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


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

He might not like the touch of the keyboard.

Guaranteed!

He surely knows what exists and what he wants.

That's why there will be a Bosendorfer there.

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

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

They probably don't have Bosdendorfer either

Arny. I was pulling your leg.

I know it's not easy for you on a UK group, but do
try to keep up, there's a good chap:-)



Iain.

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...


And you are then free to use that as you choose. So might both have a
96k/24bit version to play on any computer-based system you own, or
generate DVDs to play on your own players, or CDs, or make mp3s or
aacs or whatever *you* use for your *own* listening. An end to 'now
buy another version'.

Understood. But these are all separate products.

Yes, that is how the media companies tend to see it. However the reality is
that the buyer/customer wants the *music*. The company then tries to turn
that into the 'container' being what is sold - or even being 'rented' in
terms David exampled.

When you go to a shoe shop, do you ask for a pair of brogues in black,
size nine, and expect them to include a pair in brown, and another in
beige for the same price?

No more than when I buy one CD I expect to take home all the others in the
shop. But I do expect to be able to play the CD on any device that can play
a CD. I want the music, not the shop.

And as I've pointed out to David, I think the media companies have painted
themselves into a corner on this. It isn't an 'accident' that they are all
in trouble wrt music and that many people simply pass around 'free' mp3s,
etc. People are simply not falling any more for the ways the big companies
try to use the 'container' to control access *to the same content over and
over again*.

Remember that one of the main reasons Sony+Philips promoted SACD was that
their revenue stream from CDDA was ending and they needed a new 'format'
they could charge everyone else for. *Customers* didn't 'need' this as they
could have been sold LPCM files on a DVD. It flopped as a commercial
mass-market item.


Maybe even, "choose to buy the CD and it comes with either a DVD with
high rez lpcm wave files or a code to download the hi rez version
whenever you choose". On of the snags of downloading is the lack of a
good booklet and having to put a copy onto CDR/DVDR if you want
something off HD to 'own'.

It's more than a snag, it's a major disadvantage, and something that
companies producing vinyl have used to greatly enhance the PQ of their
product.. I received a review copy of a privately produced 2LP jazz set
with a thick 12" booklet with text and photos, probably worth the price
of the whole package.

Indeed. One of my main points is that I think music companies have missed a
trick here in assuming 'high rez' means 'downloads'. I'd certainly pay a
few quid more for a DVD with LPCM Wave files in a box with a good booklet,
etc. I doubt I'm alone. And I can see that those who won't pay anyway won't
be giving the companies any cash regardless.

And once someone (or their friend) as 'lost' their DRM'd music collection
in a computer crash they won't be pleased to be expected to go though that
again! Particularly when they see others simply doing better by avoiding
DRM. It is the *music companies* who have tied these issues together in
their anxiety to stop the future.

The problem is that the old-fashioned thinking of the larger companies is
stuck in the stone-age when they *could* control what 'formats' people used
to flog the same *music* again and again. The walls started to crumble with
musicassette, but have now vanished in practice. The only limits nowdays as
the conscience of the user on the one hand and 'big stick' laws which just
anger most people - thus losing the big companies any support or sympathy.


Looking at Linnrecords the thought I kept having was "why not given
the option to buy a CD plus a DVD with the 88k/24 or 192k/24 wave/flac
version, all in a nice CD case with the booklet?"

No DRM or 'rights management'. They just get in the way of honest
users, and don't actually stop those seriously intent on piracy.

Agreed:-)

The point is to put the paying customer into the driving seat.

Or let the lunatics run the asylum?

Well, I still haven't said that anyone who buys from Linn must be bonkers,
despite the real topic of this thread. :-)

It is an odd echo of the attitudes of the big companies to describe their
customers as 'lunatics', though. Also revealing to cast the market as an
'asylum'. But I guess you meet more of the people from such companies than
myself, so have a clearer idea of how they see things. ;-

However, regardless of what the people in the companies think or wish. the
reality here is that the listeners *are* now running the show for a lot of
the music that the big companies used to milk. Almost no-one gives a damn
that the people in suits can't pay themselves big bonuses for the work of
(what they seem to see as ) spotty pop wannabees any more. [1] Nor care if
the companies don't like the reality. Musicians are clearly already
responding. e.g as I pointed out, by setting up their own 'companies' to
make and distribute recordings.


The other problem is that no company will be able to make large
longterm project investment, over say ten years. It is important
especially in classical repertoire, that young talent, singers, solo
performers, conductors, orchestral musicians, be heard in major
projects, opera, etc. Without subsidy from various EU cultural
foundations, (and Arts Council in the UK) funding for such projects
will not be viable.

I know that for many years some companies did this as a 'prestige'
thing. However I've noticed since that small companies like Chandos,
and also 'band run' labels dedicated to specific groups of people are
working.

Yes indeed. That's encouraging, they do work but only within a limited
sphere.

Time will tell.


Chandos are a good example as they have been making really excellent
recordings for many years. Naxos also are interesting because they
have done well out of choosing 'unknown' artists and kept down their
costs. Different approaches, but both have worked OK.

The artists are the ones who lose out. There are rarely if ever firm
contracts above the current deal, so artists must go from label to label
if the wish to keep recording. The sense of continuity that Solti had
with Decca will sadly disappear. I doubt very much, Jim, with your
sense of fairplay, you would consider a budget label artist's contract
to be fair if you saw one.

Possibly so. But maybe fairer than getting nothing and seeing everyone copy
your work and hand it around for nothing anyway.

However if the performances are good, then they should find a better
treatment from someone else once they have a reputation and a track record.
pun alert!

So I do hope/expect that a number of small concerns will go on making
and releasing recordings. Also note the declared wish of the BBC that
their 'archive' should get as close as possible to 'all on line'.

That's a monumental task. But as the Beeb is keen to cash in on its
resources, I am sure it will be done.

I know they are keen. But there is a lot to be done to sort out the rights
issues and get all 'ducks in a row' as suits might say. :-)


I was listening to their 320k aac stream again yesterday having made
some improvements to the system I'm using. Once again I was very
impressed by the sound and the performance.

BTW In this case a performance of Holmboe's 1st Symphony.

It is difficult for a broadcast to reach the standard of a dedicated
recording.

Actually, I approach that from the other direction. :-) I've found that it
is seems difficult for many music companies to make recordings that are as
god as are standard for BBC R3. However I am conditioned by expecting the
sound to be that of an orchestra in a hall playing a concert. The R3 sound
often seems to me better than many CDs.

Other broadcasters I can make less comment about. But I've been impressed
by some of the Dutch stations who stream or release 320k mp3 files.

You made an interesting choice in Vagn Holboe Jim. I find his music
fascinating and can hear the influence of Sibelius, Delius and also
Shostakovich in his work.

Wasn't really my 'choice' as such. I chose to listen to R3 with the
expectation that the result would be worth hearing. And a good 'test'
of various experimental changes I've been making. As on previous
occasions R3 made a good choice for me. As they often do. :-)

I can't recall if I've heard any of his work before. I probably have (on
R3) in the past without it making a distinct impression. But this concert
performance (from a BBCCO tour of the USA) was excellent. How much of this
was due to the clarity of the R3 320k stream I don't know. Seemed like a
good performance, so I find it hard to untangle performance, work, and
broadcast quality when they all are of a high standard. I now have my
fingers crossed it will appear on a BBC Music Mag cover CD.

It is, of course, still on the iPlayer for anyone interested. But not at
320k aac, alas.



FWIW I am also concerned about how many recordings are generally
unavailable with no clear prospect of being audible by most of us.

Not much you can do about that, except buy a turntable:-)

No need. The one I have still seems to work. :-)


These listeners make up the majority of the market.

That is my greater concern TBH. Music is not taught in UK schools as
it was 'when I were a lad'.

Maybe that's a good thing. I remember when I was at school that most
students used to consider music as a free period. Surely it makes better
sense, as music is not a compulsory subject, to teach it to those who
have an interest or aptitude.

There has been a decline in interest in non-pop music due to lack of
exposure.

Erm. Sorry Jim, but I think you are mistaken there. People on UK music
newsgroups write constantly about the difficulty in getting a place in
even their local amateur classical ensemble, most of which have waiting
lists, run auditions at grade VI and can pick and choose.

That may tell us something about the ratio of established 'ensembles' to
musicians seeking a place in them. (Rather than set up their own.) And on
what may prompt people to write on usenet. :-)

But my comments were based on the fall away in the teaching of music in UK
schools in the last decade or two. And not just for players, but for people
who might simply enjoy listening. That said, I have been told that the
audience for R3 went up last year. So not all is lost. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

[1] For some reason "The X Factor" occurred to me here as contrary example.
:-) But I've never seen it so maybe I'm mislead by what others say.

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote


Was that "audition" conducted according to the requirementrs of a
listening test?, or did you all sit around listening together and in
full
knowledge of what you were listening to? Because if the later the
"audition" has no value.

:-))

It was conducted at a broadcast facility. The panel participants
were all professionals and AES members

The turntables (which had been set up by broadcast
technical service) were in the control room, and the
listeners were in the studio area, with a drawn curtain
over the window between studio and control room.
There were nine turntables in all, so it was decided to
divide them into three groups of three, with the winner
of each group taking a place in the fourth session.

Levels were matched using the Decca test LP
ZAL 16234 -3F which I provided.

We were able to obtain three pressings of each piece of music
(classical, MOR, jazz) all with the same dash number.

None of us knew which TT we were listening to.
The control-room op switched sources

So you went some way towards making it a properly controlled test, but not
far enough. It seems that the panel knew that they were listening to
turntables

Yes, of course they did, it was a turntable evaluation :-)
None of us knew which was which, there were three
TTs in each round, identified as A, B and C.

and that everyone listened together, both very definite no-nos in
subjective testing.

To complete the thing in one session it was necessary
that we listened together. There was no conferring.

Was the order in which the turntables were heard varied for each cycle?

Yes of course, with the console automation cue showing source A,B or C.

What were the voting arrangments? and how statistically significant were
the results?

People picked turntables in order of preference from
each group, and the winner of that group went forward
to the final three. Opinion was not unanimous, but, IIRC
the placing within the final three was agreed by quite a
substantial majority.

You wouold at least have made an (albeit short)
acquaintance with some top of the range turntables,
and have something to to tell your children/grandchildren :-)

LOL! I've plenty of things to tell my children (and grandchildren if I
ever
get any, my children don't seem in any hurry to provide them :-( ) far
more
interesting than a nodding acquaintance with top of the range turntables.

:-)

Frankly my children couldn't care less about such things. As long as the
right sound comes out when they press the button that's all they care
about the technical aspects of sound eproduction.

Right sound?

I listen to vinyl so rarely that the relative merits of expensive TTs
is
of little interest to me.

Yes. I understand that. It is the fact that people listen to
and enjoy music that is important, not the machine which
reproduces it.

So why are you spending so much time trying to persuade me of the merits
of overpriced turntables?

You must leave the prospective buyer to decide whether
or not they are overpriced. Current users of turntables
demand something better that the mass-produced 60s
and 70s models, built down to a price. Many people
have surprising amounts of disposable income, and for
someone who is a dedicated listener, an expensive
turntable, a once in a lifetime purchase, may not be
considered excessive.

Is the irritation due to the fact that your records are
in poor condition, and your TT not in good shape?.

The irritation starts with the awkward size of the records and the short
playing time per side.

That's interesting. Many people report both those factors
as dedicated plusses - the LP package being far more
tactile than the CD. A symphony of three movements
can often be cut on a single side, or six pop titles.
For serious listening, as oppposed to "wallpaper music"
is this not sufficient? Very few people these days seem
to be able to listen at anything more than a casual level
for thirty minutes without the need to speak, or check
their mobile phone for messages:-)

It goes on with the careful handling needed to ensure
they don't get damaged, the need to check periodically for stylus wear
etc.

Surely not too much trouble? That may be why so many musicians
own turntables, they are used to handling their instrument with care
and checking it over regularly. It's par for the course, and what makes
a player choose a Montagnana baroque cello over the modern
see-through plastic wipe-clean model.

Then there is the fact that even the most expensive and carefully set-up
turntable cannot totally eliminate the distortions inherent in the vinyl
medium. Distortions that a small, easily handled, CD does not have even
when
played on a low-cost player.

I have a huge collection of both CDs and LPs, and am not
suggesting that LP is technically a superior medium, but I
do still very much enjoy performances issued on vinyl only,
which would not be available to me without a good turntable.

It was indeed a pleasing experience.

Fair enough. I can also enjoy listening to LPs that I've owned for years,
the pleasure I get from music outweighs the technical shortcomings of the
medium. I do, however, regard it as perverse that some people are still
recording LPs which others will buy at inflated prices when better
technologies have been around for over a quarter of a century.

If you had compared the examples of parallel issues metioned
earlier on this NG, then you would know why people buy the LP,
aimed at a different sector of the market.


Cheers
Iain

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

So you went some way towards making it a properly controlled test, but
not far enough. It seems that the panel knew that they were listening
to turntables

Yes, of course they did, it was a turntable evaluation :-) None of us
knew which was which, there were three TTs in each round, identified as
A, B and C.

So you could just as easily have made the decision on the basis of which of
the three individual *cartridges* were involved and how they sounded in the
context of the rest of the system+room.


....and might have come to a different outcome with other music in some
other room on another day.

and that everyone listened together, both very definite no-nos in
subjective testing.

To complete the thing in one session it was necessary that we listened
together. There was no conferring.

Which is not the same as ensuring there was no interperson influence.


What were the voting arrangments? and how statistically significant
were the results?

People picked turntables in order of preference from each group, and the
winner of that group went forward to the final three. Opinion was not
unanimous, but, IIRC the placing within the final three was agreed by
quite a substantial majority.

So, no ability to determine if the results would have been the same if
you'd repeated the test at a different time and place.

As on previous occasions you do seem to be describing a 'test' that seems
rather dubious. You said AES members were present. I presume none of them
said a word about how tests need to be run to check for the results either
being significant, or to test if the outcome was for the reasons assumed?

Oh well, anyone can join the AES if they stump up the cash. :-)


The irritation starts with the awkward size of the records and the
short playing time per side.

That's interesting. Many people report both those factors as dedicated
plusses - the LP package being far more tactile than the CD. A symphony
of three movements can often be cut on a single side, or six pop titles.
For serious listening, as oppposed to "wallpaper music" is this not
sufficient? Very few people these days seem to be able to listen at
anything more than a casual level for thirty minutes without the need to
speak, or check their mobile phone for messages:-)

I must admit that I now find it convenient to have recordings of concerts
or works as one file. Although for some software once you go about 2GB this
can be awkward.


I have a huge collection of both CDs and LPs, and am not suggesting that
LP is technically a superior medium, but I do still very much enjoy
performances issued on vinyl only, which would not be available to me
without a good turntable.

That is, I think the key feature. The last LPs I bought were a boxed set.
Which I then copied to LPCM for actual listening. In this case I also had
the CD boxed set, but wanted to compare them. However I can see why an LP
sells if its *content* isn't available otherwise. As I pointed out a while
ago it is the *music* people generally want. But the companies want to keep
selling them the *container*. This is nothing much to do with 'LP versus
CD'. More to do with 'Another way to sell you something (which you may
already own)'. The UK government is good at this, too... ;-)

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/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"Keith G" wrote in message

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"David Looser" wrote in
message ...


So why are you spending so much time trying to persuade
me of the merits of overpriced turntables?

You must leave the prospective buyer to decide whether
or not they are overpriced.

No, we should leave that to the actual buyees.

Current users of turntables
demand something better that the mass-produced 60s
and 70s models, built down to a price.

That covers so much territory as to be meaningless.

"mass-produced 60s and 70s models, built down to a price" covers everything
from VM changers with crystal cartridges and 2-pole motors to some pretty
impressive stuff that was mass-produced and had engineering decisions that
were based on price/performance. For example, there was no question that the
Thorens TD 125 was mass-produced and show signs of cost-cutting.


Many people have surprising amounts of disposable income,

All of the people I know who are deca-millionaires and centa-millionaires
(maybe a dozen people or two) could care less about high end audio.

and for someone who is a dedicated listener,

Most such people are musicans, whose pedestrian tastes in audio are
legendary.

an expensive turntable, a once in a lifetime purchase, may not be
considered excessive.

Only if playing vinyl has any value to them. *All* such people that I know
are thoroughly middle class and have fairly pedestrian equipment such as the
better Technics tables that are sold into the DJ market.

Is the irritation due to the fact that your records are
in poor condition, and your TT not in good shape?.

The irritation starts with the awkward size of the
records and the short playing time per side.

This is only a problem for people who are more interested in the experience
of listening to music as opposed to those who are interested in the
experience of listening to vinyl.

That's interesting. Many people report both those factors
as dedicated plusses - the LP package being far more
tactile than the CD.

Something I only see on audiophile conferences.


A symphony of three movements
can often be cut on a single side, or six pop titles.


And that is about as close to good news as you get. Compare that to fitting
an entire discography by a productive talent on one CD (in MP3 format).

For serious listening, as oppposed to "wallpaper music"
is this not sufficient?

Why punish oneself unecessarily? Its not like there is any serious lack of
titles published digitally. There is a serious lack of titles on LP,
particularlly new LP.

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message


So you went some way towards making it a properly controlled test, but
not
far enough. It seems that the panel knew that they were listening to
turntables

Yes, of course they did, it was a turntable evaluation :-)

You could have brought in listeners who were not part of your group to get
an independant opinion.


To complete the thing in one session it was necessary
that we listened together. There was no conferring.

If a thing is worth doing it's worth doing properly.
"No confering" isn't enough, there are plenty of ways that people
communicate, often unconciously, without needing to speak

People picked turntables in order of preference from
each group, and the winner of that group went forward
to the final three. Opinion was not unanimous, but, IIRC
the placing within the final three was agreed by quite a
substantial majority.

There's that word "agreed" which blows your test apart. The final placing
should have emerged from the voting stats, not by agreement.
Frankly my children couldn't care less about such things. As long as the
right sound comes out when they press the button that's all they care
about the technical aspects of sound eproduction.

Right sound?

Anticipated content.


Is the irritation due to the fact that your records are
in poor condition, and your TT not in good shape?.

The irritation starts with the awkward size of the records and the short
playing time per side.

That's interesting. Many people report both those factors
as dedicated plusses - the LP package being far more
tactile than the CD.

I think you mean "some" people ;-)
I don't buy recorded music for it's "tactile" qualities, I wonder how many
people do?

A symphony of three movements
can often be cut on a single side,

At more than about 20 minutes per side the sound quality of an LP decreases
quite noticeably, and most symphonies last longer than that.

or six pop titles.
For serious listening, as oppposed to "wallpaper music"
is this not sufficient? Very few people these days seem
to be able to listen at anything more than a casual level
for thirty minutes without the need to speak, or check
their mobile phone for messages:-)

It goes on with the careful handling needed to ensure
they don't get damaged, the need to check periodically for stylus wear
etc.

Surely not too much trouble? That may be why so many musicians
own turntables, they are used to handling their instrument with care
and checking it over regularly. It's par for the course, and what makes
a player choose a Montagnana baroque cello over the modern
see-through plastic wipe-clean model.

It's "too much trouble" only to the extent that it's unnecessary trouble. I
can get better sound with less hassle from CDs.


If you had compared the examples of parallel issues metioned
earlier on this NG, then you would know why people buy the LP,
aimed at a different sector of the market.


I'm not in a position to compare parallel issues, since I neither own them
nor are prepared to shell out on expensive products that I don't want just
so that you can prove a point. What I will say is that if the CD is being
mastered in a way that makes it sound worse than the vinyl that is highly
dubious marketing on the part of the record company concerned. Frankly I'm
not sure I'd want to support a company that treats the majority of it's
customers in such a contemptuous way.

David.