<MrSpud_f7k@_jotapmwu1.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:sbv1go$12vs$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 12:55:47 +0100
> Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>>On 05/07/2021 09:30, MrSpud_48@iomri.eu wrote:
>>> When I was a kid I had some vinly that I played on my mums old 60s deck.
>>> The arm was so heavy it literally ploughed the groove and every time you
>>> played a record there was a fine coating of black dust left behind.
>>> After
>>> maybe 50 plays the record was ruined.
>>
>>There usually was a little metal strip with holes in to adjust the
>>spring counterweight under the arm of cheap [1] record players. You set
>>it so the needle just about stayed on the record.
>
> In theory it did, in practice it had 2 settings - gouge the record or fly
> off
> at the slightest bump, land back on it elsewhere and create a nice
> scratch.

I saw someone use a lump of BluTak or plasticene as an extra weight on the
stylus end of the arm, in conjunction with the bounce-and-skate setting of
the counterweight slider. I remember being told that extreme Golden
Wonder-shaped discs needed a heavier stylus weight such as a ha'penny or
farthing to prevent the needle flying off at the top excursion of the
record.

"Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote in message
news:5uvbrh-9ieh1.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu...
> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Now, here's the rub.
>>
>> There was only one system under test, and the the two consecutive
>> tests were with two copies of the same CD, with the second CD
>> having green felt tip pen around the edge.
>>
> Were you all 'blind to each other'? If not then it wasn't really a
> very significant result. Even if you were doing a 'secret ballot'
> there could be all sorts of reasons why you chose the same one. I.e.
> all chose the first one (or the second one), something happened in
> between the two test samples, etc. etc. etc.

Yes, never underestimate peer-pressure, order of hearing the two samples and
"listener fatigue" after hearing the same thing twice. That's why it needs
to be a secret ballot, preferably with only one person in the listening
booth at a time and a random order of the two discs (ie not the same order
for all the listeners).

I'm surprised that stray internal reflections in a CD would produce a large
enough effect compared with the main reflection off the foil inside the
disc, for there to be any ambiguity to trigger error correction. If it was a
known problem, you'd think that CD-pressing plants would extend the foil
beyond the plastic and then press it downwards - or apply a black strip. The
fact that this is not done universally suggests that it is not regarded as a
serious problem.

How common was it for a completely different sound mix to be used for a CD
than for an LP, as opposed to the same mix but with RIAA processing for LP
and without for CD.

In article <q0o2eg52vbft1jlt20aeqm9jbqlvicair8@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> scribeth thus
>On Sat, 03 Jul 2021 18:07:22 +0100, charles <charles@candehope.me.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>I remember a tv dealer in Fort William telling me he had to put top cut
>>filers in tv sets when uhf appeared. Up to then, 405 tv sound could get as
>>kight a 8kHz (on a good day).
>
>I'm surprised any audio above 8kHz got as far as Fort William in the
>days of analogue distribution. That was about the upper limit for
>Pontop Pike.
>
>I remember once going on a touring holiday of Scotland with a friend,
>he with his ham radio gear, me with my portable FM Hacker radio
>modified for stereo on headphones, listening to whatever we could find
>along the way, and was able to hear the quality becoming steadily
>worse the further north we got. From Rosemarkie, BBC FM sounded almost
>like medium wave but with no background noise apart from the
>occasional valve clanking or telephone dialling clicks.

>Foreign FM was
>vastly superior, and often in stereo.
>
>Rod.

And why was that then?...
--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <5946ac6769noise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <5946389107bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
><bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> To be honest I find that hard to imagine. Yes, vinyl has a host of
>> failings where CD is very much better but detail certainly isn't one of
>> them.
>
>> As it happens, this last week I've fitted a new power suppply to my
>> turntable and I've been testing it. Ignoring surface noise and the odd
>> click I thought it sounded really good and certainly no detail missing.
>
>In general I also find that many of my old LPs still sounded good when I
>played them to make digital transfers. The transfers sound the same apart
>from having removed the clicks and pops, and are easier to play.
>
>In some cases they also sound like a different balance/mix to the CDs. So
>useful to be able to choose/compare.
>
>The basic problem with LP was/is the same as for other formats. Having the
>people making them do so with due care. Not bash them out after sloppy
>mastering. However the bigger differences tend to show up with wide-range
>'classcal' music rather than 'pop' which tended to be tailored to sound
>good via LP. Alas, PPP level classical tends to expose small but
>distracting pops and clicks which pop is loud enough to make pass without
>notice.
>
>Jim
>
>
>Jim
>

Quite some time ago now i worked at Audiolab when Phill Swift, now of
Spendor audio, and Derek Scotland set up the firm.

I had a listen to a pair of the new QUAD ESL 63's and was blown away by
them, superb. I did have a pair of stacked ESL57 so know how good they
could be.

However that first track was off Vinyl! And its was excellent. Why?,
some German sourced pressing, can't remember who now but was no doubt it
was excellent!..

I seem to remember Telarc was mentioned somewhere. Derek Scotland who I
always had the greatest respect for did mention of just how piss poor UK
factories were at pressing discs and other countries and manufacturers
did it so much better!...

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 22:25:21 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:

>>Foreign FM was
>>vastly superior, and often in stereo.
>>
>>Rod.
>
> And why was that then?...

Because the grass is always greener on his side than everybody else's.
It's very noticeable, especially since he retired, and he's getting worse.
I guess there's probably a medical name for this condition, but I wouldn't
know what it is.

On Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:12:29 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
<abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:

>On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 22:25:21 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>Foreign FM was
>>>vastly superior, and often in stereo.
>>>
>>>Rod.
>>
>> And why was that then?...
>
>Because the grass is always greener on his side than everybody else's.
>It's very noticeable, especially since he retired, and he's getting worse.
>I guess there's probably a medical name for this condition, but I wouldn't
>know what it is.

I was neither old nor suffering from any medical condition when I was
able to make the comparison, sitting on a Scottish hillside somewhere
listening to various radio stations using the same stereo FM portable
receiver and the same Koss headphones. I recall France Musique could
frequently be heard, and occasionally some Norwegian stations, and
they all sounded crisper than anything the BBC could offer any further
north than the midlands. And some of them were in stereo, while stereo
from the BBC at that time beyond Wrotham amounted to none at all.

Rod.

Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:12:29 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
> <abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 22:25:21 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> Foreign FM was
>>>> vastly superior, and often in stereo.
>>>>
>>>> Rod.
>>>
>>> And why was that then?...
>>
>> Because the grass is always greener on his side than everybody else's.
>> It's very noticeable, especially since he retired, and he's getting worse.
>> I guess there's probably a medical name for this condition, but I wouldn't
>> know what it is.
>
> I was neither old nor suffering from any medical condition when I was
> able to make the comparison, sitting on a Scottish hillside somewhere
> listening to various radio stations using the same stereo FM portable
> receiver and the same Koss headphones. I recall France Musique could
> frequently be heard, and occasionally some Norwegian stations, and
> they all sounded crisper than anything the BBC could offer any further
> north than the midlands. And some of them were in stereo, while stereo
> from the BBC at that time beyond Wrotham amounted to none at all.
>
> Rod.
>

Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
links to transmitters in the north?

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 04:05:04 -0700 (PDT), "R. Mark Clayton"
<notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 20:48:04 UTC+1, Chris Green wrote:
>> Bob Latham <b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> > For me it's simple, some people like the whole LP thing. For whatever
>> > reason they like vinyl and all its oddities. Some say they actually
>> > prefer the sound of vinyl to digital and I don't even have a problem
>> > with that. It's only at the point where they claim vinyl is actually
>> > better where I raise an eyebrow.
>> >
>> However, can they actually tell the difference in a double blind test?
>>
>> --
>> Chris Green
>> ·
>One can very easily tell the difference in the first couple of seconds - see my other post - and in reality it is no contest.

One can very easily hear the thump as the stylus hits the surface of
the record, then the clunk as it falls into the groove, and various
faint but clearly audible crackles from what should be the silent
portion of the groove before the music starts.

Rod.

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 19:34:13 +0100, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:

>gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Now, here's the rub.
>>
>> There was only one system under test, and the the two consecutive
>> tests were with two copies of the same CD, with the second CD
>> having green felt tip pen around the edge.
>>
>Were you all 'blind to each other'? If not then it wasn't really a
>very significant result. Even if you were doing a 'secret ballot'
>there could be all sorts of reasons why you chose the same one. I.e.
>all chose the first one (or the second one), something happened in
>between the two test samples, etc. etc. etc.

Were you only played the music twice? It would be interesting to
perform a similar test but with the music being played many times with
a randomised choice of the two sources.

It would be interesting also to perform the test with only two
playings of exactly the same thing to different test groups, to see if
there is a consistent preference for the first playing or the second.

I honestly don't know what results you would get, but it wouldn't
surprise me if some psychological effect could be shown to be behind
this. After all, if you ask people to choose random numbers the
results are very far from random. Human beings are more subjective
than we realise.

Rod.

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 12:35:57 +0100, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>The almost total immunity to repeated-playing glitches of a CD (no dust, no
>scratches) is the thing that really "sold" CDs to me. The lower noise and
>greater dynamic range were a close second. I remember a group of us at
>university went to a hi-fi shop when CDs were in their infancy and most of
>us had never heard them before. The sound quality certainly blew people's
>minds. But the salesman then went on to demonstrate the immunity to
>scratches. He got out an old CD and made a radial scratch on it with a
>sewing needle. It played fine. My mate, who was a burly Mancunian who was
>built like a brick shithouse, said "Giz it here" and gouged out a huge
>trench in the CD. It played, with a little bit of skipping every now and
>again. "Now I'm *really* impressed," my mate said. "Do that on a record and
>you'd rip the f-ing needle off".

When CDs were a New Thing, I had read somewhere that it was possible
to drill a 3mm hole in one and the error correction would cope with
the missing data. I mentioned this to the colleague who had provided
me with my first ever opportunity to hear one (because he was the
first ever person I knew to acquire a player) and asked if I could
drill a 3mm hole in one of his CDs to verify this, but for some reason
despite the reassurance about error correction he didn't want me to.

Rod.

On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 06:12:30 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:12:29 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
>> <abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 22:25:21 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Foreign FM was
>>>>> vastly superior, and often in stereo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rod.
>>>>
>>>> And why was that then?...
>>>
>>> Because the grass is always greener on his side than everybody else's.
>>> It's very noticeable, especially since he retired, and he's getting worse.
>>> I guess there's probably a medical name for this condition, but I wouldn't
>>> know what it is.
>>
>> I was neither old nor suffering from any medical condition when I was
>> able to make the comparison, sitting on a Scottish hillside somewhere
>> listening to various radio stations using the same stereo FM portable
>> receiver and the same Koss headphones. I recall France Musique could
>> frequently be heard, and occasionally some Norwegian stations, and
>> they all sounded crisper than anything the BBC could offer any further
>> north than the midlands. And some of them were in stereo, while stereo
>> from the BBC at that time beyond Wrotham amounted to none at all.
>>
>> Rod.
>>
>
>Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
>links to transmitters in the north?

I believe so, but whatever the cause, BBC FM over most of the country
was nowhere near the quality that the system was capable of, while the
occasional reception of continental stations showed that they were
well ahead of us.

Rod.

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 19:04:53 +0100
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 05/07/2021 12:16, MrSpud_z2@4rw9jakakys66qadyq.edu wrote:
>> Sounds par for the course. I remember pens being sold that were basically
>> felt tips but the manufacturer/scammer claimed that if you painted the
>> outside of a CD with them it would keep the laser light in and give a better
>> signal. I would say you couldn't make it up but clearly they did!
>>
>
>21 years ago, I had a re-union with former fellow students of
>electronics at Essex Uni.
>
>Now, one of our number was a manager in a string of hifi shops
>and we all met up in his house where installed was an impressive
>range of equipment.
>
>He asked us to evaluate two of his systems which, being electronic
>nuts, we readily agreed to do.
>
>So he disappeared into another room for the tests, and we were
>fairly uniform in agreeing that the second systeam that we heard
>was the best audio.
>
>Now, here's the rub.
>
>There was only one system under test, and the the two consecutive
>tests were with two copies of the same CD, with the second CD
>having green felt tip pen around the edge.
>
>Needless to say, we were incredulous, and it resulted in
>an extensive discussion, and the conclusion we reached
>was that there were multiple optical paths bouncing
>between the two layers of the CD, and the effect of the green
>ink was to absorb some of the reflections, so reducing the
>error ratein pickup photo cell.

I suspect psychology had far more to do with it than any pen on a CD. Once
one persons says something the natural tendency is to agree especially if
there's nothing to choose between the options. Also bear in mind that CD-ROMs
absolutely WILL NOT WORK in a computer if the data returned isn't 100% spot
on so any CD transport worth its salt will get the data correct and don't need
felt tip pens to help. Plus I suspect the designers of the CD took into
account laser light bouncing around, its rather an obvious issue.

>***** Gullible is the one word in the English language that
>is not listed in any dictionary.

Tres drole :)

In article <sbvhk8$n42$1@dont-email.me>, gareth evans
<headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So he disappeared into another room for the tests, and we were fairly
> uniform in agreeing that the second systeam that we heard was the best
> audio.

> Now, here's the rub.

> There was only one system under test, and the the two consecutive tests
> were with two copies of the same CD, with the second CD having green
> felt tip pen around the edge.

> Needless to say, we were incredulous, and it resulted in an extensive
> discussion, and the conclusion we reached was that there were multiple
> optical paths bouncing between the two layers of the CD, and the effect
> of the green ink was to absorb some of the reflections, so reducing the
> error ratein pickup photo cell.

It is a fairly standard result for people to decide that when exactly the
same thing is played twice, that they sound 'different'. This happens for
various reasons that have nothing to do with the 'items being compared'.

Well enough established that correctly run comparisons aren't carried out
as you describe.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <+rTM0HLWw34gFwPM@bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
<tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:
> Quite some time ago now i worked at Audiolab when Phill Swift, now of
> Spendor audio, and Derek Scotland set up the firm.

> I had a listen to a pair of the new QUAD ESL 63's and was blown away by
> them, superb. I did have a pair of stacked ESL57 so know how good they
> could be.

> However that first track was off Vinyl! And its was excellent. Why?,
> some German sourced pressing, can't remember who now but was no doubt it
> was excellent!..

> I seem to remember Telarc was mentioned somewhere. Derek Scotland who I
> always had the greatest respect for did mention of just how piss poor UK
> factories were at pressing discs and other countries and manufacturers
> did it so much better!...

This may serve as a reminder...

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/LPquality/GoldenWonder.html

Barry Fox also ran a number of articles in HFN about the ways Music Shops
were used as 'human shields' by the large music companies who made lousy
pressings and resisted having to produce replacements that were also
slopply made.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sbvq65$jpg$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> I'm surprised that stray internal reflections in a CD would produce a
> large enough effect compared with the main reflection off the foil
> inside the disc, for there to be any ambiguity to trigger error
> correction.

So far as I know, no-one has observed this on the output of the optical
sensors. And 'tests' like the one reported here tend to have basic flaws.

> How common was it for a completely different sound mix to be used for a
> CD than for an LP, as opposed to the same mix but with RIAA processing
> for LP and without for CD.

Quite common. Indeed, whoever cuts the LP may well alter the sound as they
do so to deal with the limitations and difficulties of the cutter
arrangements.

e.g. Some cutters used to have a 'pot and string' arrangement. So as the
cut approached end-of-side the cutter head rotated a pot, slowly reducing
the treble content to reduce end-of-side distortion. They probably didn't
mention this to the studio. 8-]

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sc0s8e$4bg$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
> links to transmitters in the north?

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/BBC/PCMandNICAM/History.html

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <vrs7eghf73l8q6su1oi5m4u64hvnaiqrq9@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> One can very easily hear the thump as the stylus hits the surface of the
> record, then the clunk as it falls into the groove, and various faint
> but clearly audible crackles from what should be the silent portion of
> the groove before the music starts.

One interesting aspect of human hearing is that we hear the LF 'rumbles' at
first but then mentally tend to 'tune them out' given some music that is
loud enough to distract us unless we take care to keep listening for the
rumbles. The problem then comes from becoming aware of this and finding the
rumbles annoying when we previously didn't notice them!

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <0ct7egdfk9focd46pn6j064f7hbmcjn92f@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> Were you only played the music twice? It would be interesting to perform
> a similar test but with the music being played many times with a
> randomised choice of the two sources.

> It would be interesting also to perform the test with only two playings
> of exactly the same thing to different test groups, to see if there is a
> consistent preference for the first playing or the second.

Some years ago 'Stereophile' published the results of a test they ran at a
show. This was based on a 'same vs different' set of pairings.

Their initial results indicated - apparently - that people could hear a
subtle difference between two versions of something.

Later analysis showed that people were also more likely to say 'different'
when the same version had been played twice. They'd fallen into a well
known (albeit not by them!) trap.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 06/07/2021 09:23, MrSpud_4o7ymkm1@l1frbtfkuro6.gov.uk wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 19:04:53 +0100
> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 05/07/2021 12:16, MrSpud_z2@4rw9jakakys66qadyq.edu wrote:
>>> Sounds par for the course. I remember pens being sold that were basically
>>> felt tips but the manufacturer/scammer claimed that if you painted the
>>> outside of a CD with them it would keep the laser light in and give a better
>>> signal. I would say you couldn't make it up but clearly they did!
>>>
>>
>> 21 years ago, I had a re-union with former fellow students of
>> electronics at Essex Uni.
>>
>> Now, one of our number was a manager in a string of hifi shops
>> and we all met up in his house where installed was an impressive
>> range of equipment.
>>
>> He asked us to evaluate two of his systems which, being electronic
>> nuts, we readily agreed to do.
>>
>> So he disappeared into another room for the tests, and we were
>> fairly uniform in agreeing that the second systeam that we heard
>> was the best audio.
>>
>> Now, here's the rub.
>>
>> There was only one system under test, and the the two consecutive
>> tests were with two copies of the same CD, with the second CD
>> having green felt tip pen around the edge.
>>
>> Needless to say, we were incredulous, and it resulted in
>> an extensive discussion, and the conclusion we reached
>> was that there were multiple optical paths bouncing
>> between the two layers of the CD, and the effect of the green
>> ink was to absorb some of the reflections, so reducing the
>> error ratein pickup photo cell.
>
> I suspect psychology had far more to do with it than any pen on a CD. Once
> one persons says something the natural tendency is to agree especially if
> there's nothing to choose between the options. Also bear in mind that CD-ROMs
> absolutely WILL NOT WORK in a computer if the data returned isn't 100% spot
> on so any CD transport worth its salt will get the data correct and don't need
> felt tip pens to help. Plus I suspect the designers of the CD took into
> account laser light bouncing around, its rather an obvious issue.
>
>> ***** Gullible is the one word in the English language that
>> is not listed in any dictionary.
>
> Tres drole :)
>

Perchance Freudian Projection is featuring in the responses in this NG,
for once one has intimated that psychology and peer pressure are the
explanation, then you've all taken up that mantra because of your
own peer pressure and your own group hidebound reluctance to
accept a new explanation that goes against received wisdom?

for example, I wonder if any here are aware that religion is all
make-believe?

On 06/07/2021 07:13, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 04:05:04 -0700 (PDT), "R. Mark Clayton"
> <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 20:48:04 UTC+1, Chris Green wrote:
>>> Bob Latham <b...@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For me it's simple, some people like the whole LP thing. For whatever
>>>> reason they like vinyl and all its oddities. Some say they actually
>>>> prefer the sound of vinyl to digital and I don't even have a problem
>>>> with that. It's only at the point where they claim vinyl is actually
>>>> better where I raise an eyebrow.
>>>>
>>> However, can they actually tell the difference in a double blind test?

>> One can very easily tell the difference in the first couple of seconds - see my other post - and in reality it is no contest.
>
> One can very easily hear the thump as the stylus hits the surface of
> the record, then the clunk as it falls into the groove, and various
> faint but clearly audible crackles from what should be the silent
> portion of the groove before the music starts.

Not on my turntable. The signal is muted for half a second or so after
the needle drops. And mutes just before it is lifted. (Of course this
could be done manually.)

--
Max Demian

In article <8pv7eg1jdov95ujrs1gildg93hgglleld1@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> scribeth thus
>On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 06:12:30 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
><usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:12:29 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
>>> <abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 22:25:21 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Foreign FM was
>>>>>> vastly superior, and often in stereo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rod.
>>>>>
>>>>> And why was that then?...
>>>>
>>>> Because the grass is always greener on his side than everybody else's.
>>>> It's very noticeable, especially since he retired, and he's getting worse.
>>>> I guess there's probably a medical name for this condition, but I wouldn't
>>>> know what it is.
>>>
>>> I was neither old nor suffering from any medical condition when I was
>>> able to make the comparison, sitting on a Scottish hillside somewhere
>>> listening to various radio stations using the same stereo FM portable
>>> receiver and the same Koss headphones. I recall France Musique could
>>> frequently be heard, and occasionally some Norwegian stations, and
>>> they all sounded crisper than anything the BBC could offer any further
>>> north than the midlands. And some of them were in stereo, while stereo
>>> from the BBC at that time beyond Wrotham amounted to none at all.
>>>
>>> Rod.
>>>
>>
>>Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
>>links to transmitters in the north?
>
>I believe so, but whatever the cause, BBC FM over most of the country
>was nowhere near the quality that the system was capable of, while the
>occasional reception of continental stations showed that they were
>well ahead of us.
>
>Rod.

Indeed! I remember a chap name of Austin Udin writing in Hi-fi news many
years ago saying exactly the same thing re GPO landlines and the way the
French and mainly Germans went about audio distribution.

ISTR that they were more into using their own links and microwave ones
at that and didn't have to use or rely on the national Post and telecoms
operator like the BBC once had to!...

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <5947b7d8c3noise@audiomisc.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <sc0s8e$4bg$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
>> links to transmitters in the north?
>
>http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/BBC/PCMandNICAM/History.html
>
>
>
>

Excellent account of that time Jim!...

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <GOUSNOMP6D5gFwC$@bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:
> In article <8pv7eg1jdov95ujrs1gildg93hgglleld1@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart
> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> scribeth thus
> >On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 06:12:30 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:12:29 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
> >>> <abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 22:25:21 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Foreign FM was vastly superior, and often in stereo.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rod.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And why was that then?...
> >>>>
> >>>> Because the grass is always greener on his side than everybody
> >>>> else's. It's very noticeable, especially since he retired, and he's
> >>>> getting worse. I guess there's probably a medical name for this
> >>>> condition, but I wouldn't know what it is.
> >>>
> >>> I was neither old nor suffering from any medical condition when I was
> >>> able to make the comparison, sitting on a Scottish hillside somewhere
> >>> listening to various radio stations using the same stereo FM portable
> >>> receiver and the same Koss headphones. I recall France Musique could
> >>> frequently be heard, and occasionally some Norwegian stations, and
> >>> they all sounded crisper than anything the BBC could offer any
> >>> further north than the midlands. And some of them were in stereo,
> >>> while stereo from the BBC at that time beyond Wrotham amounted to
> >>> none at all.
> >>>
> >>> Rod.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
> >>links to transmitters in the north?
> >
> >I believe so, but whatever the cause, BBC FM over most of the country
> >was nowhere near the quality that the system was capable of, while the
> >occasional reception of continental stations showed that they were well
> >ahead of us.
> >
> >Rod.

> Indeed! I remember a chap name of Austin Udin writing in Hi-fi news many
> years ago saying exactly the same thing re GPO landlines and the way the
> French and mainly Germans went about audio distribution.

> ISTR that they were more into using their own links and microwave ones at
> that and didn't have to use or rely on the national Post and telecoms
> operator like the BBC once had to!...

In general, the BBC had to get GPO permission to operate its own links.
That wasn't always forthcoming.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 10:48:43 +0100
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 06/07/2021 09:23, MrSpud_4o7ymkm1@l1frbtfkuro6.gov.uk wrote:
>
>> absolutely WILL NOT WORK in a computer if the data returned isn't 100% spot
>> on so any CD transport worth its salt will get the data correct and don't
>need
>> felt tip pens to help. Plus I suspect the designers of the CD took into
>> account laser light bouncing around, its rather an obvious issue.
>>
>>> ***** Gullible is the one word in the English language that
>>> is not listed in any dictionary.
>>
>> Tres drole :)
>>
>
>Perchance Freudian Projection is featuring in the responses in this NG,
>for once one has intimated that psychology and peer pressure are the
>explanation, then you've all taken up that mantra because of your
>own peer pressure and your own group hidebound reluctance to
>accept a new explanation that goes against received wisdom?

Well thats one possibily. Though the fact that some felt tip on the rim of
a CD making the slightest fucking difference to the signal is gold plated
A grade horseshit is the other explanation you're conveniently ignoring.

>for example, I wonder if any here are aware that religion is all
>make-believe?

Wow, who knew?

On 06/07/2021 07:12, Tweed wrote:
> Presumably that was down to the quality of the Post Office distribution
> links to transmitters in the north?

Unlikely, I think very little went over PO lines.