour he decides the group needs him as a saviour.
Keith has made plain he posts because he wants to 'win' arguments, stir
things up, and be the center of things. i.e. a troll.
Maxim 1 of usenet has been "don't feed the trolls' for ages. The reasons
being as shown in this thread and many others involving Keith. I did
repeatedly try having conversations with him on the assumption he wasn't a
troll. But in the end I found every time this was a waste of effort.
You have more patience that I, though. So if you want to press on I'll
leave you to it... :-)
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> "Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:50c35c4...@davenoise.co.uk...
> > In article <hf5nn4$h55$1...@energise.enta.net>,
> > Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> >> As you well know I've been posting almost
> >> anything and everything trying to boost the traffic in here
> >
> > I'll ask again - why?
> >
> Ok, I'll tell you *again*!
> Because I had been told on numerous occasions this group was *stone
> dead* when I was unsubscribed. Is this not correct? It was certainly
> very quiet when I returned.
So? You must be the only person who only subscribes to one news group.
Can't you get someone to show you how to add others?
If it's dead it's because those who are subscribed have nothing to say at
that point in time. But are likely active in others.
> Anyway, when two different people (one lurker, one current poster) said
> so within the space of a couple of days, I finally hooked it up again;
> said hello 'how's things?' to everybody (including you which caught you
> properly on the hop and made you squirm all ugly-like, IIRC) and gaily
> started throwing posts on and starting threads as and when summat came
> up I thought someone would find even a tiny bit interesting, to fill
> out some of the silences.
Ah. Back to the knitting circle again. Is that too quiet for you?
> > FFS, there are loads of newsgroups. Why not leave this one for the
> > discussion of on topic things?
> Not everybody is all over Usenet like a rash, as you are - some people
> like their online chitchat on and off topic in the one place with
> people they feel they have got to know.
But not love - by the way you slag off so many.
> I really can't see what all
> your squealing is about - no posts in this group are compulsory reading
> and, especially as traffic here is almost non-existent, why TF does it
> bother you so much? What do you fear?
Perhaps it's because I try and keep to the etiquette of newsgroups. Not
try and take them over like you.
> And join the ones for the topics you
> > obviously prefer to discuss than audio?
> Actually, I don't like *any* newgroups; like most of the people who
> frequent them, they are superfluous, lifespan-wasting and *creepy* and
> 'forums' are even creepier. This group is only a silly habit that's
> goes back a long way and is all too easy to continue with - probably
> because you don't seem to be able to stop replying to my posts?
Pot kettle. You've never ever been able to resist having the last word -
or trying. So I'll keep on putting my oar in just to annoy you.
> Trust me, if we had an upstairs and the computer was up there and I had
> to trudge up to it to use it, I wouldn't be on it twice in one day!!
Are you that sickly? Sorry, I didn't know. Is it sheltered accommodation
you live in?
> (Wiki, IMDB, eBay and Amazon are plenty enough for any sane person..!! :-)
> >
> > I could understand you asking an off topic question if you had a high
> > regard for the opinions of those who post here...
> You are quite right in that I have lost my regard for one or two here -
> my loss, I'm sure... ;-)
> Now, forget all that shit, how about you answer my question and give me
> the information I asked for?
What would that be? And I'm certainly not going to put myself out for you.
> "While I'm on - you're obviously at a bit of a loose end, why don't you
> confirm some figures for me? As you well know I've been posting almost
> anything and everything trying to boost the traffic in here and I've had
> a quick count-up of my latest 'OT video' thread ('You can fool the
> ear...') and I make it 7 (or 8?) people posted a total of 53 times in
> that thread, with no less than 12 of them coming from *you*...??"
Only to try and correct your rubbish.
> @:-)
> >
> > --
> > *Elephants are the only mammals that can't jump *
> >
> > Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
> > To e-mail, change noise into sound.
--
*Toilet stolen from police station. Cops have nothing to go on.
Keith G
What a childish, *childish* little twat you are and and so fucking
*stupid* - you don't realise you would almost certainly get your own way, in
your *own* little newsgroup, in the end if only you could keep your stupid
mouth shut long enough.
But not you, eh? ;-)
Proof? You will not be able to resist replying to this or any other future
post I might make!
Wake up, clown - it's so damned easy pulling your pisser it's becoming a
*chore*!!
@:-)
(I'm wearing a big, fluffy syrup these days! ;-)
Arny Krueger
> What a childish, *childish* little twat you are and and
> so fucking *stupid* - you don't realise you would almost
> certainly get your own way, in your *own* little
> newsgroup, in the end if only you could keep your stupid
> mouth shut long enough.
...and this is why some of us sigh a breath of relief when Keith again
leaves our presence...
Keith G
"Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote
> Wake up, clown - it's so damned easy pulling your pisser it's becoming a
> *chore*!!
Finally!!
Believe it or not, it is only after sending my last post and a ton of
clicking about that I have finally discovered how to *block senders* in this
somewhat strange 'Vista' version of OE!
So, for their specific information, the following are (hopefully) now
blocked in the hope that it will reduce acrimonious traffic here:
Plowman
Looser
Lesurf
Let's see if that helps the *hissy fits* here wake up to the fact that the
quickest way to get rid of someone is to ignore them...??
@:-)
Keith G
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:erednSicF6wJN4vW...@giganews.com...
Really?
Say the word, Amy - only say the word! Why do you hesitate?
Actually, you are a foreigner - I'm not sure you qualify, but all the other
whiners bleating about my posts here are either too stupid or just too
damned *egotistical* to simply ignore them!!
Anyway, I hope I have found the solution to all that now with my newly
discovered 'Vista shitter'!
(Note you are not in it yet! @:-)
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> What a childish, *childish* little twat you are and and so fucking
> *stupid*
Language, Timothy.
--
*Errors have been made. Others will be blamed.
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> Believe it or not, it is only after sending my last post and a ton of
> clicking about that I have finally discovered how to *block senders* in
> this somewhat strange 'Vista' version of OE!
Pity you ever discovered the send button.
But of course you'll read every post to see what is being said about you.
And it just shows your enormous ego - thinking others care if you read
their posts or not...
--
*I pretend to work. - they pretend to pay me.
Adrian C
> So, for their specific information, the following are (hopefully) now
> blocked in the hope that it will reduce acrimonious traffic here:
>
> Plowman
> Looser
> Lesurf
>
Can you add me as well?
--
Adrian C
Keith G
"Adrian C" <em...@here.invalid> wrote in message
Yep - done! Any more?
@:-)
Iain Churches
"Michael Chare" <Munders...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
news:zbadnVgKIYgorY3W...@pipex.net...
> However unfortunately the music has clearly been taken from a some what
> scratchy record.
>
No excuse for such a thing these days. Systems such as Cedar have been
around for a generation now. With care, superb clean transcriptions can
be made from very poor pressings indeed.
Hopefully you will bring this to the attention of the suppliers, or they
will never know that their work is sub-standard.
Iain.
Iain Churches
>> http://www.darksidevoices.com/buyvinyl.phtml
>>
>
>
> CD = In stock.
> LP = Sold out.
>
> :-)
Indeed:-)
Iain
Michael Chare
I did not do that, but I found the album that I wanted on Songs.sky.com.
The FAQ on that web sites says that music is mp3 and may be 192 or 320 kbps.
What it does not tell you is the format of any particular album, so you
don't know what you are getting until you have bought it.
I thought that Sky ought to know better than that so I rang up to ask if
they could answer this question on the phone.
The response was that they could not, and that it is only a 'beta' web
site, and they are trying to find out how much business they can attract.
--
Michael Chare
Dave Plowman (News)
Carry on this way and the only posts he'll be reading will be his own.
Come to think of it...
--
*The longest recorded flightof a chicken is thirteen seconds *
Jim Lesurf
<Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> > LP = Sold out.
> >
> > :-)
> Indeed:-)
Seems strange to me if you are pleased that the LP is unavailable now you
have a copy. But then I tend to acquire recordings to enjoy listeing to the
music. Not for the sake of feeling I have 'collected' some item that is
'rare' and others might desire but be unable to obtain.
Jim Lesurf
FWIW It suites me if he wants to ignore my postings as I decided some time
ago there was no point in saying anything to him. His action just confirms
that. But I suspect in time he will start making 'asides' and then later
restart reading and responding if he wants to generate more arguments to
'win'. :-)
Iain Churches
"Jim Lesurf" <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:50c3c71...@audiomisc.co.uk...
> In article <2FARm.47305$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi>, Iain Churches
> <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>
>> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:hf3jad$7uh$1...@energise.enta.net...
>> >
>> > "Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
>
>> >> http://www.darksidevoices.com/buyvinyl.phtml
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > CD = In stock.
>
>> > LP = Sold out.
>
>> >
>> > :-)
>> Indeed:-)
>
> Seems strange to me if you are pleased that the LP is unavailable now you
> have a copy. But then I tend to acquire recordings to enjoy listeing to
> the
> music. Not for the sake of feeling I have 'collected' some item that is
> 'rare' and others might desire but be unable to obtain.
Jim. I wrote a single word "Indeed" and you managed a negative,
and totally incorrect interpretation :-(
If you want to "acquire recordings to enjoy listening to the music"
you can still buy the CD:-)
No-one these days wants to bother with vinyl (rifle shots and breakast
cereals, snap crackle pop)
Or do they?
The fact that the vinyl pressings were sold out on the day of release,
and the CD is still available many months later speaks volumes:-)
Compare the limited edition vinyl pressings with the equivalent CD
(Count Basie/Ray Charles, is a good example) and you will find out why.
Regards
Iain
Don Pearce
<Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>The fact that the vinyl pressings were sold out on the day of release,
>and the CD is still available many months later speaks volumes:-)
What is speaks volumes about is probably the relative quantities of
each that are produced. The manufacturers know that the CD will go on
selling in the long term, while the vinyl will be snapped up quickly
by the enthusiast, then stop dead.
d
Keith G
"Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote
> No-one these days wants to bother with vinyl (rifle shots and breakast
> cereals, snap crackle pop)
>
> Or do they?
>
> The fact that the vinyl pressings were sold out on the day of release,
> and the CD is still available many months later speaks volumes:-)
>
> Compare the limited edition vinyl pressings with the equivalent CD
> (Count Basie/Ray Charles, is a good example) and you will find out why.
The simple truth is that all the *enthusiasm* for audio and music lies with
the (valves and) vinyl brigade as even a cursory trawl through the Net will
very quickly show - start with eBay's completed listings and find a recent
Thorens TD124 MkII deck (listed as a Beogram 3000) that went for about 800
quid when Yamaha DSP *FX boxes* need 6 bids to reach a *heady* �12.50 if
they sell at all..!!
@:-)
Keith G
Actually, seeing Don's *digitally defensive* remark just now prompts me to
add that, other than in this queer little *digicentric* newsgroup, there is
no actual competition between CD and LPs out in the real world with real
people and, indeed, many 'vinylistas' will buy both - one for serious,
appreciative listening and one for 'rough and ready' or playing in the car
or somesuch.
(I leave you to guess which way round!! ;-)
Iain Churches
> Actually, seeing Don's *digitally defensive* remark just now prompts me to
> add that, other than in this queer little *digicentric* newsgroup, there
> is no actual competition between CD and LPs out in the real world with
> real people and, indeed, many 'vinylistas' will buy both - one for
> serious, appreciative listening and one for 'rough and ready' or playing
> in the car or somesuch.
>
> (I leave you to guess which way round!! ;-)
>
It's interesting to buy one of each for comparison. Sometimes there
is little to choose between them musically. But quite often I prefer
the way the vinyl has been presented. Once again I quote
Basie/Ray Charles as a comparison.
I dislike the overall mastering compression and EQ so common
on CD's which pushes the vocalist back into the band", but I
can appreciate why it is done, and that it probably sounds OK
on the iPod or in the car.
Iain
Keith G
>
> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:hf8bpj$1ju9$1...@energise.enta.net...
>
>> Actually, seeing Don's *digitally defensive* remark just now prompts me
>> to add that, other than in this queer little *digicentric* newsgroup,
>> there is no actual competition between CD and LPs out in the real world
>> with real people and, indeed, many 'vinylistas' will buy both - one for
>> serious, appreciative listening and one for 'rough and ready' or playing
>> in the car or somesuch.
>>
>> (I leave you to guess which way round!! ;-)
>>
>
> It's interesting to buy one of each for comparison.
But not cheap with modern, current pressings vinyl!!
Sometimes there
> is little to choose between them musically.
Dire Straits 'Brothers In Arms' CD and LP - I defy you to split them if you
have a nice, quiet (probably MC) cart which is what a lot of the 'rice
crispies & rifle shot brigade' know nothing about.
But quite often I prefer
> the way the vinyl has been presented. Once again I quote
> Basie/Ray Charles as a comparison.
Christ, listening to jazz on CD is worse than....
than....
WTF, it's just plain *loopy* and is the quickest way to bleach the *flavour*
out of the whole experience!!
>
> I dislike the overall mastering compression and EQ so common
> on CD's which pushes the vocalist back into the band", but I
> can appreciate why it is done, and that it probably sounds OK
> on the iPod or in the car.
Exactly.
(Still no Amazonians....)
Jim Lesurf
<Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> "Jim Lesurf" <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:50c3c71...@audiomisc.co.uk...
>
> >> > CD = In stock.
> >
> >> > LP = Sold out.
> >> Indeed:-)
> >
> > Seems strange to me if you are pleased that the LP is unavailable now
> > you have a copy. But then I tend to acquire recordings to enjoy
> > listeing to the music. Not for the sake of feeling I have 'collected'
> > some item that is 'rare' and others might desire but be unable to
> > obtain.
> Jim. I wrote a single word "Indeed" and you managed a negative, and
> totally incorrect interpretation :-(
OK. So my 'if' statement returned FALSE. :-)
> If you want to "acquire recordings to enjoy listening to the music" you
> can still buy the CD:-)
> No-one these days wants to bother with vinyl (rifle shots and breakast
> cereals, snap crackle pop)
> Or do they?
I assume that is a rhetorical question for the purposes of debate. :-)
> The fact that the vinyl pressings were sold out on the day of release,
> and the CD is still available many months later speaks volumes:-)
Hard to know what 'volumes' it speaks unless you know the 'volumes' of the
numbers of each type produced or sold. 10 LPs might sell out faster than
10,000 CDs. So unless you know the numbers it is unclear what it means
beyond "some people bought the LP". And of course they may be pressing
batches of CDs to maintain stock, anyway. But either way, if the format
someone wants is 'sold out' then that is something to regret since they are
denied their personal choice.
> Compare the limited edition vinyl pressings with the equivalent CD
> (Count Basie/Ray Charles, is a good example) and you will find out why.
Afraid I can't comment on that example as I've not heard either version and
have no idea of how many of each format were made or sold. Presumably it
would be a marketing decision if you make a 'limited edition' to sound
different to another edition. I can appreciate why producers like doing
that. :-) ...even if it is a PITA for people who just like well-produced
music.
Must admit I have bought the first four 'new' CDs of the Beatles 'LPs'
primarily because they are 'stereo' <sic> whereas the orginal CDs are mono.
Plus, of course, having the old LPs (stereo and mono in most cases).
The closest I can get is two recent examples.
One was a Jimi Hendrix set sold as an 'audiophile' purchase 8 LP box
compared with 4 CDs. This despite having *fewer* songs on the LPs so as to
allow for very wide spiral pitch. Despite the high price, hype, etc, it
showed clips and pops, and noticable off-center wow on some sides. So
interesting, but hardly an advert for LP. The parts without the audible
problems sound fine. But you'd think they could have bothered to take more
care for the price, hype, etc.
The other was a Queen double LP and CD. There the LPs didn't have the
clipping imposed on the CDs by the industry idiocy with obsessively
relentless loudness. Interestingly, here the label was EMI IIRC yet they'd
done a better job on the LPs than the CDs.
So in terms of preference for 'sound' you could choose your examples to
argue irrelevantly about format. The reality in both cases was that it was
how well the items were produced/manufactured that determined the results.
Given the familiar problems with the way music companies poorly produce
physical output it is a lottery either way.
But how many of either issue, in either format, were made/sold I have no
idea. Nor do I have any idea if any of the above are still available.
TBH I don't mind which was more 'popular'. My interest would be in them
being well made, and then produced in sufficient quantity for all those who
want to have their preference. Hence I'm not really a fan of the sales
technique of the 'limited edition'. Particularly when it smells of selling
to people on the basis that they want to be 'in the club' or fearing they
would 'miss the boat' and so shell out more cash. Or selling as a 'rare
collectable' to people who won't even break the shrink-wrap.Thus maximising
profits by exploiting buyers, and leaving others unable to choose what
they'd prefer.
The Queen set was a friend's and I examined it out of curiosity as they
aren't a special favourite of mine, despite having met Brian May years ago
at an observatory. :-) The Hendrix is more to my taste, and I prefer the
CDs in this case. Mind you, I prefer some older versions of his CDs like a
USA box set that has almost no 'global' level compression compared with
more modern versions. Alas, the best set in those terms also has a 'DJ'
talking over some parts as it is a set designed for playing on US radio
stations, I guess.
Iain Churches
>
> "Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
> news:uFORm.47469$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi...
>>
>> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:hf8bpj$1ju9$1...@energise.enta.net...
>>
>>> Actually, seeing Don's *digitally defensive* remark just now prompts me
>>> to add that, other than in this queer little *digicentric* newsgroup,
>>> there is no actual competition between CD and LPs out in the real world
>>> with real people and, indeed, many 'vinylistas' will buy both - one for
>>> serious, appreciative listening and one for 'rough and ready' or playing
>>> in the car or somesuch.
>>>
>>> (I leave you to guess which way round!! ;-)
>>>
>>
>> It's interesting to buy one of each for comparison.
>
>
> But not cheap with modern, current pressings vinyl!!
But still worth doing.
Enquiring minds need to know:-)
>
>
> Sometimes there
>> is little to choose between them musically.
>
>
> Dire Straits 'Brothers In Arms' CD and LP - I defy you to split them if
> you have a nice, quiet (probably MC) cart
There are a great number of instances where this is so.
Good CD mastering is possible.
> But quite often I prefer
>> the way the vinyl has been presented. Once again I quote
>> Basie/Ray Charles as a comparison.
>
>
> Christ, listening to jazz on CD is worse than....
FWIW I find that jazz CDs are well mastered.
>
> than....
>
> WTF, it's just plain *loopy* and is the quickest way to bleach the
> *flavour* out of the whole experience!!
CD has none of the pitfalls with which cutting engineers were
faced on a daily basis, so the possibility of being able produce an
accurate CD is much better. But, it seems, this is not what people
want:-(
>
>
>>
>> I dislike the overall mastering compression and EQ so common
>> on CD's which pushes the vocalist back into the band", but I
>> can appreciate why it is done, and that it probably sounds OK
>> on the iPod or in the car.
>
> Exactly.
I use my iPod when out with the dog on a long walk. Two birds with
one stone. I put the music I am learning on "loop"
Just a couple of days ago I got talking to another customer in a record
shop - we were looking through the same vinyl. He told me that
he had a pair of Leak TL12 amps, and B+W monitors.
I said "I have a valve amp too" too which he replied, "It's nice to
meet another serious listener.
:))
Iain
Dave Plowman (News)
Iain Churches <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> No-one these days wants to bother with vinyl (rifle shots and breakast
> cereals, snap crackle pop)
> Or do they?
> The fact that the vinyl pressings were sold out on the day of release,
> and the CD is still available many months later speaks volumes:-)
Speculation on a limited edition?
> Compare the limited edition vinyl pressings with the equivalent CD
> (Count Basie/Ray Charles, is a good example) and you will find out why.
Are you joining Kitty and endowing vinyl with some magical properties - or
is this just yet another example of poor mastering?
--
*I have a degree in liberal arts -- do you want fries with that
Dave Plowman (News)
Iain Churches <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> It's interesting to buy one of each for comparison. Sometimes there
> is little to choose between them musically. But quite often I prefer
> the way the vinyl has been presented. Once again I quote
> Basie/Ray Charles as a comparison.
> I dislike the overall mastering compression and EQ so common
> on CD's which pushes the vocalist back into the band", but I
> can appreciate why it is done, and that it probably sounds OK
> on the iPod or in the car.
Must be rolling in money. If the vinyl version is better mastered than the
CD I'd just burn a CD off it for car etc use. I certainly wouldn't pay
good money for a crap version. But perhaps that's too technical for vinyl
enthusiasts.
--
*They call it PMS because Mad Cow Disease was already taken.
Keith G
>
> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:hf8fab$1ph1$1...@energise.enta.net...
>>
>> "Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
>> news:uFORm.47469$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi...
>>>
>>> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:hf8bpj$1ju9$1...@energise.enta.net...
>>>
>>>> Actually, seeing Don's *digitally defensive* remark just now prompts me
>>>> to add that, other than in this queer little *digicentric* newsgroup,
>>>> there is no actual competition between CD and LPs out in the real world
>>>> with real people and, indeed, many 'vinylistas' will buy both - one for
>>>> serious, appreciative listening and one for 'rough and ready' or
>>>> playing
>>>> in the car or somesuch.
>>>>
>>>> (I leave you to guess which way round!! ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's interesting to buy one of each for comparison.
>>
>>
>> But not cheap with modern, current pressings vinyl!!
>
> But still worth doing.
> Enquiring minds need to know:-)
Not at nearly 30 quid a slice they don't!! :-)
>> Dire Straits 'Brothers In Arms' CD and LP - I defy you to split them if
>> you have a nice, quiet (probably MC) cart
>
> There are a great number of instances where this is so.
> Good CD mastering is possible.
Of course, but with 'digital' when is it ever really about quality first and
foremost?
> FWIW I find that jazz CDs are well mastered.
Got a few here - never listen to them other than as MP3s on the computer
like right now, but that's a Getz track that from the album I think you
should hear.
You could play straight over many of these tracks already - like this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/04%20O%20Morro%20Nao%20Tem%20Vez.mp3
(Not declicked - doesn't need it for speakers, IME)
> I use my iPod when out with the dog on a long walk. Two birds with
> one stone. I put the music I am learning on "loop"
See above - headphones and/or good 'buds' are not really a vinyl
transcription to digital's best friend!!
>
> I said "I have a valve amp too" too which he replied, "It's nice to
> meet another serious listener.
>
> :))
I was talking to 'The Cartridge Man' a few years ago and he said summat
about amps - I said 'Valves, I take it?'; his reply was along the lines *Of
course bloody valves*!! and the 'WTF else, dickhead (or similar)' hung
*unsaid* in the air for a few moments!!
@:-)
Jim Lesurf
<Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> CD has none of the pitfalls with which cutting engineers were faced on a
> daily basis, so the possibility of being able produce an accurate CD is
> much better. But, it seems, this is not what people want:-(
...or rather this is what many of those who produce CDs *assume* "people
want*. So impose without giving us a choice in the matter.
I can't recall being systematically offerred a choice by the industry
between two versions of a CD. One 'clipped and compressed to the innustry
delusion' and the other without this being imposed, so having no clipping
and no excessive compression for the sake of obsessive loudness.
When people have clearly been given - in a clear and openly declared way -
a choice, and given this on enough occasions with enough variety of music
to assess, then we might be able to decide if the delusion stands up to
scrutiny.
I'm afraid that I have zero confidence in the assertions of industry
'experts' who presume 'people want' heavy compression and clipping and
treat anyone with an interest in popular music as a dimwit infant. Nor any
opinions obtained from clueless 'focus groups', 'gurus', etc, etc.
> Just a couple of days ago I got talking to another customer in a record
> shop - we were looking through the same vinyl. He told me that he had a
> pair of Leak TL12 amps, and B+W monitors.
> I said "I have a valve amp too" too which he replied, "It's nice to meet
> another serious listener.
Strange. I gave up seriously listening to amplifiers some years ago. I
prefer to enjoy the music. :-)
Dave Plowman (News)
Keith G <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote:
> > There are a great number of instances where this is so.
> > Good CD mastering is possible.
> Of course, but with 'digital' when is it ever really about quality first
> and foremost?
Methinks Kitty doesn't realise pretty well all modern vinyl releases will
have been digitally mastered. Apart from those for the loonies, obviously.
--
*One nice thing about egotists: they don't talk about other people.
Michael Chare
>
> The simple truth is that all the *enthusiasm* for audio and music lies
> with the (valves and) vinyl brigade as even a cursory trawl through the
> Net will very quickly show - start with eBay's completed listings and find
> a recent Thorens TD124 MkII deck (listed as a Beogram 3000) that went for
> about 800 quid when Yamaha DSP *FX boxes* need 6 bids to reach a *heady*
> �12.50 if they sell at all..!!
>
That is an interesting comment!
I've got a TD124 with a TP14 tone arm in my attic. I never thought of it
having much value!
--
Michael Chare
David Looser
But I totally disagree with the notion that a willingness to pay an insane
amount of money for an old turntable indicates an enthusiasm for audio, let
alone music. Rather it's a desire to wind the clock back to the days when a
"HiFi" system was a status symbol. These days audio systems of a very
acceptable quality are affordable by almost everybody. So how is the audio
fetishist to get back the kudos that owning a HiFi system gave in the past?
Simple, just collect old kit, stuff that isn't made any more, and pay
through the nose for it.
David.
Keith G
"Michael Chare" <Munders...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
news:hf9g6h$at4$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
I can't find that completed auction which is annoying because I had it in my
eBay up 'til a few days ago! It was in America, pristine and had a superb
B&O tonearm with a good needle on it and it went for 1,200 USD = about 800
quid, IIRC. You might still be able to find it - it was definitely badged as
a Beogram 3000.
If yours is a Mk 1 it's worth anything from 250 quid as a pile of parts to
500 quid and beyond on a good day - tonearm excluded. The tonearm can make a
big difference depending what it is on these decks!
Check this one out (third one down):
http://www.hifisupply.co.uk/used.html
It seem's it's in shit order with bits missing and they still want 450 quid
for it!
If you were selling yours, I'd have it like a shot but I've just had a
splurge on a new DLP projector - email me anyway if you want to cash it up,
maybe I could mug another passing OAP on her way back from the Post Office!
@:-)
Iain Churches
"Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
news:50c3eba...@davenoise.co.uk...
> Are you joining Kitty
Sorry, I don't know anyone of that name.
> and endowing vinyl with some magical properties
I have cut enough masters (cutting ID -11W)
to know the answer.
- or
> is this just yet another example of poor mastering?
You seem to need to pontificate without even
taking the time and trouble to familiarise yourself with
the production in question.
Get a vinyl pressing and the CD and decide for yourself.
The Basie/Ray Charles is just one of a string of examples.
Most people would be happy with the CD until they hear
the vinyl. That's the point:-)
Iain
Iain Churches
> In article <BPPRm.47509$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi>, Iain Churches
> <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>
>> CD has none of the pitfalls with which cutting engineers were faced on a
>> daily basis, so the possibility of being able produce an accurate CD is
>> much better. But, it seems, this is not what people want:-(
>
> ...or rather this is what many of those who produce CDs *assume* "people
> want*. So impose without giving us a choice in the matter.
It's what the majority seem to (think they) want.
But Jim, it was only fairly recently that you actually
became aware of this when I pointed it out to you:-)
I remember at the time you doubted my word, but subsequently
found the situation to be exactly as I had described it. It's not a
new phenomenon. I wonder how it has escaped your attention
for more than 25 years?
>
> I can't recall being systematically offerred a choice by the industry
> between two versions of a CD. One 'clipped and compressed to the innustry
> delusion' and the other without this being imposed, so having no clipping
> and no excessive compression for the sake of obsessive loudness.
If you hadn't even noticed, why should anyone "systematically offer"
you anything?
Before too long, download sites will be offering not only 320kbs but
also lower bitrate transfers at lower cost.
> When people have clearly been given - in a clear and openly declared way -
> a choice, and given this on enough occasions with enough variety of music
> to assess, then we might be able to decide if the delusion stands up to
> scrutiny.
Members of the public could put the record straight (no pun intended)
at a stroke if say 10 000 copies of a CD were rejected by them..
Returns are incredibly low, which the industry takes as a signal of
satisfaction from the consumer.
> I'm afraid that I have zero confidence in the assertions of industry
> 'experts' who presume 'people want' heavy compression and clipping and
> treat anyone with an interest in popular music as a dimwit infant. Nor any
> opinions obtained from clueless 'focus groups', 'gurus', etc, etc.
They are probably as expert and well-qualified in their field as you
are in yours. I think you would not be pleased to have your university
activities described as a "guru in a focus group" so why do you wish
to denigrate others by the attachment of inapproriate and derogatory
labels? I note that you have had a singular lack of success in your
attempts at discussion with people at EMI etc, even after I supplied
you with an ex-directory number. Why should that be?
Perhaps the answer lies in the paragraph you wrote above.
Iain
Iain Churches
> In article <uFORm.47469$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
> Iain Churches <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>> It's interesting to buy one of each for comparison. Sometimes there
>> is little to choose between them musically. But quite often I prefer
>> the way the vinyl has been presented. Once again I quote
>> Basie/Ray Charles as a comparison.
>
>> I dislike the overall mastering compression and EQ so common
>> on CD's which pushes the vocalist back into the band", but I
>> can appreciate why it is done, and that it probably sounds OK
>> on the iPod or in the car.
>
> Must be rolling in money.
It's tax deductible:-)
> If the vinyl version is better mastered than the
> CD ........
But if you have never made the comparison, how would
you know? :-)
> I'd just burn a CD off it for car etc use.
That's what most people do. They use the same CD for
critical listening too.
It's interesting also to play the two CD's, the transcription
from the vinyl and the released version, peak level matched, �
to people and ask which they prefer. Usually, at first, they
pick the commercial CD. Louder is better. Then if they
are interested to listen a little deeper they start to hear the
differences (shortcomings) which the are the price of
producing a louder product.
> I certainly wouldn't pay
> good money for a crap version.
But, you are doing precisely that a great deal of the time:-)
Iain
Jim Lesurf
<b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <50c3dd2...@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> > Must admit I have bought the first four 'new' CDs of the Beatles 'LPs'
> > primarily because they are 'stereo' <sic> whereas the orginal CDs are
> > mono. Plus, of course, having the old LPs (stereo and mono in most
> > cases).
> I am surprised Jim. Of all pop bands, I would have had you down as a
> Status Quo man.
Afraid that - as with many other rock/pop acts - I've tended to find that
their 'songs' tend to seem repetitive and similar. The idea is to
presumably keep hacking out a 'winning formula'.
I think I do have one Status Quo 45 somewhere. That would suffice, I
think. :-)
Jim Lesurf
<Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> "Jim Lesurf" <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:50c3eb7...@audiomisc.co.uk...
> > In article <BPPRm.47509$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi>, Iain Churches
> > <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> >
> >> CD has none of the pitfalls with which cutting engineers were faced
> >> on a daily basis, so the possibility of being able produce an
> >> accurate CD is much better. But, it seems, this is not what people
> >> want:-(
> >
> > ...or rather this is what many of those who produce CDs *assume*
> > "people want*. So impose without giving us a choice in the matter.
> It's what the majority seem to (think they) want.
Well, I can't tell if it is the majority of those who produce 'popular'
CDs, but it does seem fairly common.
> But Jim, it was only fairly recently that you actually became aware of
> this when I pointed it out to you:-) I remember at the time you doubted
> my word,
Afraid you'd have to quote back where you think I "doubt" that CDs were
level compressed or clipped. I can't recall what you assert there. But I
agree that since I've not bought many popular CDs in recent decades the
development of excessive compression and clipping had passed me by!
> but subsequently found the situation to be exactly as I had
> described it. It's not a new phenomenon. I wonder how it has escaped
> your attention for more than 25 years?
IIRC I did explain at the time. So either your memory is playing tricks on
you, or you are trying to score debating points. Perhaps if I point out
that I'd been buying classical and jazz CDs, and that these tend not to be
affected in the same way you will recall my previously saying that.
> >
> > I can't recall being systematically offerred a choice by the industry
> > between two versions of a CD. One 'clipped and compressed to the
> > innustry delusion' and the other without this being imposed, so having
> > no clipping and no excessive compression for the sake of obsessive
> > loudness.
> If you hadn't even noticed, why should anyone "systematically offer" you
> anything?
I'm afraid your comment shows the source of the problem.
With pop material which has no acoustic original that the purchasers will
be using as a reference, how can they tell *if* they are denied a chance to
hear two versions of the same source recordings - one highly level
compressed and clipped, the other not?
If you have missed the point as your question shows, I'd suggest you
re-read what I wrote above (and you quoted) with more care as you have
missed the vital point. You have also forgotten that I wasn't buying and
listening to popular CDs so wasn't hearing what they were like.
> > When people have clearly been given - in a clear and openly declared
> > way - a choice, and given this on enough occasions with enough variety
> > of music to assess, then we might be able to decide if the delusion
> > stands up to scrutiny.
> Members of the public could put the record straight (no pun intended) at
> a stroke if say 10 000 copies of a CD were rejected by them.. Returns
> are incredibly low, which the industry takes as a signal of satisfaction
> from the consumer.
I agree with your last point. Yes, if you give people no alternative and no
comparisons you can, indeed, go on selling them poorer quality in the
confidence that they may not realise what they are missing. And people may
buy poor copies to get content they wish when no better version is
available. I've more than once bought a second-hand magazine or book to
read the content, even when it was torn or faded and so hard to read.
> > I'm afraid that I have zero confidence in the assertions of industry
> > 'experts' who presume 'people want' heavy compression and clipping and
> > treat anyone with an interest in popular music as a dimwit infant. Nor
> > any opinions obtained from clueless 'focus groups', 'gurus', etc, etc.
> They are probably as expert and well-qualified in their field as you are
> in yours.
Yes, in many cases I am sure they are well qualified. Indeed, from
classical and jazz CDs I'd say that the evidence shows there are many
excellent people in the field. I would also expect (as I think you have
yourself said) that some only apply compression, etc, when told to do so by
someone else.
But in fields like rock/pop the *evidence* in the form of applied level
compression, clipping, and a clear obsession with loudness shows otherwise
for the popular fields. In such cases it become irrelevant to the customers
that the producers would have known how to not apply this compression or
clip. They are given Hobson's Choice and not even told what has been
decided on their behalf.
> I think you would not be pleased to have your university
> activities described as a "guru in a focus group" so why do you wish to
> denigrate others by the attachment of inapproriate and derogatory
> labels?
I'm afraid that as an academic scientist I have to judge by the evidence.
In this case by the products - the CDs produced. Science isn't about
accepting what someone says because they are 'qualified' or wear a white
coat. Most of the CDs I have are good to superb in quality and are clearly
well produced. But as I have explained previously, only a small fraction of
them are pop/rock CDs bought in the last decade or two. In that area
problems seem rather more common.
I appreciate that the people who apply compression or clipping may be doing
so in the genuine belief that this is what 'people want'. Indeed, I assume
some people do. But until we have some genuine comparisons that have
relevance their belief has no testable basis and they are just imposing
their belief system on purchasers without even telling them - let alone
giving them an alternative.
Although I do realise they are given them the same alternative as PJW used
to give potential customers of his 33/303. When someone complained that
they didn't like the marigold colour his reaction was along the lines of
"well sod off and buy from someone else, then!" :-)
Of course, that's fine given competing amps of a different colour. But not
much good if your preferred artist is on one label.
> I note that you have had a singular lack of success in your
> attempts at discussion with people at EMI etc, even after I supplied you
> with an ex-directory number. Why should that be? Perhaps the answer lies
> in the paragraph you wrote above.
Afraid you are now drifting into irrelevances and debating ploys. Again
your memory seems to be failing you as we did discuss this here at the
time.
I'm sorry that you find it so hard to accept. But the reality is that we
have to judge the people who produce CDs, LPs, etc by the products they
output. I don't know their motives, but you and others say it is because
they think 'loudness sells'. I can then only point out that they haven't -
so far as I know - done any controlled experiments to establish this. If
you know of any such, please tell me where we can find the results and
examine them for method and statistical reliability.
Saying 'people buy the results' could just as easily be used to dismiss LPs
sales on the basis that vastly more people buy CD. However if a given item
is only available on one format, in one form, then people are given no
basis for comparison. It become 'like it or lump it'.
Dave Plowman (News)
Iain Churches <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> "Dave Plowman (News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:50c3eba...@davenoise.co.uk...
> > Are you joining Kitty
> Sorry, I don't know anyone of that name.
He's the one who loves calling people by nicknames so merely following his
lead.
> > and endowing vinyl with some magical properties
> I have cut enough masters (cutting ID -11W)
> to know the answer.
Another non answer.
> - or
> > is this just yet another example of poor mastering?
> You seem to need to pontificate without even
> taking the time and trouble to familiarise yourself with
> the production in question.
Principles are principles, Iain. I thought you at least would have a grasp
of them.
> Get a vinyl pressing and the CD and decide for yourself.
To prove what?
> The Basie/Ray Charles is just one of a string of examples.
> Most people would be happy with the CD until they hear
> the vinyl. That's the point:-)
The point seems to be your industry is in a mess. Falling standards.
Sadly all too common these days.
--
*Ham and Eggs: Just a day's work for a chicken, but a lifetime commitment
David Looser
>
> It wasn't their music I thought would suite you, it was their name. :-)
>
Really? an odd comment. Care to explain what you meant by it?
David.
David Looser
>
> The point seems to be your industry is in a mess. Falling standards.
> Sadly all too common these days.
>
It certainly is a mess, though ISTM that standards in the rock/pop field
have always been low. I remember reading a letter to "Studio Sound" many
years before the CD was even a twinkle in Philips' and Sony's eyes, that the
industry obsession with loudness resulted in many 45s being cut at such a
high level that they mistracked when played on the cheap record players that
most of the target market would own. The response from a mastering engineer
was to the effect that that was what the producers wanted, and the producer
was king.
Nowadays we are told that CDs must be mastered at such a high level at to
actually clip "because that is what the market demands". But that LPs can be
cut at a much more reasonable level. Why, if the market demands "loud" do
the LPs not need to be "load". It makes no sense.
David.
Jim Lesurf
<b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <50c44b1...@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <50c445...@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
> > <b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> > > In article <50c3dd2...@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> > > <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > Must admit I have bought the first four 'new' CDs of the Beatles
> > > > 'LPs' primarily because they are 'stereo' <sic> whereas the
> > > > orginal CDs are mono. Plus, of course, having the old LPs (stereo
> > > > and mono in most cases).
> > > I am surprised Jim. Of all pop bands, I would have had you down as a
> > > Status Quo man.
> > Afraid that - as with many other rock/pop acts - I've tended to find
> > that their 'songs' tend to seem repetitive and similar. The idea is to
> > presumably keep hacking out a 'winning formula'.
> > I think I do have one Status Quo 45 somewhere. That would suffice, I
> > think. :-)
> Okay, OK, so it wasn't that funny.
> It wasn't their music I thought would suite you, it was their name. :-)
Well, given what I've said, it probably does represent an example of my
approach to any 'Status Quo' that exists merely because people believe it.
:-)
As distinct from basing views on testable evidence which you study and
understand.
Dave Plowman (News)
David Looser <david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Nowadays we are told that CDs must be mastered at such a high level at
> to actually clip "because that is what the market demands". But that
> LPs can be cut at a much more reasonable level. Why, if the market
> demands "loud" do the LPs not need to be "load". It makes no sense.
Gives those vinyl nuts a reason to say 'I told you so' and justification
to pay the premium over a CD.
With drastically falling CD sales perhaps we'll get a 'premium' product
which has been mastered properly?
--
*I have my own little world - but it's OK...they know me here*
Jim Lesurf
<b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <50c45a1...@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> <no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> > Well, given what I've said, it probably does represent an example of
> > my approach to any 'Status Quo' that exists merely because people
> > believe it.
> > :-)
> > As distinct from basing views on testable evidence which you study and
> > understand.
> Perhaps in the future you will enjoy Arctic Monkeys. :-)
The way things are going, that seems unlikely. Looks like too
many people prefer Madness! >8-]
Rob
Told you so!
(Vinyl Nut)