porcy62

Then I must have supernatural powers of wish-fulfillment, because the difference between the lower & higher bitrate files is real... As I tried to say above (but evidently wasn't as clear as I should have been), this is NOT a matter of "retrieving information" - that is impossible. HOWEVER, you can run an algorithm designed to make a compressed file sound better to a human ear. It doesn't necessarily sound the same as the original lossless file (except for by extraordinary conincidence), but it can sound less harsh and more full. The very same of what happens with clipping, you can design an amp with a soft, or more agreable, clipping, or what happens with distorsion, usually tube amps have a distortion that is less harsh then solid state amps, but you have clipping and distortion anyway in the measurements.

So, in order to put a lossless audio file to an hard disk, including iPod, and to play it you need at least decent A/D/A converters, possibly a 24bit. Obviously the better converters are the better fidelity you get at the end of the process.

I would add another factor in the discussion. Assuming that you can transfert a cd on a portable device Ipod or an hard disc, ecc. at the same resolution of the native source, and hook the portable device/hard disk to a normal stereo, in order to play it you still need a D/A converter. The quality of the converter will have some influence in the sound's quality. Nobody here are saying that a portable Discman or the internal D/A converter of the iPod sounds exactly the same that a decent cd player, or am I wrong?

Clearly, that makes everything worse, but Yeltsin wasn't responsible for what had been going in since the days of Brezhnev. And with a more gradual transition from a totally command economy to a free market, there would have been more time to develop new habits. MG Agreed. Guy Maybe, but considering the overwhelming corruption in Soviet Regime and the fact that all the post Soviet leaders came from PCUS' nomeklatura, I doubt it. Anyway Yeltsin could have been a better leader, the point is if the other members of the CC would allow him, as it happened with the coup against Gorbachev.

No, so why don't explain us your POV? A part the fact that you are allergic to everything that smells of audio fanatic, maybe you may take some antihistamine and enlighten us?

Proper obituary.

http://geocities.com/midimagic@sbcglobal.net/mixphono.htm Wow! Thanks! It will takes me two years to fully understand it, but helpful

The "mono" switch on your Sugden simply sums the two channels into one. Every sound picked up in each channel is now played back in both channels. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was told that a mono cartridge does exactly the same thing, i.e., that it's wired to sum the left and the right to give you mono. You're wrong. AFIK a true mono cartridge translates only one way oscillations, vertically or horizontally I don't remember, a stereo cartridge translates both in order to have two different channels. While we await someone more knowledgeable in these matters , here is my understanding of the subject : While it's true that mono cartridges only respond laterally in the horizontal plane , they still pick up two different inputs or signals , inasmuch as they pick up the information contained on both the right and left wall of the groove . This fact is put to use in amplifiers that have buttons for , 'Left Mono' , 'Right Mono' or 'Right + Left Mono' . Such buttons can be useful if one side of the groove is noticeably noisier than the other , but ordinarily , summing both left and right channels yields the highest signal-to-noise ratio . If it's true that the Grado cartridge mentioned above sums both right and left channels does this mean there is no difference between it and a stereo cartridge outputted through a double Y connector or a mono button on an amp ? . No . A stereo cartridge will pick up noise in the form of a vertical component of the playback signal which was not in the mono input signal , but results from variances in groove width caused by the cutting process . The Grado and other mono cartridges , since they are wired to be unresponsive to information in the vertical axis* , will not have this added noise . A modern stereo cartridge with an elliptical stylus yields less of this type of noise than an older conical stylus , provided its diameter is not too small , but there is still a measurable difference. So the question becomes whether this difference is an audible one . Getting the most out of monophonic sound goes beyond having the right cartridge or the right stylus geometry and size . If your playing pre-1955 records you need to know which companies used which equalization curves , and then you'll need some kind of variable EQ functionality on your preamp! * While they ignore vertical signals , modern mono cartridges now have greater tolerance for vertical movement , which is why they are no longer damaging to stereo record grooves Thanks. Very helpful explanation. Abour the RIAA equalization, I assume that, because most of us are collecting LPs post 1955, ie 10' and 12' 33 rpm, we don't need a variable EQ phono stage. May you confirm this? There is some source on the net about EQ curves used by labels before the RIAA? Thanks in advance.

Andrew Hill, what else's? RIP

I think that you interpreted correctly the Constitution's emendament about arms. I think that at times the proposal of it was exactly to prevent the taking over from undemocratic federal government against single states. That is pretty obvious, considering that Jefferson and the Others lived in an epoch were undemocratic centralized Kingdoms ruled the world. A federation of armed free states (with the milicia) was the better cure for that. And the right to carry arm has more to do with it then with personal selfdefense. How ironic that Hamilton won the battle against Jefferson in the long run and today we have the more invasise and centralizad federal control over the country but the freedom to enteer in a shop and buy an assault gun. Porcy62, I do not quite agree with your assessment of the Second Amendment, but I do believe that you have to look elsewhere (i.e., the Ninth Amendment) to find support for the right to keep firearms for self-defense. Well, it's my interpretation. As the infinite debate about it between eminent lawyers, historians, ecc. demonstrated, I am sure that we will not solve the problem of the correct interpretation in Organissimo Forum. Otherwise Jim and his band mates would have a professorship at Harward's School of law. BTW, the Ninth may include the right to parking a car w/o being shoted by some armed nut who think you just stolen his place. Think about it. Well, Porcy, you are certainly entitled to your interpretation. I was just politely trying to point out to you that one does not have to turn to the Second Amendment for the supposition that U.S. citizens have some right to possess firearms (if only for self-defense). As for the Second Amendment, please know that since the Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Miller (1939), all federal appeals courts have agreed that the Second Amendment does NOT confer gun rights on individuals. There is no debate, despite the efforts of the NRA to promote an alternative interpretation. As for your second point, you are missing the mark. I am in favor of extensive restrictions on the possession of firearms. Edward, thanks for poiting out. I am italian and live in Italy, so I am not so acquainted about U.S. Constitution's interpretive history, nor I knew of Supreme Court's, decision. My opinion is based on what I read on newspapers and books, so it might be that I missed something essential like this. So, in your opinion, and in Supreme Court's one, there is no gun rights to individuals in the Constitution, at least not clearly. About the Ninth Emendament, my intent was to pointed out that is so vague that you can read it in a lot of ways. I was not targetting you.

That's one of the times I wish there were a heaven, the man deserves it.

Thanks for clarifying. How much do they go for? Same range of price as stereo ones: from $$ to $$$$, AFIK.

I have 2 arms and 2 phonostage`s. Ah yes, wich TT and phonstages?

The "mono" switch on your Sugden simply sums the two channels into one. Every sound picked up in each channel is now played back in both channels. This is great for "electronically reprocessed" stereo records, but does not enjoy the benefits of true mono playback. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was told that a mono cartridge does exactly the same thing, i.e., that it's wired to sum the left and the right to give you mono. You're wrong. AFIK a true mono cartridge translates only one way oscillations, vertically or horizontally I don't remember, a stereo cartridge translates both in order to have two different channels. So you have only one source of sound, and noise, damages,ecc. They don't are added as in the mono/stereo switcher. I may be wrong about the details, but correct about the principle. A fake mono cartdrige does exactly what you say.

I am a bit ill-at-ease in front of things like this. It reminds me Borges's "The Library of Babel". Though I admit that if listening to music is your job, it could be very usueful.

Why not Geoff Dyer's "But Beautiful" or Julio Cortázar's "The Pursuer", not history, but great books about jazz and jazzmen.

Chuck, Chuck...I am suprised that an old fox like you doesn't know the trick: just rotate your listening chair of 90 degrees, clockwise or not closkwise, it depends on wich of your ears is healthier.

The "mono" switch on your Sugden simply sums the two channels into one. Every sound picked up in each channel is now played back in both channels. This is great for "electronically reprocessed" stereo records, but does not enjoy the benefits of true mono playback. True, but my question is: do you switch cartdriges when you want to listen to a stereo record? From my POV, since I have both mono and stereo records, the only acceptable solution would be a TT with two arms, or two TT's. My Linn can't mount two arms, so I should replace it, or buy another one, and what about phono stage? I should buy another one, or replace the existing one with something that has two inputs, plus I have to buy another couple of cables. At this point the switcher on the amp/preamp is an acceptable compromise. My two cents.

I think that you interpreted correctly the Constitution's emendament about arms. I think that at times the proposal of it was exactly to prevent the taking over from undemocratic federal government against single states. That is pretty obvious, considering that Jefferson and the Others lived in an epoch were undemocratic centralized Kingdoms ruled the world. A federation of armed free states (with the milicia) was the better cure for that. And the right to carry arm has more to do with it then with personal selfdefense. How ironic that Hamilton won the battle against Jefferson in the long run and today we have the more invasise and centralizad federal control over the country but the freedom to enteer in a shop and buy an assault gun. Porcy62, I do not quite agree with your assessment of the Second Amendment, but I do believe that you have to look elsewhere (i.e., the Ninth Amendment) to find support for the right to keep firearms for self-defense. Well, it's my interpretation. As the infinite debate about it between eminent lawyers, historians, ecc. demonstrated, I am sure that we will not solve the problem of the correct interpretation in Organissimo Forum. Otherwise Jim and his band mates would have a professorship at Harward's School of law. BTW, the Ninth may include the right to parking a car w/o being shoted by some armed nut who think you just stolen his place. Think about it.

It could be, I just bought a mono RVG from Jeff Barr at $ 50.

Just bought a VPI, a big relief compared to my previous hand cleaning. Now I clean every record I listen to in a couple of minutes.

Coltrane Impulse!...it's a WLP, ok, but record rated VG++ Let's hope the Impulse! will not get the BN fever. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...p;rd=1&rd=1

Country Joe And The Fish "I-FEEL-LIKE-I'M-FIXIN-TO-DIE" , Vanguard stereo ...DG and "fin"

I saw the movie, and basically agree with the review and its conclusion: we are a long way from Pasolini and Peckinpah and I would add at least Cronenberg and Polansky.