on-reflection-digest    Saturday, October 2 1999    Volume 01 : Number 1892



gg: No GG: Official Playing the Sloth
gg: more digital audio mania than most people can stand
Re: gg: no GG: Re: mastering question; Phish concert
Re: [Fwd: Re: gg: About Gentle Giant]
Re: no gg: bawdy covers - not for the faint-of-heart
Re: gg: more digital audio mania than most people can stand
gg: Another newbie. Greetings to all
gg: Sloth songs
gg: Re: Another newbie. Greetings to all
gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection
gg: re; No gg but TULL 
Re: gg: 7 deadly sins
gg: Un-Lurking
Re: gg: Another newbie. Greetings to all
Re: gg: Un-Lurking
Re: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection
Re: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection
Re: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection
Re: gg: Un-Lurking
Re: gg: Another newbie. Greetings to all
gg: no GG: Re: mastering question; Phish concert

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 08:41:26 -0500
From: Jim Klocek 
Subject: gg: No GG: Official Playing the Sloth

<< What was on the Sloth CD?  What a kick!  This is a great idea.  - S.>>

<>

Actually, it is a series of 7 CD mixes, each one based on a different deadly
sin.  The SLOTH CD has:

I Cant' Wake Up to Save My Life - Richard Thompson
Connection - Rolling Stones
Footloose - Kenny Loggins
Lazy - Deep Purple (Title Track)
I Go to Sleep - Pretenders
Needles & Pins - The Searchers
And the Mouse Police Never Sleeps - Jethro Tull
Don't Mess with Doctor Dream - Thompson Twins
Tired of Waiting for You - The Kinks
In My Dreams - Crosby, Stills & Nash
Norwegian Wood - The Beatles
I Don't Sleep, I Dream - R.E.M.
Circling Around the Moon - John Mellencamp
An Hour in the Shower - Chicago
Separate Beds - Squeeze
Making Plans for Nigel - XTC
Dreams - Fleetwood Mac
Set Up Stand Up - Bob Marley & The Wailers
Lust for Life - Iggy Pop (re-affirmation at the end)

Some obvious choices don't appear on here because I may have used them
already on another mix
CD (I try not to repeat songs...only 8 repeats so far out of 1178 songs
recorded).  Some songs are
obvious choices and some a little more insidious...just the way my mind
works.  The cover of the CD
features Salvador Dali's painting "Sleep".

Jim

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 09:57:57 -0400
From: Richard Hilton 
Subject: gg: more digital audio mania than most people can stand

The following is offered up with no disrespect intended towards 
anything or anyone.

Is it possible that too much faith in science and math places one in 
a position where that person refuses to believe anything that has 
not, up to this point, been empirically proven?

"Showing is proof, and proving is nothing but fear." - A Cry for Everyone

See, I knew that this was gonna boil down to a discussion of what 
"true 24 bit is", and I said so last night on IRC.

At 12:20 AM -0700 10/2/99, Don Tillman wrote:
>I think what DW is saying by "no such thing as 24-bit resolution" is
>that the residual noise level of just about any piece of electronics
>is going to be roughly the same as the residual noise level of a
>16-bit digital recorder (just slightly worse than 96dB), so the extra
>bits might be considered useless in that they only provide better
>resolution for the residual noise.

This whole dynamic range discussion goes back quite a ways.  Back 
when CDs were first introduced, the "it can't be any good" guys 
immediately got on the warpath with their argument about how the best 
listening environment one was likely to encounter had a maximum 
potential dynamic range of about 60db (a very quiet listening room), 
so why did we need a playback medium that took that theoretical 
maximum dynamic range of analog vinyl records 36db further to 96db 
(of course they ignored the aliasing and phase shift issues of early 
CDs back then....but later on.......)?  Well, since that time, 
everybody knows (everybody who relies on their ears first, that is) 
that, whatever other arguments that can be made pro or con about CDs 
or digital audio in general, that the CD is a much quieter (though 
not necessarily "better" - I'm definitely not going there.....) 
delivery medium than the analog record ever could be.  It doesn't 
take a studio-wise musician/engineer or the "Issac Newton of the 
midwest" (it's a JOKE, fer crissakes) to figure this one out.  Anyone 
and everyone can easily hear it, practically anywhere (except maybe 
at the Heartland this coming weekend..........WOO HOO!).

The other thing this theoretical dynamic range discussion fails to 
take into account is that, with multitrack recording, the noise 
introduced at an early step of the process is additively increased 
with every additional channel of music playback.  So any benefits 
given by the increased dynamic range are magnified when you open up 
48 channels of music from that more dynamic medium, as the noise 
introduced by the electronics through which that music is being 
played remains relatively constant.  The thinking is that, if the 
source were 20-30db more noisy, that the addition of all that noise 
across all those channels would be significantly more noticeable, 
whereas the noise introduced later in the chain (mixers, amplifiers, 
on the surface of the speaker cones....) would remain constant per 
channel for those 48 playback channels.

>I don't think anybody cares though; the analog audio content over
>20kHz is truly negligible as almost every link in the chain kills
>stuff over that frequnecy.

Until you begin to examine 96k source material, it does, yeah.  Even 
with 48k......it's not all that hard to hear the difference between 
44.1k and 48k.  How do you explain that?  Is it the difference in the 
brickwall filters' placement (relative to Nyquist), or is there 
something else afoot here?

>Microphones generally don't put out over
>20kHz

You need better mics, Don.  You recording cymbals with an SM57?  8^)

>mixers don't

You can buy a consumer grade mixer that goes beyond 20k at reasonable 
audio levels for about $500.

>tape decks don't

Analog tape decks generally don't, but I once tuned up an analog 
Nakamichi cassette deck that, at -10dbv, went out to 23k flat as a 
board with Dolby C turned on using test tones (not full band 
noise....).  This machine out-performed some pro grade 2-tracks that 
I've worked on.

>I have a problem with these digital discussions; they always assume
>that the rest of the system is *perfect*.

I have a problem with theoretical discussions about this stuff, but 
not about practical discussions......the amazing thing to me is that 
you guys appear to believe that if you can't quantify something 
mathematically, that it doesn't, that it CAN'T exist.  What's truly 
incredible about this is that math has traditionally been much more 
accurate at explaining what happens AFTER it has happened than it is 
at accurately predicting what's going to happen.  There are countless 
examples of this.  This is why they test nuclear devices, and are 
surprised by the results, then go back and refine the engineering. 
The math doesn't really predict all that accurately (depending on how 
you want to define "accurately"), but it does manage to explain the 
surprising results very well.  Show me the math that explains how a 
cassette operating at 1 7/8 IPS with noise reduction  goes out to 23k 
flat....

>The number of bits, the
>sampling rate, and so forth, all assume that the analog-to-digital
>conversion process is completely without errors and glitches.

I certainly assume no such thing.

>The better equipment will just sound better.

This, to me, is the crux of the proverbial biscuit.  I have heard 
REAL 24 bit technology, and despite the elaborate explanations of why 
it can't possibly exist vis a vis noise and dynamic range, and can't 
possibly sound better.....IT DOES.  Clearly, immediately, repeatedly, 
to everyone present.  Fuller frequency presentation, much punchier 
impact, wider, clearer soundstage........why is it so hard to accept 
that?  Are you (general "you", not Don or Dan specifically.....) so 
married to your math that you have lost the ability to perceive 
beyond what the current math tells you is possible?  Are you truly 
"blinded by science" (it's poetry in motion.......)?

>  We just don't have the
>measurement standards set up yet to allow the luxury of "catalog
>shopping" (ie., choosing the equipment by specs without actually
>listening).

I don't believe that anyone here is advocating such a thing.  "Use 
your ears" is my credo on these things.

I ask a genuine practical question, asked without prejudice:  I 
wonder if either Dan or Don has spent much time comparing the results 
of recording to 16 bit vs 24 bit at the same sample frequency in a 
controlled environment?  If so, what did you guys HEAR?  Was it just 
what you expected to hear, or was it in some way surprising to you?

Best,
Rich


Richard Hilton/Boppybop Toons Inc.
http://members.aol.com/hiltonius/BTI_page.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 07:30:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Don Tillman 
Subject: Re: gg: no GG: Re: mastering question; Phish concert

   Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 08:43:45 -0400
   From: Alan Benjamin 

   James Warren recently mentioned:
   > The reason CD's are 44.1 KHz sampling rate is
   > because of the Nyquist 
   > frequency.  Basically this means that to reproduce a
   > frequency, the sampling 
   > rate must be twice that of the frequency you are
   > trying to reproduce.  

   I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with this. Although Nyquist's theory holds
   true when you look at the frequency of the analog source that can be
   sampled, it does not represent how accurately the timbre can be
   represented. As an extreme example, how could a 44.1kHz sample
   differentiate between a square wave, sine wave, and sawtooth wave that are
   all 20kHz (even optimally sampled)? Each cycle could only be represented by
   two samples, resulting the same digital representation. Regardless of how
   the DA converters "smooth" things out, there is no differentiation.

Something got lost in translation...

Nyquist's theory states that no *components* of the analog input can be
over half the sampling frequency for perfect reproduction.  The
sawtooth and square waves you mention have lots of fourier components
over the sampling frequency and these would need to be filtered out
first (leaving sine waves).

Nyquist's theory really works fine.

  -- Don

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 07:18:39 -0700
From: JohnEric 
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: gg: About Gentle Giant]

I did temper that statement with the fact that it grew on me, but I
can't say that for The Ladder.  I've listened to The Ladder a half dozen
times now, giving the boys as much of a break as I can.  Still, only The
Messenger clicks and sticks with me.  I don't mean to ruffle the Gentle
Giant crowd over the Missing Piece issue, I'm just being honest.  Honest
injun.  I agree with Pablo over "Memories of Old Days".  I like that one
very much.

JohnEric

SPBrader@aol.com wrote:

> JEE writes:
>
> << The Missing Piece CD was
>  where they started to disappoint me. >>
>
> First he has a pop at The Ladder and now this!
>
> I think I'm going to have to send the hired goons round ;-)
>
> Si
> n.p. KC: Mexico City

- --

Opinions? --- " "


http://www.mindspring.com/~jjellison/nightsky.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 07:29:34 -0700
From: JohnEric 
Subject: Re: no gg: bawdy covers - not for the faint-of-heart

OK, it's time to throw my hat in on this bawdy covers issue.  Try the Gruntruck
"Push" cover on for size.  It features a woman holding a toy truck in one hand,
wearing nothing but body paint.  Inside, you will find the same 60s-ish female
holding the truck just over her midsection, on her knees and bent backward, belly up,
with her other hand supporting her from falling.  The body paint barely conceals her
more telling gender feature.  By the way, this is an outstanding release from
Gruntruck.  The music represents some of the best, well played, and welling, grunge
that came out of Seattle.  I highly recommend this, but the cover is NOT for the
faint of heart.  Very tight.

JohnEric

Jorunn Nome & Bert Vijn wrote:

> David Eric:
> >So, are we going to do a thread on "wicked covers?"
>
> Not strictly a cover maybe, but:
> Through the transparent orange CD tray of Sonic Youth's "Dirty" one can see a b/w
> picture. It shows a naked woman and a naked man, both of them involved in what
> must be some form of sexual contact with soft toy animals. The man appears to be
> drawing a rabbit from his rectum. There is also quite some amount of soft smeary
> stuff on his body. Looking at the roundish form of the smeary stuff on the carpet
> under him, I get the strong impression that it is brown, and was produced inside
> the man's body...
>
> Do I like this picture? No.
> Does it tell me a about our world? Yes.
>
> please no shooting me  --  me be justa messenger play piano, yes?
>
> c-ya,
> v-bert
>
> np: XTC: Apple Venus, vol. 1
> nd: coffee
> nw: a Gorggeous T-shirt! I dig it big time. Eternal thanks, Nick!

- --

Opinions? --- " "


http://www.mindspring.com/~jjellison/nightsky.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 07:36:44 -0700
From: JohnEric 
Subject: Re: gg: more digital audio mania than most people can stand

It boils down to the difference of opinion similar to that of comparing
standard physics with the superstring theory.  We can only believe what we
are willing to accept.

JohnEric

Richard Hilton wrote:

> The following is offered up with no disrespect intended towards
> anything or anyone.
>
> Is it possible that too much faith in science and math places one in
> a position where that person refuses to believe anything that has
> not, up to this point, been empirically proven?

- --

Opinions? --- "Operation Mindcrime "


http://www.mindspring.com/~jjellison/nightsky.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 16:46:12 +0100
From: manso@ozet.de (Ansorge)
Subject: gg: Another newbie. Greetings to all

Hello listees!

As anyone can tell from the subject line, I'm new to the list and I'd
like to introduce myself. Gist of biographical background: from April to
July 1981 Gentle Giant were among my favourite groups. Then I became
more aware of contemporary evolutions in pop music and forgot almost
completely about them (not much of a miracle, given the members' low
profiles in the subsequent years). Yet I never lost completely sight of
them and of the ideas for which the group stood, so I was aware that
they had still quite some following.

Some years ago I spotted the "Edge of Twilight" sampler at my local
record shop, but it was only last week that I finally bought it. And lo,
they sounded better than I remembered them. To be honest, I was slightly
embarrassed to take it to the counter (not that a long line of customers
that had just formed made things easier), quite sure that I was kidding
myself into the deal for sentimental reasons. But I found that there
were many tracks which had yet to receive an unbiased listening or at
least a fair trial--I despised "Schooldays" for its clumsiness when I
was a kid but consider its whimsical feel to be quite redemptive now.

Anyway, I thought I'd look how come other people also have fond memories
of this group--one of the most misrepresented from its period imho. So,
greetings to all! I don't know for how long I'm going to stay with you,
but for now I'll say I'm at least impressed how much traffic this list
can generate.

Matthias

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 11:14:25 EDT
From: "Virginia Landgraf" 
Subject: gg: Sloth songs

Besides the Fairport, the song that came to mind under "sloth" (sleep is 
_not_ necessarily sloth in my book!) was a song in Thai by Pongthep 
Kradonchamnan, "Choey" (almost impossible to transliterate into English -- 
the "oe" is supposed to be pronounced like an o with an umlaut, and the "y" 
is tacked on -- sort of like chuh-y).  The title translates kind of as 
"Sitting Still."  I don't have time to dig up all the words but it goes 
something like this:

Sitting still

Sitting still
Why are you just sitting there?
Why haven't you ever gotten up
Your clothes all strewn about
Your dishes all stewn about dirty
Why do you make me follow you around picking up after you?

It's mostly acoustic blues, with a bluesy kaen solo in the middle (sounding 
more like a harmonica than traditional kaen playing).

The album it's on is called _Huay Talaeng_ (name of a town in northeast 
Thailand).  It came out in 1983.  Black, with a photo of the artist on the 
cover.  Azona label.  I think it's out of print.  It's a very interesting 
album (shades of Tull and funk elsewhere) although suffers from the fact 
that the vocal tracks seem to be about a quarter tone flat on most of the 
songs.

Ginny (too busy to try to decipher all this tech stuff, although I think I 
could understand it eventually -- is that slothful?)

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:35:31 -0400
From: "drj_saro" 
Subject: gg: Re: Another newbie. Greetings to all

From: Ansorge 
>As anyone can tell from the subject line, I'm new to the list and I'd
>like to introduce myself. Gist of biographical background: from April to
>July 1981 Gentle Giant were among my favourite groups. Then I became
>more aware of contemporary evolutions in pop music and forgot almost
>completely about them (not much of a miracle, given the members' low
>profiles in the subsequent years). Yet I never lost completely sight of
>them and of the ideas for which the group stood, so I was aware that
>they had still quite some following.
>

welcome!
i would like to find the "missing piece" of your narrative and would be
curious to know...

1) what _other_ groups were among your favorites during that short but
significant period in 1981?

2) what direction in music did you follow _after_  July 1981?
    (and what happened to cause the change?)

also, i was sad to read that you were self-conscious about purchasing music
that means something to you (and to us), i say be _proud_ of your tastes
regardless of what other people think (especially when a large proportion of
them are probably just buying the latest disposable pop.).

again, in closing, i would just like to say again, "welcome!"

thank you for your time and attention.

Julius J. SAROKA
drj_saro@neo.rr.com
Cuyahoga Falls OHIO

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 18:05:29 +0200
From: "Geir Hasnes" 
Subject: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection

Hello again. Do you read me?

The listening experience is non-perfect. It is perfectly true that a CD ought to sound as good as a LP record. It doesn't however.

A friend of mine and I have collected various examples of jazz, prog, pop, rock, both on CD and LP to demonstrate this. The demonstration effect is overwhelming on pure souls who has never offered the problem a thought.

Now it is equally true that various pressings of vinyl sound different, that various editions of CDs sound different, and that you can easily go mad if you find you have to start comparing the various pressings.

Some examples for different ranges:

Steely Dan's Pretzel Logic : first US pressing is superb compared to later US
Steely Dan's Gaucho: first US CD is terrible and later Gold CD on Mobile Fidelity is infinitely superior
King Crimson's In the Wake of Poseidon : first UK pressing is much better than later UK pressings
Steve Hackett's Voyage of the Acolyte : first UK pressing is horrible compared to first Dutch pressing
Renaissance's Scheherezade : first UK pressing is not as good as first US pressing
Gentle Giant's Free Hand : One Way's first CD pressing is terrible, 2nd is much better, but the wrong master

And so on - list could be endless - I have found English pressings that were better than Dutch and German, and the other way round. And the same for UK versus US. 

To sum up, 95% of all CD editions sound worse than the LPs. The resultant 5% sounds better, but those are largely later 90s or given special treatment.

Why is this so? The reason is not in the sampling rate, because any non-sine wave at 20KHz will have overtones at 40kHZ and up which is not audible anyway. The only reason to go up a step from 16 bit is to achieve larger dynamics, being able to represent not more levels but faster rise and fall of any frequency - and this might be audible.

The reason is largely in the error correction and timing circuitry. There has been written large articles about this and some audio specialists have made circuitry to correct jitter, from which they claim that they are able to correct this error. They even claim that when they copy a CD through this circuitry and out on a new CD, this CD sounds unbelievably much better than the original. When you know about the nature of digital circuitry you can understand this. 

To say that the sound is mixed with less-than-perfect equipment is not quite true. But the ears of engineers vary, and even the sound picture they wish to achieve. 

What you hear is not what is going into your ears, but what your brain tells you.

You compare what is coming into the brain with the previously perceived sounds and preferences within you and there you are - two different people can hear quite different things.

I tested a girl once who was able to tell me at which rate a Steve Morse solo went over from music to noise, that is at which rate she was unable to distinguish the guitar notes from each other. She didn't any longer hear what I heard, she heard unrecognizable noise.

Some people mask out noise more easily than others. Many claim that they don't even hear dirt crackles on an LP. And what about the noise of the cooling fan on huge amplifiers? Listening to music in England is terrible when the central heating is on.

The Missing Piece was probably mixed in a room with very hard walls. Consequently the bass and bass drum on this record is the worst sounding part of the whole GG output. I had the opportunity to remix As Old As You're Young together with Dan Bornemark last April - it sounded so good I had to cry. I have proposed we simply do with the GG output as with Deep Purple - release both a remaster of the old mix and a new mix. Lots of details tend to drown in the mix, and it is very very interesting to follow instrument after instrument on the 24 tracks.

My listening experience is in the end a physical one - at a certain level of well-sounding music I feel it over my entire body. I feel a certain relief and satisfaction. At top level I cry unvoluntarily. 

I have listened to many types of hifi equipment over the years. My latest experience was when a friend of mine, professional flautist who laughs at Ian Anderson's technique but digs GG, asked me if I could tell what was wrong with his equipment. It turned out to be the preamp that was the black sheep. We fed the CD directly into the (superb) amp and the sound was nearly 40dB better (yes, I judge subjectively and find that using a logarithmic scale for my own experience is very convenient).

I have changed configurations and settings and especially cables in my own setup, and anyone who states that cables don't matter has no ears at all. I perceive differences in the push of the bass, the push of the choir, the balance between lead singer and choir, the tingling or dominance of high frequencies, the balance between all areas of frequencies. Very seldom I am satisfied with a setup, but I am with mine.

Last year I bought a record cleaning machine, VPI 16.5, and the result is such that I must be careful not to sound like a fanatic. Not only do the records sound even more wonderfully warm and transparent, but I have a higher tolerance threshold for pops and crackles from scars and so on. Old records really become as new!

However, some here on the list has written about listening with the heart as opposed to the brain. I don't believe in this statement at all. When I for instance talk about development as opposed to collage it is because I am able to put words on what sucks and what not. I have met many musicians (and non-musicians) who do not want to be taught musical theory because they are afraid the magic shall disappear. The end result is more often than not the use of cliches. Cliches may or may not be a bad thing, often it sounds badly. However, I can assure you that for most tunesmiths, the amount of head that goes into any recording is far higher than we usually believe. 

But when some people like this and some that, it is because we have different expectations, different upbringings, different backgrounds. I don't like Soft Machine, and this is because .  But other people enjoy Soft Machine for the same reasons that I don't. I will not put any value on the emotional experience, but I don't get the same emotional experience from hearing Robert Wyatt drumming as many other people do. I recently purchased a book about innovation in British Jazz in the 60s and 70s, and what became even more clear to me is the value many people put into improvisation. I don't do that, I regard improvisation as a use of formulas just as gregorian chant. Some people find the use of improvisational material intriguing and emotionally fulfilling - I don't. I know that many guitarists love Zappa's improvisations, but they don't touch any string within me. But I regard Martin Barre's guitar solo on Aqualung as pure genius and Jan Akk!
 erman's guitar solos on Hocus Pocus extremely innovative.

So, for many people, at a certain stage one learns intellectually to accept certain sorts of musical practice as more valid and more emotional than other sorts.

It is OK, go on, enjoy what I detest, but do not use bad logic to defend yourself against my attacks because I never attacked people with different tastes than mine.

And by the way, I think the tunes of Samantha Fox in the 80s are brilliant! 

And yet, do you read me? (For the non-understanding pupil, yes, there is a joke on perception here.)

Geir

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:22:33 EDT
From: SHudson653@aol.com
Subject: gg: re; No gg but TULL 

Hudman delurking here... Having recently received jtull dot
com and the two Happy The Man reissues (thanks Gary Davis) I want to throw in 
my 3 cents worth. 

  *   Jtull.com is growing on me rapidly. However contrary     
      to previous posts Hot Mangoe Flush is the BEST song
      followed closely by El NINO.... These songs are Great.
      Don't tell me noone picked up the GG influences in 
      HMF???? 

  The Happy The Man reissues brought back wonderful memories. I had forgotten 
how wonderful this music was/is... Get them everyone you will not be 
disappointed...

That's all for now.....

rp:  Hot Mangoe Flush    (my 6 + 9 year olds love this song) 
   

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 11:31:49 +0000
From: Diana Green 
Subject: Re: gg: 7 deadly sins

hail;
re:


Don Tillman wrote:

>    Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 10:58:07 +0000
>    From: Diana Green 
>
>    And the Lou & Peter Berryman classic, Incommunicado:
>
> And the other Peter and Lou Berryman classic, The Dog's Asleep:
> " The dog's asleep
>   The cat's asleep
>   If the fish were swimming slower
>   They'd be standing still..."
>
> [Everybody else on the list is probably going to need an explanation.
> Peter and Lou Berryman were, and probably still are, an ex- husband
> and wife dou playing some wonderfully clever songs around Madison,
> Wisconsin.  Folky 12-string guitar and accordian, very funny stuff.]
>
> Diana, any idea what they've been up to lately?

    to the best of my knowledge, still putting it out. And still exes
working happily together. they did a couple spots on Prairie Home
Companion, but that was af few years back. Every time I go to the folk
music store, i look at their bin and see CDs I don't recall from the old
days. and there's a second book of their sheet music out, illustrated by
Peter, as was the first one.
    Sidebar to Geir: one of their early great songs is called "Bartime in
duckburg" and is very much about the Barks ducks. They are also the only
act that I know of who has done a cover version of the Walt Kelly song "I
Go Pogo".
    Ah, the old days: sipping local brew at Club de Wash on a sunday
night (it was sundays, right?) and singing along with the scathing but
strangely reverent "Are You Drinking With Me Jesus?"
    In order to further understand the Berrymans' writing and music, it's
helpful to know that Peter is an alcoholic in full recovery for at least
20 years now. He plays guitar and sings; she plays accordion and sings.
    Thanks for bringing this all back home. Those were great days, with
great music. comforting to know it's still out in the heartland
somewhere! Anyone with further information on this delectable duo, please
step forward!
still,
dg
np: King Crimson: Islands

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 12:34:10 -0400
From: Dave Blondin 
Subject: gg: Un-Lurking

Hello fellow Giants!
Add another newbie to the list!
Mammienun has provoked me to un-lurk :) First taste of Gentle Giant was
back in 1973. My friend and I would do our homework with them playing on
his home built stereo,  with speakers the size of a small refrigerator!
You could barely hear each other talk!  First album bought was In a
Glass House. Found it in a record/head shop in North Conway, NH. Still
looking for it on cd. Having never seen them in concert, are Richard
Blouin's videos worth getting?
Other favorite bands include, Genesis (up to Duke), Strawbs, King
Crimson, Pink Floyd, Kansas, ect.
We'll back to lurking, (for now)! Got to go cut the lawn!
Dave

n.p. the lawnmower

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 11:52:56 +0000
From: Diana Green 
Subject: Re: gg: Another newbie. Greetings to all

hail;
re:


Ansorge wrote:

> Hello listees!
>
> As anyone can tell from the subject line, I'm new to the list and I'd
> like to introduce myself.

Welcome, Matt! Sorry, you get used to that sort of shoddy treatment around
here, but most of the time we mean no harm. :->

> Gist of biographical background: from April to
> July 1981 Gentle Giant were among my favourite groups. Then I became
> more aware of contemporary evolutions in pop music and forgot almost
> completely about them (not much of a miracle, given the members' low
> profiles in the subsequent years). Yet I never lost completely sight of
> them and of the ideas for which the group stood, so I was aware that
> they had still quite some following.

From which I infer that you got into the more complex aspects of 80s power
pop and post punk, including XTC?

>
>
> Some years ago I spotted the "Edge of Twilight" sampler at my local
> record shop, but it was only last week that I finally bought it. And lo,
> they sounded better than I remembered them.

As is often the case with a dish you haven't had for a while, yes?

> To be honest, I was slightly
> embarrassed to take it to the counter (not that a long line of customers
> that had just formed made things easier), quite sure that I was kidding
> myself into the deal for sentimental reasons.

    I used to worry about stuff like this too, but I got over it. The other
day, I was picking up a present for my sweetie's mom and saw a couple
cheapies I wanted as well. So when I got to the counter, I had Islands by
King Crimson, Patsy Cline Live, and a cool Benny Goodman collection in a
really nice metal can (only $2.99!). time was I would have cared what the
clerk or those around me, complete strangers for the most part, thought of
my purchases. Now, I find not giving a rip has some advantages. I ended up
having a really nice talk with the clerk, who had never heard KC and was
interested because someone told her they were like Can, who she had heard
for the first time the day before (oh, the freshness of youth!). I ended up
recommending some beginning Crimson- I suggested Lizard or Discipline as
starting points- and evangelizing GG a bit in the process!

> But I found that there
> were many tracks which had yet to receive an unbiased listening or at
> least a fair trial--I despised "Schooldays" for its clumsiness when I
> was a kid but consider its whimsical feel to be quite redemptive now.

    Interesting: maybe I'm too sentimental, but that whole album always
resonated emotionally with me. Maybe it's because I've had all three of
those types of jobs and lives.

>
>
> Anyway, I thought I'd look how come other people also have fond memories
> of this group--one of the most misrepresented from its period imho. So,
> greetings to all! I don't know for how long I'm going to stay with you,
> but for now I'll say I'm at least impressed how much traffic this list
> can generate.

    Hail and well met! I hope you hang a while. We're a surprisingly diverse
group and, unlike some music lists, are far from rigid on sticking to
assigned subject matter. you may get really angry here at times, but you
will also laugh a lot and run into surprising information and more
surprising people. Many of us have made some great friends here.
still,
dg
np: king Crimson: Islands

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 12:05:10 +0000
From: Diana Green 
Subject: Re: gg: Un-Lurking

hail!
re:


Dave Blondin wrote:

> Hello fellow Giants!
> Add another newbie to the list!

with a ney-nonny-nonny and a hot-cha-cha!

>
> Mammienun has provoked me to un-lurk :)

The Nun gets another soul to repent the sin of typographic sloth. :-)

> First taste of Gentle Giant was
> back in 1973. My friend and I would do our homework with them playing on
> his home built stereo,  with speakers the size of a small refrigerator!
> You could barely hear each other talk!

I think we all had that sound system at one time or another. My current
system, at least for cds, is pretty pathetic, compared to what I think it
should be.

> First album bought was In a
> Glass House. Found it in a record/head shop in North Conway, NH. Still
> looking for it on cd.

Well, I hope you held on to the vinyl at least! last seen on cd at e-bay in
a Russian edition. sold for more than $50. but the reissue is supposedly
imminent, and we all haunt the used bins for our list brothers and sisters,
to fill that vital niche...

> Having never seen them in concert, are Richard
> Blouin's videos worth getting?

    Yes, but I'd start with the second one, as ZDF is a stronger concert by
a hair, IMPO. they're both good, though, and the BBC is superior to many
others on the collectors' market, and on a par with those other list members
have.
    There are more complete version of both the ZDF and the ABC stuff, but
they must come from Europe and you have to change formats. I can't tell you
exactly where to get them if you feel you need to, but I know they are
around.

>
> Other favorite bands include, Genesis (up to Duke), Strawbs, King
> Crimson, Pink Floyd, Kansas, ect.

You passed the initiation. Now you must either say something wonderful or
something horrible about either Jeff Beck or Starcastle. That will determine
to which army you will be assigned.

>
> We'll back to lurking, (for now)! Got to go cut the lawn!

Wow! We nearly had snow last night! Where the heck are you?

> n.p. the lawnmower

Isn't that the name Ray recorded his techno stuff under?   :-)
still,
dg
np: KC: Islands

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 11:21:33 -0700
From: JohnEric 
Subject: Re: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection

Why?  Just curious.

JohnEric

Geir Hasnes wrote:

> And by the way, I think the tunes of Samantha Fox in the 80s are brilliant!
>
> Geir

- --

Opinions? --- "Operation Mindcrime"

http://www.mindspring.com/~jjellison/nightsky.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 14:39:54 EDT
From: SPBrader@aol.com
Subject: Re: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection

John Eric asks:

<< Why?  Just curious.
 
 JohnEric
 
 Geir Hasnes wrote:
 
 > And by the way, I think the tunes of Samantha Fox in the 80s are 
brilliant!> >>

Say this quickly:

Because she had the greatest hits of the 80s

Si

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Don Tillman 
Subject: Re: gg: GG: Perception, analysis, perfection

   From: "Geir Hasnes" 
   Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 18:05:29 +0200

   The reason is largely in the error correction and timing
   circuitry. There has been written large articles about this and
   some audio specialists have made circuitry to correct jitter, from
   which they claim that they are able to correct this error. They
   even claim that when they copy a CD through this circuitry and out
   on a new CD, this CD sounds unbelievably much better than the
   original. When you know about the nature of digital circuitry you
   can understand this.

I'm very familiar with the nature of digital circuitry (I used to
design computers for a living) and this sounds bogus to me.

What would uncorrected error sound like?  The CRC error correction
algorithm just fixes the bits, it has no understanding of pitch or
waveform, or even the bit's position in the 16-bit sample; there's no
correlation to stuff we musically identify.  So any problems with the
error correction, and bit errors in general, will show up as noise or
clicks, not as a distortion or phase shift or a change in timbre.  If
noise or clicks are what you hear, then yeah, it could be error
correction.  But if the sound is thin or tinny or there's a different
singer in the middle section of "Time To Kill", error correction is
not causing it.

Although jitter could conceivable change the timbre of the sound, any
jitter before the DAC is fixed by reclocking, and I don't know of any
DAC that doesn't do that.  Jitter internal to the DAC could be an
issue, but that's just a bad design and not correctable.

  -- Don

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 15:35:35 EDT
From: Claudio666@aol.com
Subject: Re: gg: Un-Lurking

In a message dated 10/2/99 10:51:38 AM Mountain Daylight Time, 
tobar@mediaone.net writes:

<< Hello fellow Giants!
 Add another newbie to the list! >>

Consider yourself added.  Welcome, and don't be a stranger.  Well,  no 
stranger than the rest of us anyway...

Dan 12/2

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 15:36:56 EDT
From: Claudio666@aol.com
Subject: Re: gg: Another newbie. Greetings to all

In a message dated 10/2/99 8:50:53 AM Mountain Daylight Time, manso@ozet.de 
writes:

<< As anyone can tell from the subject line, I'm new to the list and I'd
 like to introduce myself.  >>

Nice intro. Welcome!  I can tell you're gonna fit right in.

Dan 18/3

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 15:41:50 -0400
From: Alan Benjamin 
Subject: gg: no GG: Re: mastering question; Phish concert

Hi Don,

>Something got lost in translation...
>
>Nyquist's theory states that no *components* of the analog input can be
>over half the sampling frequency for perfect reproduction.  The
>sawtooth and square waves you mention have lots of fourier components
>over the sampling frequency and these would need to be filtered out
>first (leaving sine waves).

Are you saying that nothing gets lost as a result of this filtering?
Wouldn't it be fair to say that some of the components are filtered while
others are not? And, if so, does this not result in an audible change?

Or, to look at it a different way, why does a higher sampling frequency
produce better-sounding results? Why do audiophile mastering houses utilize
very high sampling rates (such as Bob Katz, who was known for his custom
128x oversampling system)? And lastly, why do people perceive 20- and
24-bit recordings to have a more natural-sounding reproduction in the
higher audio frequencies?

I respect what you're saying, but I think there's something missing between
your (Nyquist's) theory and the reason why many people (including several
who I know, trust, and have great ears) can hear the benefit of the higher
sampling rates. I wish it wasn't the case, actually, as I'll probably end
up buying many recordings all over again when an improved format becomes
widely available.

Take care,


Alan

------------------------------

End of on-reflection-digest V1 #1892
************************************

    Source: geocities.com/pppppush