HD sound quality

J G Miller wrote:
On Tuesday, July 10th, 2012, at 08:16:13h +0100, Peter C exclaimed:

So the sky's the limit!

And you mean that most sincerely.

http://t2.gstatic.C
OM/images?
q=tbn:ANd9GcS2GOrd9xTe836j71lvpXVh4X0Cebfjl8WVlmTf tWHeeyBXJBSgQw

I suppose he was our answer to Lucille Ball.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:43:14 -0700 (PDT), Graham
wrote:



J G Miller wrote:
On Tuesday, July 10th, 2012, at 08:16:13h +0100, Peter C exclaimed:

So the sky's the limit!

And you mean that most sincerely.

http://t2.gstatic.C
OM/images?
q=tbn:ANd9GcS2GOrd9xTe836j71lvpXVh4X0Cebfjl8WVlmT ftWHeeyBXJBSgQw

Ah. The grandfather of Fifi, Peaches, and Pixie Geldof, and their
younger half sister Tiger Lily Hutchence.

I suppose he was our answer to Lucille Ball.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

On Tuesday, July 10th, 2012, at 08:43:14h -0700, Graham wrote:

I suppose he was our answer to Lucille Ball.

I would have thought Diana Dors would have been the
closest English equivalent to Lucille Ball.

Hughie Green was the equivalent of maybe Bob Barker?

http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/Bob_Barker

Most people do not recall that Hughie Green actually
started out as a BBC radio show host and then child
movie actor.

"Remember, the clapometer is just for fun."

On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:55:55 -0500, Adrian
wrote:

Scott wrote:
Has the sound on HD been changed? I noticed at the weekend that the
sound quality seems richer with stronger bass. Has some technical
change been made?

You don't say which channel or which system, Freeview or Freesat?

Freeview.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:13:17 +0100, tony sayer wrote:

Russ Andrews has rewired Television Centre at licence payers' expense
in preparation for some other broadcaster to take it over.

Just heard of someone who had some Quad electrostatics modified by Russ
Andrews. (why, I dunno) They needed repair (admittedly some way down the
line) and the repair company says they're scrap. Just about everything
Araldited together.

Ought to be had up in court on a charge of desecration....

Desecrating holy sound?

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:51:08 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

Ah. The grandfather of Fifi, Peaches, and Pixie Geldof, and their
younger half sister Tiger Lily Hutchence.

tenuous claim to fame
I stood next to their mother in the queue in the canteen once.
She was pregnant with Pixie at the time.
/tenuous claim to fame

Bloody 'ell, admitting that'll probably put my car insurance
premium up. Better deny it again.

In message , Martin
writes
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:27:39 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 10th, 2012, at 08:43:14h -0700, Graham wrote:

I suppose he was our answer to Lucille Ball.

I would have thought Diana Dors would have been the
closest English equivalent to Lucille Ball.

Hughie Green was the equivalent of maybe Bob Barker?

http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/Bob_Barker

Most people do not recall that Hughie Green actually
started out as a BBC radio show host and then child
movie actor.

Luckily Wiki has a long memory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hughie_Green

"Remember, the clapometer is just for fun."


His "sincerity" was unrivalled, until the '80s.
--
Ian

In article , Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
Just heard of someone who had some Quad electrostatics modified by Russ
Andrews. (why, I dunno) They needed repair (admittedly some way down the
line) and the repair company says they're scrap. Just about everything
Araldited together.

Ought to be had up in court on a charge of desecration....

Desecrating holy sound?

Quad Electrostatics ought to be Grade 1 Listed. If we can accept the notion
that it can be an offence to alter something of historical interest without
official permission, then what logic says historical interest only applies
to things that are rooted to the ground?

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

In article en.co.uk,
Roderick Stewart wrote:
In article , Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
Just heard of someone who had some Quad electrostatics modified by
Russ Andrews. (why, I dunno) They needed repair (admittedly some way
down the line) and the repair company says they're scrap. Just about
everything Araldited together.

Ought to be had up in court on a charge of desecration....

Desecrating holy sound?

Quad Electrostatics ought to be Grade 1 Listed. If we can accept the
notion that it can be an offence to alter something of historical
interest without official permission, then what logic says historical
interest only applies to things that are rooted to the ground?

Interesting point. I guess the difference here is that a number of the
orginal ESLs were made, and many are still in use by happy owners. That,
and some of them being in museums already, may be enough. But I agree that
Russ Andrews styled 'improvements' may be something of an offence to the
pure in heart. That being so, we can deter people doing that by them being
aware of the shame they would bring upon themselves. Make them feel like it
has become known that they are a Bankster... :-)

Having said that, I guess I should declare I did modify my old ESL63s.
However this was just to fit rubber mounts to the mains transformers to
reduce the mechanical hum level from them transferred to the casework.

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

In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus
In article en.co.uk,
Roderick Stewart wrote:
In article , Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
Just heard of someone who had some Quad electrostatics modified by
Russ Andrews. (why, I dunno) They needed repair (admittedly some way
down the line) and the repair company says they're scrap. Just about
everything Araldited together.

Ought to be had up in court on a charge of desecration....

Desecrating holy sound?

Quad Electrostatics ought to be Grade 1 Listed. If we can accept the
notion that it can be an offence to alter something of historical
interest without official permission, then what logic says historical
interest only applies to things that are rooted to the ground?

Interesting point. I guess the difference here is that a number of the
orginal ESLs were made, and many are still in use by happy owners. That,
and some of them being in museums already, may be enough. But I agree that
Russ Andrews styled 'improvements' may be something of an offence to the
pure in heart. That being so, we can deter people doing that by them being
aware of the shame they would bring upon themselves. Make them feel like it
has become known that they are a Bankster... :-)

Having said that, I guess I should declare I did modify my old ESL63s.
However this was just to fit rubber mounts to the mains transformers to
reduce the mechanical hum level from them transferred to the casework.


I expect that Peter Walker would have approved. Why I bet he'd be
delighted to have had today's caps around in those days and semi's..


Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer