(H)oof!
I hate to beef about it, but haven't we've milked this for all it's worth? Udderly ridiculous. Let's moo-ve on to greener pastures.
Steven Austin
-----Original Message----- From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steven Smolian Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 11:09 AM To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Fred Layn's post on the Studer list re: Quantegy
Enopugh cowbells would do the job, especially if accompanied by a moo-sical chorus.
Steve Smolian
----- Original Message ----- From: <Mwcpc6@xxxxxxx> To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 12:34 PM Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Fred Layn's post on the Studer list re: Quantegy
> In a message dated 1/13/2005 11:35:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, > smolians@xxxxxxxxx writes: > It is my unshakable belief that any sound combination originating by the > assembling of electronic signals- systhesizer, electric guitar, etc., > should > never be used for calibration or dispassionate testing of speakers. There > is simply no real-life experience of that sound to use for comparison. > Cowbells are fine. > ************ > > Cowbells may not be noisy enough. The important thing is that all > frequencies > be present in the test signal, unlike the spectrum of much synthesized > sound. > > According to Jack Mullen in the AES interview > http://www.aes.org/publications/videos.cfm the source used to equalize the > first American tape recorder was > the noise generated from the runout groove or a worn 78 rpm record. An FM > tuner tuned between channels works well too. > > Mike Csontos > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005 > >
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005